Mr Mah inaction in 2009 caused severe asset price inflation

[KARTer]

In other countries, such a bad screwup will result in the automatic resignation of the minister in question. Wonder why ours is so thick skinned?

rihnos amongst his ancestors?? ......

[Zangetsu77]

True.

 

I am amaze if he really do have 6 houses. How can this be acceptable?

 

Mr Mah is making TT Durai & Dr Susan Lim looks like angels...

 

MBT don't have 6 houses la. Ministers have pretty prohibitive compliance regulations, and they can only bank with DBS Treasures supposedly, and their money is constantly under scrutiny.

[Zangetsu77]

I don't feel asset inflation in Singapore can be considered severe.

 

Severe has to be like China or Hong Kong or Macau. In Macau, prices went up 4x over 4 to 5 years (i.e. your S$500K HDB flat become S$2m). In China, many people who bought 200K RMB apartments as late as 2006 are currently sitting on 1M RMB properties. I estimate the price increase there has been 500%. In Hong Kong, investment bankers earning millions a year can't afford the properties of their choice! There, posh apartments transact at higher quantums than our GCBs or Sentosa Coves. That's why many cash rich Chinese are absolutely stunned at the "dirt cheap" FREEHOLD S$2500 psf prime district properties!

 

In all these places, you find middle and even high income groups renting because of prohibitively high asset prices.

 

Apart from stronger fundamental growth and wealth, a key reason has to be US quantitative easing. U mustn't assume that Fed buys US$1.5 trillion from US banks with QEI, and US$600B from US banks with QEII and that's it. QEII in my opinion provided the "push" necessary to tip things over from recovery/growth into asset bubble/inflation.

 

U see, u put $1 into a bank's balance sheet, the bank will collateralize it and make it $20 to $100. Now u have US$2.1 trillion put into US banks' balance sheets, but of course a substantial part was necessary to keep the banking systems solvent during Lehmans. The excess money in USD will be depreciated, so they have long come into Asian markets via USD carried trades (borrow in USD and change into foreign Asian currency), directly into the financial systems and the inflation and growth we see in many Asian markets are directly related to this phenomena.

 

Why? US bank lends cheap money to Asian bank, Asian bank can then lend cheap money to consumers and companies. Savvy individuals have access to these cheap funds, but mass market doesn't realize it. Businesses grow, but it does not necessarily translate into wage growth. As businesses grow, cost of goods go up. Money goes into whacking up equities and assets.

 

Hence liquidity driven inflation and growth creates the polarity in society, some of which we see here in Singapore, as the average Singaporean struggles to content with rising housing prices, ever more expensive trips to NTUC Fairprice, and V-Power prices soaring faster than WTI or Brent or SGD:USD combined. Do u get credit cards calling u harassing u to borrow low interest rate money?? That's liquidity.

 

But do take a look at the BRIC and other Asean countries, they are much worse.

 

A fundamental saving grace in Singapore is the near zero interest rates, as SIBOR is pegged to LIBOR and the Brits ain't budging yet. So logically there won't be as much hot money here, and hence what we experience is already a moderated version.

 

What then happens from here? Simply, the liquidity is unbearable and the inflation will result in social unrest, BRIC and other EMs will have to react, even Euro-zone is reacting, and eventually as the US reacts, liquidity is withdrawn, USD carried trades will unwind (much like in 1997). Thankfully we will likely have a soft landing as we never had as much liquidity in our markets to begin with.

 

How low or how far do we go? I'd think a 50% retracement from the run-up is reasonable. E.g. original HDB price S$300K, went up to S$500K on paper, S$400K will probably mark a bottom. But... I'm not God... I am more likely to be wrong, wahahahaha!!!

Edited April 23, 2011 by Zangetsu77

[Kiadaw]

I don't feel asset inflation in Singapore can be considered severe.

 

Severe has to be like China or Hong Kong or Macau. In Macau, prices went up 4x over 4 to 5 years (i.e. your S$500K HDB flat become S$2m). In China, many people who bought 200K RMB apartments as late as 2006 are currently sitting on 1M RMB properties. I estimate the price increase there has been 500%. In Hong Kong, investment bankers earning millions a year can't afford the properties of their choice! There, posh apartments transact at higher quantums than our GCBs or Sentosa Coves. That's why many cash rich Chinese are absolutely stunned at the "dirt cheap" FREEHOLD S$2500 psf prime district properties!

 

In all these places, you find middle and even high income groups renting because of prohibitively high asset prices.

 

Apart from stronger fundamental growth and wealth, a key reason has to be US quantitative easing. U mustn't assume that Fed buys US$1.5 trillion from US banks with QEI, and US$600B from US banks with QEII and that's it. QEII in my opinion provided the "push" necessary to tip things over from recovery/growth into asset bubble/inflation.

 

U see, u put $1 into a bank's balance sheet, the bank will collateralize it and make it $20 to $100. Now u have US$2.1 trillion put into US banks' balance sheets, but of course a substantial part was necessary to keep the banking systems solvent during Lehmans. The excess money in USD will be depreciated, so they have long come into Asian markets via USD carried trades (borrow in USD and change into foreign Asian currency), directly into the financial systems and the inflation and growth we see in many Asian markets are directly related to this phenomena.

 

Why? US bank lends cheap money to Asian bank, Asian bank can then lend cheap money to consumers and companies. Savvy individuals have access to these cheap funds, but mass market doesn't realize it. Businesses grow, but it does not necessarily translate into wage growth. As businesses grow, cost of goods go up. Money goes into whacking up equities and assets.

 

Hence liquidity driven inflation and growth creates the polarity in society, some of which we see here in Singapore, as the average Singaporean struggles to content with rising housing prices, ever more expensive trips to NTUC Fairprice, and V-Power prices soaring faster than WTI or Brent or SGD:USD combined. Do u get credit cards calling u harassing u to borrow low interest rate money?? That's liquidity.

 

But do take a look at the BRIC and other Asean countries, they are much worse.

 

A fundamental saving grace in Singapore is the near zero interest rates, as SIBOR is pegged to LIBOR and the Brits ain't budging yet. So logically there won't be as much hot money here, and hence what we experience is already a moderated version.

 

What then happens from here? Simply, the liquidity is unbearable and the inflation will result in social unrest, BRIC and other EMs will have to react, even Euro-zone is reacting, and eventually as the US reacts, liquidity is withdrawn, USD carried trades will unwind (much like in 1997). Thankfully we will likely have a soft landing as we never had as much liquidity in our markets to begin with.

 

How low or how far do we go? I'd think a 50% retracement from the run-up is reasonable. E.g. original HDB price S$300K, went up to S$500K on paper, S$400K will probably mark a bottom. But... I'm not God... I am more likely to be wrong, wahahahaha!!!

 

Wow, so informative, & I admit, I didn't understand half of what you said. .

 

I do know that The Chinese Government (as read in papers) that they will make affordable housing & quality of life, as well as narrowing income their focus on the next coming years, even at the expense of economic growth. They said something along the line of economic growth not as critical as people standard of living. How they do it, & how successful I do not know, but at least the intension is there.

 

Here in Sunny Singapore, Our dear Mr Mah is still in denial & keep insisting housing is affordable, & very little focus on quality of life, & overly obsessed with GDP growth.

 

Off topic: Hi bro, you still doing running these days. I am too, in fact tomorrow, with a bunch of buddies, in a nice place call Bedok FCC. LOL.

[Zangetsu77]

Wow, so informative, & I admit, I didn't understand half of what you said. .

 

I do know that The Chinese Government (as read in papers) that they will make affordable housing & quality of life, as well as narrowing income their focus on the next coming years, even at the expense of economic growth. They said something along the line of economic growth not as critical as people standard of living. How they do it, & how successful I do not know, but at least the intension is there.

 

Here in Sunny Singapore, Our dear Mr Mah is still in denial & keep insisting housing is affordable, & very little focus on quality of life, & overly obsessed with GDP growth.

 

Off topic: Hi bro, you still doing running these days. I am too, in fact tomorrow, with a bunch of buddies, in a nice place call Bedok FCC. LOL.

 

MBT is right, if he compares us with China. Though he prolly overlooked that the average Sinkie don't globe trot or shuttle cross-continentally to savour the finest delicacies in XinTianDi, or the boutique vintages from private wineries in Napas Valley, so it's hard for most of us to appreciate.

 

Chinese Govt is struggling bro. They got deposit rates like 5+ percent and inflation is well beyond that on a monthly basis. It's like your $5 chicken rice every month go up by 2 to 5 cents! How to tahan??!?

 

Economists use this thing called the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which is very hard to understand, i keep it simple and use the Chicken Rice Index (CRI)!

 

Basically US flooded the world with too much cheap USD to solve their own problems, it created excessive inflation/growth every where except in USA (*sigh*) and part of it we see in Singapore. When it reverses due to mounting international political pressure, likely to have growth markets like China coming off strongly, and we get a soft landing in Singapore.

 

Do PM me for the meet-up...

Edited April 23, 2011 by Zangetsu77

[Kyrios]

We are powerless lah..horsy will be restored to power. :angry:

[Without_a_car]

Housing 85 per cent of the population in 900,000 flats is no mean achievement by the HDB. Few know that the cornerstone of our vast low-cost housing programmes is the Land Acquisition Act. The Act allows the State to acquire private land for public purpose at pre-development prices. Dr Goh asked me, then a young officer, to draft the Cabinet memorandum proposing that the compensation to be paid for land acquired exclude its potential value.

 

We saw no reason why landlords should benefit from public infrastructural investment in roads, drainage, sewerage, power and water pipelines, etc. We would pay only the market value of raw land before public development. Our policy discouraged land speculation. The development charge imposed for change of use falls within the same concept. In effect, the State creamed off about half the potential value.

 

Sadly, the clarity of thought shown by Dr Goh in pricing land was lacking in more recent years. Relying on the concept of opportunity cost, the Chief Valuer, at the behest of either the Ministry of National Development or the MTI (I am not sure which), valued land with Raffles Place land as the benchmark. The assumption is that every square metre of land in any part of Singapore has the potential to be Raffles Place.

 

The excerpt was taken from this book

http://www.infibeam.com/Books/info/Ngiam-T...997169350X.html

[Without_a_car]

http://finance.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/...ge/message/2448

 

Jan 1, 2007

Did HDB land pricing use Raffles Place as rule?

 

I REFER to the letter, 'Why sale of state land is done at market price' by Ms Kee Lay Cheng of the Housing and Development Board (ST, Dec 28).

 

Mr Ngiam Tong Dow has a very interesting thing to say about land pricing in Singapore in his book: A Mandarin And The Making Of Public Policy, on page 153:

 

'Sadly the clarity of thought shown by Dr Goh Keng Swee in pricing land has been lacking in more recent years. Relying on the concept of opportunity cost, the Chief Valuer, at the behest of either the Ministry of National Development or the Ministry of Trade and Industry (I am not sure which), has valued land across Singapore using Raffles Place land as the benchmark. The assumption is that every square metre of land in any part of Singapore has the potential to be Raffles Place.'

 

Would the HDB like to comment how this has affected the pricing and allocation of subsidy of new HDB flats?

 

 

 

 

Viktor Ye Kok Kheong

 

 

Jan 2, 2007

Settle question of HDB subsidy once and for all

 

 

I REFER to Mr Viktor Ye Kok Kheong's letter, 'Did HDB land pricing use Raffles Place as rule?' (ST, Jan 1).

 

The Housing Board said that 'HDB does not reveal the land and construction costs of specific projects as they vary from location to location... That is why it incurs an overall deficit each year for its home-ownership activity, as reflected in its annual accounts which is available publicly'.

 

The reason given for not revealing the land and construction costs is somewhat illogical, because the HDB is not being asked to disclose the costs of every project or location. Why not just reveal the breakdown of total costs, and a few examples of some projects and locations, now and in the past?

 

What the HDB is saying is akin to 'since we cannot tell you each and every item, we won't tell you anything at all'.

 

Every once in a while, the question of the cost and pricing of HDB flats comes up in the media. So, why not put a stop to the on-going speculation that HDB flats are not really subsidised?

 

In the interest of maintaining Singapore's reputation of having the highest standards of transparency and corporate governance, the HDB should keep up with the standards of disclosure in the private sector.

 

To illustrate the point of transparency, no real-estate investment trust or publicly-listed company would be able to give the reason given by the HDB for not breaking down the information on the major cost components in its accounting statements.

 

How can we tell whether HDB prices are 'at market price' without a breakdown of the land and construction costs for comparison purposes?

 

As to the market price for land taking into account the 'substantial resources... invested to provide major infrastructure, such as roads, MRT, sewers and utilities, for the new housing development', thus significantly enhancing the land value beyond the acquisition costs incurred by the Government, aren't the billions collected every year from road tax, electronic road pricing, property tax, 30 per cent water- conservation tax, etc, supposed to be used to provide such infrastructure?

 

 

Leong Sze Hian

 

 

 

an 10, 2007

New flats' market value minus sale price = subsidy

 

 

I REFER to the letters from Mr Viktor Ye Kok Kheong and Mr Leong Sze Hian (ST, Jan 1 and 2, respectively) pertaining to the subsidy for new HDB flats.

 

First, Mr Ye asked if it is true that the Chief Valuer values all land in Singapore using Raffles Place as the benchmark. We wish to state that it is not so.

 

It is a fundamental valuation principle that lands are valued based on the specific attributes of the site, such as location, the permitted use of the land, and tenure.

 

The Chief Valuer's valuation has to be supported by comparative land-sales evidence.

 

It is simply not tenable to benchmark every plot of land to Raffles Place pricing, as this would drive property prices beyond the reach of most Singaporeans.

 

For example, state land alienated by the Singapore Land Authority for housing in Tampines will be valued taking into account the market values of housing in Tampines, while state land for industrial use in Tuas will take into account industrial- land values in Tuas, etc.

 

Second, Mr Leong asked HDB to reveal its land and construction costs to prove that HDB flats are subsidised. He has missed the point.

 

To understand the full extent of public-housing subsidy for new HDB flats, one should be comparing the market value of the flats with the sale prices charged by HDB, rather than look at the input costs of land and building.

 

New flats are subsidised as they are being sold at prices that are lower than what they would otherwise fetch in the open market.

 

If this subsidy is not real, why should many flat buyers choose to buy new flats from HDB instead of resale flats in the open market using the CPF Housing Grant?

 

Third, Mr Leong asserted that HDB has not kept up with the standards of disclosure in the private sector. He is wrong.

 

HDB's financial statements are prepared in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standards, audited by the Auditor-General and tabled in Parliament for information.

 

HDB's standards of disclosure and governance are no less than those required of publicly listed companies and real-estate investment trusts in Singapore.

 

Overall, HDB is unable to recover the development cost of new flats that it offers to the public, and has incurred a deficit averaging $390 million in its home-ownership programme in the last five years. These figures are reported in HDB's audited financial statements, which are publicly available for inspection and scrutiny.

 

Kee Lay Cheng (Ms)

Deputy Director

(Marketing & Projects)

For Director (Estate Administration & Property)

Housing & Development Board

 

It is simply not tenable to benchmark every plot of land to Raffles Place pricing, as this would drive property prices beyond the reach of most Singaporeans.

 

Isn't this is what is exactly happening now?

[Lycanthrope]

 

you are damn right man .... there are so many dogs around .....

 

 

 

We are powerless lah..horsy will be restored to power. :angry:

 

[Kiadaw]

MBT is right, if he compares us with China. Though he prolly overlooked that the average Sinkie don't globe trot or shuttle cross-continentally to savour the finest delicacies in XinTianDi, or the boutique vintages from private wineries in Napas Valley, so it's hard for most of us to appreciate.

 

Chinese Govt is struggling bro. They got deposit rates like 5+ percent and inflation is well beyond that on a monthly basis. It's like your $5 chicken rice every month go up by 2 to 5 cents! How to tahan??!?

 

Economists use this thing called the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which is very hard to understand, i keep it simple and use the Chicken Rice Index (CRI)!

 

Basically US flooded the world with too much cheap USD to solve their own problems, it created excessive inflation/growth every where except in USA (*sigh*) and part of it we see in Singapore. When it reverses due to mounting international political pressure, likely to have growth markets like China coming off strongly, and we get a soft landing in Singapore.

 

Do PM me for the meet-up...

 

I also try out a lot the delicacies at XinTianTi often whenever I was in Shanghai. I wouldn't say I know alot, but I hear many stories of people cannot afford housing, & struggling. And we are talking about professional, let alone the low wage production worker.

 

The glamor of city like Shanghai just mask the problem of the rest of the country. Even Shanghai itself, have a fog that never seems to goes away. Anyway, its not a place I will like to stay & live. Once in a while go there for business trip still ok.

 

Personally I think Singapore is not that bad. But people have high expectation, which should be naturally, as we are regarded as a first world country.

I personally is doing ok, not fantastic, but going by(could be better of course) but I can see many fellow Singaporean not enjoying the economic growth as they should.

 

Off Topic:

Yap, got time & meet up for kopi, & maybe hitch a ride in your 800 or is it 1000hp GT-R , before I leave for oversea posting (which who knows, can be permanent).

 

If got the offer, will be posted to a location 100km from the nurburgring, Oh yeah baby!

 

Imagine, when you feel sianz, just drive down & have a go at the ring. Hehe.

Edited April 23, 2011 by Kiadaw

[Without_a_car]

I also try out a lot the delicacies at XinTianTi often whenever I was in Shanghai. I wouldn't say I know alot, but I hear many stories of people cannot afford housing, & struggling. And we are talking about professional, let alone the low wage production worker.

 

The glamor of city like Shanghai just mask the problem of the rest of the country. Even Shanghai itself, have a fog that never seems to goes away. Anyway, its not a place I will like to stay & live. Once in a while go there for business trip still ok.

 

Personally I think Singapore is not that bad. But people have high expectation, which should be naturally, as we are regarded as a first world country.

I personally is doing ok, not fantastic, but going by(could be better of course) but I can see many fellow Singaporean not enjoying the economic growth as they should.

 

Off Topic:

Yap, got time & meet up for kopi, & maybe hitch a ride in your 800 or is it 1000hp GT-R , before I leave for oversea posting (which who knows, can be permanent).

 

If got the offer, will be posted to a location 100km from the nurburgring, Oh yeah baby!

 

Imagine, when you feel sianz, just drive down & have a go at the ring. Hehe.

 

How much is the chairman of the communist party paid? Considering, the amount of money he is paid, surely there can be certain latitude in the mismanagement of China, wouldn't you say?

 

The same certainly can not be said our of multi million salaried minister.

 

Can't be collecting Goldman Sachs pay, but delivering Temasek holdings or Lehman Brothers results right?

[Happily1986]

I don't feel asset inflation in Singapore can be considered severe.

 

Severe has to be like China or Hong Kong or Macau. In Macau, prices went up 4x over 4 to 5 years (i.e. your S$500K HDB flat become S$2m). In China, many people who bought 200K RMB apartments as late as 2006 are currently sitting on 1M RMB properties. I estimate the price increase there has been 500%. In Hong Kong, investment bankers earning millions a year can't afford the properties of their choice! There, posh apartments transact at higher quantums than our GCBs or Sentosa Coves. That's why many cash rich Chinese are absolutely stunned at the "dirt cheap" FREEHOLD S$2500 psf prime district properties!

 

In all these places, you find middle and even high income groups renting because of prohibitively high asset prices.

 

Apart from stronger fundamental growth and wealth, a key reason has to be US quantitative easing. U mustn't assume that Fed buys US$1.5 trillion from US banks with QEI, and US$600B from US banks with QEII and that's it. QEII in my opinion provided the "push" necessary to tip things over from recovery/growth into asset bubble/inflation.

 

U see, u put $1 into a bank's balance sheet, the bank will collateralize it and make it $20 to $100. Now u have US$2.1 trillion put into US banks' balance sheets, but of course a substantial part was necessary to keep the banking systems solvent during Lehmans. The excess money in USD will be depreciated, so they have long come into Asian markets via USD carried trades (borrow in USD and change into foreign Asian currency), directly into the financial systems and the inflation and growth we see in many Asian markets are directly related to this phenomena.

 

Why? US bank lends cheap money to Asian bank, Asian bank can then lend cheap money to consumers and companies. Savvy individuals have access to these cheap funds, but mass market doesn't realize it. Businesses grow, but it does not necessarily translate into wage growth. As businesses grow, cost of goods go up. Money goes into whacking up equities and assets.

 

Hence liquidity driven inflation and growth creates the polarity in society, some of which we see here in Singapore, as the average Singaporean struggles to content with rising housing prices, ever more expensive trips to NTUC Fairprice, and V-Power prices soaring faster than WTI or Brent or SGD:USD combined. Do u get credit cards calling u harassing u to borrow low interest rate money?? That's liquidity.

 

But do take a look at the BRIC and other Asean countries, they are much worse.

 

A fundamental saving grace in Singapore is the near zero interest rates, as SIBOR is pegged to LIBOR and the Brits ain't budging yet. So logically there won't be as much hot money here, and hence what we experience is already a moderated version.

 

What then happens from here? Simply, the liquidity is unbearable and the inflation will result in social unrest, BRIC and other EMs will have to react, even Euro-zone is reacting, and eventually as the US reacts, liquidity is withdrawn, USD carried trades will unwind (much like in 1997). Thankfully we will likely have a soft landing as we never had as much liquidity in our markets to begin with.

 

How low or how far do we go? I'd think a 50% retracement from the run-up is reasonable. E.g. original HDB price S$300K, went up to S$500K on paper, S$400K will probably mark a bottom. But... I'm not God... I am more likely to be wrong, wahahahaha!!!

 

Do you know what is the most insulting part of all these? In HK for e.g. asset appreciation has been deliberately aimed because vast tracts of lands, presumably suitable for residential development have long been snapped up by the capitalists just to keep the supply of land nice and tight. They release land ever so carefully. It is no different like what is happening in the diamond market where traders snap up and store stones for donkey years to prevent the market from imploding due to a glut in supply.

 

And these entities that are responsible are commercial entities. Can we blame them if they are perfectly justified to act so legally? Let us look at our own backyard. May i know who is the chief entity that has been responsible for this asset depreciation? I find it preposterous!

Edited April 23, 2011 by Happily1986

[Wind30]

Do you know what is the most insulting part of all these? In HK for e.g. asset appreciation has been deliberately aimed because vast tracts of lands, presumably suitable for residential development have long been snapped up by the capitalists just to keep the supply of land nice and tight. They release land ever so carefully. It is no different like what is happening in the diamond market where traders snap up and store stones for donkey years to prevent the market from imploding due to a glut in supply.

 

And these entities that are responsible are commercial entities. Can we blame them if they are perfectly justified to act so legally? Let us look at our own backyard. May i know who is the chief entity that has been responsible for this asset depreciation? I find it preposterous!

 

you mentioned in HK developers are hording land to prevent over supply. I thought our government is releasing quite a fair bit of land.

 

 

[Wind30]

How much is the chairman of the communist party paid? Considering, the amount of money he is paid, surely there can be certain latitude in the mismanagement of China, wouldn't you say?

 

The same certainly can not be said our of multi million salaried minister.

 

Can't be collecting Goldman Sachs pay, but delivering Temasek holdings or Lehman Brothers results right?

 

surely you don't believe that the "REAL" pay for the communist party is less than our ministers?

 

 

[Without_a_car]

surely you don't believe that the "REAL" pay for the communist party is less than our ministers?

 

Of course the party officials, bankers and the developers are in cahoots in proping up the property markets.

 

I think the Chinese Communist Party officials have vested interest in property prices, besides the state is the biggest landlord. Not to mentioned the Chinese state bank is the biggest lender in home loans and mortgages.

 

The part I don't understand is that, our officials, bankers, and developers are NOT in cahoots, how come we also experience severe asset price inflation???

 

 

[Jamesgetz]

Mr Mah failed to act on academic's advice to control HDB prices in 2009

 

'Severe asset inflation'

By Melissa Tan

Aug 11, 2009

 

SINGAPORE risks 'severe asset inflation' during the economic recovery, a local economist has warned.

 

But this danger can be averted if the Government acts now to control the prices of HDB flats, said Mr Paul Yip, Nanyang Technological University (NTU) associate professor of economics.

For the whole of 2009, the housing tsar insisted that the prices are affordable and there is no bubble.

 

Sep 15, 2009

HDB flats still affordable

8 in 10 households qualify for grants; first-timers use less than 30% of household income to service loans

By Goh Chin Lian, Senior Political Correspondent

 

HDB flats still affordable, says Mah

8 in 10 households qualify for grants; first-timers use less than 30% of household income to service loans. -ST

Thu, Sep 17, 2009

The Straits Times

By Goh Chin Lian, Senior Political Correspondent

 

 

Flat prices will rise but still be affordable

December 14, 2009 Monday, 05:25 AM

SINGAPOREANS can expect the prices of HDB flats to keep on rising as long as the economy continues to grow, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said yesterday.

 

Housing prices set to rise, but govt committed to affordable homes

By Joanne Chan, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 29 December 2009 2315 hrs

 

HDB flat supply will meet demand: Mah

Sat, Jan 16, 2010

The Straits Times

By Rachel Chang

 

This means they can comfortably buy any of the flats offered in the latest BTO projects this month, said Mr Mah.

Finally, 1 year after the NTU academic's warnings.

Mr Mah finally acknowledges there is a imbalance in the market

 

Jul 25, 2010

'Imbalance' in resale HDB

By Melissa Kok

 

THERE is an 'imbalance' in the HDB resale market and it may take around a year or so before prices of resale flats will stabilise.

 

These comments were made by National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan on Sunday, who was addressing concerns about the prices of HDB resale flats, which have been consistently rising since 2008.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/sin...1077918/1/.html

 

Govt introduces new measures to cool S'pore property market

By Joanne Chan | Posted: 30 August 2010 0824 hrs

 

prices shot up by some 11 per cent in the first half of this year and have now exceeded the previous peak in 1996.

 

National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan said prices are "on the high side".

 

He said: "If the current momentum in the market continues, what will likely happen is that a property bubble will form. And when the bubble burst, and not if, but when the bubble burst, there will be severe implications for individuals, as well as for the economy on the whole."

Channel News Asia

HDB resale prices rose 14.1% in 2010

By Joanne Chan | Posted: 28 January 2011 1357 hrs

 

SINGAPORE: Prices of HDB resale flats rose by 2.5 per cent in the last three months of 2010, the lowest quarterly growth for the year.

 

This brings the full year's price increase to 14.1 per cent.

 

confirm plus chop. good riddance if mah bow tan loses in the election... i think he was the one who implemented the ERP which collected so much $$$ but yet took forever to implement road widening, MRT extensions...

[Jamesgetz]

Of course the party officials, bankers and the developers are in cahoots in proping up the property markets.

 

I think the Chinese Communist Party officials have vested interest in property prices, besides the state is the biggest landlord. Not to mentioned the Chinese state bank is the biggest lender in home loans and mortgages.

 

The part I don't understand is that, our officials, bankers, and developers are NOT in cahoots, how come we also experience severe asset price inflation???

 

s'pore is an open country in terms of currency flows and investments. lots of hot $ from USA due to printing of $ flowing into asian and emerging economies which are expected to have good growth potential. rising oil and commodities prices also play a part

[Without_a_car]

s'pore is an open country in terms of currency flows and investments. lots of hot $ from USA due to printing of $ flowing into asian and emerging economies which are expected to have good growth potential. rising oil and commodities prices also play a part

 

No leh, SM says Minister for National Development was caught off guard.

 

http://www.pmo.gov.sg/content/pmosite/medi...blemssmgoh.html

On housing, Mr Goh acknowledged that the surge of immigrants in 2007 and 2008 caught the Government by surprise. But the Government had not stopped them from coming because the booming economy needed workers.

 

Mr Goh also acknowledgedthe National Development Ministry 'did not provide for the sudden surge' in its housing plans.