What is worse than a govt that implements bad policies? A govt that implements bad policies then blame the people who suffer from their bad policies for its negative effects. Sickening isn't it? But the PAP govt has done it again.
"Unrealistic expectations are a reason for some unhappiness about flats"
- Straits Times, 7 April 2010.
The PAP govt opened the floodgates to foreign labor and did not expand the supply of housing accordingly causing the price of flat to escalated by more than 50% in 4 years. Yet it blames the problem on ordinary Singaporeans for having unrealistic expectations. The Straits Times article "Mr. Minister, a nice home, with nice view now please" is extremely insulting - it rubs salt on the wounds of ordinary Singaporeans who are now struggling with the high cost of living and belittles the financial pain ordinary Singaporeans suffer to own a home.
Please read the whole article to pick up flaws. One especially serious one is the chart of median household income vs housing prices. It was meant to illustrate that rising house price is due to rising household income. Using household income is extremely misleading as it has risen because more married women are pushed into the workforce due to the rising cost of living i.e. higher housing prices can drive household income up. Also, rising housing prices can cause couples with difficulties owning a home to share a place with their parents causing household income to rise. Our median worker income rising far slower(median income in 2000[Link] and median income in 2009[Link]). The Reform Party pointed out the discrepency why using household income can be misleading because of the effects of large number of PRs:
"Firstly though he omits to tell us, he probably means residents (which include PRs) and not just citizens when he talks about Singaporean households. Over the past decade the resident population grew by 15% while the resident labour force grew by approximately 25%. This was undoubtedly due to the surge in new citizens and PRs as a result of the government’s liberal immigration policies. The majority of these new residents did not have dependents (hence the much faster rise in the resident labour force than the resident population) and all of them would have had jobs so the proportion of working adults in the average resident household would have risen. As a result we would have seen an increase in real median income per household member without any real increase in the median incomes of Singaporean citizens who were already here before this period began, i.e., the majority of us. Another reason why the Minister’s figure is misleading is that it excludes households consisting solely of non-working persons over 60. If their incomes fell during this period or their numbers increased as a proportion of total households), due not only to the aging population but also because of the diminished employment opportunities for senior citizens as a result of the government’s open-door foreign worker policy, then excluding this group would distort the figure for median income per household member and make it look better than it really is" [Link]
The article uses "resident household income" instead of "Singaporean household income"- to tell how badly affected were Singaporeans by rising housing costs, you have to use Singaporean incomes as a measure. Using misleading statistics to push the blame for the housing situation to ordinary Singaporeans who are finding it increasing hard to cope with rising cost of living is highly irresponsible. The Minister should address the problem directly instead of denying responsibility.