Archive

Archive for the ‘Problems caused by PAP’s policy’ Category

When aliens got too many

April 28, 2012 Leave a comment

To be fair, I wouldn’t know if this post is posted deliberately. After all, in this social media society, it’s pretty easy to raise tensions. And I am sure this post had made it’s round in Facebook, TR, TOC and other social media platform , and you have most probably read it:

Apparently, this pinoy loves Tamil shows

Talk about complaining, this pinoy has surpassed the average Singaporeans! A talent indeed.

This facebook comment is waiting to be criticized, especially at such heightened tensions between true blue Singaporeans and aliens. But then again, I have witnessed foreigners (not only among the Pinoy communities I have to stress) who had displayed similar attitudes as Angelo.

It is natural for people such as Angelo to feel threatened by the growing vociferous Singaporeans. At the same time, I think it is callous and insensitive for a foreigner (treated even so for new citizens) to overplay their importance. From another post, I have indicated how under appreciated Singaporeans are and how the government is not helping, but are actually worsening the notion that foreign talents are extremely important to the nation. The corollary is even foreigners are perpetually believing in their own self-importance and superiority over citizens of the country they are working in. In my opinion, the ‘talent’ word should simply be scraped. But doing so will blunt the PAP’s assertion that more foreign workers are required.

In a short 10 years since the policy of opening the flood gates to foreigners, the aliens have changed from a position of being silent on local politics to one that tried to lecture Singaporeans to welcome aliens like themselves (and applauding the PAP government that allowed them to enter Singapore) as they grow from a few thousands to millions. Never mind that they left their own country and are unwelcoming of Singapore’s culture evidenced by their unwillingness to assimilate thanks to their growing numbers.

For me, it is a very sad thing. The Singapore culture, which the PAP government doesn’t seem to understand nor recognize (since the ex-president actually commented before that there is no Singaporean culture), is slowly dissolving. As a young nation, it has taken many decades for the 4 major races to assimilate to one another creating the by-product of Singlish with the smattering of different dialects and languages in a communication tool that is unique in this world (Malaysia comes close although Malay is still the dominant language).

What the government has done is essentially destroying the social fabric in exchange of cheap economic growth driven by solely labor input. The argument of the importance of economic growth will always be correct since it’s simply about rising numbers. But is building a nation only about the economy? Even though I am economically trained, I choose to look at problems from the normative point of view. Singapore is a country, not just a city. Without a doubt, the PAP government is one that is without a soul. They only recognize numbers, symbols that mean tangible calculation. It is extremely difficult for them to understand things that cannot be seen. What they failed to recognize, is the intangible cost of social disruption and the rising daily social tension cost between the local and the aliens.

HDB flats: Public housing left to private market forces. SBS: Private company funded by public funds

February 22, 2012 9 comments

Competition

I mentioned earlier that the McKinsey study also mentioned the term perfect competition as one of the key to improve productivity. The fundamental idea is also simple. Under a perfect competition environment, companies are forced to outdo one another to survive. Inefficient and ineffective companies are naturally displaced by stronger opponents who could generate more output at the same or even lower input. A stronger company would also most likely mean a more productive company. More importantly, consumers get to enjoy a better quality and/or lower cost product. In essence, a competitive environment is important for productivity to thrive.

Singapore has been a great place to do business. There are many rules and regulations that build a strong system that allows businesses to compete freely. Yet, we see that such regulations are selectively applied. One industry stands out in terms of controversy and complexity when we tried to apply the word competition–None other than the transportation sector.

Many Singaporeans, including myself, were peeved when we were told that the government is co-funding $1.1 billion to help so called privatized bus companies procure buses. Many questioned the reason for the government to use public funds to assist private companies. While the intention is good, to improve the current crunch on public transport, it is not unreasonable to question whether such direct assistance is appropriate.

By co-funding, it is akin to a direct transfer of $1.1 billion worth of assets (to be depreciated over many years) to SBS/ SMRT. These are valuable resources that can generate a lot more income for ComfortDelgro and SMRT. For people who are unaware, SBS is mostly owned by ComfortDelgro, and the majority shareholder of both ComfortDelgro and SMRT happens to be Temasek Holdings. If the government insists that it is best to let the companies go private and operate in a free market, why did the government decided to interfere?

Public funds go into private companies to generate more income for shareholders. The balance sheet of the transport companies got a boost and in time to come, the assets will generate more income to the profit and loss statements. Shareholders (including the government) of the transportation companies rejoiced. In the meantime, the commoners down the street did not reap any benefit from this capital injection. One can argue that the people benefit from lower waiting time for buses. However, there is also the possibility of slower traveling buses since the roads are already so congested. Simply adding more buses onto the road do not seem like the wisest move I would expect from the legion of scholars within the Civil Service.  The opportunity cost of such a huge amount of money is almost limitless.

In my opinion, the government should loan out the $1.1 billion instead of simply giving it away. After all, we are talking about healthy privatized transportation companies. From the media release by ComfortDelgro, full year revenue in 2011 increased by 6.4% to reach $3.41 billion, and net profit increased by 3.1% to $235.6 million. The Singapore taxi operations increased 7.6% to $748.7 million due to higher rental income from a larger fleet and increase in new replacement taxis. Bus revenue also increased 3.1% to $566.1 million as average daily ridership grew by 6%.

All these figures are respectable numbers. As such, I don’t see the rational to give these privatized companies such a huge amount of money for free. With more bus comes greater operating cost. Will the transport companies then again cite operating cost increase to justify their fee hike? If the money is to be loaned to the companies with interest, the returns from the loan can be put to better use that benefit the general public.

It seems that a government backed monopolistic position of SBS and SMRT has left the companies inefficient, inflexible and ineffective. Many people quoted Hong Kong and Taiwan, where the public transportation system seems to function better and smoother than Singapore even though the fares are lower despite the fact that the companies are nationalized (and they survive). With the government supporting these companies as the largest shareholder and even allow capital transfer easily from the country’s treasury, it is not difficult to see why our transportation companies had ballooned into a rigid, lurid semi-government agency that only serves the interest of the selected few. While the Worker’s Party Yaw Shin Leong incident was shamelessly trumpeted on local media in recent times, the media seems to be pretty quiet on this blatant transfer of public funds from one pocket to another, which to me is a more serious issue.

Government-linked companies like Singapore Airlines, Changi Airport and Keppel Corporations continue to do well amid intense competition from foreign companies, suggesting that free competition is good and government intervention is not required. The issue is straightforward. If the government wants to intervene with public funds, SBS and SMRT should be nationalized. If the companies remain as private entities, public funds should not be used.

Merry Christmas everybody!

December 24, 2011 Leave a comment

I just came back from holidays and was astonished at the kind of damage the PAP (or government-linked, however you wish to call it) has digged for themselves this christmas. Firstly, I would like to suggest to PAP/ pro-PAP members to stop more defensive moves that seems to create a larger hole. PUB’s classification of a flash flood as ‘ponding’ is uncalled for. A flood is a flood. Damage is done, shop owners are unhappy about monetary losses and public is unhappy to see their favorite shopping street ‘ponded’ again. Concrete actions are needed to solve the problem and they can stop playing with the English dictionary. And why are plans to widen the canals only be implemented next year? Where is the urgency since the flooding of Orchard Road SIX months ago??? Probably the top management at PUB are having fun clearing their leave after getting their fat bonuses.

MP Seng’s recent note to push the blame to TOC is also uncalled for. His own pathetic little speech with poor use of English (and yes, he was telling people that broken english is ok) language sparks a chain of youtube videos and complaints before TOC started publishing an article (sure, it’s bias, but what do you expect from a media that tends to be more bias against government controlled media? I also admit in my first post that my blog tend to be bias against the government for very obvious reasons). Such an article posted on Facebook (rather than coming on bravely on national TV) is not only cowardy but also speaks volume about his sincerity in apologizing for this episode. More importantly, it seems to insinuate utterly poor communication skills of the authorities.

So much for a ‘world class’ government.

Price up, up, up

December 5, 2011 4 comments

Is there any reason why nobody is feeling they have gained anything from the so called economic growth?

Just today, ComfortDelgro announced a ridiculous increase in taxi fares to ‘cater to higher demand’, just weeks after a price revision by SMRT and a report stating that transportation and accommodation are the two main drivers of inflation in Singapore. While I am not against price increase, the magnitude of increase this time round is jaw dropping.

As a summary, most prices (per unit, whether in minutes or meters) increased from almost 4% to 22%. Current booking of Limousine increased from $8 to $10 while advanced booking of limousine increased from $16 to $18.

While peak hour surcharge decreased from 35% to 25%, the hours extended from 7am-9am from Mon-Fri and 5pm-8pm from Mon-Sat to a ridiculous 6am-9am (excluding public holidays) and 6pm to MIDNIGHT Mon-Sun including public holidays. How on earth is 6am considered peak period baffles me. On the other hand, we have ministers asking the citizens to travel to work earlier (and gave some cents off your transport cost). If 6am is considered peak, I don’t know what is non-peak. It’s totally ridiculous.

Do you know what that means? It means you’ll forever be paying ‘premium prices’ from 6pm to 9am the following day. From 6pm to midnight, you have to pay 25% more. From midnight to 5:59am, you have to pay midnight surcharge of 50%. From 6am to 9am, you have to pay 25% more again. So according to ComfortDelgro, peak hours (including midnight demand) forms 15 hours a day.

The removal of holiday surcharge of the pathetic $1 is a joke.

The ComfortDelgro group is taking advantage of their monopolistic position to push prices up, and given their close connection to the government, we have the ‘National Taxi Association’ URGING other taxi companies to follow suit. Well, given that the big boy is taking the lead, other smaller taxi companies would just have to follow suit. The last thing I want to know is ComfortDelgro is increasing their rent to the taxi drivers (and probably quote the increasingly expensive COE and oil price (like when is oil price not a reason right?) as a reason).

The often used excuse is diesel oil price is increasing and the taxi group is ‘doing their part’ to ‘help’ the taxi drivers cope with the rising cost. While it’s true that diesel oil price is increasing, crude oil (the main factor affecting diesel) is no where near the price levels back in 2007 (the so called last price adjustment). The economic outlook is pretty dim given all the US and Europe financial problems. And the company has strategically opted to increase prices before you feel your wallet shrinking. If the company is sincere in helping the taxi drivers, why don’t they lower their obscene rental rates?

Who are the losers? Consumers of course. With local transportation fully monopolized by government linked companies, consumers don’t have much of a choice. What is made even worse is the sub-par trains and bus services we have that is overwhelmed by the increasing population. While SBS and SMRT loves to self-praise themselves as world class, they are not comparable to Hong Kong, Taiwan and Japan. Even the taxi drivers might end up losing as the higher price will kill off more demand which might leads to lower pick up rates.

Every price is going up, up, up in Singapore. Officials say inflation is 5%. Do you feel it’s 5%? Property tax just went up because housing valuation is increasing. What causes housing valuation to shoot over the roof? Poor housing policy handling by the PAP government, and opening the flood gates to foreigners into the country and allowing them to enter the HDB market; subsidized housing originally planned for Singaporeans. So now Singaporeans are paying the price for such failed policy (admitted by the PAP themselves that they have failed in this area) while paying the ministers such high salaries?

While the government claims that a higher population will make Singapore better off, what we see is an entirely different picture. We see tonnes of problems caused mainly by increased demand for goods and increased land demand thanks to the liberal population policy. We only see increased cost of living especially in housing and transportation, deteriorating infrastructure as the increasing population continues to overwhelm, marginal increase in salary that ends up mostly eaten away by inflation, decreased quality of life due to alarmingly shrinking flats (while some lame academic high post officer from HDB claims that personal space is larger due to smaller household size, it doesn’t make any sense since a larger household can simply buy 5-rooms flats instead of 4-rooms. Personal space and utility of a larger living space is not correlated), suppressed salary for the unskilled and uneducated due to cheaper labor from poorer countries made worse by the lack of minimum wage laws and uncontrolled population policy, distortion of the social fabric…..I can go on and on.

What one obvious benefit of a liberal population policy is: more tax money being collected by the government. However, I have yet to see any being used significantly in pressing problems such as the poor, disabled and elderly. All these, while hearing billions of losses from Temasek and GIC.

To the authorities if you ever read this post, are you ever ashamed of yourselves? How the heck did you manage to sleep soundly at night? Oh, I forgot, you are too busy counting your money in the bank to take notice. And when is the Salary Review Committee announcing the ministers’ salary review again? The last time I heard the committee’s second meeting is scheduled in year 2016.

More money lost via Temasek

July 5, 2011 6 comments

Temasek Holdings has once again taken huge money losing positions (via many sub-hedge funds) in ‘they think it’s stable stocks to ride on China’s economic growth’:

Source: Bloomberg

Temasek Holdings Pte, the Singapore state-owned investment company, is seeking to raise about HK$28 billion ($3.6 billion) by selling stakes in China Construction Bank Corp. (939) and Bank of China Ltd. (3988), two of the country’s three biggest banks.

The Singapore-based investment company is selling about HK$18.7 billion of shares in Bank of China and about HK$9.3 billion in an offering of China Construction Bank stock, according to term sheets obtained by Bloomberg News.

Shares of China’s four biggest banks fell in Hong Kong trading today after Moody’s Investors Service said banks’ loans to local governments may exceed official estimates by more than 3.5 trillion yuan ($540 billion) more than official estimates and the credit outlook for the industry could decline.

The extra liabilities, coming on top of the national audit office’s findings last week of 10.7 trillion yuan in local government debt, may fuel concern that banks will be unable to absorb losses on defaults should property prices drop.

Bank of China shares slid 0.3 percent to HK$3.86 in Hong Kong today while China Construction Bank dropped 1.2 percent to HK$6.48. Industrial & Commercial Bank of China (1398) Ltd., the world’s most profitable bank, fell 0.5 percent to HK$5.93.

Morgan Stanley (MS) is managing both sales, the terms show. Jeffrey Fang, a spokesman for Temasek, declined to comment.

2006 Investment

Temasek’s Fullerton Financial Holdings Pte. Ltd. unit is offering about 5.2 billion shares in Bank of China for HK$3.60 to HK$3.67 each, according to a term sheet. That’s as much as 6.7 percent less than today’s closing price.

Temasek owned about 10.5 billion shares, or 12.5 percent, of Hong Kong-listed Bank of China, according to a Dec. 31 filing. The fund paid about $1.5 billion for a five percent stake in the lender in 2006.

Cairnhill Investments (Mauritius) Pte. Ltd. and Crescent Investments (Mauritius) Pte. Ltd., both controlled by Temasek, are also selling about 1.5 billion shares in China Construction Bank for HK$6.22 to HK$6.35 each. The Singapore fund holds seven percent, or 16.9 billion shares, of China Construction Bank, according to company filings.

Temasek, set up in 1974, bought $1 billion of stock in China Construction Bank’s initial public offering in 2005. It also purchased an undisclosed stake in the Chinese lender from China SAFE Investment Ltd. the same year.

To contact the reporter on this story: Zijing Wu in London at zwu17@bloomberg.net Cathy Chan in Hong Kong at kchan14@bloomberg.net.

***********************

This is obviously a desperate move to dispose off questionable chinese national banks with high links with a corrupt chinese government. It’s appalling how the Financial Crisis had not taught the two megamoths GIC and Temasek that bank stocks are not exactly the best stocks to own. And they obviously takes up very risky positions (looking at how Temasek can be purchasing the same stocks via 2 other hedge funds). So who are the management of Temasek accountable to at the end of the day? The citizens deserve a clear answer and some responsibilities taken.

Uncle Tony will be Singapore’s next President

July 3, 2011 4 comments

As expected, George Yeo gave way for Uncle Tony in the running for President and Nathan is sick of being an old puppet. I don’t know about you but I honestly think that if George Yeo is to run, his chance of winning is higher than Uncle Tony. George Yeo is well liked and he had earned sympathy points during the last GE. Uncle Tony, on the other hand, is only known as one of the silver hair old guards, highly loyal and strategically placed in SPH (which is supposedly the ‘national security and media control’ in disguise), rarely seen in the spotlight.

How many of you actually believe that Uncle Tony will be impartial? While the PAP insist that they have yet to endorse any candidate and Tony Tan is running as an independent candidate, the recent waves of praise from Prime Minister Lee Hsien Long, various MPs (many whom I have never heard of their names anyway) and tonnes of ‘advertisements’ from the local media is nothing short of an official endorsement by the PAP government. Uncle Tony is PAP’s god-given. He is ONE OF THEM. Non-confrontational (since I reckon he is one of the old guards that formulate the current imperialistic system anyway) and a typical PAP leader.

All of us knows that the president of Singapore is nothing but a puppet figure. If the PAP is really keen on the idea that the President post is created to protect the country’s reserves, they should allow an independent figure, independent from PAP, to stand as President. What check is there on the PAP government if the president is one of their minions? You mean the check is only applicable to NON-PAP governments? In my opinion, the presidency is yet another scheme that should be discarded. What use is a puppet president with $3 million of tax payer’s money wasted and only appears to do charities, handshakes and parade around the stadium every national day celebration?

The idea that the next government might waste hard earned reserves by the previous government (referring to the PAP themselves) is to chastise voters as idiots who can’t make a rational choice of their preferred government. Why is only the PAP government allowed to play around with the reserves, wasting it on losses in investments and all profits never made their way back to the budget to assist Singaporeans???? The fact that the PAP is reluctant to disclose the reserves is not so much of a national security issue. It is more of a PAP-security issue as they do not want their ugly losses and wastage disclosed to the public. What a shame. This presidency episode is making me view the PAP with much more negativity.

BT reported 76% margin for some DBSS while Khaw Boon Wan said it’s ‘only’ 26%

July 3, 2011 Leave a comment

Obviously Business Times stirred up a pot of shit with this outrageous figure of 76% margin. While the new Minister of National Development is quick to correct this figure in his blog (surprisingly the controller of local media is being taken for a ride by it’s own minions), the minister cited the mistake is due to a large difference between the land cost:

“For example, it quoted a land price of $82,222,000 and a maximum GFA of 721,188 square feet for the project.  Both figures were wrong. The correct figures were respectively $178,128,000 and 682,385 square feet.  This was a huge difference of almost $100 million.  The errors led to a gross over-estimation by BT of the developer’s profit and gross profit margin.”

No matter what, the fact remains that a ‘subsidized’ public housing will be sold for close to 30% profit. And that is ridiculous. What is even more outrageous is the Sim Lian can afford to dramatically lower their price range by a difference of $100,000. It does not take a PhD to realize that the DBSS is a failed policy. If the government wants to provide public housing, it should go back to the roots of offering affordable (but then the term affordable is a relative term in this society with burgeoning Gini coefficient) housing for everyone. No point offering something in between the gray lines and charge a price most people cannot associate with the term ‘public housing’. Didn’t the government knows something as simple as product differentiation? If the government wants to provide a ‘middle class’ housing that lies between a public housing and a condominium, it should be relegated to the private sector.

Why did Sim Lian group gave a ‘misleading’ ‘indicative price range’ if they expect to sell at a lower cost, as it was asserted in the local newspaper? What use is this ‘indicative price range? Nothing except to gauge how much profit surplus the developer can squeeze from the buyers. Private developers are greedy profit driven monsters. We don’t expect them to be benevolent in selling below the maximum price they can charge. The DBSS scheme had created another money tree for private developers subsidized by citizens taxes and take advantage of extreme low elastic demand caused by the era of Mah Bow Tan.

That is absolutely absolutely absolutely unforgivable. MND and the government has helped the private developers to leech on citizens.

What happens when you tried to outsource a high demand product – Property

June 18, 2011 2 comments

I can never understand why would the government want to outsource a PUBLIC housing to a PRIVATE company that would later price the public housing to PRIVATE market prices. So instead of a ‘market rate’ for only resale flats, we now have market rate for NEW public housing. What’s the point of offering ‘better fitted furnishings’ when it comes at such a high price?

**************************************

Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_680819.html

$880,000: Priciest HDB flats launched in Tampines

THE priciest-ever new HDB flats went up for sale yesterday under a Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) development launched in Tampines.

The most expensive five-room flats at Centrale 8 by developer Sim Lian will set buyers back a cool $880,000.

That works out to a whopping $750 per square foot – a price tag more often seen on suburban condominiums.

PropNex chief executive Mohamed Ismail said he did a double take when he first heard about the prices.

‘No doubt it’s in Tampines, which is a mature estate with many good things going for it, but it is still extremely high for a public housing flat,’ he said.

DBSS flats are public housing units designed and built by private-sector developers and they typically come with more luxurious fittings.

**************************************

Just because you add in a few ‘luxurious fittings’ doesn’t substantial the $880,000 price tag on a PUBLIC housing that is essentially owned by HDB! This is what happen when you naively think that that it’s fine to let a private company handle a public project and let it charge whatever price it deemed necessary to get some ‘reasonable’ return. A 5-room BTO in Yishun doesn’t cost more than $450-500,000. The nearby DBSS in the exact same area as Centrale 8 cost somewhere from $3-550,000 for a new 5-room flat a few years ago. And here you have a DBSS in Tampines costing almost twice of that. If even a PropNex chief executive couldn’t believe his ears and eyes upon knowing the price tag, there MUST be something wrong with such pricing.

Ultimately, the ones who gains are Sim Lian and the government. Those who end up buying the most expensive units in Centrale 8 (what a stupid name anyway, like Tampines Central or Junction 8 or something) end up paying excessive consumer surplus and saddled in more debts. Not for a private property. But for a public flat. While the location is attractive, the ROI is not. You are better off buying some $300-400,000 5-room flat in some other places and sell it at the market rate of $5-600,000 a few years down the road. Saying that, I must reiterate that most people who stay in public housing do not usually speculate on their property for investment and would stay for a long time.

Even Pinnacle at Duxton, the mother of all DBSS and a much better location than Centrale 8, wasn’t priced at that range when it was first built. The danger is with the impending raise in income ceiling for flats, demand will increase. The current supply crunch will also almost guarantee the Centrale 8 would be snapped up regardless of the crazy prices. The real danger, however, is the price point would be increased for future DBSS projects.

Once again, you have the most ridiculous project undergone under the Minister of National Development’s ward.

EZ Singapore…loose, in fact

June 5, 2011 Leave a comment

Singapore must be the easiest place on earth to get permanent residency:

Source: http://www.singaporesetup.com/singapore-employment-pass-eligibility-certificate-epec/

**********

Singapore Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC)

What is the EPEC?

Have good educational background and professional working experience? Looking for a job in Singapore? If you are a foreigner and would like to work in Singapore, you:

  1. Have to first secure a job offer in Singapore;
  2. Once you have a job offer, you need to apply for an Employment Pass;
  3. Only upon approval of the employment pass you can start employment in Singapore.

The main problem with the above steps is that many Singapore companies are often reluctant to make job offers because they don’t know if the employment pass will be approved or not. In order to address the above problem, Singapore government has introduced so called employment pass eligibility certificate (EPEC). This certificate from Singapore government will make it lot easier for you to find a job in Singapore for the following two reasons:

  • You will be issued a 6-12 months visa to stay in Singapore and look for a job.
  • Your prospective employer will have the high confidence that you will be issued an employment pass if they decide to hire you.

The processing time for an employment pass eligibility certificate (epec) application is about 3-4 weeks from the date of submission.

EPEC Requirements: The following documents are required for application of employment eligibility certificate:

  • Copies of your educational certificates and transcripts
  • Passport copy
  • 2 passport size photos
  • A copy of your Curriculum Vitae (CV)

All documents must be in English or official English translation is required.

After you have found a job in Singapore and have obtained your employment pass, you are eligible to apply for permanent residence in Singapore.

**********

Such ease of getting a visa (up to 12 months!!!) and getting PR status must be, once again, uniquely Singapore. If the ruling party is not rethinking this policy, we will again see great population growth, transportation problem, and housing problem getting worse for the next 5 years.

Flash floods….AGAIN!

June 5, 2011 Leave a comment

While I was too busy in recent times to update this blog (and also due to lack of ‘boomz’ news), God decided to test the ‘new anti-flood’ system the government had put in place.

The pictures are amazing, going by TR’s facebook page:

Wow, waterfall!!

Bukit Timah, the kid that loves to submerge in water

People are blaming the construction going on

So what happened to the 'anti-flood' barrier?? The Godzilla is a prank on this pic, lolz. But I love it.

Luckily for the ruling party, election is over. But the citizens will remember this episode. At least, it’ll remain in my blog as archive. I have no doubt this will once again appear on the front page of tomorrow’s paper. The Straits Times website (http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_676435.html) innocuously show a less severe picture near the main headline although the picture insinuate flood occurring due to the nearby construction site.

Shops in Orchard are once again hit hard. I wonder whether Hermes and Wendy’s are affected again. Once upon a time, the PUB and PAP gave excuses that flash floods are rare occurrences that happened once every 50 years, and it doesn’t make any economical sense to undertake major alterations to the canal and road system to solve the problem. Well, obviously God doesn’t seem to agree. With global warming and ever changing climate across the entire world, the PAP has to rethink how to solve these problems as heavy rain becomes a norm rather than the exception. As a country deriving most of it’s GDP growth from the service industry, Orchard Road flooding is a huge dent on our economic competitiveness, especially with Singapore receiving rain throughout the year.

The ever-elitism mentality of the ruling party has once again clouted their decision backed with the usual ‘cost and benefit economic analysis’. Apparently the economists and statisticians don’t communicate with the meteorologists (from probably NEA?). In econometrics speech, it’s called omitted variable bias. I’m not surprise, such studies are usually conducted in the ivory towers of the government offices.

I look forward to what the new minister of Environment and Water Resources, Vivian Balakrishnan has to say. Mr Vivian seems to be cursed by water. First we have the dead maid in the water tanks and now we have flooding again. Probably after all that analysis and decision among the elites they’ll suggest longer, bigger barriers as a solution?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.