Home is where the heart is.

Coveting Singapore's public housing system - USATODAY.com

"People keep asking for housing that is cheaper, faster and better. "

Firstly, how cute of the guy to quote that stupid line. Secondly, we do want cheaper housing because it is insanely expensive. I long ago decided that CPF was not meant to be a retirement fund, but money for my housing. But the way prices are now, I doubt I can ever pay it all off. And should I ever buy on the resale market, the high COV is upfront. So yes, we want cheaper cos otherwise you are going to have a massive homeless situation. And yes we want it faster. It's because of you dumbasses not building when there was a massive influx of people that we don't have enough homes. Which, incidentally is a reason why the prices rose! DUH....if build it faster, you settle a lot of the discontent brewing in the country. Plus, you should have started building pre-emptively, forecasting the population, instead of building re-actively, the complaint and demand would not exist, would it? As for better, well, when we see our mature estates, and how large the flats are, and we see how small the current ones are, well, of course we go, "Say what?" And when you refuse to release the cost of creating the housing, while prices are rising exceedingly fast over a small period of time, you once again had best be prepared to deal with public discontent over the lack of transparency.

Now, don't get me wrong. I think we have a pretty comprehensive public housing system, but I also feel it has rather lost it's way over time. I mean, a public housing facility focusing on building condominium structures? It's definitely part of why things are so expensive. And arguing that the market set the prices is disingenuous, considering they can intervene with the price of food when market prices get out of hand.

I'm not saying we should do things like how they were. I like the idea of Treelodge@Punggol(but why, why, do we use @ in so many signs for so many places? So fucking stupid!), and would love to have more places like that. So I do think that we definitely have to progress, but there should be adjustment of policies over time as well. And stop-gap reactive measures don't count.They should also lower the age limit for singles. That was for the country at a different time, when it was a different place. With the families much smaller then they were before, the support network for singles is gone. Also, there is less of a stigma in a person staying alone at a younger age in the country, and more people want to spread their wings while young. So change it. Bring it down to age 25-27, for smaller units like the 1 and 2 room flats. And if we want to keep building designer housing under public housing, then it should come under a completely separate cost bracket. Public housing should be fully subsidised, as it was before (If it is now, show us the figures. It certainly feels like it is not, and arguments about market forces just reinforce that feeling). If full subsidy is too much, then something can be worked out. People are not unreasonable. But don't push us.