Does it really? I would love to see some like for like figures.
And they do take the locals jobs. Singaporeans don't mind so much though because they get massive subsidies from the government and the economy is doing pretty well.
If the government didn't provide incredibly subsidised housing the country would fall apart very quickly. Likewise if unemployment came close to 10%.
> Does it really? I would love to see some like for like figures.
That was nothing but a guess, but I think it's reasonable. Labor is the largest component of infrastructure costs by a wide margin, and migrant labor would be at least 5x less than local. Even if it's "only" 2x cheaper my point would stand, though, and that seems very conservative indeed. I'd also like to see some figures.
I don't know what "massive subsidies" you could be referring to. The HDB system is the only one I can think of? Calling it "incredibly" subsidized is kind of overstating it - maybe 20%-30%, and you can only play that game twice, with 6 years in between. I think of it as more like a stock option.
The HDB program costs about a billion a year. There's about 3.3 million citizens, so that's $300 a year each. I don't call that "massive", and I don't see why the country would collapse if it was withdrawn (not that there's any reason it would be).
No, that is completely wrong, but admittedly it's a fairly uncommon situation so the confusion is understandable. Singapore is quite unique in that it's such a tiny city, the government has very tight control over land use, and as such has historically acted as a gigantic real estate developer. It has seen its mission as providing cost-effective and yes, sometimes subsidized, housing for its population, and the program to manage this is known as the HDB.
Over 80% of the population live in HDB-provided apartment housing. However, the vast majority of those residents own their own apartments, having purchased them from the government (and yes, certain subsidies can apply - up to perhaps 30% the fair value of the property). It's public housing only insofar as it was developed by the government - certainly not free or nearly-free as the phrase might imply in other countries, so it's quite a misleading term to use.
The condo in that case is going to be far superior in every imaginable way. A $400k BTO is going to be very basic.
The rule of thumb is 20-30% discount on fair market value. Not 80%! Yes, it's a pretty sweet scheme if you're eligible, but it's not a total giveaway.
If you really could buy a $400k HDB that was comparable to the $2m condo next door then the $2m condo would never even be built, as there would be no market for it.
There are serious restrictions on resale hdb flats which cause them to be priced a lot lower than condos.
These restrictions are deliberate policy to ensure affordable housing and subsidise Citizens and PR.
The major ones:
- You have to be a citizen or PR of at least a few years. This cuts out 1.5 million people.
- You have to meet racial and PR quotas. This limits demand.
- You can't have other properties. This excludes people with overseas property and excludes wealthier Singaporeans from buying HDBs as investment property.
Yes I know. You sound like you're agreeing with me. I was arguing against some long-ago comments that insinuated the subsidies were "massive", "incredible", etc, and that being born in singapore was some kind of golden ticket to a life of endless government gravy. This is not at all the case.
I don't know where people thing the SG government would get these "incredible" subsidies from anyway. It's not the UAE!
Does it really? I would love to see some like for like figures.
And they do take the locals jobs. Singaporeans don't mind so much though because they get massive subsidies from the government and the economy is doing pretty well.
If the government didn't provide incredibly subsidised housing the country would fall apart very quickly. Likewise if unemployment came close to 10%.