The current contentious issue on the affordability of public housing was given another airing by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew who cautioned Singaporeans not to cast a protest vote against the ruling party over this.
As Singaporeans lament rising flat prices, he said they ought to understand that the Government sells them at a subsidised price, below market rate, so that they can own an asset that will appreciate in value over the years.
It adds to their wealth and this is an asset-enhancing policy Mr Lee believes citizens should not find fault with.
If they do, they must be ‘daft’, he said, at a dialogue during a housing conference as part of a series of events to mark the Housing and Development Board’s 50th anniversary.
First, a subsidised price and subsidies are two matter entirely, not to mention that there is no such thing as a subsidised price. There is only discounts and subsidies. In our case, our so-called affordable public housing is really not subsidised, but rather just sold to us at a discount since this government gahmen would have you believe that they have given us a real and tangible subsidy simply because they couldn’t make the same amount of money out of all of us compared to a private developer. As to whether the Minister Monkey Mentor is wise (or politically correct) or not in calling those who cast a protest vote ‘daft’, I’ll come back to that later.
“But if you criticise without an alternative solution and sometimes you criticise without giving the full facts and the context, it is our job to point out that you are just giving wrong information and giving figures out of context.” – SM Goh
There used to be a time when I would have countered the part about providing alternatives as being a load of crap since I am not paid a million dollars like the Tali-PAP mini$ter$. Yet, these days I have written blog posts arguing against voting out the Tali-PAP for those without any alternative plan. My point has been: What then Blue Cow, after we vote out the Tali-PAP? The situation certainly won’t change for the better while they figure out a plan, yes? Not to mention it might become even worse as a result of a hasty plan or the long deliberation in coming up with a proper one.
As an individual criticising the gahmen, it is easy for me to just shoot off and not provide an alternative. But for an opposition party, providing alternatives would simply be for the sole purpose of making their vision competitive. Just like my friend pointed out in his courtship analogy: A guy can bad mouth his rival, or demonstrate why he is the better guy to convince the girl to choose him. The first method would simply make the rival look bad, but it goes nowhere to address the girl’s needs and concerns.
The girl in the analogy refers to the electorate. But what are the needs of Singaporeans?
Since I am not a complicated nor exceptional brilliant person and I tend to think of matters simply, I will attempt to explain using Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.
Basically, the Tali-PAP gahmen has been successful in providing for the most basic of needs for Singaporeans – the physiological needs. Very few of us are starving or without a roof over our heads. That means, what really concern most Singaporeans would be the next level of needs above that: Safety (or security) needs, such as job security, property security, general security from crime and harm etc. For me, once these two levels of my needs are met, I am not really concerned whose is in power, or whose face or what is printed on the money – as long as that money would not suddenly become waste paper tomorrow.
After all, if that isn’t the case we won’t be complaining about the ever rising property prices, the prospect of an increase in crime or lawlessness as a result of the Integrated Resorts and foreigners, or losing our jobs to foreigners etc. Singaporeans generally are not very much concerned with democracy or even human rights, unless these matter translate into some form of monetary cost for each of us – for e.g. the failure to ensure the safety for foreign workers transiting on the roads (a matter of human rights) causing an increase of health subsidies paid out to foreign workers which translate to an increase of taxes or budget deficits. It is clearly obvious, that ‘security needs’ is the level that both the ruling Tali-PAP and the opposition parties cross swords and engage the electorate. Unfortunately, I personally don’t think I have seen much coming from the opposition to address these needs.
The opposition clearly also does not think that it is in the position to take over the reins of gahmen and appears to be contended to address our security needs by suggesting that as long as we keep the Tali-PAP in power, but lower their majority – those needs ‘will not be harm’. It is sort of like a guy telling a girl to marry the other guy so she can get her luxuries, and she could still enjoy all those by going to him for sex.
In another discussion with another friend, he mentioned said that if the opposition really wants to convince him, it should already act like it is in the position to take over. He pointed out that even before the Manchus established themselves as rulers of China, they already have officials and departments mirroring those of the Ming. In his opinion, that is why even when the the foreign (or ‘barbarian’) Qing suddenly found itself in place of the Ming, it lasted more than two and a half centuries in China while the Yuan didn’t even last one! It certainly makes some sense though I have yet been able to find the historical records to support his assertion.
Anyway, I am not suggesting that Singaporeans do not aspire for the higher levels in Maslow Hierarchy of Needs. Political participation would be social needs – the next higher level, and many Singaporeans try for personal glory (and thus self-actualisation) in the form of Gold Medals in sports meets, climbing Mt. Everest or even going to the South Pole.
However, the extent that of our political participation is generally limited to grumbling in taxis and coffee shops, venting our anger on blogs or forums, going to election rallies even when our constituency is a walkover, or at the very most voting in the General and Presidential Elections when required. Very rarely do Singaporeans forming interest groups in an attempt to effect / affect political outcomes. As enthusiasm and the level in participating in the political process is directly proportional to how much one can effect / affect a political outcome, the ruling Tali-PAP has been very successful in dampening political participation by refusing to bow to social pressures. It is my considered opinion that even though the opposition may attract some seemingly talented people right now, these people will fade from the scene within a decade if they do not start winning seats. Few people would have persisted like the late JB Jeyaratnam or even Chee Soon Juan.
Now, dampening the desire of Singaporeans in participating the political process is only one aspect of the ruling party’s strategy in staying in power. The other aspect of it would be making Singaporeans believe that voting for the Tali-PAP is in their own best interest, and that brings me back to the ‘daft’ remark recently made by Lao Lee.
Frankly, I do not really think giving Mah Bow Tan Mabok Tongue the boot would seriously affect property prices (since another Tali-PAP man will just take over to continue those policies). No one will be selling their house because Mabok is voted out because we still need a roof over our heads. That’s not mentioning, if everyone is trying to sell, where are we going to find buyers? So, even though I have called the housing policy Singapore’s version of modern slavery, as an existing house owner I still wouldn’t like the idea of a new policy that might caused the value of my property to start depreciating.
As such, Lao Lee’s comment has not only appealed to the self interest of people like me, it had created a pseudo-interest group that even though not led or organised by any one, would hesitate to cast a vote against (or even prefer to vote for) the Tali-PAP. The opposition may be in denial of this, and choose to believe public outrage at Lao Lee’s ‘inconsiderate or politically incorrect comment’ would give them votes, but the fact is that this pseudo-interest group would have a pronounced effect on the political outcome in the favor of the Tali-PAP.
Many will still disagree with my assertion. But let me just point out that just like the bread winners of the household would be the ones with a final say on all decisions in the home, the people who are now earning the money and paying to maintain their houses will be the very ones who would decide whether it is in their best interest to vote for the Opposition. While I am concerned about the threat to my job and financial security as a result of the current policies, the very idea that those who oppose the current policies don’t have an alternative is even a more dreadful prospect. In fact, while I still dislike the fact that I am working my ass off to pay for the remainder of my housing loan, I definitely wouldn’t want to end up with the group that currently complain that houses will soon be out of their reach. On top of that, it would be ironical and utterly unpleasant if it was my vote that result in that predicament!
One can be idealistic when one has completely nothing to lose. At this moment, I do not yet have that luxury.
