Now that PAP’s asset enhancement scam has been exposed, Singaporeans will also need to scrutinize public housing ‘subsidy’.
Frequently used by PAP, ‘market subsidy’ is misleading: there is no free ‘market’ as PAP controls both the supply and to a large extent demand (20,000 new citizens/30,000 new PRs annually if decreased would have resulted in price reduction).
If the government wants to increase the cost of HDB flats, it could simply reduce the supply.
Or increase the foreigner population drastically as it did between 1990 and 1996 or 2004 and 2010.
When PAP increases public housing ‘subsidy’ by say $20,000, it is solely because the price of a flat has increased by a much higher amount. The net effect – after giving the ‘subsidy’ – is increased government revenue.
When PAP owns the land to construct HDB flats and HDB is the developer cum banker, ‘subsidy’ should immediately become suspect to thinking Singaporeans.
What more when HDB’s funds are CPF members’ retirement savings?
We can see this clearer in another public good where the subsidy is clearly fake: healthcare.
With regard to polyclinic consultation fee – same charge regardless of doctor’s time – isn’t it preposterous for PAP to claim patients have been given $31.70 subsidy when a neighbourhood GP charges about $20 for consultation?
Question: Is public housing subsidy another PAP lie?