(24-05-2023, 10:04 AM)forum456 Wrote:  why 2 PAP Indian Ministers like to live in ultra outrageous big bungalows ?

does it means that they will never become ministers if they cannot live in outrageous big bungalows ?

To each his own.  The President actually prefers to live in her Yishun HDB flat.

Some peepur can afford to buy and live in a condo, but they continue to live in a HDB flat, having grown up in one, and they like the easy access to amentities.  Others can actually only afford to live in a HDB flat but to show off, or sextisfy some personal ego or dream, they stretched their finances to buy a condo while eating instant noodles for dinner to save money to pay the mortgage.

Question here is:  Did they receive favours from the government like cheap below market rent?  If they paid above the asking rent, what wrong have they done leh?  Further, if they are living within their means, they did not steal, then it's none of anybody's business to question how they spend their hard earned money right.

The two bungalows are state owned and vacant for years.  If two ministers rent it, I see it as income for Singapore.  They may be earning millions but are actually returning a portion of their income through renting properties which would otherwise be vacant.  Suppose they move out, who loses?  They?  No man.  It's Singapore because now we have lost two tenants.  Remember, these are state-owned properties which were vacant for years.  They are not owned by Ah Kow or Ah Seng who would be losing rental income otherwise.

Let's be honest lar.  The whole fracas is aimed at chipping away at PAP's integrity by casting aspersions on the ministers.  This is what the comments here and in edmw and Reddit are all about.  It's dirty politics.

(24-05-2023, 10:06 AM)ODA TETSURO Wrote:  They probably jealous jiakliaobee Halimah living in so freaking big Istana and not her HDB flat.

https://mothership.sg/2017/10/halimah-ya...oad-house/

(24-05-2023, 10:31 AM)Oyk Wrote:  To each his own.  The President actually prefers to live in her Yishun HDB flat.

Some peepur can afford to buy and live in a condo, but they continue to live in a HDB flat, having grown up in one, and they like the easy access to amentities.  Others can actually only afford to live in a HDB flat but to show off, or sextisfy some personal ego or dream, they stretched their finances to buy a condo while eating instant noodles for dinner to save money to pay the mortgage.

Question here is:  Did they receive favours from the government like cheap below market rent?  If they paid above the asking rent, what wrong have they done leh?  Further, if they are living within their means, they did not steal, then it's none of anybody's business to question how they spend their hard earned money right.

The two bungalows are state owned and vacant for years.  If two ministers rent it, I see it as income for Singapore.  They may be earning millions but are actually returning a portion of their income through renting properties which would otherwise be vacant.  Suppose they move out, who loses?  They?  No man.  It's Singapore because now we have lost two tenants.  Remember, these are state-owned properties which were vacant for years.  They are not owned by Ah Kow or Ah Seng who would be losing rental income otherwise.

Let's be honest lar.  The whole fracas is aimed at chipping away at PAP's integrity by casting aspersions on the ministers.  This is what the comments here and in edmw and Reddit are all about.  It's dirty politics.

all we wanted to know is how much rent they paid ? 

no need beat around the bush and simi vacant for yrs no income for SLA.

(24-05-2023, 10:31 AM)Oyk Wrote:  Question here is:  Did they receive favours from the government like cheap below market rent?  If they paid above the asking rent, what wrong have they done leh?  Further, if they are living within their means, they did not steal, then it's none of anybody's business to question how they spend their hard earned money right.

the market rental rate is at least $1.6 to 2 millions or more per year for such bungalows.

how can they afford to rent when their pay is only up to $2 millions per year ?

what do you think of person who spend all his yearly salary to rent a bungalow ?

(24-05-2023, 10:37 AM)forum456 Wrote:  the market rental rate is at least $1.6 to 2 millions or more per year for such bungalows.

how can they afford to rent when their pay is only up to $2 millions per year ?

maybe the rent is only $5K per month to help SLA since the bungalow were vacant (no income for SLA).

(24-05-2023, 10:39 AM)K88 shu shu Wrote:  maybe the rent is only $5K per month to help SLA since the bungalow were vacant (no income for SLA).

if it is $5K, need another review to check on SLA staff to see how many SLA staff rent such bungalows ?

(24-05-2023, 10:35 AM)K88 shu shu Wrote:  all we wanted to know is how much rent they paid ? 

no need beat around the bush and simi vacant for yrs no income for SLA.

Was that what Pritam Singh asked?

So who is beating around the bush now? 

(24-05-2023, 10:39 AM)K88 shu shu Wrote:  maybe the rent is only $5K per month to help SLA since the bungalow were vacant (no income for SLA).

That's the quality of your comments and the quality of the 39%.

Maybe.

Maybe your grandmother is Singh's mother.  

Maybe.  

(24-05-2023, 10:37 AM)forum456 Wrote:  the market rental rate is at least $1.6 to 2 millions or more per year for such bungalows.

how can they afford to rent when their pay is only up to $2 millions per year ?

what do you think of person who spend all his yearly salary to rent a bungalow ?

The market rate for a woman with no takers is zero dollar.  Whereas one who has a long line of suitors can ask for the sky and the moon.

The properties were vacant for several years, so there is not even a market to talk about.

It would be more correct to talk about SLA's asking rent.  So, let us not use the term "market rent", can we agree on that?

will salary of minister be adjusted or pegged to ability to rent colonial bungalows ?

if not, people like bala and shan will not become ministers if they cannot rent colonial bungalows ?

(24-05-2023, 10:55 AM)Oyk Wrote:  The market rate for a woman with no takers is zero dollar.  Whereas one who has a long line of suitors can ask for the sky and the moon.

The properties were vacant for several years, so there is not even a market to talk about.

It would be more correct to talk about SLA's asking rent.  So, let us not use the term "market rent", can we agree on that?

need to check the rental price when it is vacant and the rental price when it is rented to shan and bala.

if the rental price is in $millions, no one wants to rent.
when it is lowered to $20K, people like shan and bala will rent.
need to check if it is known to public or only afew people know.

why PM is not aware ?
who is the senior minister that shan informed ?
if he informed the wrong minister, it is a wrongdoing.

(24-05-2023, 10:55 AM)Oyk Wrote:  The market rate for a woman with no takers is zero dollar.  Whereas one who has a long line of suitors can ask for the sky and the moon.

The properties were vacant for several years, so there is not even a market to talk about.

It would be more correct to talk about SLA's asking rent.  So, let us not use the term "market rent", can we agree on that?

Spoken like a true idiotic pappy ball carrier.

Who told you there are no takers?  You grandmother?

SLA can always adjust the rent depending on who the tenant is.

(24-05-2023, 10:37 AM)forum456 Wrote:  the market rental rate is at least $1.6 to 2 millions or more per year for such bungalows.

how can they afford to rent when their pay is only up to $2 millions per year ?

what do you think of person who spend all his yearly salary to rent a bungalow ?

Oyk will post that 200K a year is the goodwill that the ministers are coughing up to keep SLA's bank balance in check.

Typical CCB CECA pappy angkat bola reply LOL

.
All sort of crap

(24-05-2023, 11:02 AM)forum456 Wrote:  need to check the rental price when it is vacant and the rental price when it is rented to shan and bala.

if the rental price is in $millions, no one wants to rent.
when it is lowered to $20K, people like shan and bala will rent.
need to check if it is known to public or only afew people know.

why PM is not aware ?
who is the senior minister that shan informed ?
if he informed the wrong minister, it is a wrongdoing.

I don't know if Pritam Singh will be asking the questions you asked, but it is for him to ask questions in Parliament.

As of now, PM Lee has commissioned SM Teo to compile the information to be given to Parliament upon Singh's questioning.

Did PM Lee do the right thing? Of course!  He has to prepare the facts, and compile them as otherwise, he would be accused of not doing his job, going to Parliament without doing due homework, and giving random BS answers right.

Did the two ministers do anything wrong?  We don't know, we do not have the information which are in the process of being compiled, so let's not start judging even before Pritam Singh has started questioning them.

As of now, there is not a shred, not a dot, of evidence to suggest wrongdoing.

It is a 'willing buyer willing seller' case. So nothing is wrong with that attitude. But SLA is under his ministry and being boss sla staff no choice kuai kuai accommodate whatever boss asks. Sla feels wah empty for years must as well rent out to get some revenue. To that why sla staff not willing to be creative to divide into smaller plots to rent out like those reverted properties in the former british army camps? Acutally state land is people land it belong to the people who gave unwritten authority to the ruling govt to handle all land affairs. Look if Oxley house can get away with it so is Ridout.

(24-05-2023, 11:06 AM)aiptasia Wrote:  Oyk will post that 200K a year is the goodwill that the ministers are coughing up to keep SLA's bank balance in check.

Typical CCB CECA pappy angkat bola reply LOL

Attack the comments but not the commenter.

Making ad hominem attacks is low..

When majority living and going to live in a smaller house each day its ok but you earn money from the tax payer , you even want a hilarious bigger land to satisfy your materialistic desires
Why do you really need a big land?
Why cant you rent from the private sector?
When you are a public servant , you should know your limit.What type of role model you are practicing?
Is our President and PM house bigger than yours?
You mustvbe greater than them.🤦

(24-05-2023, 11:15 AM)Oyk Wrote:  Attack the comments but not the commenter.

Making ad hominem attacks is low..

That is typical of your responses, pappy angkat bola cretin.

(24-05-2023, 11:12 AM)Oyk Wrote:  I don't know if Pritam Singh will be asking the questions you asked, but it is for him to ask questions in Parliament.

As of now, PM Lee has commissioned SM Teo to compile the information to be given to Parliament upon Singh's questioning.

Did PM Lee do the right thing? Of course!  He has to prepare the facts, and compile them as otherwise, he would be accused of not doing his job, going to Parliament without doing due homework, and giving random BS answers right.

Did the two ministers do anything wrong?  We don't know, we do not have the information which are in the process of being compiled, so let's not start judging even before Pritam Singh has started questioning them.

As of now, there is not a shred, not a dot, of evidence to suggest wrongdoing.

something is fishy when they did not inform PM about the rental when they report to him.
it is even more fishy when they informed another senior minister instead of PM.

it is like they felt PM would not approve and they bypassed PM ?

'nothing to hide' ?!?!?
aiyoh you know I know when something stinks of bullshit , it usually is bullshit lah.
every single singaporean knows - what is there to deny?
noone can " cast aspersions" on one's character and integrity except for the person and his factual deeds itself.
adultery scandal
fook mee hard scandal
now raiding the SLA's BNW GCBs , our reserves for own benefits . What character and integrity?

Shan and Vivian are potentially violating the Ministerial code of conduct by renting opulent properties from a public agency

Under Section 3 of the Ministerial Code of Conduct, it’s stipulated that a Minister must avoid any actual or perceived conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.

https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/da...isters.pdf

(24-05-2023, 11:19 AM)forum456 Wrote:  something is fishy when they did not inform PM about the rental when they report to him.
it is even more fishy when they informed another senior minister instead of PM.

it is like they felt PM would not approve and they bypassed PM ?

You are making assumptions to make allegations.  It's very dangerous.  Please retract your comments.

(24-05-2023, 11:23 AM)Oyk Wrote:  You are making assumptions to make allegations.  It's very dangerous.  Please retract your comments.

it is a fact asked by reporter to shan.
i am asking a valid question.

reporter asked who is the senior minister. shan refused to reveal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlXT5qGSbD8