Hello? Do you know what you're posting?
you're making a assumption here. So you know that 15 years ago
when SG introduced the grand it is not a temp GDP boost measure?
And that Aust first time
grant is a GDP boost measure? How smart are you huh?
what is the ration of HDB (15 years ago) vs avg salary (15 years
ago)
ration of HDB (current) vs avg salary (current)
Now tell me who is in deeper shit? we or aust?
you know what is thick-headed, narrow minded and
self-deception?
And back at home, most of the factories worker now work only 4
days per week?
some office worker also working 4 days a week. So what are you
trying to prove here?
Do you really know the shape that singapore is in now?
I strongly believe that you're bias against aust for whatever
reason/s that i know not of.
But if it is really as what you've described, why so many of us
still going there?
Is the majorities who went over stupid? Or are you the smart ass
here?
yaya... fly to the moon and stay there. don't come back ya?
SG CPF grant still on at good and bad time.I am not sure if the
CPF waS MEANT FOR a temp boost.But we all known the grant still on
at the very good time.
2.HDB price v salary
ratio.Well a very tough question to answer.
I cant tell u now.But dunt forget the interest rate is as
important as the ratio.
Can u get a 2.6% pa in oz?U guys just tell me how high of salary
in oz,
good welfare.But dunt forget the higher interest rate in oz will
off set
part,if not majority of the higher salary.
A A$200,000 loan for 30 years,in sg HDB rate,it is abt A$790
pm.
In oz say interest rate is 5.5%,it is 1134pm.
I think the rate is much higher than i quote.
3.crime rates---a matter of
probabilty
Like gambling or insurance,it is a number game.
If u stay in a city of high crime rate,some one have to be the
victims
to make up the figures.
I must admit some unluck guys in singapore also share the
crime
not according to the figures.Some car owners i know just get
their cars
broken into twice in a month.
4.Oz banks still very generous to
grant near 100% loan,with the protection
of mortgage insurance.
If the insurer can pay the banks when the lender default,then
the banks
are ok in the future.Wat if the insurers face systematic
failure,like AIG,
then can insurers compensate the banks?
we have to bear in mind the down payments
in oz traditionally is very low,even in 2009!!read
carefully.
The loan offers were made on the proviso the borrower paid
mortgage insurance, which is a one-off cost as high as
$10,000.
The ANZ's loan criteria was much tighter, requiring a 10 per cent deposit for a loan, as well as
mortgage insurance.
The other three banks have recently tightened loan criteria to
first-home buyers, requiring a minimum deposit of 5 per cent, including a minimum of 3
per cent saved over several months, and mortgage insurance.
But the survey's findings defy the general belief that banks have
become stricter on first-home-buyer lending due to the global
financial crisis.
A $444,000 loan from the CBA would require someone on $70,000 to
spend 62 per cent of their
monthly income on mortgage repayments, which amounted to $2827 a
month.
Real Estate Buyers Agents Association of Australia president Byron
Rose said a loan of more than $400,000 for someone on $70,000 a
year was "absolutely too
much".
http://www.news.com.au/business/money/story/0,28323,25319421-5013951,00.html
Read full story
