Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

thebigsplat t1_iyi1m3l wrote

Reply to comment by nowyourdoingit in New York and Singapore top the list of world’s most expensive cities in 2022 by Elandtrical

Singapore's public housing situation is far better too. 80% of the population lives in public housing.

Cost of eating out is a lot less with hawker fare even compared to street carts, let alone the variety and the experience.

NYC doesn't win on cost of living. NYC wins on the strength of its arts scene. Music, galleries, broadway etc.

Other CoL factors: Singapore has public healthcare (See a doctor for $30 or $50 for a private consultation to skip the line), Public education ($2 in fees for locals monthly for elementary and like $20 for middle/high school).

24

nightkingscat t1_iyi2k7s wrote

NYC weather is a lot better lol

6

thebigsplat t1_iyi5cw5 wrote

Roasting in the sun isn't great, but neither is being dark out at 4pm amazing.

I'd take the heat over the winter, but that's not an all year round thing. Honestly I'd call it slightly in favor of NYC since the weather isn't always miserable here, but not a lot.

6

nightkingscat t1_iyia7u7 wrote

it's not really roasting as it is steaming in singapore. it feels like you're swimming in air, even at night.

13

Elandtrical OP t1_iyirdvn wrote

That 90% constant humidity makes your blood run thin! You get used to it but still need to drink lots of water and learn tricks like standing in the shadow of a traffic light waiting to cross the road.

6

thebigsplat t1_iyienv3 wrote

Fair - I never had a problem with Singapore's weather at night, but I'm from there and acclimatized. 6-7pm you'll see the locals all out enjoying the cool breeze and sunset while sipping hot drinks.

3

Chromewave9 t1_iyjjgtq wrote

80% of the population lives in public housing by design. They have limited land space. Try raising a family in these HBD flats. It's tight as hell. Even for a couple, it's really tight.

Besides, people are using these HBD flats to flip. They get sold on a 99 year lease (similar to China, you don't physically own the rights to the housing unit. You're basically just a long-term renter) to Singaporean residents for $300k-500K (depending on the unit) but after five years, they're able to sell them in the resale market with many units going for $600-$1 million. Private rentals or housing is way more expensive so there are very few options, hence, why 80% live in HBD flats. You have a ton of people who basically just get their family to sign up for HBD flats and sell them after five years for guaranteed profit.

You'll hear that housing is one of the biggest issues in Singapore. The lack of space, high demand, and people being allowed to flip them is way worse than in America. In America, you can just move elsewhere. In Singapore, you have no choice.

6

thebigsplat t1_iyjpy3j wrote

> Try raising a family in these HBD flats. It's tight as hell. Even for a couple, it's really tight.

I grew up in Singapore. On my mom's side they had three nuclear families + grandma living in one HDB flat with 2-3 kids each.

America has its own housing crisis. Singapore has basically solved homelessness, that's for one. You can just move elsewhere doesn't apply to everyone, and we all know that "just moving elsewhere" means giving up a lot of things, especially if you're a PoC.

There's a reason it costs more to live in Singapore and NYC than East St. Louis or Wichita.

3

Apart-Bad-5446 t1_iyk0x00 wrote

It doesn't really cost more if you know what you're doing. AKA, shop at Malaysia. Housing is really the only thing truly expensive. Owning a car isn't a necessity because their public transportation is amazing.

America's housing crisis is because of NIMBY's. Not because there isn't enough land. That's why Singapore's housing is expensive. Either way, if NYC is too expensive for you, you can relocate to Florida, Texas, down South, etc., If you're retiring, many people eventually move away from cities and into suburban/rural-ish homes. Don't say it's not really an option because it is. In Singapore, if you're old, you have nowhere to go. I was quite alarmed by how old some people were but still working. Singapore is more of a "tough luck" situation if you're poor.

What works for Singapore doesn't work everywhere. A lack of housing in NYC/L.A. is because of again, NIMBY's.

6

thebigsplat t1_iyk3u07 wrote

> I was quite alarmed by how old some people were but still working. Singapore is more of a "tough luck" situation if you're poor.

Are you really comparing that to America? Sure Singapore's worse for poor people if you don't consider the homeless passed out on every corner to be people. Of course housing is going to be expensive, but if you're poor the government puts you in an apartment for as little as $26 a month.

If I was poor and destitute it's absolutely no question where I'd want to be.

2

Apart-Bad-5446 t1_iyk6jgt wrote

Lol. Come to NYC. NYCHA housing (while bad because the government sucks at running things) is basically free. You get $280 per person to buy food every month. A family of five gets over $1k for food stamps. If you're poor, you get free health insurance. I actually have lived in NYC and Singapore. You must not be aware of what NYC offers, honestly. NYC by far spends more on social programs than Singapore. It's just that Singapore is one of the least corrupt countries in the world and the government knows how to run shit.

Singapore's population is also incredibly small with a large % of people being expats who are only there for business/huge financial banking services in Singapore. Let's not kid ourselves... The 'actual' population is much smaller.

Also, the homeless people in American cities are usually caused by drugs. Something that Singapore doesn't have to deal with as they are not located near the Southern border where drug trafficking is rampant.

7

thebigsplat t1_iykb6da wrote

Firstly, NYC isn't America.

Secondly, just like how there are gaps in my knowledge of the programs for poor here, you're talking like Singapore's government doesn't provide food stamps and the like for the poor? And NYCHA housing? That compared to Singapore's one BR flats are miles apart. When everyone lives in public housing there is no ghetto.

Singapore's government is better run yes, but NYC doesn't get plus points for De Blasio's wife making a billion dollars supposedly meant to help the mentally ill disppear into the ether.

Also this

> Singapore's population is also incredibly small with a large % of people being expats who are only there for business/huge financial banking services in Singapore. Let's not kid ourselves... The 'actual' population is much smaller.

It's not a mystery or anything. It's a population of about 3 million locals, expats make up a tiny number. The rest are temporary workers from poorer countries.

> Also, the homeless people in American cities are usually caused by drugs. Something that Singapore doesn't have to deal with as they are not located near the Southern border where drug trafficking is rampant.

Yeah again you don't really get it. New York is a thousand miles from the Southern Border, about the same distance from Singapore to the Golden Triangle.

Lastly homelessness by drugs, jury's out on that - but I'm no expert so whatever.

1

Apart-Bad-5446 t1_iykoq8c wrote

I never said NYC isn't America but Singapore is a country. Hence, why I said what works for Singapore doesn't work for other countries. What worked for Norway hasn't worked for Venezuela despite both countries having vast resources of oil. It's much easier to run a homogenous country with just a few million citizens than it is to run 330 million people all being managed in different states with each state having their own separate values, tax structure, etc.,

NYCHA is proof that the governments suck at running stuff in America. It's also a cultural thing but I won't get into that. Singaporeans follow the laws very closely. NYC, not exactly the same. The government owns the property, leases it, and people are allowed to flip it. NYCHA doesn't have that, hence, people don't really care for their property which means people piss on the elevators, break stuff, don't clean, etc.,

I can assure you Singapore doesn't spend more than NYC on social programs. Again, the factor here seems to be money. NYC spends more than any city on social programs when you account for education, healthcare, etc., NYC spends $30k per student annually from K-12. No other country comes close. It's just inefficiently spent and a very corrupt government overall which you yourself highlighted. Thing is, Singapore manages a few million people. Brooklyn+Queens alone has a higher population than Singapore.

30% of a country's population being expat is tiny? Hmmmm...

New York could be a thousand miles from the Southern border but the drugs coming from the Southern border means you can easily transport those drugs to other states... I think YOU don't get it. Try transporting the drugs from Mexico or South/Central America to Singapore... You're telling me there isn't a difference? Once it gets past the Southern border, getting it to NY is the easy part because the logistics becomes much easier. The bottleneck is the border - not crossing state lines.

As for the homeless statistic, I said usually. The study you linked shows that it's high in areas with high housing prices. Again, caused by NIMBY's. If you're unfamiliar with that term, it's because people who own property with high valuations do not want their property prices to decline with more housing. Aka, artificially increase the price of housing. Many homeless people move to California because of the warm weather and lenient policies toward homelessness.

Anyways, I'm not here to slight Singapore. I loved visiting there. Not as much as Malaysia but the crime is low, food is pretty cheap, and it's very clean with great transportation. But what works for Singapore doesn't work for NYC. And what works for NYC, doesn't work for Singapore. You initiate policies based on what fits your people. I'm just saying the housing crisis in Singapore is due to a lack of land. The housing crisis in NYC is due to NIMBY's and politicians. You have NIMBY's who don't want high rise buildings because it blocks sunlight from entering their home and then environmentalists come out and start causing mayhem which means nothing gets built.

1

thebigsplat t1_iykqb72 wrote

Yeah I don't think I disagree with much of what you said - just a misunderstanding. I'm saying there's more effective spending in Singapore vs NYC. The money in this city, it all disappears into some bottomless pit or is inefficiently spent like you said.

> 30% of a country's population being expat is tiny?

Do you count workers from poorer countries working in construction as expats? If so then yes they're expats, I was under the impression that expats only referred to highly paid workers contributing to the knowledge economy.

> The study you linked shows that it's high in areas with high housing prices. Again, caused by NIMBY's.

Totally in agreement - just confused because you said it's due to drugs when my understanding was it was due to home prices, and a lot of the people take up drugs on the streets.

Malaysia though? Man. That's another place with a stupendously large amount of money and a sad amount of poverty. It all disappears into a bottomless pit in Malaysia and people suffer.

1

nowyourdoingit t1_iyia4o1 wrote

I wouldn't call HDBs better. They live in them because the BTOs are provided at below market rate. Kind of a Jevon's Paradox situation. Clear cutting rain forest to build massive concrete block housing using Bangladeshi slave labour and PRC companies laundering funds out of China isn't exactly a sustainable model. Did you live in an HDB? I'd take a prewar walkup in a vibrant local community any day over that again.

−7

thebigsplat t1_iyidxxy wrote

Yes? I'm a Singaporean. Calling them concrete block housing is disingenuous. This was my neighborhood. And the latest HDB developments are basically indistinguishable from luxury condos...

Singapore has it's problems but calling it unsustainable or lacking a vibrant local community compared to NYC is pretty wild and entirely off base especially since that's how the entire city was built and has been built since the 1960s.

If you think Singapore is going to run out of money to fund it's housing market and is dependent on money from China your grasp of the economy there is very weak to say the least.

10

Elandtrical OP t1_iyislj1 wrote

I think HDB's are one of Singapore's better features. Some of the older ones are a bit tatty but that is to be expected when the country was just starting and not as wealthy. Also an annual 9 feet of rain is harsh on building exteriors.

4

nowyourdoingit t1_iyipexd wrote

I have a long view of history. Singapore exist as a portal for corporate access from east to west and as a tax haven. It has almost no inherent value differentiating it from Malaysia and will look like Detroit in 100 years.

−4

thebigsplat t1_iyjpk5p wrote

Yeah I mean Singapore's infamously incorruptible and business friendly government isn't inherent and there's no guarantee it's going to remain there for the next 100 years, but you don't have to be a betting man to put good money on Malaysia, a country where a single man stole so much money from the national sovereign wealth fund the US DOJ raised their eyebrows, not getting anywhere close anytime soon.

Oh what's that? Despite it's reputation as a financial playground did you know that Singapore is the world's largest trading port outside of China?

Not sure what your long view of history has anything to do with the cost of living here and now anyhow.

4

nowyourdoingit t1_iyjs3y8 wrote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_Canal

0

thebigsplat t1_iyjtmux wrote

> A canal through the Kra Isthmus, which would shorten shipping times around Asia, was suggested as early as 1677.

> The idea of a Kra Canal has been proposed in modern times since the 1930s, but has never materialized due to high cost and environmental repercussions.

Your own link.

There's a reason it hasn't been built yet despite reams of Chinese money interested in funding the project. But I don't expect much nuance out of you.

Don't believe me. Ask the Malaysians what they think of it - and they love to shit on us.

1

nowyourdoingit t1_iyju2x2 wrote

Ok, yep, Singapore is best greatest all time number 1. They'll never build the canal and relegate it.

RemindMe! 2 years

−1

thebigsplat t1_iyjua8e wrote

In TWO YEARS? You're hilarious mate. I'm crying.

You think they'll build a canal longer than the Panama Canal through some of the most politically unstable territory in Thailand with an active Muslim insurgency in two years without a spade in the ground right now? I'm in stitches.

Can I put some money on this? 2K in 2 years?

2

nowyourdoingit t1_iyjuedl wrote

Of course not. I think China will have a new deal with the Thai gov in 2 years.

−1

thebigsplat t1_iyjukw1 wrote

2K in 2 years I'll bet on that.

1

nowyourdoingit t1_iyjv3oe wrote

It doesn't matter if I'm wrong by a decade or 5. Singapore is a backwater that China will bypass eventually.

edit: but I'll bet there is a new deal in place in 2 years.

−1

thebigsplat t1_iyjvgw8 wrote

> Singapore is a backwater that China will bypass eventually.

None of which was ever relevant to the conversation at hand and your inability to understand economic conditions in Singapore. Seek help and feel some grass.

1

nowyourdoingit t1_iyjwlwc wrote

Yes, it is. Singapore has no natural resources, no long term benefit for trade once the Kra Canal is completed, no great tourism appeal. It's a happenstance of history that the Brits utilized Singapore as their main trading port with SEA and China and that Malaysia kicked them out allowing them to establish a corporate tax haven.

Also, only ~10% of Singapore GDP is derived from shipping.

Intl tax law is changing rapidly and the wild west situation that currently exist enabling places like Singapore and Dubai to flourish won't last long and then they'll be back to being backwaters. Every company with a headquarters building in Singapore is there as a tax dodge.

1

Elandtrical OP t1_iykhf6z wrote

Singapore's lack of resources is a great strength. It means it had to invest in the only thing it had- its people. Highly educated workforce based on international commerce, no one wanting to go back to work in the glorious coal mines. For the foreseeable future Singapore is locked in. Hong Kong is no longer so Singapore serves as the sole finance center of the whole of Asia until another country creates one.

0

thebigsplat t1_iyjw2fw wrote

Mate are you that kid who went to prison after punching that taxi driver in Singapore? I've had a beer with you and heard you out in person.

Honestly, the government of Singapore has done worse to me, so get over your bitterness. I don't pretend to understand this country intimately and I've lived here six years, not sure why you feel so sure about mine.

0

nowyourdoingit t1_iyjx2eq wrote

I've never punched any taxi drivers in Singapore. We had a beer?

1

Elandtrical OP t1_iyid0n9 wrote

We lived in a semi-detached with front and back garden in a nice area. I could cross the road and access 50km of jungle trails and still have a very good supermarket 5 minutes walk away. Our house was very kampong but loved it for that.

I used to volunteer for a charity fixing up old people's HDB flats that fell through the cracks. These people grew up illiterate in kampongs when Singapore started, worked hard manual labor their whole lives and usually couldn't afford to marry or kids didn't want to look after them. Their savings didn't account for big COL increases. Some of what I saw heartbreaking sad

6