Should PRs Leaving SG be Allowed to Keep HDB Sales Proceed?

[Kar_lover]

 

The same rules apply - if give up the status, then can withdraw money.

 

So the problem you have is not with withdrawing the money - its that you don't have somewhere to "run" to

 

Somehow if a citizen is thinking of running to another country just so he can withdraw his CPF en masse, there is really something wrong with his thinking. PRs returning to their country do so mostly cos they have come to the end of their useful life here so they go home. And as someone pointed out, since after they go home they will no longer be a burden to the country (Singapore) there is no reason to keep the CPF funds which are rightfully his. Actually I never understood why netizens despise PRs for going home. Hell I wish they would! Then the country would have less elderlies to take care of and I will have less people fighting with me for age-related care when I am old.

[Darryn]

 

You forgot one thing - a citizen giving up his citizenship is not the same as a PR giving up his PRship.

No it's not - but then - what can be done about it? It's a simple construct - you leave SIngapore, and give up your rights to stay here, you get back your CPF. And do remember - it's not money the govt gave you, but is money that was "taken" from your wages.

 

The other solution - make CPF optional for PR.

Then let's see how loud people scream about PR having an unfair advantage in the labour market.

 

Somehow if a citizen is thinking of running to another country just so he can withdraw his CPF en masse, there is really something wrong with his thinking. PRs returning to their country do so mostly cos they have come to the end of their useful life here so they go home. And as someone pointed out, since after they go home they will no longer be a burden to the country (Singapore) there is no reason to keep the CPF funds which are rightfully his. Actually I never understood why netizens despise PRs for going home. Hell I wish they would! Then the country would have less elderlies to take care of and I will have less people fighting with me for age-related care when I am old.

Exactly right -

why do you want to STOP someone from leaving if they are no longer contributing meaningfully to the economy - and just add to overcrowding etc etc - sounds like a "crab in a bucket" policy to me

[Ender]

Other than should not be allowed for HDB, I think PR residency should be limited to, like 2 years or more with no renewal. I think, 2 years of residency with unlimited entry to the country is more than enough to decide if Singapore is the place they want to be a citizen. Also most rental contract is 2 years, just nice for them to rent a property instead of participating in property speculation.

 

This will weed out those who are super long term PR who are here for more than 10 over years and have no intention of being a citizen.

[Tianake]

For your info - PR is ALREADY limited to 5 years.

 

Every 5 years must get a "re-entry permit" - one of the criteria is that you must be gainfully employed to get the re-entry permit.

 

Also - I worked with the RC for a while - the most common question for certain groups of PR - "how quickly can I get citizenship"

 

After 5 years are you willing to GUARANTEE someone citizenship? What about those that apply but don't make it?

 

If "kick out" after 5 years - what about PR that are kids? Or PR that are here as spouse of citizen?

To "limit" PR to 5 years it is no longer PR, but rather a 5 year visit permit...which is different.

 

NOTE - I personally feel the thing to do would be to make PR harder to get in the first place - not to place restrictions on the person after PR has been granted

 

then might as well remove the terms PRs.

 

Either apply to become a singapore citizen or stay as a foreigner on a work permit.

 

currently PRs have the best of both world , working in singapore earning singapore dollar and building their retirement nest, after which renouncing PR status and going back to their country of origin and retire.

[Acemundo]

 

Whether it is entirely HDB policies or MAS policies or a combination of the two (or even more), as long as it works why should it matter whose policy it is right? After all it's coming from the same government. Nope, the ABSD for FIRST flat only applies to PRs. Singaporeans buying their first flat don't need to pay ABSD (which is something like 5%). So it's not applied (equally) to "all and sundry".

 

still the point of contention is that the public housing policy needs to be beefed up. if you have other measures outside the public housing policy that achieves almost (but definitely not yet) the same effect, is it the same? then after market come down, cooling measures removed, how is it going to stand up against similar (complaints of) occurrences of PR renouncing and bringing back their profits?

 

if there is a problem with the car's air intake making the car go unusually slow, you do a host of things outside the air intake (eg ecu remap, change exhaust, change spark plug) it will perhaps help you gain back some speed but the right thing would have been to tackle the air intake problem heads on.

[Jman888]

No it's not - but then - what can be done about it? It's a simple construct - you leave SIngapore, and give up your rights to stay here, you get back your CPF. And do remember - it's not money the govt gave you, but is money that was "taken" from your wages.

 

The other solution - make CPF optional for PR.

Then let's see how loud people scream about PR having an unfair advantage in the labour market.

 

 

i believe the PR would like the idea cos they can take home 100% of the salary, and without CPF will also make them think twice of purchasing a resale hdb.

[Tianake]

No it's not - but then - what can be done about it? It's a simple construct - you leave SIngapore, and give up your rights to stay here, you get back your CPF. And do remember - it's not money the govt gave you, but is money that was "taken" from your wages.

 

The other solution - make CPF optional for PR.

Then let's see how loud people scream about PR having an unfair advantage in the labour market.

Exactly right -

why do you want to STOP someone from leaving if they are no longer contributing meaningfully to the economy - and just add to overcrowding etc etc - sounds like a "crab in a bucket" policy to me

 

don't forget the money that any PRs take out after renouncing is their own money plus interest from CPF.

 

so where do the interest from CPF come from? from investment that singapore government did or from taxpayers like us?

[Scion]

For your info - PR is ALREADY limited to 5 years.

 

Every 5 years must get a "re-entry permit" - one of the criteria is that you must be gainfully employed to get the re-entry permit.

 

Also - I worked with the RC for a while - the most common question for certain groups of PR - "how quickly can I get citizenship"

 

After 5 years are you willing to GUARANTEE someone citizenship? What about those that apply but don't make it?

 

If "kick out" after 5 years - what about PR that are kids? Or PR that are here as spouse of citizen?

To "limit" PR to 5 years it is no longer PR, but rather a 5 year visit permit...which is different.

 

NOTE - I personally feel the thing to do would be to make PR harder to get in the first place - not to place restrictions on the person after PR has been granted

 

yah i know

 

but the new rule applies to the new PRs

 

the old ones are still leeching

 

i have friends who are PRs for 30+ years already

 

 

 

If "kick out" after 5 years - what about PR that are kids?

 

 

i assume you are referring to the second generations of PRs? they have to serve NS anyway so they will probably be given citizenship

 

 

 

Or PR that are here as spouse of citizen?

 

 

this is the part i don't understand and have mentioned earlier...

 

some spouses cannot get citizenship or PRships despite marrying Singaporeans... some even bore kids already

 

so i guess this is due to the economic value of the individual... in other words, our govt is $$$-faced

 

 

 

To "limit" PR to 5 years it is no longer PR, but rather a 5 year visit permit...which is different.

 

 

think you misunderstood... i mentioned PRs can buy resale flats, but they must convert within 5 years

 

visit permit cannot buy flats, just like those on employment passes

[Icedbs]

I feel the whole argument very one dimensional.

 

PR has to also leave heir homeland, sacrifices their comfort zone for a better life in Singapore. And while here, they too contribute to the economy and taxes which share a part of nation building for Singapore.

 

If they leave, it is their right to take back their savings. It is not like they stay here with zero taxes or no need for GST like tourist.

 

Often PR are the real foreign talent because they are very thoroughly assessed or have been educated in the Singapore schools/universities before getting their PR. They are not expats, foreign workers on S-pass which many of you think they are good for nothing except cramping the MRT space. PRs often form the talent pool that truly contributes to companies and Singapore.

 

I have many friends who are PR and they have been in Singapore for a long time. They are rooted here, and their sons serve NS. And if any of them leave, I am perfectly fine if they withdraw every of their CPF savings because they do deserve it, They have done their part in exchange for that better life.

 

Question is, have Sinkies done their part besides whining at every PR and foreigners?

[Darryn]

 

then might as well remove the terms PRs.

 

Either apply to become a singapore citizen or stay as a foreigner on a work permit.

 

currently PRs have the best of both world , working in singapore earning singapore dollar and building their retirement nest, after which renouncing PR status and going back to their country of origin and retire.

And how is that different from every other country in the world? What makes Singapore so unique in this aspect?

 

Indeed - isn't that exactly what many SIngaporeans do - work hard, build nest egg and then retire elsewhere?

 

yah i know

 

but the new rule applies to the new PRs

 

the old ones are still leeching

 

i have friends who are PRs for 30+ years already

 

 

 

 

I'd be curious - how are PR "leeching"?

[Sosaria]

I think many of the policies were drawn up in the olden days back in the 70s and 80s where singapore's viability was not so certain, and there was a need to attract skilled professionals to quickly build up the country. And giving out PR with its attendant benefits was one way to achieve this.

 

But now singapore is a magnet to so many foreigners knocking down our doors to come and work here. So perhaps it's time to "tone down" some of the attraction, IMHO, through some policy review.

[Scion]

I feel the whole argument very one dimensional.

 

PR has to also leave heir homeland, sacrifices their comfort zone for a better life in Singapore. And while here, they too contribute to the economy and taxes which share a part of nation building for Singapore.

 

If they leave, it is their right to take back their savings. It is not like they stay here with zero taxes or no need for GST like tourist.

 

Often PR are the real foreign talent because they are very thoroughly assessed or have been educated in the Singapore schools/universities before getting their PR. They are not expats, foreign workers on S-pass which many of you think they are good for nothing except cramping the MRT space. PRs often form the talent pool that truly contributes to companies and Singapore.

 

I have many friends who are PR and they have been in Singapore for a long time. They are rooted here, and their sons serve NS. And if any of them leave, I am perfectly fine if they withdraw every of their CPF savings because they do deserve it, They have done their part in exchange for that better life.

 

Question is, have Sinkies done their part besides whining at every PR and foreigners?

 

so you are saying we Singaporeans haven't done our part in contributing to this country?

 

yes, PRs contribute to Singapore... but don't forget they benefit from this country in terms of economic progress, education, security, etc too

 

please don't give me bullsh1t like they are rooted here... if they truly consider Singapore as their home, they will be converting to citizenship

[Darryn]

I think many of the policies were drawn up in the olden days back in the 70s and 80s where singapore's viability was not so certain, and there was a need to attract skilled professionals to quickly build up the country. And giving out PR with its attendant benefits was one way to achieve this.

 

But now singapore is a magnet to so many foreigners knocking down our doors to come and work here. So perhaps it's time to "tone down" some of the attraction, IMHO, through some policy review.

 

For me - I don't think you should "tone down" the benefits of PR - IMHO, I think enough of that has been done already such that the differentiation between PR and CItizen in Singapore is more than most countries in the world*

 

Instead - the point of control should be in how many are granted PR status - make it harder to get, so that only the best of the best can get it, those that are most likely to stay and / or contribute most meaningfully. I don't know that the policy is right at the moment - but rather than make PRs "miserable", I think you should be making getting PR more of an achievement - with those that don't make the grade getting passed to another scheme that could well be a "track to PR".

 

 

* this is a seat of the pants assessment that I am not going to research right now - but I can tell you for a fact, that the differentiation between PR and citizen is far greater here than in NZ

[Acemundo]

 

Often PR are the real foreign talent because they are very thoroughly assessed or have been educated in the Singapore schools/universities before getting their PR. They are not expats, foreign workers on S-pass which many of you think they are good for nothing except cramping the MRT space. PRs often form the talent pool that truly contributes to companies and Singapore.

 

 

 

I find this part almost impossible to compare. Singaporeans outnumber PRs at every strata. to use a small small sample population to compare against the bigger populace is just incomparable.

 

there are also lesser qualified PRs as well but safe to say, the lowest qualified PR will always be higher qualified than the lowest qualified Singaporean. so this way of looking at it, does give merit to your argument. still my point is, this saying is founded on a biased comparison.

[Darryn]

 

so you are saying we Singaporeans haven't done our part in contributing to this country?

 

yes, PRs contribute to Singapore... but don't forget they benefit from this country in terms of economic progress, education, security, etc too

 

please don't give me bullsh1t like they are rooted here... if they truly consider Singapore as their home, they will be converting to citizenship

I never mentioned whether or not Citizens contributed.

 

Most do.

 

A few don't.

So what? That is not the issue - unless you are suggesting that you want to measure the contribution of every citizen and kick out those that don't measure up?

 

Some PR will be, and are rooted here. Some won't be.

But again - so what? Does what they do tomorrow make any difference to the work they do today?

 

If someone is not contributing to the economy, aren't you better off without them? Wouldn't you rather see them leave instead of clogging up the city?

[Jman888]

 

Often PR are the real foreign talent because they are very thoroughly assessed or have been educated in the Singapore schools/universities before getting their PR. They are not expats, foreign workers on S-pass which many of you think they are good for nothing except cramping the MRT space. PRs often form the talent pool that truly contributes to companies and Singapore.

 

 

 

as much as i agree with most of your comment, but selection and granting of PR is not as thorough as you thought, maybe for people around you but there are junior clerk making $1800 can qualify for PR.

[Kar_lover]

Other than should not be allowed for HDB, I think PR residency should be limited to, like 2 years or more with no renewal. I think, 2 years of residency with unlimited entry to the country is more than enough to decide if Singapore is the place they want to be a citizen. Also most rental contract is 2 years, just nice for them to rent a property instead of participating in property speculation.

 

This will weed out those who are super long term PR who are here for more than 10 over years and have no intention of being a citizen.

 

Assuming I agree with your above suggestion, is the SG Government ready to decide whether they want to accept this person as a citizen after 2 years? There are other implications of someone becoming your citizen - he is your "problem" for life! On the other hand, with the 5 year re-entry permit renewal requirement, govt can cherry-pick which people they want to keep in and which ones they want to keep out. I remember there was an airline pilot who stirred up the ALPA-S into some strike and his PR was subsequently revoked. If that PR was a citizen and he stirred things up (like certain Singaporen bloggers) govt will need to deal with him instead of just jettisoning him.

 

And again I ask, what is the obsession with wanting PRs to become citizens? They become part of this "aging" society for life! As it is we already have a greying population with low birth rates. Being able to reduce the aging population by sending old PRs home and replacing them with new young productive PRs (who do jobs we don't want to do such as taking care of that same greying population) sounds like a good thing to me.

[Darryn]

 

I find this part almost impossible to compare. Singaporeans outnumber PRs at every strata. to use a small small sample population to compare against the bigger populace is just incomparable.

 

there are also lesser qualified PRs as well but safe to say, the lowest qualified PR will always be higher qualified than the lowest qualified Singaporean. so this way of looking at it, does give merit to your argument. still my point is, this saying is founded on a biased comparison.

 

I think this bears repeating -

 

PR won't always be the "best of the best", they worst PR won't always be better than the best Singaporean -

 

But in GENERAL the quality of the "average" PR should (if the scheme is working properly and as intended) should be somewhat better than the "average" Singaporean - otherwise - what's the point in the first place? PR status should be something sought after and coveted, reserved only for those that bring up the "average quality" of the country and the workforce -

 

Much the same way as a good school may well actively recruit "good" students from other schools - or a good soccer team attracts the best players - to build the OVERALL quality of the institution.