Wildlife Reserves CEO apologises for Halloween Horrors closure

Khaw: S’pore should prohibit trans fat products  CHEERS

How the Internet destroyed the market

Digital piracy, greedy tech firms are crushing the life and innovation out of films, music, newspapers

As pressure builds to enforce copyright law online, technology companies and the activists they support have started to argue that any attempt to block pirate sites will ‘break the Internet’.

The truth is that the Internet is broken already:

It is simply too chaotic to provide the infrastructure for a 21st-century economy.

Indonesia declines Singapore help to tackle haze

JAKARTA

Mr Arif Yuwono, the Deputy Minister of Environmental Degradation Control and Climate Change, told

UntIl  sIck and deAth  ? ? ? ?— The Indonesian government has declined help from Singapore on tackling the haze situation and said it was capable of resolving the matter on its own.Jakarta Globe that the situation was under control although heavy haze continues to blanket parts of western Indonesia.

Let us keep our spouses by our sides

Letter from Aik Theng Chong

I REFER to the article “Without migration of some magnitude, Singapore’s population will decline, says IPS” (Sept 8) on the Institute of Policy Studies finding that up to 60,000 migrants a year may be needed to keep Singapore economically active.

Before we need to even consider such numbers, can we not first welcome foreign spouses of all Singaporeans?

It was disclosed in Parliament in May last year that on average, 6,700 foreign spouses of Singaporeans were denied long-term visit passes or permanent residency per year from 2005 to 2009.

Other than for reasons of national security, why do we reject Singaporeans’ foreign spouses?

The rejection of such PR applications makes it harder for the spouse to contribute financially and for the family to afford public housing.

Would this be fair to the children, the same young ones Singapore is trying hard to increase in number?

We should abandon this form of social engineering, which places less educated and/or lower-income individuals at a disadvantage, indirectly discouraging and limiting their right to have a lifetime partner of their preference.

Less Educated ones  support  OppOsItION  ? ? ? ?

Population projections show us the choices

Letter from Ng Ya Ken

I REFER to the letter “Our population can’t keep rising” (Sept 14).

Projections made under different assumptions give us a quantitative idea of the possible results if certain actions are taken under certain circumstances. With these projections, we then choose what actions to take to achieve a desired result.

The population projections by the Institute of Policy Studies showed that, with an ageing population, increasing numbers of immigrants would be needed to sustain acceptable support ratios in the future.

If we do not accept these scenarios, then we have to contemplate the alternatives.

We could aim for three or four children per married couple, slow down economic growth to 2 per cent, raise productivity by working harder or longer, cut down nonessential consumption to save labour, boost self-help community services or downplay our role in international business, sports, culture and politics.

Instead of maintaining our status as a vibrant and modern city, we slow down the pace of life and cut down our expectations. We do not have to be the cleanest city or have the best airport in the world.

We do not have to promote Singapore as a tourist spot.

We shall not worry if our international standing drops or if we are not so attractive to foreign investments due to shortage of manpower and world-class facilities.

When the support ratio drops — which means fewer working persons per elderly — we could raise taxes or borrow money to finance public expenditure, like Japan had been doing all these years. Also, we could use our reserves.

Five years ago, the population parameter used for planning land use for the next 30 to 40 years was raised to 6.5 million.

Let us revert to the original 5.5 million and plan for fewer roads, schools, hospitals, houses, factories and shops, if we agree to have that as our maximum population.

Personally, I prefer to live in the Singapore of the mid-’80s.

But I know we cannot forever remain in the ’80s or ’90s. No country in the world could, without being sidelined.

Put houses in order, China urges euro zone leaders

DALIAN — China remains willing to invest in Europe but wants rich economies to show they are serious about tackling debt, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao (picture) said yesterday, sending the troubled euro zone a mix of reassurances and demands from the world’s biggest foreign exchange holder.

All this talk about immigration serves to obscure the issue of productivity, which is a crucial part of the solution and which the Institute of Policy Studies should focus on instead of an old chestnut.

Chan Chi Yung

“Anyone who believes in indefinite growth of anything physical on a physically finite planet is either a madman or an economist.”

In a small dot like Singapore, we can do better when we set a common goal.

Going green but getting nowhere

Individual action, no matter how well-meaning, does not add up to enough

You reduce, reuse and recycle.

You turn down plastic and paper.

You avoid out-of-season grapes.

You do all the right things.

Good.

Just know that it would not save the tuna, protect the rain forest or stop global warming. The changes necessary are so large and profound that they are beyond the reach of individual action.

Say you are willing to make real sacrifices.

Sell your car.

Forsake your air-conditioner in the summer, turn down the heat in the winter.

Try to become no-impact man.

You would, in fact, have no impact on the planet. Americans would continue to emit an average of 20 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year Europeans, about 10 tonnes.

What about going bigger?

You are the pope with a billion followers, and let’s say all of them take your advice to heart. If all Catholics decreased their emissions to zero overnight, the planet would surely notice, but pollution would still be rising.

Of course, a billion people, whether they are Catholic or adherents of any other religion or creed, will do no such thing. Two weeks of silence in a Buddhist yoga retreat in the Himalayas with your BlackBerry checked at the door?

Sure. An entire life voluntarily lived off the grid?

No thanks.

And that focuses only on those who can decrease their emissions. When your average is 20 tonnes per year, going down to 18 tonnes is as easy as taking a staycation.

But if you are among the four billion on the planet who each emit one tonne a year, you have nowhere to go but up.

Leading scientific groups and most climate scientists say we need to decrease global annual greenhouse gas emissions by at least half of current levels by 2050 and much further by the end of the century.

And that will still mean rising temperatures and sea levels for generations.

So why bother recycling or riding your bike to the store? Because we all want to do something, anything.

Call it “action bias”.

But, sadly, individual action does not work.

It distracts us from the need for collective action, and it does not add up to enough.

Self-interest, not self-sacrifice, is what induces noticeable change.

Only the right economic policies will enable us as individuals to be guided by self-interest and still do the right thing for the planet.

Every tonne of carbon dioxide pollution causes around US$20 (S$24.70) of damage to economies, ecosystems and human health. That sum times 20 implies US$400 worth of damage per American per year. That is not damage you are going to do in the distant future. That is damage each of us is doing right now.

Who pays for it?

We pay as a society.

My cross-country flight adds fractions of a penny to everyone else’s cost. That knowledge leads some of us to voluntarily chip in a few bucks to “offset” our emissions. But none of these payments motivate anyone to fly less. It does not lead airlines to switch to more fuel-efficient planes or routes. If anything, airlines by now use voluntary offsets as a marketing ploy to make green-conscious passengers feel better.

The result is planetary socialism at its worst:

We all pay the price because individuals do not.

It would not change until a regulatory system compels us to pay our fair share to limit pollution accordingly.

Limit, of course, is code for “cap and trade”, the system that helped phase out lead in petrol in the ’80s, slashed acid rain pollution in the ’90s and is now bringing entire fisheries back from the brink.

“Cap and trade” for carbon is beginning to decrease carbon pollution in Europe and similar models are slated to do the same from California to China.

Alas, this approach has been declared dead in Washington, ironically by self-styled free-marketers.

Another solution, a carbon tax, is also off the table because, well, it is a tax.

Never mind that markets are truly free only when everyone pays the full price for his actions.

Anything else is socialism.

The reality is that we cannot overcome the global threats posed by greenhouse gases without speaking the ultimate inconvenient truth:

Getting people excited about making individual environmental sacrifices is doomed to fail.

Do not stop recycling.

Do not stop buying local.

But add mastering some basic economics to your to-do list.

Our future will be largely determined by our ability to admit the need to end planetary socialism.

That is the most fundamental of economics lessons and one any serious environmentalist ought to heed.

THE NEW YORK TIMES

Gernot Wagner is an economist at the Environmental Defence Fund and the author of the forthcoming But Will the Planet Notice?

UK banks face up to

S$13.7b cost on reforms

[property share prices will AlsO fAll ? ? ? ?]

SINGAPORE

are expected to fall 8-10 per cent over the

next year as government policies work

their way through the market amid a worsening

economy, according to brokerage

UOB Kay Hian’s latest note to investors

published yesterday.

It has been eight months since the

Government introduced stiff stamp duties

of as high as 16 per cent on the seller of a

residential property and lowered the loanto-

value ratio to 60 per cent for individuals

with one or more mortgages and 50 per

cent for housing loans to buyers who are

not individuals.

But UOB Kay Hian highlighted the huge

oncoming supply and the deteriorating

macroeconomic environment as key factors

for its call, adding that home-buying

activity would slow down sharply once the

rise in unemployment accelerates.

UOB Kay Hian said property developers’

cautious stance in recent residential

site auctions suggested moderating price

expectations.

“Biddings for recent residential sites

witnessed a lukewarm market response,

with top bids coming in 10 to 15 per cent

below market expectation. While developers

actively sought to replenish their

falling land banks, the cautious bidding

stance is suggestive of moderating selling

price expectations amid weakening macroeconomic

environment,” the report said.

The report comes only days after

the Real Estate Developers’ Association

(REDAS) called on the Government to

review its land sales programme to ensure

that new supply is introduced only

when the market is confident of absorbing

it. REDAS on Friday had also urged the

Government to review property cooling

measures already in place so that genuine

demand is not artificially suppressed.

In the second half of this year, the Government

will put up for sale 17 private

residential sites under the Confirmed List of

the Land Sales Programme. Including sites

recently sold, about 53,000 private homes

will hit the market in the next few years.

At the same time, in the public housing

sector, the Housing and Development

Board will construct another 25,000 Build-

To-Order flats next year, on top of the

25,000 already slated for this year.— Residential property prices

Property stocks below book value,

offer buying opportunity: DBS

SINGAPORE

at steep discounts from book value and

this may make them ripe for the picking,

according to a DBS Group Research report

published yesterday.

As earnings visibility is clouded by

the current economic uncertainties, a less

volatile valuation parameter to consider is

the book value of assets, the report said.

About 60 per cent of the stocks listed

on the Singapore Exchange are currently

trading below their book value and the

research house said: “Among the stocks

in our coverage list, most of the propertyrelated

stocks are trading below book.”

Among the property counters, Wing

Tai is the most undervalued, currently trading

at 0.5 times price-to-book value (P/BV).

Wing Tai offers particularly good value

because of its upcoming launches of new

developments, DBS said, noting that most

of its projects in Singapore are at the high

end of the market.

DBS also noted that Orchard Parade,

in which Far East Organization has a

58.25-per-cent stake, has been trading

at 0.51 times P/BV. DBS said the possible

injection of some assets held by the group

into a real estate investment trust made

it attractive.

At 0.6 times P/BV, Tuan Sing is currently

trading close to its 10-year historical

average. DBS said a good entry level for

Tuan Sing would be closer to S$0.23, or a

P/BV of about 0.47 times.

DBS said Tuan Sing’s property unit

contributed 77 per cent of its profit in

FY2010 and potential redevelopment of

its office properties would be a further

catalyst.

Despite the value seen in these stocks,

DBS did warn that it “does not rule out the

possibility of further weakness in share

prices given the current uncertainties in

the global market”.

“It would be a more prudent move

to consider these stocks should the stock

market fall further, preferably closer to

the STI (Straits Times Index) at the 2,600

level,” it said.

The STI fell 2.9 per cent yesterday to

close at 2,743.58, with the property subindex

down 3 per cent, as fears of a Greek

default on its sovereign debt deepened.— Property plays are trading

UOB Kay Hian said

property developers’

cautious stance in recent

residential site auctions

suggested moderating

price expectations.