The Singapore General Election has concluded, and many people are expressing vocal displeasure regarding the expected results. Here are my thoughts, coming from a naturalized citizen with quite a fair bit of traveling experience to other states, based on my interaction with the locals of the area, without doing much fact check but just a general sense of the situation : 

COMPARISON OF HOUSING SITUATION OF SELECTED CITIES 

Hong Kong Housing Situation : 

> Land Scarcity by Design : Only 7% of Hong Kong’s 1,100 km² land is developed into housing, despite plenty of undeveloped or underutilized land, the government controls land scarcity, because up to 50% of HK government revenue depends on land sales, leases, and related taxes. Politically, this follows a statist capitalist model: the state behaves like a corporate landlord, monopolizing land to extract maximum rent from private enterprise.

> Hyper-Capitalism and Inequality : Median wage in Hong Kong is around HKD $19,000/month (~USD $2,400), but property prices are wildly disproportionate, to purchase a modest 300 sqft unit, it costs HKD $3 million (~USD $380,000), renting even a basic private unit would cost HKD $8,000–$10,000/month, about half of an average worker’s salary, trapping many in a rent burden cycle (where >30% of income is spent on housing). This reflects "Global City Squeeze", where global capital inflates costs without matching local wage growth.

> Urban Solutions to the Housing Crisis : Rise of the Cage Homes, to afford a living space, many private home owners sublet their housing space by dividing into smaller compartments, some units contains up to five persons into 100 sqft "Cage Homes", caged in order to lock their personal belongings since your roommate are strangers, and yet this is still at about HKD $2,000/month.This is a legal arrangement as long as a living space is above 20 sqft. Similarly, a family may rent a full unit to be divided by wooden or cardboard divders thus the term Coffin Homes, where they eat, sleep, hang laundry, children studying, all in one of that 300 sqft unit. This loophole is a state-managed informal sector: the government tolerates micro-or-nano-apartments to reduce visible homelessness while avoiding expensive systemic reforms. As I visit the famous Yick Cheong Building ("Monster Building", where 10,000 people squeezed into aprroximately 15,000 square metres space, showcase extreme urban density and the phenomenon of "Dead Person Cosmetics" — cheap, quick renovation of crumbling buildings to resell or rent for profit. Since this is privatised, it is impossible to get residents to chip in for renovations and upgrades so the space is usually run down and in bad condition. Everyone wants to sell for profit, and many temporary tenants that dont care about conditions. Alot of singles use this for temporary houses. Apart from these solutions, some owners would do "Time Share", where spaces are fragmented into micro-dorms and hostel beds, for temporary residents or domestic workers. 

> Hidden Poverty : Officially, 25% of Hong Kong’s population lives under the poverty line, but you rarely see visible slums on streets due to government strategies like subdivided flats and rooftop settlements therefore "Rooftop Slums". This "invisible poverty" is a hallmark of neoliberal urban governance: the city prioritizes external image (global finance hub) over internal social welfare.

> Public Housing : Public Rental Housing is about half the private market price and offers three times more living space, however, only about 30% of Hong Kong residents live in public housing as the waiting times average 5 – 6 years. 

Seoul Housing Situation : 

> South Korea, another Asian Tiger Economy, has a different approach to housing. having 26 million population in the Greater Seoul Metropolitan Area of 600 square kilometres, the Korean government started building apartment blocks called apateu, 아파트.  Unique to Korea, "cheonse" is a rental model where tenants deposit a lump sum (50–80% of property value) instead of monthly rent. Landlords invest this deposit to earn returns. After 2 years, they return the deposit, which is KRW 450 – 700 million (USD $300–500K). 

> In response to severe affordability issues, the government implemented Price Caps on new apartments. This results in a shrinking housing supply because of the reduced incentive for Private Developers to build or even to maintain houses. Therefore those that got the "Lottery" of a new apateu would generally resale for much higher value therefore exacerbating disparity. Over time, demand outpaces supply, ironically raising prices elsewhere, or delaying the entry of young people into homeownership, therefore only half of the population gets home ownership. 

> An average home price of 1,000 square feet will cost about KRW900 million (USD$650,000), in comaprison to the average monthly salary of KRW3.5 million (USD$2,500), with a National Tax of 15% - 24% and an additional of 10% fixed Income Tax. 

Munich Housing Situation : 

> Munich, a popular destination and terms one of the most livable cities in Germany, of 1.5 million population in the 300 sqaure kilometres space, has 30% non locals, and 30% students too. It has an average monthly income of Euro $6,000, and a cost of Euro $800,000 for a 1,000 square feet apartments. Ownership is at 25% due to the high cost of housing prices, which drives 600,000 homelessness, in which half are supported by public services. Tax wise, this is too complicated for me to comprehend due to the different set of laws for many individualised criteria, but effective tax is at about 30%. 

> Wallerstein Core-Periphery logic explains Munich’s magnetic pull: As a “core city” in the global capitalist system, Munich extracts labor, capital, and talent from semi-peripheral regions (e.g., Eastern Europe, East Germany). Accumulation by Dispossession is visible when inner-city properties are bought by global investors; social housing stock is privatized or underfunded; and lower-income renters are displaced to peripheries. Ecological Differentiation therefore exist amongst the neighbourhoods. 

> Resistance to building new affordable housing is often driven by NIMBYism (Not In My Backyard) from existing homeowners. Therefore local policymakers cater to voting homeowners rather than non-owning renters, creating a democratic deadlock, meaning the priority is always on the "haves" and the "have-nots" are completely ignored. 

> Munich seems to me like a neoliberal city in a social democracy, caught between ideals and capital. It is a tech-focused global city competing for talent, but failing to house its essential workers.

Los Angeles Housing Situation : 

> Hollywood, Pop Culture, Palm Trees and Blue Skies, are the image of LA. LA city itself has about 4 million population in the 1,300 square kilometres space. With monthly average salary of USD$6000, and effective tax of 30%, houses are not as scarce as many Asian cities. With USD$1 million, you would expect a 2,000 to 3,000 square feet bungalows, and depending on the zones, the 50% of the city rents 1,000 square feet apartments at about USD $3,000 - USD $4,000. 

> I've learnt on my trip that large part of government revenue is actually Oil, then is Shipping and Aerospace, then Tourism and Entertainment, therefore Property, is not as significant (15%-ish). 

> There are unique laws to the city for example Zoning Laws (single-family zoning in 70% of LA). There are two main types of residential zones in Los Angeles: single-family zones and multi-family zones. In single-family zones, you can only build one house on the lot, no matter how big the lot is. Therefore most ownerships are on these Single Family Zoning, leaving the 30% of the land for Multi Family Zones where you can build apartments for rent. This translate to exlusive zones for different social stratification, becoming a "Polycentric Model" with multiple “cores” (e.g., Downtown, Westwood, Culver City). Los Angeles housing districts therefore reinforce racial and class hierarchies. 

> LA is a “global city”, attracting foreign investment (especially Chinese, Korean, and Gulf capital) in downtown condos and real estate. These investments often sit empty or drive speculation—unproductive assets create real-world displacement. 

> With more than 75,000 homeless, LA has the largest unsheltered population in the U.S, mostly at Skidrow. Efforts to combat homelessness include Inside Safe Program to transition individuals from encampments into interim housing, and Permanent Housing Placements to transition from interim housing to permanent housing, but this effort is slow as other states are "dumping" their homelessness into LA due to its favourable climate. Still, during winter, we saw the population burnign random items to keep warm in Skidrow. 

Sydney Housing Situation : 

> Greater Sydney spans 12,400 square kilometers for its 5.5 million population. It's average monthly income is at AUD$9000, in comparison to AUD1.2 million for a 2,500 square feet apartments, thus a 65% home ownership rate. 

> Sydney's urban landscape exhibits spatial stratification, with affluent populations concentrated in inner-city and coastal suburbs, while lower-income groups are increasingly pushed to peripheral areas. This pattern reflects broader ecological models where socio-economic status influences residential location and access to amenities.

> The liberalization of Australia's economy and the emphasis on market-driven policies have influenced urban development in Sydney. Deregulation and incentives for private developers have led to a surge in high-density housing projects, often prioritizing profitability over affordability and community needs.

> Most of the population lives 1.0 hour drive / metro / bus away from the CBD (Central Business District). Majority of the occupation centres around Healthcare, Tech, and Finances. There are high demand for Civil Engineers as their Minimum Wage model 

> Though Minimum Wage of AUD$25 per hour, most of the casual labour and F&B are shunned due to its low guaranteed hours of labour, thus income insecurity and limited potential for career growth. Therefore demand for Civil Engineers and Technical Trades such as Plumbing, Electrician and Constructions are higher in demand as the ageing population sees many seniors going into retirement. The gentrification on the areas around CBD also drives demand for these jobs. Sydney started apartment projects recently to prepare for global inbound migration. 

> Youths ages 16yo onwards for students and 22yo onwards for Job Seekers could seek Youth Allowance where the Sydney government provides about AUD$1,500 a month for education, apprenticeship, entry level work or training. To ease on Parental Burdens, many youths declare "Homelessness" status in order to enjoy access to Transitional Housing, shelters, or programs like Foyer Foundation for youth pursuing education. Homelessness services provide food vouchers, healthcare, transport cards, etc too. 

> Thus the viewpoint on “Homelessness” is not always about sleeping rough. It can be a fluid, constructed identity leveraged to access state resources — especially if you're couch-surfing, in unsafe housing, or institutionally estranged. Australia’s welfare model offers a modest safety net, but it's not luxurious. Most youth on Youth Allowance still struggle to afford rent, especially in Sydney. However, the symbolic security of the welfare state can make declaring homelessness less frightening than family dysfunction or precarity. Youth asserting their autonomy to live, learn, and be housed within the city is a claim to urban citizenship — even if they’re excluded from formal housing markets. This may sound like a reasonable solution, but these “youth gaming the system" would pressure poitician to reevaluate the benefits and supports in order to apease the Working Class Adults and the Elites where a large portio of their Taxes are to support these Youths. 

Then comes to our Nation's Singapore's Housing Strategy, in my opinion, is a unique solution that divides the responsibility between Government, Community and Individuals. It is not entirely a Welfare system (we do not need to as a status of port city) and not entirely Capitalistic either. 

Singapore - Housing Situation :

> Over 80% of Singaporeans live in HDB flats; 90% of households own their homes. CPF (Central Provident Fund) is used for housing, making homeownership accessible without needing liquid cash upfront. Public housing is heavily subsidized for first-time buyers, and ethnic quotas (Ethnic Integration Policy) promote racial harmony, avoiding ghettos and racial enclaves. The HDB is not for profit—it is part of a social policy, not a market. 

> One may argue on the rising cost of home ownership. This is true, but looking at the policies and how it fare against the rising median income, I feel its proportionate. The system achieved consistently, a Mortgage Servicing Ratio (MSR) of around 30% of household income. In 1980s when our Median Household Income is about SGD $1000, our monthly installment was SGD $300. In 2000s, it's $4,000 against $1,200. In 2020s, it's SGD$10,000 against $3,000. This is an estimate of a 4-room HDB across the years. Again, we encourage pro-family units to buy large and downsize on retirement, and with consideration of Grants such as EHG and Proximity Grants, this value may drop, understand it is a blindspot for some lifestyle chocies of non-procreation, but that's not a National Direction. Realistically, the installment period do extends, it is at approximately 20 years today as compared to 10 or 15 years in the past. 

> Land is scarce; the 99 years leasehold reflects the state’s view that housing is a right, not a wealth-building instrument. En bloc redevelopment allows renewal of aging estates and ensures continuous optimization of land use. This allows continuous renewal or urban spaces to keep up with new standards of facilities. The fear of decreating value to 0 for older estate persists, but in history, none of this had happened, most are put up for SERS, therefore sold back to governemnt with reasonable compensation based on buying price. Again, HDB is not for profit.

> Decentralized Urban Planning : Heartland Model : Based on the Concept Plan (1971, 1991, 2001) and the Master Plan, Singapore’s model ensures access to work, play, live and learn within towns (e.g., Tampines, Jurong, Punggol). Each HDB town has its own regional center, polyclinic, schools, malls, transport hub. This reduces congestion, fosters local community identity, and flattens class divides in space. This breaks away from Concentric Circles, thus there would be no stark "poor" or "elite" zones in residential areas (on exception on Private Foreign-Dominated Condominiums).

> If we look at housing in Singapore as a means for shelter for all, Singapore excels. But if you look at housing as a means for wealth acculumation or financial freedom, then Singapore housing system is not designed for this purpose, though many many many citizens try to game this by acquiring condominiums and renting for passive income or the buying and selling of HDB in speculation of potential area development.

> Singapore’s system prioritizes social cohesion, basic shelter security, and responsible state planning over short-term profits. It may not be emotionally or aesthetically ideal for everyone, but it does deliver on its promise: no one is left homeless, and most are not rent-dependent. We are all slaves to housing, globally. The difference is that in Singapore, you’re a slave to a dignified system, not to an unpredictable market or a landlord. 

Summary

Singapore’s Unique Governance Model : A Hybrid State Built on Pragmatism, Planning, and Purpose

(Note, this is purely based on my own personal opinion as a Singapore citizen having some background in Sociology and Political Science, should NOT be taken as absolute truth, fact checking is not done)

Since its independence in 1965, Singapore has charted a governance path that defies traditional political categorization. Officially a Republic, Singapore’s political and social architecture is a hybrid blend—melding elements from dictatorship, socialism, capitalism, democracy, communism, and military sovereignty, grounded firmly in pragmatic survival rather than ideological purity. This governance philosophy has been critical for Singapore’s resilience as a city-state with no natural resources, a small population, and constant external vulnerabilities.

1. The Republic Structure: Elections with Guardrails

At its core, Singapore is a Republic, where sovereignty resides with the people, exercised through regular elections and rule of law. Singapore’s political architecture reflects classical Sovereignty Theory—where supreme authority is vested in the state and exercised through institutions. Yet Singapore departs from pure Liberal Democracy: elections are free, but guarded by eligibility criteria for candidates to ensure only individuals of proven competence can contest top roles such as Ministers or President. This "meritocratic democracy with guardrails" ensures national leadership maintains global credibility and governing capacity, avoiding populist swings that have destabilized many democracies elsewhere. This model recognizes the Constructivist idea that political legitimacy is socially constructed — not simply through elections but through the perception of capacity, integrity, and service. While critics highlight "dictatorship tendencies" due to PAP's unbroken rule since 1965, Singapore’s long-term stability enabled Realist strategic planning such as the 1972 Concept Plan — ensuring the city-state could outlast regional turmoil, from Cold War threats to modern-day geopolitical shifts. Where many nations plan for election cycles, Singapore plans for generations.

2. The Socialist Elements: Security Through the CPF System

Singapore incorporates elements of socialism through the Central Provident Fund (CPF) — a mandatory savings system that secures housing, healthcare, and retirement needs for all citizens. Instead of welfare dependence, Singapore builds self-reliance through forced but personalized savings mechanisms. Citizens are shielded from destitution not by open-ended welfare transfers but by a structured and sustainable framework that promotes dignity and personal responsibility. This mirrors the Asian Developmental State (ADS) model, where social protections are not about handouts but about enabling productive citizenship — thereby reinforcing the social contract while avoiding fiscal unsustainability.

3. The Capitalist Core: Free Market Efficiency with State Macro-Intervention

Singapore remains one of the world’s freest economies (Liberalist) — boasting competitive markets, strong entrepreneurship, and open global trade. Yet, unlike laissez-faire capitalism, the state intervenes strategically at macro levels to redistribute wealth, regulate monopolies, and guide economic transformations. Urban Ecology Theory explains how Singapore nurtures high-density, globally connected hubs (e.g., CBD, Jurong) while managing urban competition and clustering, avoiding uncontrolled sprawl and fragmentation. From industrialization to biotechnology to fintech, Singapore’s economy is shaped by calibrated state intervention aimed at national strategic interests while allowing market forces to operate efficiently. This delicate dance between free-market dynamism and guided steering is central to Singapore’s success. Intervention comes in forms of : Correct inequality (e.g., Workfare), Maintain competitiveness (e.g., Industry Transformation Maps), and Build future industries (e.g., Smart Nation initiatives). In this, Singapore also aligns with Flying Geese Theory—not leading unilaterally but moving in formation with ASEAN and regional economies, adapting dynamically as global shifts occur.

4. Democratic Processes with Rational Control

Singapore exhibits Constructivist Realism in how it manages democracy: it holds regular elections but ensures that political participation preserves national strategic interests, rather than being a playground for populist cycles. Rather than populism, Singapore seeks leaders with policy foresight, ethical grounding, and national resilience. This guards against what Globalization Theory shows elsewhere: the rapid disillusionment and instability that come when populism overruns sound governance. In this model, democracy is not merely the right to choose anyone — but the responsibility to protect national coherence, especially for a small state facing constant external pressures (Neorealism).

5. Communist Echoes : Land Ownership and Urban Management

Singapore’s 90% state ownership of land resembles a communist model, but for practical, not ideological reasons. State land control enables urban revitalization, public housing equity, and prevention of generational land hoarding, critical in a nation where land is finite. Without such control, land use would fossilize around wealth elites—an unacceptable risk for a country with pressing housing, infrastructural, and economic needs. From an Urban Ecology perspective, this allows Singapore to regenerate urban spaces dynamically, maintaining environmental resilience and economic vibrancy—critical for a secondary nation-state without limited land, and could not reclaim any further in width (730sqkm), height (300m) nor depth (150m). 

6. Military Strength and Diplomatic Relevance

Singapore’s strong military (Total Defence doctrine) and shrewd diplomacy align with Realist theories about small-state survival. Understanding its geopolitical smallness, Singapore invests heavily in military deterrence (15%) through National Service and a well-equipped Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). Diplomatically, Singapore pursues neutral, multilateral engagement, maintaining good relations across rival powers — a rare feat today. This "value proposition diplomacy" ensures Singapore remains indispensable, rather than disposable, in global power calculations (US, China, ASEAN, EU).

7. The Asian Developmental State 

Singapore exhibits the hallmarks of an Asian Developmental State (ADS), rejecting both Export-Oriented Industrialization (EOI) dependency and Import Substitution Industrialization (ISI) inwardness. Neither fully subscribing to free-market fundamentalism (Washington Consensus) nor state-socialist isolation, Singapore charts its own middle path — building capabilities systematically while ensuring fiscal prudence, openness, and strategic autonomy. This state-engineered modernization shows how institutional capacity, not market forces alone, drives long-term national success. In terms of Wallerstein's Globalisation, it operates as a semi-core city within the global capitalist system — intermediating trade, finance, and innovation flows between advanced economies and developing regions. Regional talent integration through ASEAN partnerships, EP schemes, and cross-border investments ensures Singapore remains vital in the shifting global network. Yet Singapore also guards against hyper-globalization risks by maintaining Financial Conservatism (50% of Returns of Investments), Domestic Resilience and Strategic Autonomy.

8. Urban Sociology Insights: Decentralization and Integration

In urban planning, Singapore avoids the classical "concentric model" seen in many global cities where wealth concentrates centrally. Instead, heartlands like Tampines, Woodlands, Jurong East were developed as decentralized regional hubs, distributing jobs, services, and amenities evenly across the island. HDB racial quotas, 3-Generational Estates, Community Centres, estate WhatsApp groups, and ethnic festivals enforce integration, sharing spaces and resources, nurturing a shared national identity rather than allowing urban segregation. This aligns with Constructivist Sociology : nationhood and solidarity are not natural—they are constructed and reinforced through daily practice and urban space design. Due to these macro-level planning, we are the 6th Blue Zone in the world too. 

9. Career Progression: Capitalist Meritocracy 

Career structures in Singapore are built upon a philosophy of capitalist meritocracy, where continuous self-improvement, competition, and performance-based advancement are not merely ideals but institutionalized norms. This system reflects a conscious national design: survival of the fittest is not left to chance but systematically cultivated through educational pathways, workforce reskilling initiatives, and societal expectations. From early education, the system emphasizes achievement, discipline, and effort into the Streaming and differentiated Education Tracks (e.g., subject-based banding, IP, DSA), therefore these are tailored opportunities based on ability and interests. Then, we move on to continuous adult learning frameworks like SkillsFuture ensure that workers, regardless of age, must remain adaptive. We practice Merit-Based promotion schemes in Civil Service and Corporate sectors reward quantifiable competence, not just seniority or patronage. In the Innovation sector, we nurtured Entrepreneurship ecosystems (like Startup SG, Enterprise Singapore, one-north BizPark) to recognise merit not only in employment but in risk-taking and innovation. Institutions and employers alike prioritize measurable excellence, future potential, and adaptability over fixed credentials or static entitlement. Without a system that ruthlessly rewards excellence and punishes complacency, Singapore would rapidly fall behind in global relevance, innovation, and growth. Thus, capitalist meritocracy is not a luxury for Singapore — it is a strategic imperative deeply embedded into national consciousness. In line with Constructivist Sociology, Singapore's national ideology constructs individual responsibility as a civic duty that Success or Failure is Personalized; and future is Self-Authored, within a system that removes many structural barriers but offers no unconditional safety nets for underperformance. 

10. Evaluating against Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

Physiological : affordable food, water, transport, cost of living

Safety : public security, job stability, healthcare, international military defence

Belonging : strong community networks

Esteem : career advancement, achievements

Self-Actualization : opportunities in arts, innovation, entrepreneurship

This creates a social mobility engine—allowing those who strive and innovate to ascend, while maintaining social security nets for those in need.