In Tennyson's poem, Ulysses, the much-travelled Greek hero gets restless in his old age and wants
To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths
Of all the western stars, until I die.
Now, of course, he would have to furnish all kinds of documents to get a tourist visa though a younger bloke might be able to swing a work permit.
Age can be a drag on all your prospects except that of meeting your Maker, if you believe in that.
You are written off before you shuffle off.
I was reminded of that by the editorial in the Sunday Times headlined "50 and relax" — as if most people could afford that.
Employers hesitate to employ fiftysomethings, reckoning they would be stuck with them until they retire in their mid-60s, it said.
Then followed the usual patter about the need to change mindsets.
The young, of course, can't be written off since they are the future of the nation.
The Sunday Times' weekday avatar, the Straits Times, on Saturday spilled more ink on the frustrations of young Singaporeans unable to afford their dream homes.
It was a follow-up to another article, which urged the government to "tweak (the) fundamentals of housing policy" because people were unhappy with it.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had described the litany of complaints as "astroturfing" — a deceptive campaign by a few people who manage to make it look like it has lots of popular support.
But the government could not dismiss the complaints out of hand, said the Straits Times article. It concluded:
People’s expectations can have very real impact on the ground, regardless of whether that ground is paved with real grass or astroturf.
It was the first time I had read about "ground … paved with… grass" — and for a good reason:
Pave v. (often paved with): cover (a piece of ground) with flat stones or bricks.
(Concise Oxford English Dictionary)
Linguistic quibbling aside, the housing controversy begs the question: How did it come to this?
I recall news reports years ago about unsold apartments in new public housing estates which were considered too far from the city.
So I did a Google search and came across this article which appeared on the Little Speck website in March 2002:
The public need for HDB apartments has declined substantially through the past decade…
The younger generation does not just want a subsidised flat like their needy parents. It wants one in a choice area comparable to some of the high standards of a private condo…
Some people have called for the closure of HDB, but it will not happen because its task of providing "affordable" housing to Singaporeans is never-ending…
The famous long queue of applicants for HDB flats has all but disappeared. During its peak, an applicant could wait several years before getting a unit.
Young Singaporeans have developed a love of living in the city centre and refurbished estates with bright lights, exciting shopping and train stations.
This demand is driving many first-time buyers to leave the queue to buy resale units in a choice locality.
How times have changed. Now people are complaining about HDB prices.
The government has not turned a deaf ear. It has taken measures to prevent speculation.
But it has to walk a fine line on the property front.
For, in a country with nearly 90 per cent home ownership, how many people will gain from falling property prices?
PS: Talking of Ulysses, here's a link to Cream performing Tales of Brave Ulysses.
Related posts:
