Introduction
Singapore is renowned for its high quality of life – boasting economic prosperity, efficient public services, low crime, and world-class infrastructure. Yet many Singaporeans often express discontent in daily life. This seeming paradox can be explained by several persistent issues that affect ordinary residents. High living costs, pressures in housing and work, frustrations with certain government policies, and perceived limits on social freedoms all contribute to an undercurrent of dissatisfaction. The sections below explore each of these factors in detail, supported by recent surveys, news reports, and expert analyses. A concluding summary ties together why, even in a developed nation admired for its success, these grievances continue to surface.
High Cost of Living
Singapore’s cost of living is frequently cited as a top complaint among residents. The city-state consistently ranks as one of the world’s most expensive places to live. In fact, Singapore has repeatedly topped the Economist Intelligence Unit’s global cost-of-living index in recent years . This dubious honor stems from the steep prices of many essentials. Transportation is notably costly – Singapore imposes strict vehicle quotas, driving car ownership expenses (like Certificate of Entitlement fees) sky-high. The EIU report notes Singapore has the world’s highest transport prices due to these controls . Daily items such as food, utilities, alcohol, and tobacco are also expensive, partly due to import costs and heavy sin taxes .
Surveys show that citizens acutely feel these cost pressures. In late 2022, a poll found a whopping 89% of Singaporeans want the government to prioritize addressing cost-of-living issues, making it the number one public concern . More recently, a 2025 YouGov survey confirmed cost of living as the most pressing national issue, cited by 72% of respondents – far above any other concern . While inflation has moderated somewhat after peaking in 2022–2023, prices remain high relative to salaries. Everyday Singaporeans complain about rising grocery bills, pricier hawker meals, higher electricity tariffs, and the 2023 GST hike (from 7% to 8%, with another increase to 9% in 2024) which made goods and services even more expensive. All of this contributes to a feeling that it’s increasingly hard to get by in Singapore, even if headline economic indicators are strong. Simply put, many residents worry that their incomes aren’t keeping pace with the consistently high cost of living in the country .
Housing Affordability and Space
Singapore’s mix of high-rise apartments and landed houses – housing affordability is a key public concern. Housing is arguably the most emotionally charged cost-of-living issue in Singapore. About 80% of citizens live in government-built HDB (Housing & Development Board) flats, with the rest in private condominiums or landed homes. In recent years, home prices have surged to record levels, sparking anxiety especially among younger Singaporeans seeking their first home. During the pandemic era alone (2020–2023), HDB resale flat prices jumped by about 32% , while private property prices climbed nearly 28% . This rapid escalation far outstripped income growth, fueling a sense that housing is becoming unattainable for many. By one measure, the median price of a private home is over 13 times the median annual household income (a price-to-income ratio ~13.7), indicating highly unaffordable private housing . Public HDB flats are subsidized and comparatively cheaper (around 4.5–5 times annual income on average) , but even those have grown less affordable than before. The HDB resale price-to-income ratio rose from about 3.7 in 2020 to roughly 4.7 in 2023 , reflecting the strain on buyers despite government grants.
Real-world markers of housing stress are evident. There has been an explosion in million-dollar HDB flat sales, once a rarity. 467 public flats were resold for S$1 million or more in 2023, up sharply from 259 such cases in 2021 . Every few weeks headlines announce yet another record-setting HDB resale deal, even in non-central estates . For many Singaporeans, these eye-popping prices underscore fears that “affordable housing” is slipping out of reach. Young couples complain of long wait times (5 years or more) for new BTO flats and increasingly stiff competition for desirable units. Those who turn to the resale market face not only higher prices but also Cash-Over-Valuation (COV) premiums – extra cash required above a flat’s appraised value – which became common during the recent boom. Beyond cost, there’s also the issue of space constraints. Typical HDB flats are compact (a modern 4-room flat is ~90 square meters), and newer units are slightly smaller than those built in past decades. Dense high-rise living is the norm, and while efficient, some families feel their living space is cramped compared to housing in other countries. All these factors explain why polls consistently rank housing affordability as a major public concern. According to one 2022 survey, two out of three Singaporeans (66%) said the government needs to focus more on improving housing affordability . Housing touches on Singaporeans’ sense of security and future – and when home ownership starts to feel insecure or burdensome, discontent grows.
Work Culture and Stress
A relentless work culture is another source of frequent complaints. Singapore’s workforce is highly educated and productive, but also highly stressed. Competitive pressures, long hours, and an ethos of excellence (locally dubbed the “kiasu” mentality, meaning fear of losing out) contribute to burnout and work-life imbalance. By global standards, Singaporeans put in very long working hours. In the early 2010s, the average work week was about 46.6 hours (highest in the world at the time) . Although this has improved slightly – down to roughly 43 hours per week by 2021 – it remains well above the norms in many Western countries (where 35–40 hour weeks are common). A 2022 study comparing cities’ work-life balance ranked Singapore as the 4th most overworked city worldwide (only behind Dubai, Hong Kong, and Kuala Lumpur) . It’s not uncommon for local employees to stay late at the office, log on after hours, or work weekends, especially in competitive industries like finance or tech.
Unsurprisingly, stress and mental exhaustion are widespread. A recent global workforce survey found **68% of Singaporean employees experience stress at least once a week, and 12% report feeling stressed every day . These figures were higher than the Asia-Pacific average, indicating the intensity of Singapore’s work environment. Another poll in 2022 revealed 86% of Singapore respondents felt stressed at work, one of the highest rates internationally. Burnout symptoms – physical fatigue, sleep problems, and mental distress – are commonly reported, especially among younger professionals. Nearly half of workers say they feel exhausted after a typical workday . Concern over poor work-life balance has grown to the point that many Singaporeans say they would trade jobs or even take pay cuts for a less stressful life. (In one 2023 poll, over 40% of respondents indicated they would quit their jobs for better work-life balance.) The government and some companies have started promoting work-life harmony initiatives – for example, encouraging flexible hours, remote work, or “right to disconnect” policies – but progress has been gradual. Culturally, a sense of insecurity (fear of falling behind if one doesn’t work hard) still looms large. Thus, while Singapore’s unemployment is very low and incomes are high, the day-to-day work experience leaves many feeling drained. The complaint “we work to live, not live to work” resonates with a populace that increasingly aspires to a healthier balance. Until the work culture shifts more significantly, stress and long hours will remain a key gripe despite the nation’s economic success.
Government Policies and Trust Issues
Singapore’s government is often praised for efficient administration and low corruption, but some policies and political practices draw criticism from segments of the population. The ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) has been in power since 1959, overseeing decades of stability and growth. However, this one-party dominance also means a tightly controlled political space that can feel paternalistic. The PAP’s policy approach is sometimes described as “nanny state” – heavy government involvement in guiding citizens’ behavior and a top-down style of governance. While many appreciate the order and stability this brings, others chafe at it. There are calls for more transparency, accountability, and inclusiveness in policy-making. For instance, Singapore does not have a Freedom of Information Act, and government data (from finances of sovereign wealth funds to criteria for certain decisions) is often opaque. This has led some to question if authorities are as transparent and accountable as they could be. Notably, in 2023 a rare scandal – the investigation of a cabinet minister for corruption – shocked Singaporeans, illustrating that even in a clean-government model, accountability must be vigilantly maintained .
Public surveys hint at areas of discontent. A recent poll found that among those who feel Singapore is “on the wrong track,” common reasons cited were economic strains, wealth gaps, and dissatisfaction with government policy decisions . In particular, respondents pointed to “perceived gaps in wealth distribution” and frustration that lower-income wages aren’t keeping up with the cost of living . Indeed, Singapore’s income inequality is high for a developed country – the Gini coefficient after taxes and transfers stands around 0.38–0.40 in recent years , indicating a significant wealth gap. Many feel that social support schemes could do more to help the poor and elderly, and that policies have favored economic growth over equality. Government leaders, whose salaries are pegged to top private-sector earnings, are sometimes seen as out of touch with ground concerns. There is also debate about immigration and foreign labor policies. While foreign talent has helped drive the economy, some locals worry about job competition and the strain on housing and infrastructure from a growing population. This showed up in the YouGov survey, where immigration and related political issues were cited as areas of dissatisfaction by those unhappy with the country’s direction . In response to such concerns, the government has in recent years tightened some foreign worker rules and increased support for citizen households (through grants, subsidies, etc.). Still, a segment of the populace remains skeptical about whether the “growth at all costs” policy mindset has truly shifted. Overall trust in government remains relatively high – Singapore consistently ranks among the least corrupt nations, and about 58% of Singaporeans in 2025 say the country is moving in the right direction . Yet the same surveys show a notable minority voicing that the government could listen more and be more responsive to feedback. As Singapore matures as a society, these calls for a refreshed social compact – one that is less elitist and more consultative – form part of the undercurrent of complaints.
Social Freedoms and Civil Liberties
Singapore’s tightly governed nature extends to the civic space, where certain social freedoms are curtailed in the name of order and security. This is a perennial source of discontent, especially among activists, academics, and younger Singaporeans who desire greater liberty. Freedom of speech and expression is limited by strict defamation and censorship laws. Criticizing government leaders can lead to defamation lawsuits – over the years, opposition politicians, bloggers, and journalists have been sued or made to pay damages for remarks deemed defamatory. There are broadly worded laws against sedition and spreading false information (the 2019 Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act, or POFMA, allows authorities to demand corrections/removals of online content considered false). These tools, while intended to prevent instability, have a chilling effect on open debate. International indices reflect this controlled media environment: in the 2024 World Press Freedom Index, Singapore was ranked 126th out of 180 countries , placing it among the lowest for press freedom globally. Mainstream media is largely government-linked, and though generally reliable on straight news, it avoids overt criticism of the ruling establishment. Many Singaporeans get news from alternative online outlets or social media, but those platforms too face surveillance and regulatory oversight.
Freedom of assembly is also heavily regulated. Spontaneous street protests are essentially banned. Under the Public Order Act, any outdoor gathering of even a handful of people for a cause requires a police permit – and such permits are rarely granted for demonstrations . The one place where protesting is allowed (with notification) is the Speakers’ Corner in Hong Lim Park, a designated free-speech zone, but even events there can be restricted if deemed disruptive . Foreigners are not allowed to participate in protests or political rallies at all . Activists who have staged peaceful assemblies without approval – from marching down a street with a sign to holding a lone vigil – have faced fines or jail time for unlawful assembly, even for one-person “protests” . This stands in stark contrast to Western democracies and has been a point of contention for human rights groups. In 2023, for example, several climate activists and opposition figures were investigated for small-scale demonstrations. The heavy-handed response reinforces a climate where public dissent is discouraged, leading some citizens to feel voiceless.
LGBTQ+ rights and other civil liberties form another area where social freedom is constrained, though there have been recent changes. For decades, Singapore retained a colonial-era law (Section 377A of the Penal Code) that criminalized sex between men, contributing to a climate of stigma for LGBTQ+ individuals. In late 2022, the government finally repealed Section 377A, effectively decriminalizing same-sex relations . This was a landmark shift, applauded by rights advocates. However, the repeal was accompanied by a constitutional amendment to block any legal challenges to the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman . In other words, the law now explicitly protects the heterosexual definition of marriage, preventing courts from recognizing same-sex marriages or partnerships. Furthermore, Singapore has no laws barring discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity . Gay Singaporeans still cannot marry, adopt children as a couple, or benefit from spousal rights in housing and healthcare, and media depicting LGBTQ relationships remains censored or given restrictive ratings. Progress on this front has therefore been cautious and limited, reflecting conservative social attitudes. Beyond LGBTQ issues, Singapore maintains the death penalty for drug offenses, mandatory military service for men, and other strict laws (for example, caning as a punishment for certain crimes) that, while supported by a segment of the public, are condemned by international rights observers. The government’s stance is that such measures maintain order and public morality in a multi-ethnic city-state. But for liberal-minded citizens, these curbs on personal freedoms and harsh penalties can feel at odds with Singapore’s developed-nation status. As one analyst put it, Singapore enjoys First World comforts but not fully First World liberties – a trade-off that continues to be debated.
Conclusion: Why the Complaints Persist
In summary, the undercurrent of dissatisfaction in Singapore – despite its enviable living standards – arises from the pressures of daily life and limits on personal liberties. Economic grievances top the list: the strain of sky-high living costs and housing prices makes people worry for their future, even in a wealthy country. Many feel they are on a treadmill – working punishing hours yet barely keeping up with expenses – leading to stress and frustration. At the same time, a paternalistic governance model means that while material needs are met, citizens have less say in the political sphere. Those who value freedom of expression, transparency, and diversity of lifestyles chafe at the boundaries set by the state. Essentially, Singaporeans’ expectations have risen alongside the nation’s development. As basic infrastructure and safety are taken for granted, people now seek quality-of-life improvements in affordability, work-life balance, and social liberties. When these higher-level needs are not met, complaints inevitably surface.
It’s worth noting that voicing complaints is itself part of Singapore’s culture – sometimes humorously referred to as the national pastime. This constant feedback, whether in coffee shop chatter or online forums, has in some cases prompted policy responses (for example, recent relief packages for cost of living, or dialogues on mental health and work culture). The government has recognized many of these issues and insists it is working to address them. Still, a gap remains between policy intent and public sentiment. High expectations, global comparisons, and generational value shifts mean that Singaporeans today are less content to simply accept the status quo. They desire not just prosperity and security, but also quality, fairness, and voice in their lives. Until they feel relief on those fronts – be it cheaper housing, a more relaxed work environment, or greater freedom to speak and be heard – it is likely that the chorus of grumbles will continue, even under the shiny skyscrapers of this successful city-state. The paradox of Singapore is thus explained: its people complain because they care deeply about their quality of life, pushing for improvements that befit a nation that has already achieved so much.
Sources: Recent surveys and reports have been used to substantiate the above analysis, including Bloomberg and YouGov polls on cost of living and housing , property market data from PropertyGuru and DollarsAndSense , work stress surveys by ADP and others , and assessments of governance and freedoms by Freedom House and international indices . These provide a factual basis for understanding why discontent lingers in a nation often celebrated for its success.