Singaporeans react to a study that suggests food prices haven’t increased significantly after GST hike.
If you’re a fan of affordable kopi, Queenstown might be your next destination. It’s home to the cheapest Kopi O, which costs an average of $1.01, according to the recent Makan Index 2.0 survey conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS).
The Makan Index, originally created to explore regional differences in living costs based on food prices at local eateries, took a deeper dive in its latest edition. This time, two rounds of data were collected: one from mid-September to early-November 2022, and another from mid-January to early February 2023. The goal was to see whether food prices had been impacted by the GST hike that took effect in 2023.
Surprisingly, most stalls did not raise their prices after the GST hike. For instance, only 11 out of 30 fishball noodle stalls that researchers revisited had increased their prices.
But how does this align with the ground reality?
We’re Looking in the Wrong Places
A key limitation of the study was that only 50 establishments out of the original 263 were revisited. Due to time and manpower constraints, researchers couldn’t revisit more stalls, and some of the businesses they initially visited had closed or changed ownership.
Instead of focusing on the stalls that survived, exploring those that shut down could provide more valuable insights into the full picture. The closures could be a result of price hikes that drove away customers. This is known as survivorship bias, which occurs when only the “survivors” are studied, ignoring the potential reasons behind business closures.
While the study accurately reflects the stalls that remained open, it may miss the underlying causes for the closures of other stalls. This gap between research and real-life experience highlights the challenges of understanding the true impact of rising costs.
Rise of the Keyboard Warriors
Many Singaporeans found it hard to accept that most stalls didn’t raise their prices. With inflation and the rising cost of living being everyday struggles, some people dismissed the findings as propaganda, accusing the government of downplaying the difficulties faced by ordinary citizens.
Despite the study’s clear limitations, such as not factoring in food quality or portion sizes—which many Singaporeans feel have shrunk—the report still sparked frustration. The research was focused on a small subset of food items, and while it highlighted small price hikes, it didn’t paint the full picture of daily living expenses.
For many, the study’s findings felt disconnected from their lived reality. While the researchers acknowledged these limitations, the optics of the survey—suggesting that things were still affordable—clashed with what people experience on the ground.
What Determines a Small Margin?
Among the 18 food items studied, most of the price increases were modest, averaging less than $0.30 per item. For instance, the Iced Milo saw a price increase of $0.12 (a 7% rise), and the breakfast set went up by $0.21 (a 6.8% increase).
While these may seem like small increases in isolation, for those struggling with tightening budgets, even these small hikes can add up over time. The price increases were measured over a five-month period, which raises concerns about future hikes.
It’s Not About the Details
Ultimately, the frustration isn’t about the fine details of the survey or its methodology. What people are really upset about is the narrative that things are still affordable. For many Singaporeans, the survey came at the wrong time. Amid an unstable economy and rising living costs, they don’t need another reminder that food prices might be increasing—even in small increments.
The survey was meant to be a lighthearted exploration of food prices, but in the current climate, it inadvertently became a focal point for years of financial stress and frustration. Even the smallest hint that their daily struggles may not be as severe as they perceive triggered a backlash.
In the end, the study may have only scratched the surface of a much deeper issue: the ongoing financial strain faced by many Singaporeans, which can’t be captured in a set of numbers alone.
