Is the New Tapera Policy Beneficial or Burdensome for the Middle Class?

 

The new Tapera (Public Housing Savings) policy has been met with a range of opinions. Some people believe it will have a positive impact in the future for the next generation. Tapera has benefits in addition to helping underprivileged people, it is also beneficial for the participants themselves. However, there are also those who think that this policy is only burdensome for the community, particularly the middle class and workers whose salaries are uncertain, not to mention that it is also considered to have an impact on today's society which is in an economic crisis. In my opinion, this policy is too burdensome for the middle class, who are currently experiencing a financial crisis.

Some groups of officials and economists think that the new policy of Tapera will have a positive impact on the new generation in the future and guarantee welfare in old age. According to them, Tapera money is savings money, not money that we save and then lose. The savings are a convenience to get a house in the future. On the other hand, some people refuse because of a lack of trust in financial management by the government. They think that the new policy only opens up a field of corruption that allows this policy to not run well. The proposal is for the government to provide houses first, so that people can have confidence that there is already a form of housing available and that they can start paying in installments for Tapera savings. 

The government asserts that the implementation of the Tapera policy will have an impact on the country's economic development. This is based on the assumption that an increase in the economy will lead to an increase in wages for the population. It can be posited that the establishment of a tapera will have a dual impact on the economy. Firstly, it will result in the creation of employment opportunities. Secondly, it will facilitate an increase in production. The higher the employment rate, the more labor is needed, thus allowing an area to increase production in the production of goods and services. Consequently, people's wages have increased, and their purchasing power is high. High demand increases production power, which requires high labor as well. The cycle will rotate and repeat until it ultimately impacts the country's economy. However, some people think that this new policy has no clear benefits. The 3% salary cut is considered only burdensome and reduces their income for basic needs. People who are required to pay Tapera are those who have salaries above the UMR (Regional Minimum Wage), but this is considered burdensome for the middle class. The middle class, which has an income exceeding the MBR (Low Income Community) criteria and already owns a house, is unable to access subsidized housing. The fundamental issue is that their income is insufficient to meet basic needs, let alone to make various deductions from health and employment benefit plans, old age insurance, income tax, and Tapera.

The government said that the Tapera policy was made with the principle of mutual cooperation for those in need. This principle contains that MBR participants can take advantage of Tapera financing. Apart from that, it is also a solution to overcome the housing deficit (backlog). However, for most labor workers Tapera only adds to the financial burden of the people, especially middle-class workers. They perceive Tapera as an example of the government's lack of involvement in ensuring adequate housing for its citizens. 

After considering the arguments on both sides of the issue, I find myself in disagreement with the recently introduced Tapera policy. This policy does not adequately consider its impact on those from the middle class, particularly millennials and Generation Z. Furthermore, the policy requires a significant time commitment to implement. Participants must save a considerable amount of money over an extended period to reach the required savings threshold. I believe that the savings required to reach this threshold are not realistic for the middle class to achieve. For the middle class, it will take a considerable length of time to reach the target that aligns with their financial plans. Furthermore, property prices are unaffordable for the middle class, despite the Tapera policy offering more affordable options.