ERP works like magic!
-
Hmmm ... don't get exactly what u r trying to say. Are you saying your coffers are empty because you have to pay ERP?Originally posted by maven2:Actually, No. I find myself at a loss. I cannot find a better solution. At least I'm not pretending that by expanding my coffers, I'm solving the problem, when in fact, it is not doing anything to that effect and has longer term repercussions.
And we would certainly be guilty of not voicing it out when we've seen it. I'm saying, go anywhere you want. But don't go backwards. And it is indeed towards that we're headed. And because it's the best I can do given my current situation which is a result of living in "modern-day" Singapore, I'm doing it.
Instead of branding everyone who doesnt give up everything an "armchair critic". It's easy to say we are that when you don't have HDB loans to pay, car loans to pay or when your coffers are opulent with gold. Instead, to add on to the burdens, you make it very expensive to be an opposition candidate.
I'm not a critic. I give credit where its due. But this is not one of those places. -
How often do we hear opposition MPs talk in parliament? Very little because the govt does not televise them. This is through no fault of the opposition MPs.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:My mom is just like so many forumers here, talk only. But she is better than opposition candidates who cannot talk. Listen, how often do you hear our opposition parliamentarians talk? And if they do, also like the boliaos here!
As for free lunch, my mom also includes breakfast and dinner. Now, I am paying back. You think I like you, just eat and talk only?
They talk also like the bo liaos here? Have you seen Sylvia talk? Have you read her speeches? Have you seen Low orate? Have you read his speeches?
A lot of what the regulars here in Speakers Corner do is to educate the public. We debate so that Singaporeans may see the truth. We post excerpts, statistics and blogs so that more may be edcuated and be informed about what we normally do not see in this press controlled nation.
Just what the fcuk have you learnt or chosen not to learn if you opine like the way you have done above? -
Most like regulars here are confusing the public with distorted information, unrealiable statistic and their stupid ideologiesOriginally posted by Rock^Star:How often do we hear opposition MPs talk in parliament? Very little because the govt does not televise them. This is through no fault of the opposition MPs.
They talk also like the bo liaos here? Have you seen Sylvia talk? Have you read her speeches? Have you seen Low orate? Have you read his speeches?
A lot of what the regulars here in Speakers Corner do is to educate the public. We debate so that Singaporeans may see the truth. We post excerpts, statistics and blogs so that more may be edcuated and be informed about what we normally do not see in this press controlled nation.
Just what the fcuk have you learnt or chosen not to learn if you opine like the way you have done above? -
Surely, that's a sweeping statement.Originally posted by Gazelle:Most like regulars here are confusing the public with distorted information, unrealiable statistic and their stupid ideologies
Distorted, unrealistic and stupid? Let people here be the judge. -
stressful.
-
Originally posted by reddressman:
If COE were $1 each but limited to a small number a month, that would still achieve the objective of reducing congestion. But have you thought about how you are going to ration out the small number of COEs which everyone (including the road sweeper) can afford?
My question to you is, if cars are as cheap as in Malaysia, [b]and COE is $1 and limited to x number a month, Singapore island certainly surely absolutely positively can limit road usage by limiting the number of road users.
Singapore ONLY has 4.62km of road per 1kmsq, we can also build more roads to ease congestion.[/b]
First come, first serve? The aunties and bangla workers will all be hired by companies and the rich to queue up for days before the issue.
Only businesses will be allowed to own cars? Everyone will start a small bogus company to own a car. You can register a business in a HDB flat and have an online website for a shop front.
Market force is still the best way to ensure that we appreciate the market value of a precious commodity. If the COE and a car is so important to you, you must pay more for it. -
Instead of a COE, the govt can regulate by having a minimum amount of cash for downpayment before ownership of a car is possible.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:If COE were $1 each but limited to a small number a month, that would still achieve the objective of reducing congestion. But have you thought about how you are going to ration out the small number of COEs which everyone (including the road sweeper) can afford?
First come, first serve? The aunties and bangla workers will all be hired by companies and the rich to queue up for days before the issue.
Only businesses will be allowed to own cars? Everyone will start a small bogus company to own a car. You can register a business in a HDB flat and have an online website for a shop front.
Market force is still the best way to ensure that we appreciate the market value of a precious commodity. If the COE and a car is so important to you, you must pay more for it.
That would save a lot of people from huge bank loans and would filter out those who geniuinely cannot afford a car. -
How about seeing it as half the cars will have to pass twice a day?Originally posted by Gazelle:All the cars will have to pass an ERP gantry once a day? HAHA...Atobe, please stop making me laugh lah...plus have you consider the population of Off Peak cars in Singapore.
Another failed attempt by Atobe??
ERP varies from $0.50 to $2, so Atobe's estimate was actually rather conservative.
I guess his statistic excludes trucks, buses, taxis, motorbikes, and Malaysian cars that come in and go past ERP gantries. $1 mil slightly conservative in that sense... -
It's not in MY nature to be doing any name-calling or making generalised statements, or QUOTING SOURCES out of context. Frankly, you should re-read all your posts.Originally posted by Gazelle:There are many type of business in this world, you have hospitality, F&B, PR and Marketing, Mass Production, Precision Engineering, Logistic and Distribution, Chemical processing, Health Care etc. Just because you are doing business are you saying that will by default make you more knowledgable and you will know how to run all form of business?
resorting to name calling just because you are unable to back up your below statement? thats pathatic.
"This certainly is the ideal. The slight side-effect would definitely be the increase in costs for public transport as the public transport companies scramble to increase their fleet.
Greater business costs and sharp demand for public transport would cause prices to increase at least twofold, which translates to some $1-2 extra per trip. Fuel prices can also be expected to increase due to the drop in consumer demand for petrol as there are less and less car owners. The amount is a small price to pay. Estimating a daily return trip at $6, this would translate to $180 monthly per commuter. Still better than paying $700-$900+ a month for a car. "
I asked you for your background in either transportation or business. None?
Marketing Strategy is not pegged to any one kind of business. It is something that REQUIRES you continually be able to assess the CHANGING market dynamics in any area and also to be sensitive to all the other industries against which you are competing for dollar.
It also demands that you are able to analyse trends and come up with suitable action plans to either leverage on a trend or set a trend.
That, coupled with my background in PR. And because we ourselves are in the habit of marketing things, I can smell bullcrap from miles away. It's all part of my job.
I dont need to know how to run all the businesses. I only need to know how to smell bullcrap. Which obviously you have a problem smelling. Which I can attribute 2 reasons.
i. When you've been climatized to the bullcrap smells after being knee-deep in it all day, you just cannot tell the difference. And this is precisely what marketing strategists and PR folks try to achieve. PAP has some success with their PR i note.
ii. Your nose is stuffed. And hence you cannot tell the difference between bullcrap and mudpie. -
No. I don't think anything in my posts suggesting anything to that effect.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:Hmmm ... don't get exactly what u r trying to say. Are you saying your coffers are empty because you have to pay ERP? -
I don't think any one of us are saying that traffic congestion can be solved. We are saying that the ERP is not helping. The only thing it does is add gold into government coffers.Originally posted by mancha:I think the congestion problem will he inherent to Singapore.
Because we have limited road/parking space, and there is just too much cars.
That means congestion will always be with us.
The government can only shift it here and there.
They are in a dammed if you do, dammed if you don't situation.
How would the people take it, if the car population is to be reduced?
That means people who want a car, and can afford it, would not be able to own a car.
How to get employers to stagger the work hours, so that morning and evening peak hours are spread out.
Large events also contribute, anyone who owns a car wants to drive there. All of them at the same time.
Vehicle traffic is to be viewed like water moving around a duct system. It has to keep moving. But unlike water, any vehicle that stop, would be an obstruction to the flow. Thats why all vehicles must be in good repair. And also what about vehicles involved in collisions, they too present an obstruction. Then there is that input/output equation. When input is greater than output, a back up results. Traffic lights improve or retard the flow?
Is it possible for hundred of thousands of quirky drivers to drive round and round without getting off or stop?
Congestion will always be with us.
Get the government to shift it so somebody else's route.
That is our only contention. Something Gazelle doesn't seem to understand. -
Heard of misquotes?Originally posted by Gazelle:This is not call nitpick, this is to ensure that that "statistic" forumers posted here are reliable and worthy for discussion and not something that is make up base on gut feeling.
Or again "out of context?" -
You have openly admitted that limiting the COE number can control congestion, when set to $1. This is just for illustration purpose. This is to show that COE need not be controlled by skyrocket prices. All you need is $1.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:If COE were $1 each but limited to a small number a month, that would still achieve the objective of reducing congestion. But have you thought about how you are going to ration out the small number of COEs which everyone (including the road sweeper) can afford?
First come, first serve? The aunties and bangla workers will all be hired by companies and the rich to queue up for days before the issue.
Only businesses will be allowed to own cars? Everyone will start a small bogus company to own a car. You can register a business in a HDB flat and have an online website for a shop front.
Market force is still the best way to ensure that we appreciate the market value of a precious commodity. If the COE and a car is so important to you, you must pay more for it.
But this will mean the government takes in less money. It depends on what is the concern here.
Restricting to businesses, 1st come 1st serve, these are just my basic suggestions. Are you competent of coming up more oxford solution? I not oxfords standard lah, I only sec4 but I use commonsense to respond to your scholarstic rebuttal.
As said, COE or no COE (as in COE= $1), I can achieve the same congestion control. So, why have COE? Is there another reason?
Okay lah, since you so bombastic, I dun argue with you too much this point lah. I come up a better solution of no-COE lah then I come back to you lah. You think this is impossible?
Now, I direct your attention to ERP. As many have experienced, like the COE, with ERP or no ERP, the result is the same --->>> Traffic Jams and Congestion. Never solved.
You will and can only rebut by saying that ERP divert some traffic from CTE. Even so, there is still congestion as all experienced. Reduced some congestion but still congestion. Is this not equal to congestion? Congestion still exist. So why ERP? But in your oxfordian rebuttal, please also comment on what happens to this diverted traffic? I tell you, it flows into smaller roads creating its own congestion there. and so you may say, that is why ERP is extended further. And so my sec4 commonsense will tell you that there will be no end to this as the vicious cycle of spreading congestion to elsewhere will continue. Allow me to enlighten you that the number of cars in singapore is never reduced. It only increase every day and month. COE is low now. Cars are needed and a status symbol. How can Singaporeans not want it? 1st world standard want to cramp on bus? How glorious? share air in a congested 4x4 box with anyone with any coughing disease? lung disease? skin disease? And to this, you may argue that I should not go out in that case, to which I will say, no its not that I will not go out. I will choose to own a car for convenience and less need to cramp with people. Ok with you or not? Can approve my lifestyle or not?
Your logic on ERP is long long ago defeated. Give it a rest. And all these points did not come from me alone. So many forummers have given the same.
Pitty you having a job like this to counter to so many strong rebuttals and all you can do out of desperation is to use your mama to douse the fire? Good try but no use. I would rather listen to the Real reasons given for implementing the ERP than to accept that it reduces congestion. I not primary school pass only leh. I sec 4 ok. -
Maven2,Originally posted by maven2:It's not in MY nature to be doing any name-calling or making generalised statements, or QUOTING SOURCES out of context. Frankly, you should re-read all your posts.
I asked you for your background in either transportation or business. None?
Marketing Strategy is not pegged to any one kind of business. It is something that REQUIRES you continually be able to assess the CHANGING market dynamics in any area and also to be sensitive to all the other industries against which you are competing for dollar.
It also demands that you are able to analyse trends and come up with suitable action plans to either leverage on a trend or set a trend.
That, coupled with my background in PR. And because we ourselves are in the habit of marketing things, I can smell bullcrap from miles away. It's all part of my job.
I dont need to know how to run all the businesses. I only need to know how to smell bullcrap. Which obviously you have a problem smelling. Which I can attribute 2 reasons.
i. When you've been climatized to the bullcrap smells after being knee-deep in it all day, you just cannot tell the difference. And this is precisely what marketing strategists and PR folks try to achieve. PAP has some success with their PR i note.
ii. Your nose is stuffed. And hence you cannot tell the difference between bullcrap and mudpie.
I am afraid that by simply calling yourself a businessmen or directors in this forum is not going to make your argument any more credible or superior than any tom dick and harry. If you are as capable as what you claim and that you have good understanding of cost structure, lets talk FACTS and lets do it point by point, and dont simply label my argument as bullcrap, because this is the usually stunts used by whiners and empty vessel in this forum when they couldnt back up their statements.
This is what you wrote :
1) If I increased my fleet from 10,000 to 20,000, I'd employ more heads of departments and overseers and of course more drivers. I'd also have to build additional depots and interchanges. And because my CEO is managing more and has more on his plate, I'll increase his pay as well. I'm not sure about the amount, but I'll increase his pay nonetheless... substantially.
2) When you have higher ridership, because the current fleet of trains are insufficient, I have to once again buy more trains and build more depots. And perhaps more lines to reach more places because the demand for it is there. I also might have to extend work hours, some of which wont be packed but have moderate amount of people. As it is the trains are already almost 100% utilised. When we have more people and more trains.. it still will be 100% utilised. There wont be a difference in the percentage utilisation. So costs wont go down. But I built more facilities and lines?
This is my response to what you wrote :
1) What you are talking about are direct and variable cost. What you dont need to increase is the fixed overhead. CEO are not operation people they can run a company with a million trains, and if the same business model is being duplicated, the cost of duplicating be is lower. CEO get paid more if the company makes more money and the share price goes up, not because the company is buying more trains.
Maybe you should read up more on economy of scales to get a better understanding of what I am talking about.
2) The train line in Singapore are build by our government, not the train operators, if you have more ridership, your utilisation of asset and manpower employed will be higher which mean cost will go down, not up. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
And the rebuttal to that is
Maven2,
I am afraid that by simply calling yourself a businessmen or directors in this forum is not going to make your argument any more credible or superior than any tom dick and harry. If you are as capable as what you claim and that you have good understanding of cost structure, lets talk FACTS and lets do it point by point, and dont simply label my argument as bullcrap, because this is the usually stunts used by whiners and empty vessel in this forum when they couldnt back up their statements.
[b]This is what you wrote :
1) If I increased my fleet from 10,000 to 20,000, I'd employ more heads of departments and overseers and of course more drivers. I'd also have to build additional depots and interchanges. And because my CEO is managing more and has more on his plate, I'll increase his pay as well. I'm not sure about the amount, but I'll increase his pay nonetheless... substantially.
2) When you have higher ridership, because the current fleet of trains are insufficient, I have to once again buy more trains and build more depots. And perhaps more lines to reach more places because the demand for it is there. I also might have to extend work hours, some of which wont be packed but have moderate amount of people. As it is the trains are already almost 100% utilised. When we have more people and more trains.. it still will be 100% utilised. There wont be a difference in the percentage utilisation. So costs wont go down. But I built more facilities and lines?
This is my response to what you wrote :
1) What you are talking about are direct and variable cost. What you dont need to increase is the fixed overhead. CEO are not operation people they can run a company with a million trains, and if the same business model is being duplicated, the cost of duplicating be is lower. CEO get paid more if the company makes more money and the share price goes up, not because the company is buying more trains.
Maybe you should read up more on economy of scales to get a better understanding of what I am talking about.
2) The train line in Singapore are build by our government, not the train operators, if you have more ridership, your utilisation of asset and manpower employed will be higher which mean cost will go down, not up.
[/b]
1. If you think the CEO is only paid as a result of the share prices and the company making money, you are being very simple. The KPI is but only a small part of the CEO's salary package. Secondly, you fail to address the issues of the need to hire more sub-heads and heads of departments to micromanage a greater amount of fleet and staff. This is, in economic terms, one of the Diseconomies of Scale factors which makes Economies of Scale not so simple.
2. My bad. The train lines are built by LTA. But the maintenance of more trains and having to buy more trains will see no change in the percentage of ridership. It already is operating at near maximum capacity. Hence there will still be a need for increase in costs.
To add on in the arguments, assuming Economies of Scales were enjoyed. This would only mean that SMRT would be able to make more profit. Thus it is in the interest that SMRT works towards it. But in no way does this translate as lower costs to the consumer. Naturally, with a greater number of trains there will be as i quote "Higher Operational and Maintenance Costs" and "Staffing Costs". These are just but two of the reasons cited by SMRT to justify its price increases.
Finally, you completely sidestepped the topic on Monopoly, and Diseconomies of scale which if you wiki it up, or read in economics books, will tell you makes Economies of Scale a topic not so simple as what you have portrayed.
You also failed to address the issue, that as a privatised company, the SMRT corp is required as a duty to its shareholders to increase the price of its shares. -
Originally posted by reddressman:
There are many ways which you could limit road usage here in Singapore, You can increase the ERP by $10, you can increase the petrol tax by 100%, you can increase the legal driving age to 25 years old, or like what you said limit the COE every month and make it $1 per month.
I am afraid that is a very narrow minded view of the situation.
My question to you is, if cars are as cheap as in Malaysia, [b]and COE is $1 and limited to x number a month, Singapore island certainly surely absolutely positively can limit road usage by limiting the number of road users.
Singapore ONLY has 4.62km of road per 1kmsq, we can also build more roads to ease congestion.
public transport is run by privatised and listed organizations with focus on profit and revenue is prime concern for directors and shareholders.
[/b]
My question to you is, how are you going to control the black market trade of COE in Singapore? Will Singaporeans be happier when we have less cars on the road but only the rich are using them?
by limiting COE to first come first serve basis, how are you going to ensure that we have enough veh on the road to support the economy?
Public trasport companies are privatised and listed, but it is the government that construct the tunnel, the station, bus stop and rail track, the bridges and road for the transport companies.
if life is as simple as you think then I am sure you should be a transport minister by now... -
Removed. Inaccurate Statement :p
-
Maven2,Originally posted by maven2:And the rebuttal to that is
1. If you think the CEO is only paid as a result of the share prices and the company making money, you are being very simple. The KPI is but only a small part of the CEO's salary package. Secondly, you fail to address the issues of the need to hire more sub-heads and heads of departments to micromanage a greater amount of fleet and staff. This is, in economic terms, one of the Diseconomies of Scale factors which makes Economies of Scale not so simple.
2. My bad. The train lines are built by LTA. But the maintenance of more trains and having to buy more trains will see no change in the percentage of ridership. It already is operating at near maximum capacity. Hence there will still be a need for increase in costs.
To add on in the arguments, assuming Economies of Scales were enjoyed. This would only mean that SMRT would be able to make more profit. Thus it is in the interest that SMRT works towards it. But in no way does this translate as lower costs to the consumer. Naturally, with a greater number of trains there will be as i quote "Higher Operational and Maintenance Costs" and "Staffing Costs". These are just but two of the reasons cited by SMRT to justify its price increases.
Finally, you completely sidestepped the topic on Monopoly, and Diseconomies of scale which if you wiki it up, or read in economics books, will tell you makes Economies of Scale a topic not so simple as what you have portrayed.
You also failed to address the issue, that as a privatised company, the SMRT corp is required as a duty to its shareholders to increase the price of its shares.
as I have mentioend earlier that the cost you are referring to are variable and direct cost that changes in proportion to the business activities. As such such incremental will be offset by the addition revenue generate for employing them.
Are you certain that 100% of the comapnies fleet of buses and trains are already operating near 100% capacity?
both SBS and SMRT are natural monopoly in the sense that they are the only opertors on their track and route, hence there isnt much we could do to change that.
As to how privatised company will price their tickets in the event of an increase in ridership, we can speculate till the cows come home and yet there will still be no definite answer. -
ai ya, avoid peak hours. so simple also dont know.
-
Relax guy, talk is better than doing nothing, right? Some pple prefer not to talk and keep in the heart, do u know what happen? They commited suicide, freak out etc. A lot of forumers here do present their statistic and informations, do u read? It is a battle of wit. Oh, I forget, internet is use for chatting, discussion, playing game etc. Can anyone here use internet to beat the guy u dislike in internet? I don't think so, right? Plus, isn't forum is for pple to post & reply? U wouldn't have join in the discussion if u find a forum which is empty and no reply, right?Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:My mom is just like so many forumers here, talk only. But she is better than opposition candidates who cannot talk. Listen, how often do you hear our opposition parliamentarians talk? And if they do, also like the boliaos here!
As for free lunch, my mom also includes breakfast and dinner. Now, I am paying back. You think I like you, just eat and talk only?
In this era, where got pple charge without using wit. U mean protest in the street and get caught and come out again and protest and later stay in jail for life. Do u know internet has become powerful tool for u to protest & gather strength? That y gahman is worrying. M"sia has been keeping very close watch on pple who use cyberspace to spread ???. Sooner or later, u might see results how it influence the votes. Plus, when my mother raise me, she never call me to pay back but I do it willingly and voluntary without charge. Dun treat relationship like transaction.
-
Yea, even argue till the cows come home. I realised that we, including I, have been guilty of not sticking to the topic. As a result there is no structure to the discussion and hence no direction.
Coming back to the topic.
ERP works like magic.
Our position is that ERP has not served its purpose and hence unnecessary.
Let's keep to the topic. I'll do the same in the other threads. Else we are just ranting on - when we cannot address one issue, we bring in another and in the end we don't even know what is it that we set out to show. -
Government should introduced CAR IMPORT Quotas in Singapore. This will solve the OVERSUPPLY of cars.
- Force commuters to take private transport
Once they are use to taking private transports
- release the cars to them. but with all the policies intact
ERP is horrible in such a small country. whenever u drive pass a town. $2 is deducted
I think companies are also affected as well, company vehicles and sales allowances went up due to the fact of the ERP system. Decreasing their profits. -
hahaha, so what the fcuk have you told us that are useful to learn! Tell the opposition you so admired to talk more and not give excuses like you do, there are many avenues for them. Here in this forum is one, or they can write to countless newspapers, or hold press conferences with foreign journalists!Originally posted by Rock^Star:How often do we hear opposition MPs talk in parliament? Very little because the govt does not televise them. This is through no fault of the opposition MPs.
They talk also like the bo liaos here? Have you seen Sylvia talk? Have you read her speeches? Have you seen Low orate? Have you read his speeches?
A lot of what the regulars here in Speakers Corner do is to educate the public. We debate so that Singaporeans may see the truth. We post excerpts, statistics and blogs so that more may be edcuated and be informed about what we normally do not see in this press controlled nation.
Just what the fcuk have you learnt or chosen not to learn if you opine like the way you have done above? -
Actually they do hold press conferences with foreign journalists. Shortly after which the foreign press is either sued or banned.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:hahaha, so what the fcuk have you told us that are useful to learn! Tell the opposition you so admired to talk more and not give excuses like you do, there are many avenues for them. Here in this forum is one, or they can write to countless newspapers, or hold press conferences with foreign journalists! -
When Singapore had the minimum downpayment requirement for cars years back, not that many owned cars like today?Originally posted by Gazelle:My question to you is, how are you going to control the black market trade of COE in Singapore? Will Singaporeans be happier when we have less cars on the road but only the rich are using them?
Still PAP continued their good run at the elections. Singaporeans will understand that the land is small and cannot afford a large car population.