ERP works like magic!
-
This is one bird-brain idea - how do you regulate minimum amount? You want to show me your bank accounts?Originally posted by Rock^Star:Instead of a COE, the govt can regulate by having a minimum amount of cash for downpayment before ownership of a car is possible.
That would save a lot of people from huge bank loans and would filter out those who geniuinely cannot afford a car.
It is not the gahmen's job to save people from taking huge bank loan. The banks have ways to ensure that. But if the bank couldn't be bothered, why should you? Those borrowers are also not borrowing from you ..... -
OIC, you just want to tell us the gahmen coffer is getting heavier. Does that help in solving traffic congestion?Originally posted by maven2: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.
That is our only contention. Something Gazelle doesn't seem to understand.
Somehow you contradict yourself: if you don't want to add gold, then you don't have to own car and pay ERP. I supposed you are like the many here: want the cake and eat it too. -
1. Apt description. It would make little sense to have a cake and not eat it :pOriginally posted by TheGoodEarth:OIC, you just want to tell us the gahmen coffer is getting heavier. Does that help in solving traffic congestion?
Somehow you contradict yourself: if you don't want to add gold, then you don't have to own car and pay ERP. I supposed you are like the many here: want the cake and eat it too.
2. I don't own a car. And I don't pay ERP. Because I've assessed that its more expensive to own a car than all the public transport I take.
3. What is the contradiction? ERP is not helping solve the traffic problems. It only increases the coffers of the government.
3 Hit Combo.
-
Are you not being cautious with your premature ejaculation of joy ? Now learning to control your revelations of your impotency ?Originally posted by Gazelle: 2 September 2007 11.39 AM - Page 3
[quote]Originally posted by Atobe:
How certain are you that the Singapore Government does not collect millions of ERP per day ?
According to Official Statistics, there are 124 cars per 1000 persons in Singapore, which will give us approximately 558,000 cars for a population of 4.5m.
All cars will have to pass an ERP gantry once, if not twice a day - and assuming an average of $2, the deduction will have amounted to $1,116,000 per day.
Can you produce any of your favorite statistics to prove the Government do not collect less ?---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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??
Still, you continue with your wild efforts to find a weak link and doing so in a mindless manner just to claim hollow success.
Are you doubting the data from the Department of Statistics that there are 124 cars per 1000 Singaporeans ?
Would you think that the Department of Statistics have differentiated between the Full-taxed cars and Off-peak cars ?
Even if you want to split hairs, at least try to keep your ends intact.
Try not to make so much efforts and be so quick on your draw - all you will achieve is more heartburn when you trip on your own style.
Too bad, Gazelle..... you tripped again. -
The congestion on Singapore Roads are due to the LTA and Traffic Police methods of planning and implementation of the Plans; and also the manner in which these two Government Departments illogical manner in managing traffic during Peak and Off-Peak Hours.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.
Roads are planned ahead of its needs, but are seldom put into action until the expected problems are reaching almos full-blown - if not already deteriorating.
According to Mah Bow Tan - then the Minister of Transportation - when he opened the CTE, he claimed that the CTE was ten years in the making, and by the time it was opened, it had reached its maximum capacity; and he claimed that the Government cannot continue building roads in Singapore.
Should we be surprised and question the brilliance in the manner that the CTE took 10 years to plan, and when opened it is almost immediately congested - and has remained congested till today ?
Does it not tell us that the CTE was under-designed ?
When the CTE was under construction, the AYE was undergoing major upgrading to accomodate the heavy East-West traffic flow along the ECP and AYE; as well as expected inflow from the CTE.
Even the older PIE was upgraded at about the same time as the AYE - when the CTE was under construction.
Yet when the CTE was opened , it did not have any of the features that were introduced in the upgrading works to the AYE or the PIE - that have helped the AYE and PIE to handle high volume traffic more effectively.
Since its opening the CTE has been congested due to its lanes being narrower than the AYE, the filter lanes to exit or enter into the CTE have insufficient lengths for vehicles to filter safely from or into the main stream of traffic flow; and with multiple exits that end up in traffic light junctions that result in vehicles being backed up onto the CTE - [especially at the Ang Mok Kio and Yishun intersections].
Generally, construction of expressways do not seem to reflect the logical flow of traffic, as seen in the heavy traffic from AMK moving to Jurong in the morning or evening peak hours - when traffic from AMK Ave 6 will turn off at Marymount, to pass a short section of Upper Thomson before going up the ramp onto the MacRitchie flyover into Lornie-Adam Road towards Jurong.
For the residents staying in the North and North-east parts of Singapore, travelling to Jurong is smooth along the TPE and SLE until the expressway end, and the 3-Lane Expressway will need to split into - one filter lane to the Causeway, another filter lane to the Kranji Horse Race Tracks, and one lane to south-bound BKE for subsequent connection to the KJE.
How did LTA planned for a 3-Lane expressway to terminate into a 1-Lane filter exit to three separate directions, when the SLE was supposed to provide a northern route towards Jurong and traffic flow is the heaviest in the morning Peak Hour ?
If Mah Bow Tah claim that there are insufficient land to build more roads, somehow the LTA has proven him wrong, as newer roads and flyovers are being squeezed into higher third level flyovers - between the existing MacRitchie flyover - that allow traffic from Braddell Road to move into Lornie-Adam Road - for traffice to flow East-West; as well as new constructions that link the TPE to the PIE and AYE.
Traffic congestion is also caused by the fact that the Traffic Police do not seem to work within the LTA traffic management plans, as the Expressways are designed to carry a high load of traffic speedily per hour.
Somehow, the Traffic Police will insist on downgrading the speed limit to ridiculous speeds that will force traffic flow to a crawl, and with the speed limits rigidly imposed in an unthinking manner, and designed as a blanket revenue collecting scheme for the Government.
Most roads and expressways are safe to drive at higher speeds, as can be seen during Off-peak hours, when most cars are driven at speeds of 100km or more along the expressways with that has a conservative speed limit of 90kmh. Most secondary roads are safe to drive at 90kmh but drivers are restricted to a fixed speed of 70 kmh imposed throughout the island - unless other speed restriction levels are displayed.
Unless due to the inattention of drivers, or selfsih attitude of road hogging that caused impatient drivers to manoevre dangerously - most roads are safe to drive at higher speeds.
During Peak-hours, cars are prevented from going any faster due to the silly Speed Cameras planted by the Traffic Police that will get ''kia-see drivers'' to slow down to a speed of 80 kmh - or to a crawl during Peak Hours, when the speed limit on the Expressways is 90 kmh
The speed camera has caused the smooth traffic flow into a ''slow-stop-and-go'' crawl that produce a backed up chain effect, causing a multiple repeated built-up of time that each car stop and pick-up again, leading to the massive jams caused by the slow down before the speed cameras.
Expressways are designed to allow a high volume of traffic to move vehicles to their destinations safely at the safest speed reasonable based on the traffic conditions.
Slow driving speed is not necessarily safe - as frequent bumper-to-bumper collision that lead to pile-up can occur more frequently at crawling speed too.
The Traffic Police should change their attention on catching speedsters, but to actually manage traffic situations along Expressways.
Speed limits should be adjusted and road discipline should be intelligently enforced that require slow or slower drivers to observe lane discipline, and for cars 'NOT to hog the lead position beyond 3km' and for such lead cars to stay from the lead position for another 1 km to 3 km - so as to allow other cars from the rear to overtake the lead cars.
Intelligent traffic and speed management, as well as road or expressways designs - will need to guide the Traffic Planners and Managers in approaching the traffic situation in Singapore.
This is but only one part in solving the traffic problems, and other essential parts will need to be included to complete the jig-saw solution. -
Yar right, and it was during that time the COE reaches $105K. Are you going to tell me that whiners in this forums is going to be celebrating because they cant afford to own a car in this life?Originally posted by Rock^Star:When Singapore had the minimum downpayment requirement for cars years back, not that many owned cars like today?
Still PAP continued their good run at the elections. Singaporeans will understand that the land is small and cannot afford a large car population. -
Yes, I agree with Atobe that our roads are planned years ago.
The Bedok Reservoir Ave 3 link to the PIE was planned more than 10 years ago. It is only now being made.
I come to this conclusion, because all these years, I noticed the Bedok Green Secondary School signage was built at an odd curve. I always wondered when I passed it, why it was built in that manner. When the link was being built, I understood. The curve fitted exactly with the slip road. When the school was built, the slip road had already been planned.
So it is something that was planned more than 10 years ago, to cater to todays situation.
That is why the CTE is inadequate today.
But there is also the "stadium effect". This was coined by Mr Yong Nyuk Lin, the first minister appointed to handle the congestion issue in the 1970s. He introduced the Park & Ride system, which caused him to be parked in London, as an envoy.
My Yong surmised that there is enough road space and the transportation system adequate, the problem being that the massess comming out all at the same time, like after a football match. This is the problem,he said.
I agree with that. The congestion is most acute going to work and going home. At other times, special events causes congestion.
Too many people owning cars, want to use their cars, at the same time.
Congestion don't happen 24/7.
Staggering work hours would help disperse the some of the volume of traffic. Developing regional centres, and dispersing the business centres would also redirect traffic away from the CBD. Tampines and Woodlands were earmarked as regional centres, and more is supposed to come up, I wonder what happened to that plan.
Yes, the TP can help in regulating traffic. I think this is the best ad hoc solution. Their presence not only induces better driving discipline and courtesy. They would also help ensure a smooth flow of traffic. Traffic need to flow, speed is not essential. There is no point in speeding along the expressway, only to queue and wait your turn at the exit.Originally posted by AtobeThe Traffic Police should change their attention on catching speedsters, but to actually manage traffic situations along Expressways.
The TP should go about policing traffic, rather than nabbing offenders.
The Police should then take over the duty of catching the offenders. Smoky exhaust, overloading, illegal modification let the police handle those.
This is only part of a multi faceted approach to traffic management. Other aspects can also tacitly contribute to the efficient management of vehicular traffic on our roads. Town planning, population distribution, business districts, social education all can play a part. -
Originally posted by hiphop2009:the thing is, esp for CTE congestion problem, ERP does not seems to solve the problem!
-
1. Do not equate your financial status with ours.Originally posted by Gazelle:Yar right, and it was during that time the COE reaches $105K. Are you going to tell me that whiners in this forums is going to be celebrating because they cant afford to own a car in this life?
2. What's this about name-calling again? "Whiners" qualifies as namecalling. Hypocrite.
3. Just cause you will be disappointed if car prices were that high, it doesn't mean we will be complaining. -
Obviously, you know zilch about the history of car downpayments in Singapore.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:This is one bird-brain idea - how do you regulate minimum amount? You want to show me your bank accounts?
It is not the gahmen's job to save people from taking huge bank loan. The banks have ways to ensure that. But if the bank couldn't be bothered, why should you? Those borrowers are also not borrowing from you .....
People taking huge loans is not the business of the govt? Then I'm surprised that the govt is actually taking steps to look into the annuity proposals. Can you link the two together?
With that tomfoolery that you are spewing, it only exposes that you are only little better than a dimwit, who professes to criticise but makes minute effort to keep himself updated and informed.
Go read up more. That would be much appreciated and certainly would make for more meaningful banter. -
PAP could have just stuck to the minimum downpayment rule, increase it if necessary and do away with the COE.Originally posted by Gazelle:Yar right, and it was during that time the COE reaches $105K. Are you going to tell me that whiners in this forums is going to be celebrating because they cant afford to own a car in this life?
The COE ensures a never ending source of revenue for the govt, no wonder its implementation. Needless.
Many who own cars today could never afford to do so back then but PAP still enjoyed good runs at the elections. -
Originally posted by Rock^Star:Obviously, you know zilch about the history of car downpayments in Singapore.
Financial and fiscal measures are meant to regulate market from overh-heating. So loan quantum is one way. But your bird-brain idea isn't. There already exists many measures to regulate car ownership - COE, ARF, ERP. At end of day, there are no better ways than to make people pay. This maybe sound unfair as the rich could afford. Well, isn't that the way to tax the rich and those who wants to be taxed?
People taking huge loans is not the business of the govt? Then I'm surprised that the govt is actually taking steps to look into the annuity proposals. Can you link the two together?
Its too simplistic to link the two. Its not even related. Sounds like you have more grudges in addition to bird-brain.
With that tomfoolery that you are spewing, it only exposes that you are only little better than a dimwit, who professes to criticise but makes minute effort to keep himself updated and informed.
hahhaha, sounds like you know everything by the minute. Your updated knowledge is just whinning, nothing useful.
Go read up more. That would be much appreciated and certainly would make for more meaningful banter.
You can try me here, let's see who has read more. I can take all your banters. -
I can see all your readings and updates are just whinnings. Your minimum down-payment is still-born bird-brain. What impact does it make? To those who cannot afford, they will find ways to meet the minimum - another loan from somewhere.Originally posted by Rock^Star:PAP could have just stuck to the minimum downpayment rule, increase it if necessary and do away with the COE.
The COE ensures a never ending source of revenue for the govt, no wonder its implementation. Needless.
Many who own cars today could never afford to do so back then but PAP still enjoyed good runs at the elections.
Let me say your gripe - whether you are car-owner or not, is that the gahmen (why PAP?) is collecting monies. So, you don't want the gahmen to have revenues - but you want everything to be paid for by PAP members?
Again, your last statement is just idiotic. Can't see any linkage: car-buying v election. -
Dear TheGoodEarth,
I can only do so much to help you understand. If you cannot comprehend the nature of my statements before you comment, then it cannot be helped either.
20% of car's purchase price for the minimum downpayment was the mandatory requirement a few years back. That was meant as a way to curb the car population. Have I not reminded you to read up about the history?
People taking huge loans is not the govt's business? Citizens who go bankrupt or have little money for retirement are cause for concern as social ills may result. Is this not under the purview of the govt? The reason for the govt looking into annuities is so that no Singaporean lives beyond his money. To sum it all up, it is to prevent social unrest should that day beckon. Open your lenticularis and look harder how it is the govt's responsibility to maintain a society well taken care of.
I do not want the govt to have revenue? Surely, that is an irresponsible sweeping statement.
Car buying and election...how are they linked?? I suggest you go read up the exchanges between me and Gazelle before you sink yourself further in. I certainly do not have the time to entertain your laziness.
You are getting really agitated. The fcuk word must have triggered all that off huh. You said Low and Slyvia of WP are "bo liao" (means nothing better to do), I then asked you to read up more on their speeches. Have you?
Obviously, you have not and only selectively keep yourself informed. Is it also not apparent that you have begun reading Speaker's Corner only of late? Perhaps you are just an opportunist participant here who reacts to comments, rather than act with the brain sitting firmly on your shoulders. -
again you providing a whole bunch of BSOriginally posted by Rock^Star:Dear TheGoodEarth,
I can only do so much to help you understand. If you cannot comprehend the nature of my statements before you comment, then it cannot be helped either.
20% of car's purchase price for the minimum downpayment was the mandatory requirement a few years back. That was meant as a way to curb the car population. Have I not reminded you to read up about the history?
People taking huge loans is not the govt's business? Citizens who go bankrupt or have little money for retirement are cause for concern as social ills may result. Is this not under the purview of the govt? The reason for the govt looking into annuities is so that no Singaporean lives beyond his money. To sum it all up, it is to prevent social unrest should that day beckon. Open your lenticularis and look harder how it is the govt's responsibility to maintain a society well taken care of.
I do not want the govt to have revenue? Surely, that is an irresponsible sweeping statement.
Car buying and election...how are they linked?? I suggest you go read up the exchanges between me and Gazelle before you sink yourself further in. I certainly do not have the time to entertain your laziness.
You are getting really agitated. The fcuk word must have triggered all that off huh. You said Low and Slyvia of WP are "bo liao" (means nothing better to do), I then asked you to read up more on their speeches. Have you?
Obviously, you have not and only selectively keep yourself informed. Is it also not apparent that you have begun reading Speaker's Corner only of late? Perhaps you are just an opportunist participant here who reacts to comments, rather than act with the brain sitting firmly on your shoulders.
a) Since when was the min. 20% downpayment meant to control car population in Singapore? If what you say is right can i also say the min income for credit card is meant to limit the no. of shoppers visiting orchard road?
b) You have been whining about CPF and compulsory annuity, now you are saying that government should control people's spending and prepare for retirement. (you double head snake or what?)
c) I cant remember what BS you have been posting here, but I see no link about car buying and election, but I do see a rock star mental masturbating. -
Gazelle gazelle, just can't do without the term "mental masturbation"Originally posted by Gazelle:again you providing a whole bunch of BS
a) Since when was the min. 20% downpayment meant to control car population in Singapore? If what you say is right can i also say the min income for credit card is meant to limit the no. of shoppers visiting orchard road?
b) You have been whining about CPF and compulsory annuity, now you are saying that government should control people's spending and prepare for retirement. (you double head snake or what?)
c) I cant remember what BS you have been posting here, but I see no link about car buying and election, but I do see a rock star mental masturbating. . Little wonder that you like sniffing your friend's panties huh.
a) Since when wasn't the 20% downpayment meant as one of the ways to control car population? Zero downpayment policies in recent years shot the car population up, didn't it? And why compare to shopping with credit cards? You mean one cannot shop without a credit card? Bloody silly yah.
b) Whining about annuity? You mean you agree with it? After all the discussion in SC......oh that grey matter of yours is in dire need of some cleansing. Have I said anything that the govt should control the citizens' spending? It has more to do with control of the car population, right? -
Elections and car buying...how are they related?Originally posted by Gazelle:Yar right, and it was during that time the COE reaches $105K. Are you going to tell me that whiners in this forums is going to be celebrating because they cant afford to own a car in this life?
Many who could afford cars today couldn't afford it in yesteryears. Did it affect PAP at the elections then? No.
Control of the car population is necessary and citizens understand. They understood in those years and they will understand it today. -
Rock^Star,Originally posted by Rock^Star:Gazelle gazelle, just can't do without the term "mental masturbation" . Little wonder that you like sniffing your friend's panties huh.
a) Since when wasn't the 20% downpayment meant as one of the ways to control car population? Zero downpayment policies in recent years shot the car population up, didn't it? And why compare to shopping with credit cards? You mean one cannot shop without a credit card? Bloody silly yah.
b) Whining about annuity? You mean you agree with it? After all the discussion in SC......oh that grey matter of yours is in dire need of some cleansing. Have I said anything that the govt should control the citizens' spending? It has more to do with control of the car population, right?
a) Did you know that LTA revised the ARF from 110% to 130% in 2004? Which mean cars are alot more affordable than before
b) Did you know that COE quota in 2002 was around 89,000 and LTA gradually increases it to 144,000 in 2006. Without an increase in COE quota, do you think there is any chance to increase the car population?
Stop dreaming lah.. -
Scrapping of the minimum downpayment requirement, coupled with the increase in COE quotas, were meant to raise the car population in Singapore.Originally posted by Gazelle:Rock^Star,
a) Did you know that LTA revised the ARF from 110% to 130% in 2004? Which mean cars are alot more affordable than before
b) Did you know that COE quota in 2002 was around 89,000 and LTA gradually increases it to 144,000 in 2006. Without an increase in COE quota, do you think there is any chance to increase the car population?
Stop dreaming lah.. -
On another note, it has also become uneconomical to scrap one's car after 5 years as the PARF rebate is much less than the previous system. So, more Singaporeans scrap early and buy new cars. Instead of collecting one COE per car owner over 10 years, why not encourage it to be twice over the same period of time?
WOW, more revenue...thought of by a profit centred govt, brilliant huh.
I'm not saying that collection of revenue is wrong but to raise prices at the slightest of reasons so that problems may be solved certainly breeds a morally suspect mentality among Singaporeans. -
let's stop arguing and start building HDB style roads
Imagine a 3-storeyed expressway -
In landscarce tiny dot,
we must try and go underground as that is where unlimited space is .
I support the idea something along the line of multi-storey expressways. But not just highrise but underground also.
This could also be an engineering challenge.
But if can be done, it would be remarkable.
There is a lot of space. The limit is our imagination. -
thats only true if you think that all singaporeans are as dumb as you and they will not find other means to meet that 20% down.Originally posted by Rock^Star:Scrapping of the minimum downpayment requirement, coupled with the increase in COE quotas, were meant to raise the car population in Singapore.
Have you heard of the thing call cash back financing?
stop trying lah, you are no longer making sense. -
Imagine if repeat of Nicoll Highway collaspe at the topmost expresswayOriginally posted by reddressman:In landscarce tiny dot,
we must try and go underground as that is where unlimited space is .
I support the idea something along the line of multi-storey expressways. But not just highrise but underground also.
This could also be an engineering challenge.
But if can be done, it would be remarkable.
There is a lot of space. The limit is our imagination. -
20% of a car in those days, may amount to $20,000 cash. Cash back financing up to that amount? Surely not, in the hundreds yes but not in the thousands.Originally posted by Gazelle:thats only true if you think that all singaporeans are as dumb as you and they will not find other means to meet that 20% down.
Have you heard of the thing call cash back financing?
stop trying lah, you are no longer making sense.
I understand your anger when I criticise PAP policies but I am just doing my part to let people see the truth about ERP and COEs. Hope you will not take offence at that.