ERP? Aren't COEs meant to check car population?
-
if raising GST can help the poor, what else cannot be done
-
Hmm... where do you think their salaries came from???
-
Here is my theory.
Remember when e gahman mentioned ERP is not meant as a mean of revenue? The reduction in Additional vehicle tax is more than the revenue by ERP.
But remember my fellow Singaporeans, PAP are a far-sighted party.
They reckon that vehicle growth in Singapore is in no doubt going to slow down, resulting in lower revenue from Additional vehicle tax.
On the same time, they know they can increase the number of ERP gantries and the gantries fees incessantly whenever the traffic 'becomes more congested'. In this way, sooner than later, the revenue ERP is going to significantly exceed the loss of revenue from lower Additional vehicle tax. And note the vicious cycle: When traffic slows down, ERP rates increase, traffic slows down again, ERP rate increase again, and so...
WOW lot of money for the gahman...
-
Anyone who believes that ERP is meant to control traffic volume is either severely delusional or just pacifying him/herself in a futile manner or a dog.
There is only 1 purpose of the ERP, and that is to fatten all the MPs (money people) pockets!!!
Oh on a sidenote, all governments in the world are corrupt, including Singapore's. Difference is while other country ministers do it under table, try to be as discreet as possible, Singapore is the opposite. They siphon money from us openly, such as through the ERP. Then have super high salaries. It is like they are telling us: See, we are being corrupt for all of you peasants to see and you weaklings are just going to let us get away with it. Like spitting on our faces. A random thought...
-
Anything relating to cars are easy target for profit making by the government.
-
I am amazed by singaporeans competency in supporting policies.
Without you, there is no singapore.
Uniquely singapore is created. Unique also in the form of democracy.
I wonder why NO ERP for CAUSEWAY traffic that is always so packed with motorists who contribute a lot of air pollution in terms of pollution per sq ft area.
Why no ERP for causeway areas?
I am sure the LTA will do what is good for your country - implement even more ERP. I heard many pipes are already in the pipeline :) (forgive me the pun which was intended) The more the better , up to a point. Else why are new ERPs and price hikes implemented to benefit you the singaporeans? If its bad how could it have been implemented over and over again and you singaporeans are ok with it, by buying more cars even when you cannot afford it? Lured by zero-money down deals? I thought singaporeans are smart right? So, I must be missing something.
Singaporeans are so smart - if new ERP implemented and drivers use small roads or routes to bypass the new ERP causing new traffic congestion, a new ERP can be IMPLEMENTED ! All up to the LTA and related peoples. So wonderful! Singapore has so many highly paid talents! But these geniuses could surely never have succeeded without you, the Singaporeans
who helped in a big big way to ensure that they succeed.
What can I say? Good for you Singaporeans? Well done, once again.
Hoping to visit Singapore one day soon and study the psychology of singaporeans who are so unique that I am constantly amazed. Kudos!
-
MRT - hardly get seats..
TAXIS - want to get taxi aso difficult.. even i call also cannot get.. so expensive smore
CARS - ERPs just killed me
BUS - Slow..
wassap man... knn
-
ERP? Aren't COEs meant to check car population?
Yes, COEs are meant to check car population
But who ever said ERP is meant to check car population too?
-
Originally posted by dinky1409:
MRT - hardly get seats..
TAXIS - want to get taxi aso difficult.. even i call also cannot get.. so expensive smore
CARS - ERPs just killed me
BUS - Slow..
wassap man... knn
Thats why people are starting to push for seats. And rush.
-
i think the gahman is trying to achieve a few things here:
1. As stated, to control traffic flow & increase speed. I'm a bit skeptical about the gahman on this. they should jolly well know the economics and know the curve is already fast approaching the flat end. increasing ERP will gain lesser and lesser effects at those highly congested areas. Those who still drives, need to drive. period.
2. To deter people from driving to work, esp. those in city area (w/o affecting those who needs to drive to ulu ulu places for work) those driving to places for leisure on weekends don't get affected much too.
3. To control car population. even though they don't admit it, the setting up of gantries at less congested areas suggest that. they have to "charge" more ERP to achieve the desired effect of control
4. To maintain or increase the revenue from ERP to offset public transport & road projects. again, the increase in gantries does that. its a nice way to collect "toll charges" for those new expressways, since they are "controlling traffic flow".
Overall, they are going to achieve some positive results, but i think they are also adding on to inflation, low/middle income's misery who needs to drive. but hey, I think they are wise enough not to add ERP into their CPI basket to measure inflation. "its a luxury" they will counter.
-
Somehow we are on the losing end .. We drive private transport .. Petrol and diesel increase, we go for public transport .. Fees increase to god know how much..
-
Let's put this way.... either way we still end up PAY AND PAY....
The "good" garman of ours pushes us to take public transport... if that succeeds, more buses and MRT will be congested.... den what will happen? More buses and MRT are needed... Den they will say... due to rising cost of diesel and PROFIT is going down, we need to increase BOTH the bus and MRT fares so that they can cover their costs... So we ended up paying higher fares again....
My thought is this.... if got lots of PROFIT... why still increase fares... It happens before the last fare was increase... So who wins?
I really ponder... Public transport or own a car? Either way... the garman wins.
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
i will ask this question about this statement you made..
why the hell did you blame the gabrament for the actions of irresponsible asswipes who cannot make responsible decisions for themselves?
you can blame the gabrament for a lot of things.. their greed, their idiocy, their speed in blaming people.. but you cannot and must not blame the gabrament for the decisions made by individuals who refuse to take personal responsibility for their own actions..
for that, you show yourself to be unwilling to shoulder your own responsibilities... making you... what? the very thing that requires the very "autocratic gabrament" you rail against...
look into the mirror and think about your own responsibilities before you rant against the gabrament...
and if you want to rant against the gabrament, please rant against the correct things.. here, it's the flooding of COE, the duplicity of COEs/ERPs, the lies told, their arrogance in not even bothering with a believable lie... the lot...
don't undermine everything said by being so stupid that you blame the gabrament for decisions made by the people...
that's the same as blaming the gabrament for the way people voted.. and they did...
I get where you are coming from.
Let say there is a country X and the govt closes an eye on drug trade. Drug addicts are rampant in the country. Do you blame the government or do you blame the drug addicts?
Compare that with Singapore where the government take a very harsh view on drugs and imposes death penalty on drug traffickers. Still there are drug addicts. Do you blame the govt or the drug addicts?
In the first case, there is a policy failure resulting is large amount of people having the same problem.
In the second case, the govt has formulated the right policy and only a small group are still affected hence those drug addicts can only blame themselves.
My position is in the first case is while the people should take part of the blame,the Govt should bear the lion share of the blame for formulating the wrong policy.They shouldnt pretend like they didnt make any mistake at all.
I guess PAP suffers from an overdose of MM's "good governance" . Good governance means they make no mistakes, talented people like our ministers do not make mistakes. Singaporeans really needs some opposition if they dont want "flawless" ministers.
-
Ok you colse my topic on erp i talk here now. I have a proposition, on 9th aug we hang a no ERP flag outside our house instead of the Singapore flag. The trailer of Money no Enough 2 gave me this idea but maybe not to the extent of a protest. Hows that sound? Will there be problems?
-
Sillyporeans,
So simple also dont know, no wonder ppls in Tw says sinkaporeans stupid!!!
Road tax is 2 suck yr h2o during bad time, COE is 2 suck yr milk,good 2 times is 2 suck u dry!!!
Understand!!!
-
When I visited the Land Transport Gallery at LTA HQ (Hampshire Road), the female guide said that ERP is there to control uses of roads, control congestions and deter people's thinking of having a car so easily.
About the controlling the usage of roads, I had to disagree with her. The roads are being used so, as they are, vehicles running on it. She mentions the alternative roads, so people can filter out and choose a route that they can pay lesser and use. But this becomes a mind game, on how to save more instead of getting to the destination.
The ERP system is meant to 'control private car usage', 'ensuring smoothness of the road conditions', 'curb the want of having a car'. This was what was mentioned in the tour.
She just saying what the LTA told her and the public. I have nothing against the person but much against the system.
Those years when the Restricted Area system came about, it was to curb congestion in CBD areas. Now, I can see a gantry in Bukit Timah. What is the congestion about, that gantries have to be set up so far away? Maybe tweak the traffic light timings a bit and congestion occurs, and another reason to put a gantry up.
Another thing that cannot be explained; public buses have to pay ERP too! That came as a shock when I read that SBS Transit have to pay over a million dollars a year for ERP charges. I ever thought that red ICU (in car units) are disabled of that money deducting issue! Cannot imagine that the LTA sucks the public bus companies of money too!
So much so for Going Green (SMRT slogan) and Ride and Redeem (SBS Transit). In the charges for the transport include ERP charges as well! Not only paying for diesel, bus captains' pay and comfort!
LTA should:
1. Revise and publish ERP gantry related road usage data per month. Road usage that does not amount to congestion, and non-CBD area gantries should be turned off.
2. All new gantries, when turned on, should come with a reason and not plainly 'to curb congestion'. Take example, Bukit Timah Road gantry (after The Rail Mall towards city), do not think that by going to BKE it would solve the problem, before entering PIE there is one waiting for you! This would only affect if both are turned on.
3. Do not charge ERP to public transport vehicles. What more can be said if they are encouraging public to take public transport and charge the operators ERP? The buses are definitely not contributing to excessive road usage!
Only then can the public except the existence of ERP.
-
Every Road Pay man!
-
Singaporeans, YOU have asked for the ERP! When we only had a limited number of COEs and bid price went up to tens of thousands, YOU complained that there were too few COEs available. YOU pressured the govt to listen to your aspirations to own private cars. YOU claim that the govt should not deprive you of the rights to car ownership. You only use the car for emergency and on weekends, so you do not contribute too much to road congestion. YOU argued that if you bought a car and leave it in your garage to admire, you won't contribute to road congestion at all.
The only mistake the govt made was to LISTEN to you lot of whiners. They have increased the number of COEs, prices have dropped and the roads get congested. So you complain that you cannot around quickly. The govt has no choice but to begin ERP to charge for road usage rather than car ownership, which YOU claim to be a fairer way forward. Now private car ownership has ballooned in the past 5 years. Road construction cannot keep up with the young punks who would buy a car with their $2500 monthly salary. ERP has gone up progressively and now YOU dare to complain?
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Singaporeans, YOU have asked for the ERP! When we only had a limited number of COEs and bid price went up to tens of thousands, YOU complained that there were too few COEs available. YOU pressured the govt to listen to your aspirations to own private cars. YOU claim that the govt should not deprive you of the rights to car ownership. You only use the car for emergency and on weekends, so you do not contribute too much to road congestion. YOU argued that if you bought a car and leave it in your garage to admire, you won't contribute to road congestion at all.
The only mistake the govt made was to LISTEN to you lot of whiners. They have increased the number of COEs, prices have dropped and the roads get congested. So you complain that you cannot around quickly. The govt has no choice but to begin ERP to charge for road usage rather than car ownership, which YOU claim to be a fairer way forward. Now private car ownership has ballooned in the past 5 years. Road construction cannot keep up with the young punks who would buy a car with their $2500 monthly salary. ERP has gone up progressively and now YOU dare to complain?
wow i didnt know sg goverment take feedbacks/ listen to our opinions. And the government is so kind that they implement a solution that make their own people pay. Is the government meant to serve the people or the people serve the government ?
-
Originally posted by HeiHao:
wow i didnt know sg goverment take feedbacks/ listen to our opinions. And the government is so kind that they implement a solution that make their own people pay. Is the government meant to serve the people or the people serve the government ?
That's the mistake the government made: they listened to the whining of spineless and imbecilic Singaporeans who want to own private cars. The ERP solution is a backup plan to control road usage but it is never going to be as good as the high COE option.
The government should not serve brainless whiners.
-
Tis topic appears before recently... I just cut and paste the reply I used before
About ERP, it is not a bad idea in the way tat in a city with a high population density, control of cars is always a problem. Either car is very expensive to own or cars r always caught in a jam. U can solve the problem with more roads, but it is gonna cost especially with the small land size of singapore. So u can say either the old model is tat only the richer citizen have a car or everone have car but is always jammed
The best model is tat people own car, however use it only in selected occasions. Tis offer some flexibility among the two other options. Normally u go to work taking the public transport. If u wake up late one day, u have the option to save yourself by driving over to work. If u wanna bring your girlfriend for a date, u have the option of spending the ERP charges and use the car to fetch her. U get a smooth ride and u get to have a car. Now the model had become more people can have cars, and they can drive it at selected moment without causing excessive jamming.
Maybe can think of it in the economics sense ba... the roads r limited while the drivers r a lot. Some form of economy should be present to ensure the supply (road) is used for the demand (drivers). If there is no control, then the supply cannot fulfilled the overwhelming demand and roads r jammed. The way to control tis supply and demand is done by setting price changes, which becomes the ERP. If u wanna use more of such resources, u pay more tax which help the people who do not have a car.
Tat is why tis system is adopted by some countries now.
-
On buses, lets put it tis way... if there r a lot of people, it boils down to only a few cents per person. In a way, it is already much cheaper than cars going through ERP. If we remove ERP for buses we not only encourage more buses, we also encourage more buses with very little people to use it. If a bus just go over with 2-3 passenger and slow the road and took up space, is he better than a car ? Tis is really pressurising the bus operators and not the passenger to come up with bus services tat have more people using it with lesser buses, resulting in lesser congestions
Secondly, a scenario tat may occur is buses may purposely drive on the ERP roads at peak hours since it is less congested if it is free to them. They could have used other roads but they choose to use the ERP roads instead and worsening the situation. We have to see tat buses include SBS buses and also school buses, private buses etc
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
On buses, lets put it tis way... if there r a lot of people, it boils down to only a few cents per person. In a way, it is already much cheaper than cars going through ERP. If we remove ERP for buses we not only encourage more buses, we also encourage more buses with very little people to use it. If a bus just go over with 2-3 passenger and slow the road and took up space, is he better than a car ? Tis is really pressurising the bus operators and not the passenger to come up with bus services tat have more people using it with lesser buses, resulting in lesser congestions
Secondly, a scenario tat may occur is buses may purposely drive on the ERP roads at peak hours since it is less congested if it is free to them. They could have used other roads but they choose to use the ERP roads instead and worsening the situation. We have to see tat buses include SBS buses and also school buses, private buses etc
Not remove ERP for all buses, but for buses that are part of the public transport system.
Afterall, they want to encourage more people to take public transport.
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Singaporeans, YOU have asked for the ERP! When we only had a limited number of COEs and bid price went up to tens of thousands, YOU complained that there were too few COEs available. YOU pressured the govt to listen to your aspirations to own private cars. YOU claim that the govt should not deprive you of the rights to car ownership. You only use the car for emergency and on weekends, so you do not contribute too much to road congestion. YOU argued that if you bought a car and leave it in your garage to admire, you won't contribute to road congestion at all.
The only mistake the govt made was to LISTEN to you lot of whiners. They have increased the number of COEs, prices have dropped and the roads get congested. So you complain that you cannot around quickly. The govt has no choice but to begin ERP to charge for road usage rather than car ownership, which YOU claim to be a fairer way forward. Now private car ownership has ballooned in the past 5 years. Road construction cannot keep up with the young punks who would buy a car with their $2500 monthly salary. ERP has gone up progressively and now YOU dare to complain?
So from your post, I presume you are telling us that
it is not the government's faul that road construction cannot keep pace with the increase in car ownership, when it is the government who plans the amount of road construction?????
-
Not remove ERP for all buses, but for buses that are part of the public transport system.
Afterall, they want to encourage more people to take public transport.
Just a question hor... is the bus going through ERP more expensive than the one tat don't ? If it is not, then aren't u helping the bus company and not the people ?
I just felt tat the ERP cost, compared with employing the bus driver, buying the bus, the diesel and the facilities to support the bus trip is much more than the few dollars it spent on the ERP. In fact if it is not someone who pointed it out, no one even notice they have to pay ERP charges