ninelives
Senior Member
heal the world, make it a better place, for you and me and the entire human race, there are people dying , if you care enough for the living, make a better place for you and for me.
guess this song !!
1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???
- Thread starter D60D60
- Start date
- Status
heal the world, make it a better place, for you and me and the entire human race, there are people dying , if you care enough for the living, make a better place for you and for me.
guess this song !!
night86mare
Deregistered
Old Man Lee
Deregistered
a thousand ERP gantries, a smoother ride .... The Lee government is a brave one, it is better to take bitter pill than to take the sweet candy. Years down the road you will see the wisdom of lee kuan yew's greatest son.
V
vince123123
Guest
What makes you think that the ERP will only be activated during peak periods?
Of course we will be jumping for joy, since as camera owners, we have so much money that we belong to the group of elites having 3 high powered sports cars waiting in the garage and seldom drive out, saving road tax and ERP at the same time!
Of course we will be jumping for joy, since as camera owners, we have so much money that we belong to the group of elites having 3 high powered sports cars waiting in the garage and seldom drive out, saving road tax and ERP at the same time!
night86mare
Deregistered
...and may i point out, in so doing, avoid imposing any negative externality on ANYONE, save the fact that people will be jealous? an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly doesn't affect any driver on the road cursing as the CTE is clogged up once again. an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly isn't contributing to degradation of the environment and spewing of harmful gases. it is YOU, the people with your family cars that you drive that cause the jams, so you mean, you would perceive it as fair that the rich are punished just for being rich? that's ludicrous to me. i had no idea that the singaporean idea of meritocracy had fallen thus far.
the erp could essentially be viewed in some ways as a pigouvian tax, if you have no idea what that is, check out the wiki article (i expect Silence Sky will now enter and do some econs ra-ra since this is his cue). the fact that a driver on the road actually imposes a lot more social cost (i.e. cost to society) than the price he pays for it, should be corrected in one way or another. this isn't so much of a problem in less congested cities, but undeniably singapore is getting more and more congested. it won't make sense to end up having a road system where you take an hour to get from pasir ris to eunos simply because you kena jam all the way. so how do you do it? you increase the price of driving, so that individuals who gain less from the driving and are able to function well with alternative forms of transport will do so. holding it unchecked is certainly not unlike a nomad letting his cattle graze on a single ground for years on end - the ground later becomes unusable. similarly, if every driver's cost to drive remains unchecked, with rising affluence you can bet it is only a matter of time before our roads become unusable. solutions? build more roads? like we don't have enough. i think focusing on a minority's imaginary crows of delight.. does not serve to alleviate any perceived problem,wherever you are coming from.
by doing so, you miss the forest for a single tree, and seem to wish to garner popular support by instigating flaming, emotional rants which add no value to any society, even clubsnap.
what would add value? discussion of why erp implementation in such a manner may do detrimental damage. a government exists to serve the best interests of its people, not the random empowered individual with a car. if you think everybody should think that way, let me crow in absolute delight as i do not own a car and i am happy now that you are potentially less able to drive yours in the future. WHEE! maybe you should rant about that too.. less priveleged people feeling happy that the more priveleged-than-them have to join them on foot, bicycles and mrts.
but why don't you do that? because there is no "higher moral ground" for you to take.in other words, welcome! welcome to the joyous club!
Poor old vince, never fail to miss the woods for the trees :bsmilie:. So nothing else matters except the uncertainty about the activation time for the ERP then?
Nothing further.
1. Cars are a necessary part of the transport infrastructure. It's impossible for everyone to rely on public transport.
2. Pollution is not the issue, there are green cars. Unless you are a fervent environmentalist who cycles 20 km to work, you contribute to pollution even if you take a bus.
3. Congestion is not the issue. People in hong kong and other cities can get by without erp, why can't we? Are we so special that we must have erp? Says who? Can they prove their case when there are so many counterexamples?
4. The govt can already control car population and thus congestion thru coe, so erp is not strictly speaking necessary for congestion control.
5. So erp serves more as a stealth tax by our govt than anything else, esp given how inelastic the demand curve is.
6. And this just proves that the people get what they deserve when they make their choices at the ballot box.
2. Pollution is not the issue, there are green cars. Unless you are a fervent environmentalist who cycles 20 km to work, you contribute to pollution even if you take a bus.
3. Congestion is not the issue. People in hong kong and other cities can get by without erp, why can't we? Are we so special that we must have erp? Says who? Can they prove their case when there are so many counterexamples?
4. The govt can already control car population and thus congestion thru coe, so erp is not strictly speaking necessary for congestion control.
5. So erp serves more as a stealth tax by our govt than anything else, esp given how inelastic the demand curve is.
6. And this just proves that the people get what they deserve when they make their choices at the ballot box.
night86mare
Deregistered
1. is fair enough. refer to my point that by increasing the cost to driving, this will ensure that the people who place the most value on the convenience of driving will be willing to jump through the hurdle and pay the price.
2. a solution to this is to exempt green cars from erp. but this doesn't resolve the problem of congestion.
3. you may want to take note that hong kong has asked for erp before. i recall being in hong kong a while back and noting puzzledly in the newspapers there two or three letters in their forum pointing out happily that singapore had erp, so why didn't they have it too? examples like these are never going to hold water, because comparisons are going to be skewed and one-sided. london here has a congestion charge for the city, btw. not unlike erp, and without the convenience either. on the bright side, you can try escaping it by not buying the coupon to the tune of a hefty fine if caught. :devil:
4. apparently it isn't prohibitive enough. in fact, maybe we should just jack up coe prices to kingdom come and watch the resultant complaints that singapore is the one place in the world where nobody can afford a car. like you have pointed out, a car is essential, but not ALL THAT essential. so now everybody can own one, and use it only when necessary.
5. oohz. and you base this on what logic or basis? if i may so point out, so many people here are happily embracing the BMW concept before anything has been solidified yet, this is just the speculation phase. are you quite as certain that the demand curve is as inelastic as you paint it out to be?
6. see 5. and i advise you not to go further down this road.
note that i do not wholly agree that you should build erp all over the place. but i think there is some form of logic going behind it, and it really isn't very fair to just brand it as "stealth tax", or yet another means to collect more money from the people. this is just typical of an enraged voice speaking who hasn't considered both sides of the story.
This 1000 ERP thing came up before on another car forum.
It turned out to be ERP devices for carpark entry and exit scanner things. Not the kind for gantry that goes across roads.
It is physically impossible to have 1000 ERP gantries across the island. Just think of how much money you have to top into your cashcard just to make cross-island trip during peak hour.
It turned out to be ERP devices for carpark entry and exit scanner things. Not the kind for gantry that goes across roads.
It is physically impossible to have 1000 ERP gantries across the island. Just think of how much money you have to top into your cashcard just to make cross-island trip during peak hour.
Are you implying that the carbon footprint for one individual out of 80 in the bus is the same as one person driving a car to work?
Congestion control and road pricing is a fact of life in many major cities, including Melbourne and London. The trend is for INCREASING implementation around the world, not LESS.
It is a stated position of the LTA to regulate BOTH car population and car usage. The trick is finding the balance.
Please cite your numbers. 1% change in income tax levels will far submerge any amount of ERP revenue the govt can gain. They don't need ERP to generate income, not worth it for the amount of angst they get.
Exactly right. An administration that thinks ahead and not afraid to implement unpopular policies that cannot be swallowed by a short-sighted, narrow-minded and self-centred populace. ERP was cited as the forerunner of the London congestion control system, implemented by London ex-mayor Ken Livingstone. Go read a little about him, a Labour 'red' through and through, and he felt it to be a progressive system! Far from it favouring the rich, he thought it necessary to reclaim the streets of London for its citizens and not surrender to the tyranny of the motor vehicle.
I dont mind giving private transport if public transport is
(for buses)
1. efficient
2. comfortable (more leg room, more seats, not more standing spaces)
3. better road coverage
(for taxis)
1. exemption from ERP charges
2. more taxis
3. flat rate charges (see how midnight surcharges effective make taxis disappear before midnight)
4. cheaper than car ownership.
(for buses)
1. efficient
2. comfortable (more leg room, more seats, not more standing spaces)
3. better road coverage
(for taxis)
1. exemption from ERP charges
2. more taxis
3. flat rate charges (see how midnight surcharges effective make taxis disappear before midnight)
4. cheaper than car ownership.
It is your personal choice which mode of transport to use. But it is the role of the g-ment to balance transport usage in the context of moving citizenry around, promoting economic growth, protecting the environment, and prioritizing land use, amongst other considerations. And it will do this in a multi-faceted way, of which ERP is but 1 piece in the puzzle.
The majority of households in Singapore do not own cars. Its NOT all just about the drivers.
awesome....the (pay & pay) scheme just gets better & better................
heard from a quite reliable source, that L?A has plans & already executing their plans, in building almost 1000+ ERP gantries islandwide, to be completed in the next 3 years.
The compensation?
July this year, road tax rebate given to motorists.
Once all the ERP gantries are completed & ready & running progressively 3years later, ROAD TAX PAYMENTS SYSTEMS WILL BE ABOLISHED!
not sure about the 1000+ gantries and total abolishment of road tax. more like a much reduced road tax which may no longer be tied to engine capacity.
big cars dont take much more space then smaller cars. so the new system will be more on road usage. the more you drive the more you pay. probably makes more sense.
din they announce soon no need cash cards for erp?
V
vince123123
Guest
Thank you for writing a long (but irrelevant) essay in my honour - I basically paraphrased a point made by an earlier poster but obviously you only chose to extend your monologue when I am the one doing the posting.
Good Job
Good Job
...and may i point out, in so doing, avoid imposing any negative externality on ANYONE, save the fact that people will be jealous? an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly doesn't affect any driver on the road cursing as the CTE is clogged up once again. an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly isn't contributing to degradation of the environment and spewing of harmful gases. it is YOU, the people with your family cars that you drive that cause the jams, so you mean, you would perceive it as fair that the rich are punished just for being rich? that's ludicrous to me. i had no idea that the singaporean idea of meritocracy had fallen thus far.
the erp could essentially be viewed in some ways as a pigouvian tax, if you have no idea what that is, check out the wiki article (i expect Silence Sky will now enter and do some econs ra-ra since this is his cue). the fact that a driver on the road actually imposes a lot more social cost (i.e. cost to society) than the price he pays for it, should be corrected in one way or another. this isn't so much of a problem in less congested cities, but undeniably singapore is getting more and more congested. it won't make sense to end up having a road system where you take an hour to get from pasir ris to eunos simply because you kena jam all the way. so how do you do it? you increase the price of driving, so that individuals who gain less from the driving and are able to function well with alternative forms of transport will do so. holding it unchecked is certainly not unlike a nomad letting his cattle graze on a single ground for years on end - the ground later becomes unusable. similarly, if every driver's cost to drive remains unchecked, with rising affluence you can bet it is only a matter of time before our roads become unusable. solutions? build more roads? like we don't have enough. i think focusing on a minority's imaginary crows of delight.. does not serve to alleviate any perceived problem,wherever you are coming from.
by doing so, you miss the forest for a single tree, and seem to wish to garner popular support by instigating flaming, emotional rants which add no value to any society, even clubsnap.
what would add value? discussion of why erp implementation in such a manner may do detrimental damage. a government exists to serve the best interests of its people, not the random empowered individual with a car. if you think everybody should think that way, let me crow in absolute delight as i do not own a car and i am happy now that you are potentially less able to drive yours in the future. WHEE! maybe you should rant about that too.. less priveleged people feeling happy that the more priveleged-than-them have to join them on foot, bicycles and mrts.
in other words, welcome! welcome to the joyous club!
What's there to check? That was the ONLY line in your post. :bsmilie::bsmilie:. I take it from the lack of any further input into the discussion that you were simply bereft of any additional insight into the issue.
If you want to discuss, then discuss the whole issue. If you want to drop one liners, then don't feel sorry for yourself when you appear clueless.
While the likelihood seems very high, the premise of this thread is a speculative one; and all it's capable of achieving at this point is more grouch and grievance. There's enough to worry on the plate already. I vote for this thread to be closed. Until an official release is made of any sorts.
1. Where did I imply that?
2. You can only implement something if you can sell it to the population. They couldn't sell it in New York, they couldn't even sell GST in Hong Kong.
There is no "trend" to speak of, one or two cities does not constitute a "trend".
3. I don't agree with their position. There are many other means to regulate congestion into the city, eg. through mandatory car pooling (like we had before 1975), odd/even car days, etc. none of which are designed to swell govt coffers.
4. You can check figures yourself in LTA annual report.
You may like to note, a 1% change in income tax level will lose huge political support, maybe even put off some "foreign talent" from coming here.
A 50 cent or $1 increase in ERP can be explained away much more easily, even enable them to score political points among the majority who don't own cars. And yet, 50 cents is such a small amount that drivers really don't alter their habits, so the govt can pocket $$$ without having to raise other fees.
ANGST? What angst? A few letters to the press is "angst"? A few forum postings is "angst"? A few blog postings is "angst"? In Hong Kong, they had huge demonstrations and marches against GST-- that's angst.[/quote]
If the people want a govt that does ERP, so be it. Just because a policy is unpopular doesn't mean it's right. And vice versa.
- Status
Similar threads
