Balloting COE sends the wrong signal

[UncleFai]

Josephine Teo: Balloting for COEs sends the wrong signal

Absolutely... cars should be only for the rich. The rest of you take bus and MRT please.

 

[edutilos-]

Actually, balloting for car ownership also lends itself to abuse, such as the black market situation mentioned in your link.

Like I've mentioned before, Beijing provides a good case study on the loopholes in a balloting system if it were adopted. I believe it is these that the lady is referring to, not anything else you construe. Personally, I don't think balloting is the answer either.

Million-long queue to buy a car in Beijing - Telegraph

However, a poll last year by the city's Municipal Commission of Transport showed that 76 per cent of locals believe the traffic has not improved and that only nine per cent approve of the lottery.

Indeed, rich Chinese are said to be buying their number plates on the black market for up to 150,000 yuan (£15,000), and some canny buyers have switched to number plates from Hebei, the province surrounding the capital, which allow them to enter Beijing from 8pm to 7am during the week and anytime at weekends. The authorities have now promised to take punitive action to stop this practice.

 

[UncleFai]

I said it in jest. I also think that there is no easy solution when demand far outstrip supply. But I do think that making the individuals bid for non-transferable COE (rather than have the distributors do it) would help. More troublesome? Yes, but hey you wanted that car right? Also, COE (at least a large portion of it) must not be in the loan. That will make people become more prudent.

 

[Shizuma]

COE should be transferrable with huge tax.
Imagine a COE model of 20k with a 80k "hidden" tax which will kick in only on transfer of COE / car ownership.

Government can ballot COE at low prices to people while preventing COE-arbitrage by using a kick-in tax.

 

[qystan]

I said it in jest. I also think that there is no easy solution when demand far outstrip supply. But I do think that making the individuals bid for non-transferable COE (rather than have the distributors do it) would help. More troublesome? Yes, but hey you wanted that car right? Also, COE (at least a large portion of it) must not be in the loan. That will make people become more prudent.

What jest?

Mere mortals please keep to means befitting your lower forms of life! ;-)

 

[Bukitimah]

COE is just another form of tax. Basically to make ownership more expensive. We don't have a choice if we don't want to own a car and never get to drive it since the roads are jam packed.

I don't think we need to coin a new idea to tax or increase the ownership cost. This will only result in driving car dealers profits. I think the PARF system will make car ownership cheaper because you pays what is taxed. Many are paying more than the COE of their car.

Improve public transport is the only answer. Car ownership has to be high, just to ensure we don't add the layers of people profiting from it

 

[ricohflex]

Josephine Teo: Balloting for COEs sends the wrong signal

Absolutely... cars should be only for the rich. The rest of you take bus and MRT please.

If they lose many GRCs and the public says COE is the main reason why; then COE will be quickly dismantled.
Otherwise, COE is a cash cow and an eternal spring of MASSIVE revenue that cannot be shut down.

 

[An drew]

Josephine Teo: Balloting for COEs sends the wrong signal

Absolutely... cars should be only for the rich. The rest of you take bus and MRT please.

Absolutely.

Balloting is a game of chance and luck. If you want to go by luck, then our good government has already opened two casinos, sell 4D, sell TOTO, anyone can go try their luck. Win money then use it to buy COE lah. All they want is your money.

Minister already said, if you poor, you better go die in Johor.

 

[stuck]

Actually, balloting for car ownership also lends itself to abuse, such as the black market situation mentioned in your link.

Like I've mentioned before, Beijing provides a good case study on the loopholes in a balloting system if it were adopted. I believe it is these that the lady is referring to, not anything else you construe. Personally, I don't think balloting is the answer either.

Million-long queue to buy a car in Beijing - Telegraph

why can't we tie the ballot to the bidder (through IC number or otherwise) and make the COE only transferrable after 5 yrs - that would kill the speculative market right? There'll probably also be an underground black-market - but surely this can be dealt with by harsh penalties (jail time plus heavy fine).

If we can ballot for something as important as public housing I don't see why we can do it with COEs with proper regulation???

 

[ricohflex]

The present COE system is not perfect. It has the false appearance of fair allocation by way of high bidders setting price level.
Which by definition penalises the less well off. It will never be changed voluntarily as it is a cash cow.
Only if they lose many seats. When the pain of keeping the COE is greater than the pain of losing it.

 

[Yappy]

I will get every members of my family and my friends to send in their names for balloting!

 

[Yappy]

The present COE system is not perfect. It has the false appearance of fair allocation by way of high bidders setting price level.
Which by definition penalises the less well off. It will never be changed voluntarily as it is a cash cow.
Only if they lose many seats. When the pain of keeping the COE is greater than the pain of losing it.

What is your proposal?

Any suggestion to improve the system?

Do you think the other party can solve the problem or who do you think is the best person to solve the problem?

Talk is easy!

 

[Yappy]

why can't we tie the ballot to the bidder (through IC number or otherwise) and make the COE only transferrable after 5 yrs - that would kill the speculative market right? There'll probably also be an underground black-market - but surely this can be dealt with by harsh penalties (jail time plus heavy fine).

If we can ballot for something as important as public housing I don't see why we can do it with COEs with proper regulation???

Housing is only one per household but many members need cars. It is common now to have 2 to 3 cars per family.

You can easily multiply one household by 2.5 and you will know the number cars not counting those doing business

 

[Yappy]

Absolutely.

Balloting is a game of chance and luck. If you want to go by luck, then our good government has already opened two casinos, sell 4D, sell TOTO, anyone can go try their luck. Win money then use it to buy COE lah. All they want is your money.

Minister already said, if you poor, you better go die in Johor.

Minister did not say that!

 

[Yappy]

..

One proposal is cancelled the COE system and let all car owner suffer!

Would you support this?

 

[UncleFai]

..

One proposal is cancelled the COE system and let all car owner suffer!

Would you support this?

Of course not! We want our cheap cars AND jam-free roads. Go build more expressways and roads. Pay you guys so much for what if not to solve problems for us?

 

[Shizuma]

If they lose many GRCs and the public says COE is the main reason why; then COE will be quickly dismantled.
Otherwise, COE is a cash cow and an eternal spring of MASSIVE revenue that cannot be shut down.

Don't forget ERP. also a lot of revenue.

LTA, 30yr bonds were going at almost 5% PA (AAA grade Sg Stat Board Bond!) back in 2009 !!! Guess where the ca$h flow is coming from? (for those wondering what the catch is - minimum tranche is $ 250k

 

[edutilos-]

LTA, 30yr bonds were going at almost 5% PA (AAA grade Sg Stat Board Bond!) back in 2009 !!! Guess where the ca$h flow is coming from? (for those wondering what the catch is - minimum tranche is $ 250k

I don't understand this statement. I don't think any company issues bonds with a view to benefit the bond-holder.

Besides, you are missing out the part about the bond period being 30 years. Do you have any idea what that entails? The longer the bond period, the higher the rate. It's a simple logic, the bond-holder is simply taking more risk and thus needs a higher rate (in case alternatives become more attractive over that long long period).

I found a historical 10-year rate for US Treasury Bonds, and the link is appended below for your reference - this was around 3% in 2009. US Treasury Bond Chart Naturally, 30-year rates would be higher then perhaps to the tune of 4+% and it is not shocking to see 5%?

I also hope you're not comparing that percentage to what people get in DBS or POSB for 1 or 2 year FD. It is simply not comparable.

 

[ricohflex]

Just watched 13-3-13 TV news. The CNA newscaster said COE for Ferrari is cheaper than COE for Altis. Hmm...maybe they need to tweak it.

 

[Blur Shadow]

Just watched TV news. The CNA newscaster said COE for a Ferrari is cheaper then COE for an Altis. Hmm...maybe they need to tweak it.

Haha. Maybe you can try calculating the ARF of both vehicles and figure out just how large the difference is.