LTA seeking feedback on COE

[ffshooter]

They are only afraid of cars driving in city area and cause congestion. Why not make a double or triple city in north, south, east and west. Develop mini Orchard Roads or mini Marina Bay in all this areas. It will surely disperse all the crowds even office workers.

Instead remove some of many golf courses in Singapore, they are just taking up too much land in already a land scares Singapore. It is only serving a few rich people.
Then cars will have more space and less congested. Do away with COE.

 

[cks2k2]

They are only afraid of cars driving in city area and cause congestion. Why not make a double or triple city in north, south, east and west. Develop mini Orchard Roads or mini Marina Bay in all this areas. It will surely disperse all the crowds even office workers.

1. building new city centers + getting them to flourish, that itself will take don't know how many years.
2. you just shift problem from one location to other locations.

 

[UncleFai]

My suggestions:

1. Individuals must bid, not dealers.

2. Base it on the public selling price of the car (without COE).

 

[kei1309]

My suggestions:

1. Individuals must bid, not dealers.

you would need to set a clear set of guidelines. if not, this will be abused by individuals in the long run.

 

[UncleFai]

you would need to set a clear set of guidelines. if not, this will be abused by individuals in the long run.

Agree. How about this? You first "book" a car. Using your booking as proof, bid for COE. Not transferable.

"But what if I fail to get a COE?" - car dealer must (partial) refund after say 3 attempts. Buy property also can chicken out (at a penalty) after deposit, so too cars.

 

[Octarine]

And what about a simple but moneyless waiting list? Take a number, queue up, track the number online. At least one knows when it's time to buy the car, even if it's 1 year down the road

 

[dniwkh]

If there is so many problem with "COE", just kill it.

Make it a Fixed "COE Tax" for new car based on:
1. Single or more than 1 car: 100% OMV
2. Married no kid : 75% OMV
3. Married with kids: 50% OMV
4. Stay with re-tired Parent : 50% OMV discount
5. Dis-abled 100% OMV discount

err.... fixed price then how you limit the number of cars? If got 10000 people apply how?? Ballot izzit?

seriously sometimes before you give suggestions/feedback also must think a little. Frankly, I have been to sgconversation and sometimes the suggestions given by singaporeans....

 

[dniwkh]

To satisfy the aspiration of car ownership, commercial vehicles (other than public transport) will cost more to use during peak hours. You can do you deliveries during non peak hours. Just like 'Off Peak' cars. I have seen those huge container truck, less the 40 footer container used to ferry family to the market! Taxi used as private car for ferrying wife to market or buying breakfast for the family. With today COE price, it is cheaper to rent a taxi for private use and at the same time to earn some extra when you have the time? Hope some LTA big shots are reading CS. haha

hey this I think is a great idea. It should not be too hard to implement too since we already have ERP system. Just double the ERP charged to commercial vehicles during peak hours. Triple that for heavy vehicles.

 

[giantcanopy]

hey this I think is a great idea. It should not be too hard to implement too since we already have ERP system. Just double the ERP charged to commercial vehicles during peak hours. Triple that for heavy vehicles.

Yes. And without the exorbitant tax and the Coe system, LTA should look to put way more ERP gantries, and up calibrate the traffic to a point where we have much more manageable traffic flow compared to what is happening now.

And I can be reasonably sure that when that happens, the total cost of ERP per trip is not just going to be simply treble or quadruple of existing.

And I can be reasonably sure when all singaporeans can own their car or two, people will complain that LTA makes it too expensive to start their engine in the first place.

OR, alternatively if cars are much more affordable, government could perhaps levy a gargantuan tax on petrol prices/electric pump facilities/lpg etc, to dissuade sg drivers, and perhaps channel the tax levy to do more flyovers, or whatever to improve traffic.
(* and then there will be outcry again.)

The way I see it, COE is a necessary evil. I dun like it either.

 

[UncleFai]

The idea of "allow ownership, but dissuade usage" has proven not to have worked. If one pays so much for a car, the owner will jolly well use it.

 

[ricohflex]

When money is used a a crude instrument to allocate something (in this case car ownership) it is always badly skewed in favour of the merely rich. The super mega rich will not even blink if money is used to control the gate to car ownership. In fact the super mega rich love the COE policy, because it makes them more "exclusive" by denying the masses the aspiration to car ownership.

Prolonged purposeful artificial denial of the masses' aspirations to something as basic as car ownership, has its consequences.

People look North to their friends/relatives in Peninsula Malaysia (where lots of ordinary folk own cars) and ask where has SG gone wrong?

 

[cks2k2]

When money is used a a crude instrument to allocate something (in this case car ownership) it is always badly skewed in favour of the merely rich. The super mega rich will not even blink if money is used to control the gate to car ownership. In fact the super mega rich love the COE policy, because it makes them more "exclusive" by denying the masses the aspiration to car ownership.

Prolonged purposeful artificial denial of the masses' aspirations to something as basic as car ownership, has its consequences.

People look North to their friends/relatives in Peninsula Malaysia (where lots of ordinary folk own cars) and ask where has SG gone wrong?

lol
malaysians are forced to have cars, cos the public transport system there is non-existent. imagine waiting 2 hours for a bus in the klang valley area.

 

[Octarine]

Prolonged purposeful artificial denial of the masses' aspirations to something as basic as car ownership, has its consequences.

The basic need here is 'transportation', not car ownership. Have a look at some socioeconomic books.

People look North to their friends/relatives in Peninsula Malaysia (where lots of ordinary folk own cars) and ask where has SG gone wrong?

And people from North and other countries look at Singaporeans and wonder what went wrong in the thinking department that Singaporeans do not recognize their geographical situation and the resulting limitations. :bsmilie:
Quite funny to see how people declare cars to be a basic need...

 

[dniwkh]

The basic need here is 'transportation', not car ownership. Have a look at some socioeconomic books.

And people from North and other countries look at Singaporeans and wonder what went wrong in the thinking department that Singaporeans do not recognize their geographical situation and the resulting limitations. :bsmilie:
Quite funny to see how people declare cars to be a basic need...

Does it matter need or want? Since when is the government supposed to be providing "needs" only?

I don't think it matters and it is hard to define what is a need anyway. Looking at housing.... everyone needs a roof... do you need a BIG roof or SMALL roof?? 1 room hdb for family of 7?? or 5 room HDB for family of 4? How about EC?

Same for transportation, some people like to take MRT, some aspire to drive a car. I think it is unreasonable to dismiss someone's aspiration as not important because it is a "want"...

 

[dniwkh]

http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/l...files/FactsandFigures/MVP01-1_MVP_by_type.pdf

something to read.... looking at the numbers you can see the HUGE mismanagement by the government in the years 2005-2008

 

[kei1309]

http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/l...files/FactsandFigures/MVP01-1_MVP_by_type.pdf

something to read.... looking at the numbers you can see the HUGE mismanagement by the government in the years 2005-2008

so how did you come to arrive at the conclusion that it's a mismanagement that the numbers jumped?

 

[Octarine]

Does it matter need or want? Since when is the government supposed to be providing "needs" only?
I don't think it matters and it is hard to define what is a need anyway. Looking at housing.... everyone needs a roof... do you need a BIG roof or SMALL roof?? 1 room hdb for family of 7?? or 5 room HDB for family of 4? How about EC?
Same for transportation, some people like to take MRT, some aspire to drive a car. I think it is unreasonable to dismiss someone's aspiration as not important because it is a "want"...

Despite your assumption - it does matter and it makes a big difference whether it is Need or Want. There are entire scientific disciplines only researching these areas - and governments do well if they take this into considerations. Why do you think the MRT system was built in the first place? Only certain people here will assume it is a money laundering scheme for government related construction companies. The same goes for HDB flats and other infrastructure like expressways. All these are basic human needs, defined as result of scientific research into societies, independent from cultural, racial or historical context. Personal wishes for cars or EC matters little here. What is important are average development patterns of societies in their environmental context. And if the average means "0.4 cars per citizen" then it's clear that the majority of citizens will not own one. Simple as that.
If the government were to entertain all wishes for cars .. well.. then Singapore will be a world class inhabited car park. Not sure where the benefit of having a car is, then.

 

[kei1309]

Despite your assumption - it does matter and it makes a big difference whether it is Need or Want. There are entire scientific disciplines only researching these areas - and governments do well if they take this into considerations. Why do you think the MRT system was built in the first place? Only certain people here will assume it is a money laundering scheme for government related construction companies. The same goes for HDB flats and other infrastructure like expressways. All these are basic human needs, defined as result of scientific research into societies, independent from cultural, racial or historical context. Personal wishes for cars or EC matters little here. What is important are average development patterns of societies in their environmental context. And if the average means "0.4 cars per citizen" then it's clear that the majority of citizens will not own one. Simple as that.
If the government were to entertain all wishes for cars .. well.. then Singapore will be a world class inhabited car park. Not sure where the benefit of having a car is, then.

Then some entrepreneurial bureaucrats will declare that society needs beautiful car parks to house the cars they will seldom drive due to congestion.

 

[Octarine]

Then some entrepreneurial bureaucrats will declare that society needs beautiful car parks to house the cars they will seldom drive due to congestion.

And HDB will remove all the nice top level roofs and covers on their carp parks (just mounted in the last two years) so that they can stack up more levels :bsmilie:

 

[coolthought]

With recent technological advancements in augmentation for Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSSs). Perhaps can merge the COE, ERP and OPC schemes together? Thus for example, say a motorist driving to work in Lim Chu Kang during non-peak hours everyday will have to pay significantly less in the form of rebates as compared to someone driving into the downtown central area during peak hours everyday over a 10 years period?

I think using GPS in place of ERP is in the pipeline. With this, can remove COE totally. What will happen is when you drive, you will pay. The more you you drive, the more you pay and driving on congested roads will need to pay a whole lot more.

This will make owning a car relatively cheap but driving one will be very very expensive. This way can encourage people to use the public transport,(or walk or cycle) car pool and use the car only when really needed or only during off peak hours and using less congested roads.