Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 36789 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 179

Thread: LTA seeking feedback on COE

  1. #141

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images View Post
    Many Singaporeans attend to their private vehicles as a holy shrine, one slight touch leaving behind a thumbprint on their weekly hundred dollars polished surface and they go into a hissy fit.
    LoL.. too true

  2. #142
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dniwkh View Post

    so u expect the coe to be free... and by a first come first serve basis...

    you are right. i did not understand your idea. or rather i underestimated its stup.....

    there isnt much to discuss if you actually think that is a good idea.
    So obviously you are not able to discuss ideas in constructive way? May I ask why you join a discussion then? Spare us your quick rubber stamp judgements of what you deem being stupid then. We welcome any idea with substance. Back to topic then.
    EOS

  3. #143
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images View Post
    Many Singaporeans attend to their private vehicles as a holy shrine, one slight touch leaving behind a thumbprint on their weekly hundred dollars polished surface and they go into a hissy fit.
    Yes, but that's an effect, not the cause. If cars are purchased at normal values and not inflated by silly bidding exercises then the mental valuation will be different: down to a normal tool for transportation, away from the status symbol.
    At this level car sharing is just a logical and reasonable result.
    EOS

  4. #144

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post
    So obviously you are not able to discuss ideas in constructive way? May I ask why you join a discussion then? Spare us your quick rubber stamp judgements of what you deem being stupid then. We welcome any idea with substance. Back to topic then.
    Agreed about the "any idea with substance" It is not quick rubber stamp judgement. common... you seriously think a queue system for FREE COE is going to work???? how many FREE COEs are you going to give out a month? the same rate as now right else the roads will not be able to handle it. Once you announce it, EVERYONE (whether or not he/she needs a car) is going to apply immediately and in the end, you have a lottery system where the chance of success is 1 in a thousand. I will ask my father, my mother, my baby, my dog (if possible) to apply for it. The average Joe will have to wait like 10 years before getting a car. That is the WORST kind of resource allocation because the resource does not get allocated to the person who value it the most. The car get assigned based on luck. The government gets no revenue in return for public projects improvement. A total lose lose scenario for EVERYONE except the guy who won the car lottery.

    I just spent 10 minutes typing this so I hope a word of thanks is not too much to ask for.

    I already posted three ideas. not all mine by the way but what I have gathered from LTA round table discussions and other online forums.


    1) Change COE to pay as you bid, closed auction system.

    2) Remove dealer bidding.

    3) Add a COE category that pays 10x or 20x ERP.

  5. #145

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    No need COE here.
    Name:  family_with_baby_on_motorcycle.jpg
Views: 0
Size:  37.2 KB

  6. #146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dniwkh View Post

    Agreed about the "any idea with substance" It is not quick rubber stamp judgement. common... you seriously think a queue system for FREE COE is going to work???? how many FREE COEs are you going to give out a month? the same rate as now right else the roads will not be able to handle it. Once you announce it, EVERYONE (whether or not he/she needs a car) is going to apply immediately and in the end, you have a lottery system where the chance of success is 1 in a thousand. I will ask my father, my mother, my baby, my dog (if possible) to apply for it. The average Joe will have to wait like 10 years before getting a car. That is the WORST kind of resource allocation because the resource does not get allocated to the person who value it the most. The car get assigned based on luck. The government gets no revenue in return for public projects improvement. A total lose lose scenario for EVERYONE except the guy who won the car lottery.

    I just spent 10 minutes typing this so I hope a word of thanks is not too much to ask for.

    I already posted three ideas. not all mine by the way but what I have gathered from LTA round table discussions and other online forums.

    1) Change COE to pay as you bid, closed auction system.

    2) Remove dealer bidding.

    3) Add a COE category that pays 10x or 20x ERP.
    I do agree on your point 2, actually the dealers are trading and gaining in the surge of COE prices.

    However with due respect, I don't think it's going to work. I travel to Jakarta often, I tell you we don't want to be in a situation like them. It's like always jam. It's really really bad..

  7. #147
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,390

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by dniwkh View Post
    Agreed about the "any idea with substance" It is not quick rubber stamp judgement. common... you seriously think a queue system for FREE COE is going to work???? how many FREE COEs are you going to give out a month? the same rate as now right else the roads will not be able to handle it. Once you announce it, EVERYONE (whether or not he/she needs a car) is going to apply immediately and in the end, you have a lottery system where the chance of success is 1 in a thousand. I will ask my father, my mother, my baby, my dog (if possible) to apply for it. The average Joe will have to wait like 10 years before getting a car. That is the WORST kind of resource allocation because the resource does not get allocated to the person who value it the most. The car get assigned based on luck. The government gets no revenue in return for public projects improvement. A total lose lose scenario for EVERYONE except the guy who won the car lottery.

    I just spent 10 minutes typing this so I hope a word of thanks is not too much to ask for.

    I already posted three ideas. not all mine by the way but what I have gathered from LTA round table discussions and other online forums.
    1) Change COE to pay as you bid, closed auction system.
    2) Remove dealer bidding.
    3) Add a COE category that pays 10x or 20x ERP.
    This is just tinkering in the old system, it will not help. It's the same approach what is done to the open market HDB and other areas which have been spoiled and screwed in the past years and reach the limits now. Let me detail my idea, then we can discuss step by step. The bidding is the biggest flaw. It favours those with loads of money and makes the outcome unpredictable. It is the root cause for the discussion here since bidding drives up the figures. It is the same idea as COV: if the nominated value is fixed then it's a bidding via COV who gets the deal, driving up the HDB resale figures. I even saw this for rental HDB. Nominated rental was $1.7k, then the owner shortlisted 5 and asked them for their offer of rental. It went for $2.3k finally..

    Basis for my idea is that there is already some kind of system and figures that dictates how many new COE's can be issues before the roads become parking lots. The bidding exercise is run against a limited amount of COE per categorie, the LTA publications show how many were awarded.
    1) The categories remain as classifications, each of the categories gets a quota similar to what is already in place.
    3) Everyone (person) can only queue for one category. Companies are not restricted.
    (Yes, everyone can queue up, the entire family. But it's a linear queue (in technical terms: FIFO). SO what's the point of loading your entire family into the queue? You just block others, but no gains for you unless your family members queue up for another category.)
    4) If it's your turn and you can't afford a car at this point in time then the COE goes to the next in queue.
    5) Lifespan is increased to 15 years.
    In addition, the financing rules need to be checked, similar to HDB financing rules to avoid people overload themselves with loans.
    The system in an evolving system anyway, nobody can predict the outcome just by knowing the few rules that we discuss here. But at least it removes the price driving factors and puts everyone at the same level. As a result, the second hand market will also benefit and many people will get their cars there. The idea of 'must have new car' is just another driving factor for the crazy bidding.
    EOS

  8. #148
    Senior Member UncleFai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,429

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by LangLee View Post
    You're mistaken or did not understand what I said. There has never been an LTA Levy on petrol. I am suggesting that the Levy be actively used as a usage control method in place of the Quota System.
    Yes, and I am saying that this won't work - or rather won't reach it's intended consequences and, worse, produce very undesirable side effect.

    Let's look deeper. Your proposal include diesel? If no, people just rush to diesel engines.

    If yes, car owners just switch to lower cc hybrids. But then lorry, vans, busses can't. So general transportation cost goes up. In addition to the increase in the cost of living, those NOT owning or using cars will be penalized while those that do have ways to mitigate the effect. Most companies only need to buy a COE once in a blue moon - but needs to keep running their vehicles on the road 24/7. And you think companies will absorb the increase in fuel cost? Just look at airlines.

    The bottomline is that: "tax on usage" does not work because there are differences in the types of usage - using a lorry to ferry rice to the market is not the same as some one ferrying his kids to ballet class. Yet, there is no easy way to distinguish nor classify these usages on a micro scale. So neither an island wide ERP nor your proposed additional fuel tax will work - because they can't distinguish one usage from another.
    Last edited by UncleFai; 24th March 2014 at 09:55 AM.

  9. #149
    Senior Member UncleFai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,429

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by White Wolf View Post
    However with due respect, I don't think it's going to work. I travel to Jakarta often, I tell you we don't want to be in a situation like them. It's like always jam. It's really really bad..
    Exactly, supply (as in the amount of land, the concentration of traffic patterns etc) is limited physically, yet with growing affluence, demand is steadily growing. There is no painless way out. And if the city gets clogged up, there is no unclogging the system without even more painful and unpopular consequences. A clogged up city would also have a much lower quality of living.

  10. #150

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post
    Nominated rental was $1.7k, then the owner shortlisted 5 and asked them for their offer of rental. It went for $2.3k finally...
    What is wrong with this outcome?? That is how resource allocation are supposed to work. The guy who bidded $2.3k is the guy who wants/needs the house the most. Granted I see your point that 2.3k may mean less to a rich person but sadly that is how the world works. Do you feel happier if someone force the owner to rent out the house to the guy for bidded $1.7k? If that happens, the owner will not get his due returns and the person who needed the house the most did not get the resource.
    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post

    Basis for my idea is that there is already some kind of system and figures that dictates how many new COE's can be issues before the roads become parking lots. The bidding exercise is run against a limited amount of COE per categorie, the LTA publications show how many were awarded.
    1) The categories remain as classifications, each of the categories gets a quota similar to what is already in place.
    3) Everyone (person) can only queue for one category. Companies are not restricted.
    (Yes, everyone can queue up, the entire family. But it's a linear queue (in technical terms: FIFO). SO what's the point of loading your entire family into the queue? You just block others, but no gains for you unless your family members queue up for another category.)
    Just think what is going to happen if the government annouce your plan tomorrow with the start date on 1st April. How do you join the queue? Electronically I supposed. Within the 1st second, thousands will join as there is no penalty for forfeiting. So as to who join the queue first, it will be lottery. How long do you think the average waiting time for a car will be??? 1 year 2 years or 10 years?? don't you think it is stupid to wait fo years before you can buy a car???

    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post

    4) If it's your turn and you can't afford a car at this point in time then the COE goes to the next in queue.
    5) Lifespan is increased to 15 years.
    In addition, the financing rules need to be checked, similar to HDB financing rules to avoid people overload themselves with loans.
    The system in an evolving system anyway, nobody can predict the outcome just by knowing the few rules that we discuss here. But at least it removes the price driving factors and puts everyone at the same level. As a result, the second hand market will also benefit and many people will get their cars there. The idea of 'must have new car' is just another driving factor for the crazy bidding.

  11. #151

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by UncleFai View Post
    Yes, and I am saying that this won't work - or rather won't reach it's intended consequences and, worse, produce very undesirable side effect.

    Let's look deeper. Your proposal include diesel? If no, people just rush to diesel engines.

    If yes, car owners just switch to lower cc hybrids. But then lorry, vans, busses can't. So general transportation cost goes up. In addition to the increase in the cost of living, those NOT owning or using cars will be penalized while those that do have ways to mitigate the effect. Most companies only need to buy a COE once in a blue moon - but needs to keep running their vehicles on the road 24/7. And you think companies will absorb the increase in fuel cost? Just look at airlines.

    The bottomline is that: "tax on usage" does not work because there are differences in the types of usage - using a lorry to ferry rice to the market is not the same as some one ferrying his kids to ballet class. Yet, there is no easy way to distinguish nor classify these usages on a micro scale. So neither an island wide ERP nor your proposed additional fuel tax will work - because they can't distinguish one usage from another.
    Actually I think taxing petrol seems workable. Granted that there will be additional costs on businesses, it is not a problem that cannot be fixed. You can always introduce rebates or something. Admin costs wise, it is probably not higher than COE bidding.

    No solution is perfect. The best solution is one that has the least problems. Actually Island wide ERP can differentiate passenger car from bus/goods vehicle.

  12. #152

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Everyone wants a car, and everyone thinks they deserve it or have a good reason to own it, but doesn't want to pay for it.

    No one wants to pay tax, COE or ERP, and wants to have a smooth ride to work, a nice cushy job that pays big bucks with short working hours, and no competition from any others domestic or foreign..

    Please tell me which country has this?
    Nikon D750; FM2; FG; 55mm Micro Nikkor; 28-300 VR; 70-200 VR; Nikon V1 + 10-30mm

  13. #153
    Senior Member UncleFai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,429

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by petetherock View Post
    Everyone wants a car, and everyone thinks they deserve it or have a good reason to own it, but doesn't want to pay for it.

    No one wants to pay tax, COE or ERP, and wants to have a smooth ride to work, a nice cushy job that pays big bucks with short working hours, and no competition from any others domestic or foreign..

    Please tell me which country has this?
    We are working towards that ideal.

  14. #154
    Senior Member UncleFai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,429

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by dniwkh View Post
    Actually I think taxing petrol seems workable. Granted that there will be additional costs on businesses, it is not a problem that cannot be fixed. You can always introduce rebates or something. Admin costs wise, it is probably not higher than COE bidding.
    COE targets exactly those who wants to own cars. You want to move away from that to a scheme that targets EVERYONE then try to compensate with rebates? All sorts of new abnormalities will result.

    Quote Originally Posted by dniwkh View Post
    No solution is perfect. The best solution is one that has the least problems.
    But it should not spread the problem to those initially not at all affected.

    Quote Originally Posted by dniwkh View Post
    Actually Island wide ERP can differentiate passenger car from bus/goods vehicle.
    Yes, but passenger cars are used by many small businesses. If they all switch to goods vehicle only, new problem - pollution and road space utilization increases. Anyway, I believe it is already in implementation, so let's see.

    Bottomline: people will game whatever system you can think up - including the car vendors, and the owners.
    Last edited by UncleFai; 24th March 2014 at 02:00 PM.

  15. #155

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by petetherock View Post
    Everyone wants a car, and everyone thinks they deserve it or have a good reason to own it, but doesn't want to pay for it.

    No one wants to pay tax, COE or ERP, and wants to have a smooth ride to work, a nice cushy job that pays big bucks with short working hours, and no competition from any others domestic or foreign..

    Please tell me which country has this?
    Not Singapore ?

  16. #156
    Member Bukitimah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    After all the inputs, don't we all accept that owning car is a luxury item other than those for commercial use?

    Pricing is the only way out, whether via COE or ERP. HOWEVER, public transport needs to be improved. I have been driving for the past 40 years. If it becomes unaffordable for me to drive, I will rely on public transport. That is life. Who shouldn't own a car? I need a bungalow! Haha.

  17. #157
    Senior Member UncleFai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,429

    Default Re: LTA seeking feedback on COE

    Quote Originally Posted by Bukitimah View Post
    After all the inputs, don't we all accept that owning car is a luxury item other than those for commercial use?
    Often one generation's luxury becomes another generation's necessity.

    I have heard those who said:

    "Work so hard yet cannot own a car or a big house here, no choice have to leave lor."

  18. #158
    Member Bukitimah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UncleFai View Post
    Often one generation's luxury becomes another generation's necessity. I have heard those who said: "Work so hard yet cannot own a car or a big house here, no choice have to leave lor."
    It depends on how ones define necessity. Of course if you have other options such as moving to another place, it is worth considering. However, there is no perfect world out there but maybe a more suitable place for the individual.

    Many a times, it is a matter of adjustment. We didn't born with anything. A simpler life may. It be bad after all.

  19. #159
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    85

    Default

    Layman's/coffeeshop talk theory..

    The "authority without authority" say too many cars on the road. Raise ERP to "curb" traffic. Then they found ppl bo chap abt ERP, now becomes their cash cow.
    They see Sg people $$ to easy to earn. COE prices rise as high as the hdb flats built. Ppl LL have to buy car as it's becoming a necessity. (Hdb area no market, have to head somewhere away from hdb estate.)

    They forgot that ppl scrap old cars to buy new cars. This is called replacement.

    ---

    Another theory..
    They ask people not to drive as for car, mostly govt only earn road tax/petrol taxes. Insurance, servicing n other stuff is by private biz.
    Take public transport. Haha! The "govt associated" companies already monopolised the entire sg.

    So u think singapore think about the people?
    Msia, once u buy the car, it's urs. 10 yrs after buying ur first car, u buy 2nd car still can keep w/o paying to govt anything more.

  20. #160

    Default

    Pay as you bid. I was a proponent of this but thinking about it again, it might not achieve the intended. It also needs to be coupled with elimination of proxy bids by the dealers.

    Initially, yes, everyone will bid what they 'feel' is reasonable. After a few failed tries, you'll up the bid. Undoubtedly some will fall by the wayside. But with each failed bid, the bid creeps up until you'll likely see the same levels as today once it becomes a resigned fate that anything lower than $80k or whatever it is will be a failed bid.

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 36789 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •