Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 117

Thread: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

  1. #41
    Senior Member azul123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Eastern Bloc
    Posts
    2,776

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    in any case, i have already mentioned before that i will try to refrain from such discussions, it is always the same group of individuals perpetuating weird nonsense, i expect some of the rest to come in soon and hoot me together, so i will take my leave, since it does not give me any pleasure to try to overcome bull-headedness and a blatant lack of logic. we all believe what we want to believe. cheers.
    It's mutual, you know... samo samo from you too, always the same defence.

    ../azul123

  2. #42
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    There is neither a need to agree, nor disagree when posting up information. I will say that I am unable to proivde you with the rationale simply because I am not a worm living in the author's stomach to know what he was thinking or what his basis or train of thought was before he penned that article.

    Whether I am the only one who responds or otherwise is irrelevant - and that doesn't change the fact that I was only responding to your point on comparison.

    It is not selective vision - how about you respiond to each and every point here in this thread then, if not, is it now not selective vision by your own reckoning?

    A man can be happy without comparison, and unhappy with comparison. There is no such thing as truly happy, or fakely happy. A man is happy at any point or stage in his life, and such happines can change with circumstances changing, one of which, may be comparison.

    Comparisons are irrelevant simply because you have not compared all aspects but only one. The patch of grass may be greener there, but the man's original patch could have a pet worm that he has which the other doesn't . Same for your Tube comparison.

    Since you try to refrain from such discussions, I do not know why you wish to continue it. Taking the "this is my last post here" way out, is merely an attempt to get the last word in edgewise.

    How about I say this is my last post here and then lock the thread after I give my last post, thereby denying the chance to rebutt?




    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    ? you are the one who posted up the interesting information

    effectively this is interesting, this means that you are of the view that if someone just pushes something forth while implicitly agreeing with it without stating it out explicitly, he is immune to criticism with regards to his agreement. unless of course, you do not agree. in which case make it clear, please. in any case, you are the only one who responded to my last post, so if you choose to respond to one part, while holding a disagreement with the second part (remember, once you reply that you DO NOT AGREE, you are thereby absolved, i suppose).. is it not selective vision?

    do not even understand the last part thing, i was responding to the pathetic argument put forth, which many here tend to agree with, yes, including you, apparently. in which case, refer to last paragraph.

    if a man is truly happy, there is no such thing as comparison that will make him unhappy. a man who is content with what he has, with his patch of grass, can look at greener grass, compare the greener grass that is greener than his patch and still feel happy because he has attained a level beyond which comparison has no meaning to him. this is something that people choose to ignore, refuse to acknowledge and do not even try to understand most of the time in life. and i guess that is why there are a lot of unhappy people in this world.

    in any case, i have already mentioned before that i will try to refrain from such discussions, it is always the same group of individuals perpetuating weird nonsense, i expect some of the rest to come in soon and hoot me together (edited for effect, refer to post after this one ), so i will take my leave, since it does not give me any pleasure to try to overcome bull-headedness and a blatant lack of logic. we all believe what we want to believe. cheers.

    btw, it's SAMA SAMA, what SAMO SAMO, lol

  3. #43
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    I have no idea what he's saying on samo samo LOL.

    You mean he's been shooting off from the hip and then saying its his "last post here" in other threads as well?

    Quote Originally Posted by azul123 View Post
    It's mutual, you know... samo samo from you too, always the same defence.

    ../azul123

  4. #44

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Traffic Congestions = Burn more fuel = Pay $$$ more fuel = Fuel $ goes high

  5. #45

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post

    in any case, i am also amused by how this argument is overly simplistic and widely accepted. basically, an argument has to be both VALID and SOUND for it to be logical. validity is when the argument follows through based on the premises. soundness, is with regards to examining whether the premises are true.

    your little boy or girl who wrote this thing, sounds like a coconut jc student who has just but touched the surface of economics and is making mountains out of molehills. if we could look at life so simply, i wish, then economists would know what to do everytime, because their models would probably be all linear or something, and we would NEVER EVER have economic regression and all that jazz. what a load of hogwash written there.
    Before you start calling people coconut, why not you show us how proficient you are in the field of economics study.

    Economic models are simplified tools used to explain human behaviours and its implication on the economic. The most basic Supply and Demand model uses two straight lines to explain the market. What is your concern with linearity and economic regression? Even the GPD and money supply curves use straight lines.

    1) Petrol prices is going up and we are still keeping the 3/4 tank rule.
    2) We banned chewing gum but still selling cigarette.
    3) The penalty for drug trafficking is death and we still have drug in Singapore.

    Use your economic theory to explain the above points and show us how deep is your understanding before you say people is just scratching the surface.
    Last edited by Silence Sky; 18th November 2007 at 01:32 PM.

  6. #46

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    i disagree

    if there is no basis for comparison, how is one to be happy or sad

    there is only such thing as FAIR or UNFAIR comparison
    This is what i call gross stupidity.

    Does one really need a basis for fair comparison to be happy?

    Beside each having 24 hrs a day, what else is fair in this world?

  7. #47

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    I found this somewhere and thought its interesting to share it here:
    Quote:


    there's no need for a bitchfight and point fingers...
    a few things
    reasons for owning a car are varied, ERP alone won't stop people from driving.
    In the first place we all know that it's more expensive to drive a car in the first place than take public transport.
    Public transport increases have been pretty minimal when viewed from the perspective of someone who owns a car.
    That theory you posted up seems to ignore this (chances are the person writing it doesn't own a car...heh)
    I don't own a car and I don't even care about the public transport increases (3 cents?4 cents?) what makes you think that it'll bother a person who already owns a heavily depreciating asset like a car?

    You want people to take more public transport, then make deterrents like extremely expensive parking and ERP that are heavy enough for people to consider taking the effort to walk to the bus stop and wait for a bus and battle it out with all the other people on the bus
    Last edited by mattlock; 18th November 2007 at 03:39 PM.

  8. #48

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    in any case, i am also amused by how this argument is overly simplistic and widely accepted. basically, an argument has to be both VALID and SOUND for it to be logical. validity is when the argument follows through based on the premises. soundness, is with regards to examining whether the premises are true.

    your little boy or girl who wrote this thing, sounds like a coconut jc student who has just but touched the surface of economics and is making mountains out of molehills. if we could look at life so simply, i wish, then economists would know what to do everytime, because their models would probably be all linear or something, and we would NEVER EVER have economic regression and all that jazz. what a load of hogwash written there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silence Sky View Post
    Before you start calling people coconut, why not you show us how proficient you are in the field of economics study.

    Economic models are simplified tools used to explain human behaviours and its implication on the economic. The most basic Supply and Demand model uses two straight lines to explain the market. What is your concern with linearity and economic regression? Even the GPD and money supply curves use straight lines.

    1) Petrol prices is going up and we are still keeping the 3/4 tank rule.
    2) We banned chewing gum but still selling cigarette.
    3) The penalty for drug trafficking is death and we still have drug in Singapore.

    Use your economic theory to explain the above points and show us how deep is your understanding before you say people is just scratching the surface.
    well replied Silence Sky

  9. #49

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by netidolweb View Post
    well replied Silence Sky
    No...No.. Not at all. I am waiting for the guru to come in and give me a lesson or two on economics. I want to hear from the guru what did find so wrong about article, while I find some truth in it.

    I think the writer is trying to tell us that in the transport industry, the demand is inelastic, no matter what is the price, people still have to travel. The supplier or provider always have the upper hand or the final say when it comes to determining the market price. It is especially so when it is a controlled market and the barrier to entry is extremely high.

    Let's hear from the guru.

  10. #50

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by Silence Sky View Post
    Before you start calling people coconut, why not you show us how proficient you are in the field of economics study.

    Economic models are simplified tools used to explain human behaviours and its implication on the economic. The most basic Supply and Demand model uses two straight lines to explain the market. What is your concern with linearity and economic regression? Even the GPD and money supply curves use straight lines.

    1) Petrol prices is going up and we are still keeping the 3/4 tank rule.
    2) We banned chewing gum but still selling cigarette.
    3) The penalty for drug trafficking is death and we still have drug in Singapore.

    Use your economic theory to explain the above points and show us how deep is your understanding before you say people is just scratching the surface.
    at least there is no ad hominem attacks here this time, this is much better than before. just look at the other THREE people. i shall ignore them.

    i am not sure what your 3 examples are talking about, but still, to be fair, the most BASIC, and i stress BASIC supply and demand model uses 2 straight lines. if you go into slightly more depth, you have stuff like indifference CURVES, and much much more than just straight lines. the reason why i compared the guy's argument to a linear model was that it was overly simplistic, do you not agree? he insists that a begets b, b begets c, c begets d, blah blah blah, so a and b are not good. but this sort of argument is easy to defeat - you disprove one link on the chain, and this chain is extremely weak, as others have pointed out, and the entire chain fails.

    you'd see that in more in-depth studies, the demand and supply straight line thing is but rudimentary, anyone who has done economics at a higher level could easily tell you that. the fact is that economists do have to make a lot a lot of presumptions to construct their models, it is not easy, and to me, sometimes good economists who make good predictions could just be lucky, unless they attain consistency.

    1) petrol prices going up, 3/4 rule, are you talking about the causeway restrictions? this is but protectionism in some form, to me there are so many ways to explain this from the government's viewpoint. have you heard of the fairtrade initiative? it is apparently a very big thing here. you can google about it. does it work economically? no. but does it benefit parties in one way or another, perhaps. i think you'd agree with me that life isn't all about economics, and in some sense economics has its limitations in explaining human behaviour.

    2) we banned chewing gum but still sell cigarette. HUH? WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ECONOMICS?

    3) this is extremely simple to explain. when you are talking about drugs, you are talking about a particular slot of "demand behaviour", due to two factors in different instances - addiction and risk factor. hence despite the death penalty, while it is certainly not viable per se (after all, you literally give up everything in your life, facing the death penalty) in economic terms, the people who traffick drugs do so because they BELIEVE that there is a chance of a high payoff with regards to their effort. to this particular group of people, the potential risk taken is by far shadowed by the potential utility stood to be gained.

    why do people speculate and dabble in risky stocks which are volatile? same result. this is sadly why there are people who jump off buildings i guess. sama sama, as one would say.

    also, one is certainly assured that he would not be left with drugs that no one would consume. whenever one is addicted, the behaviour in his demand would naturally shift to priotising irrationally, to spending most of his income of the "addiction" factor.

    i am not entirely sure why one wishes to pose such a challenge over the internet, i could claim to be anything i want to, that is my point. expression of my point of view,is merely something i like to do, and as so many people here have proved, there is not even a need to back up what they say. do note that i am refusing to do this as of now, but seriously though, your 1, 2 and 3 examples, i'm not trying to be funny, but from what little i have learnt of economics, i sincerely doubt you even have a basic understanding of "economic theory".

    i must say that while you have at least, shown a basic courtesy in terms of good discussion, which i really appreciate, do note that what i said initially, about people ganging up to just make personal attacks to feel good about themselves, has already come true. hence, if you wish to discuss this further, should you disagree, you may take it to PM. i will not reply here any further. there is really no point, since there exist people who do not really believe in logical, open discussion, but proclaim themselves to be practioners and advocates of this very cause. hypocritical in the shallowest sense of the word, i guess. i hope you understand.
    Last edited by night86mare; 19th November 2007 at 12:55 AM.

  11. #51

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    once again, examining the guy's rubbish argument:
    1. erp discourages people from going to congested areas
    2. people will then use public transport
    3. public transport becomes more used, and public transport operators have to raise costs due to number of vehicles required
    4. public transport operators pass on costs to people
    5. erp becomes less effective to curb traffic congestion and people start driving again, which defeats purpose of 1, loop infinitum
    why i think this is a rubbish argument:
    1. is definitely a valid point, this is after all an official reason given, and is intuitive.

    2. is NOT a given. of course there will be some who will choose to just absorb the erp. in economics you will learn that people have inelastic demand at times, especially when the erp is a small portion of their salary. by logical deduction, would you agree with me that the majority of people who can afford cars in the first place, will not have any trouble absorbing an additional cost of say, $3? add cbd $5 for a month (hey, i don't drive yet, so don't kill me if it's too much, because it's even better; if it's less, my apologies), becomes $240, a month? i would thus be as bold to make a statement that right now the erp would probably not aid in congestion too much, nor will it persuade a lot of people to switch to public transport. why? you are purely thinking in monetary terms. whereas people will think in terms of utility. there are so many reasons why public transport is going to be a lesser choice, like convenience, accessibility, time, personal space. what do you think?

    besides that, note that erp is not in operation all the time. hence, it does not dissuade people from going to congested areas only, it does so for SPECIFIC PERIODS of time. which is why you have all the cute cute drivers waiting at the side until the erp gantry turns off. am i not right? so 2. is even more so not a given, since people are willing to carry out such actions to reduce their expenditure, and they have a choice as well.

    3. and 4. even funnier. the passed on costs, assuming that public transport companies raise prices fairly, and do not take advantage of the situation to go beyond maximised profits - to me the raise in prices thus far is fair enough, due to petrol price increment.

    firstly - now, tell me, if the bloody $240 a month does not dissuade most people from switching to public transport (obvious fact, look at the demand for automobiles only increasing and increasing).. how is 3 cents x 120 (assuming 4 trips per day) = $3.60 a month going to make people start driving cars? 5. is therefore the most ridiculous point here. even if we give him points 1. to 4. , following that very same line of thought in pure monetary terms, this would mean that PUBLIC TRANSPORT has become MORE EXPENSIVE than PRIVATE TRANSPORT. now tell me, IS THIS POSSIBLE?

    we must not also forget the economies of scale fact of life. public transport companies are going to purchase in bulk, whatever they purchase. i would maintain that a transport company would roughly carry out equivalent or even less of what a private transport owner would do, i.e. costs. but they can do this at a lower rate. therefore, when you're talking about increased strain on the whole group of individuals versus a company, it would naturally apply LESS to the latter than the former.

    thirdly - INCREASED DEMAND, means MORE PROFITS. MORE PROFITS means MORE CAPITAL TO PROVIDE MORE SUPPLY. the effect is not as drastic as he paints it out to be, do you get my idea here?

    he says, it loops? more like his argument is LOOPHOLE INFINITUM

    you want more points? i could probably think of more.

    as for erp prices and public transport prices going up, come on, welcome to the real world, and let me introduce you to the concept of INFLATION. if you do not know what it means.. GOOGLE is your best friend.
    Last edited by night86mare; 19th November 2007 at 01:21 AM.

  12. #52
    Member/Tangshooter
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    ClubSNAP Community
    Posts
    3,118

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    at least there is no ad hominem attacks here this time, this is much better than before. just look at the other THREE people. i shall ignore them.

    i am not sure what your 3 examples are talking about, but still, to be fair, the most BASIC, and i stress BASIC supply and demand model uses 2 straight lines. if you go into slightly more depth, you have stuff like indifference CURVES, and much much more than just straight lines. the reason why i compared the guy's argument to a linear model was that it was overly simplistic, do you not agree? he insists that a begets b, b begets c, c begets d, blah blah blah, so a and b are not good. but this sort of argument is easy to defeat - you disprove one link on the chain, and this chain is extremely weak, as others have pointed out, and the entire chain fails.

    you'd see that in more in-depth studies, the demand and supply straight line thing is but rudimentary, anyone who has done economics at a higher level could easily tell you that. the fact is that economists do have to make a lot a lot of presumptions to construct their models, it is not easy, and to me, sometimes good economists who make good predictions could just be lucky, unless they attain consistency.

    1) petrol prices going up, 3/4 rule, are you talking about the causeway restrictions? this is but protectionism in some form, to me there are so many ways to explain this from the government's viewpoint. have you heard of the fairtrade initiative? it is apparently a very big thing here. you can google about it. does it work economically? no. but does it benefit parties in one way or another, perhaps. i think you'd agree with me that life isn't all about economics, and in some sense economics has its limitations in explaining human behaviour.

    2) we banned chewing gum but still sell cigarette. HUH? WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ECONOMICS?

    3) this is extremely simple to explain. when you are talking about drugs, you are talking about a particular slot of "demand behaviour", due to two factors in different instances - addiction and risk factor. hence despite the death penalty, while it is certainly not viable per se (after all, you literally give up everything in your life, facing the death penalty) in economic terms, the people who traffick drugs do so because they BELIEVE that there is a chance of a high payoff with regards to their effort. to this particular group of people, the potential risk taken is by far shadowed by the potential utility stood to be gained.

    why do people speculate and dabble in risky stocks which are volatile? same result. this is sadly why there are people who jump off buildings i guess. sama sama, as one would say.

    also, one is certainly assured that he would not be left with drugs that no one would consume. whenever one is addicted, the behaviour in his demand would naturally shift to priotising irrationally, to spending most of his income of the "addiction" factor.

    i am not entirely sure why one wishes to pose such a challenge over the internet, i could claim to be anything i want to, that is my point. expression of my point of view,is merely something i like to do, and as so many people here have proved, there is not even a need to back up what they say. do note that i am refusing to do this as of now, but seriously though, your 1, 2 and 3 examples, i'm not trying to be funny, but from what little i have learnt of economics, i sincerely doubt you even have a basic understanding of "economic theory".

    i must say that while you have at least, shown a basic courtesy in terms of good discussion, which i really appreciate, do note that what i said initially, about people ganging up to just make personal attacks to feel good about themselves, has already come true. hence, if you wish to discuss this further, should you disagree, you may take it to PM. i will not reply here any further. there is really no point, since there exist people who do not really believe in logical, open discussion, but proclaim themselves to be practioners and advocates of this very cause. hypocritical in the shallowest sense of the word, i guess. i hope you understand.

    U always tot this world is so good..good for u!

    One piece of advice: Hope u enjoy wat u have now.
    This is an electronic post which requires no signature.

  13. #53

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by blazer_workz View Post
    U always tot this world is so good..good for u!

    One piece of advice: Hope u enjoy wat u have now.
    why not? the world is simple. people make it complicated.

    life will always have its good and bad, ups and downs. the optimist who sees the half full glass is wrong. so is the pessimist who sees the half empty glass. the realist who sees the glass is half empty and half full, acknowledges the flaws AND strengths of what he has in life, and tries to fill the glass up further, while remaining relatively content with what he has..

    is the person who succeeds in life, no matter how far or not far he goes

  14. #54
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    I wonder who's the one doing personal attacks with name calling.

    And if you're not replying, just dont reply. Dont give the last shot and think you're free from rebuttal

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    i must say that while you have at least, shown a basic courtesy in terms of good discussion, which i really appreciate, do note that what i said initially, about people ganging up to just make personal attacks to feel good about themselves, has already come true. hence, if you wish to discuss this further, should you disagree, you may take it to PM. i will not reply here any further. there is really no point, since there exist people who do not really believe in logical, open discussion, but proclaim themselves to be practioners and advocates of this very cause. hypocritical in the shallowest sense of the word, i guess. i hope you understand.

  15. #55
    Member/Tangshooter
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    ClubSNAP Community
    Posts
    3,118

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    I wonder who's the one doing personal attacks with name calling.

    And if you're not replying, just dont reply. Dont give the last shot and think you're free from rebuttal
    Easy bro..give the young man some time..mindsets can be changed when u start working, u know..
    This is an electronic post which requires no signature.

  16. #56
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Lol, okok I'm not sure on his background though - do you know?

    Quote Originally Posted by blazer_workz View Post
    Easy bro..give the young man some time..mindsets can be changed when u start working, u know..

  17. #57

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by blazer_workz View Post
    Easy bro..give the young man some time..mindsets can be changed when u start working, u know..
    wa lau eh

    how come people so interested in me

    you guys got pretty daughters you want me to marry isit

    I REJECT FIRST OK

  18. #58
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    I see an implied admission

  19. #59

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    I see an implied admission


    what admission? i don't really know blazerworks actually

    but i like doremon.. i used to read a lot of the chinese comic books when i was younger

  20. #60

    Default Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

    anyways, stop trying to invade my personal space
    this is horrible, why are you trying to stalk me

    i'm scared, are you going to come over and knock on my door

    if you want bg, ask nicely
    i was formed out of a rock on this mountain.. after being nourished by the elements and rain
    it just split apart and i was born
    oh drat, that isn't me. must be one of them funny chinese mythical stories

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •