# Thread: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

1. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Didn't the one of the minister just recently said the cars on the roads have increased?
Then i question the implmenting of the ERP...

2. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

I am taking on your point number 2.

Lets say \$240 ERP charges a month does not change the equilibrium point, then why are we having ERP in the first place? According to your theory, taking down the ERP gantries and the number of car entering congested area will still be same.
I have never seen a perfectly inelastic curve, but putting your idea into the supply and demand curves and I can see that the demand curve is a vertical line.

So what is the best deterrence since EPR is not working? Are we practicing price discrimination with ERP that favours the rich?

\$240 is how many percent of their income after deducting expenditure? We should look at absolute terms when comparing prices, or else it will sound very irresponsible. 3 cents increase in transport fare is peanut? Wait till you have a wife and three kids. \$1.6 per trip for adult and 90 cents for your teenagers. 4 trips per day = \$23.60 = \$708 per month. = monthly installment for QQ + Petrol.

Back to the point, how do you control the number of car entering congested area, if ERP is not effective?

Originally Posted by night86mare
once again, examining the guy's rubbish argument:

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.

3. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by Silence Sky
I am taking on your point number 2.

Lets say \$240 ERP charges a month does not change the equilibrium point, then why are we having ERP in the first place? According to your theory, taking down the ERP gantries and the number of car entering congested area will still be same.
I have never seen a perfectly inelastic curve, but putting your idea into the supply and demand curves and I can see that the demand curve is a vertical line.

So what is the best deterrence since EPR is not working? Are we practicing price discrimination with ERP that favours the rich?

\$240 is how many percent of their income after deducting expenditure? We should look at absolute terms when comparing prices, or else it will sound very irresponsible. 3 cents increase in transport fare is peanut? Wait till you have a wife and three kids. \$1.6 per trip for adult and 90 cents for your teenagers. 4 trips per day = \$23.60 = \$708 per month. = monthly installment for QQ + Petrol.

Back to the point, how do you control the number of car entering congested area, if ERP is not effective?

We have technocrats running the show,what else can we do.

4. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

actually i did a reply that some may have saw

but i just examined myself

and i realised that there is no point, because there is a gross misrepresentation of facts in that last reply to my counterpoint, displays ultimate ignorance. silence sky, read my argument again. and think in INCREMENTAL terms. that's all i have to say. cheers

5. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Bare denials do not assist anyone in their case.

6. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by night86mare
actually i did a reply that some may have saw

but i just examined myself

and i realised that there is no point, because there is a gross misrepresentation of facts in that last reply to my counterpoint, displays ultimate ignorance. silence sky, read my argument again. and think in INCREMENTAL terms. that's all i have to say. cheers
I have read it, was typing my response and you took it down.
Below is what you have posted. Do i have to response to your below points?

erp does not serve as a deterrent to STOP PEOPLE FROM BUYING CARS
i am intensely amused by the people who keep harping on that

what is rubbish argument's PREMISE ONE again?

Quote:

1. erp discourages people from going to congested areas

read. this is really amusing. it discourages people from going into congested areas at specific timings. it does not stop them from buying cars. we can easily see that due to an increase in the purchase of cars due to increase in salaries across the board over time, and the fact that coe prices have dropped somewhat.. the effect that erp is not working so well could be easily explained away by a cancellation of effects.

of course people play an implicit cost by experiencing traffic jams, etc

and hello, silence sky, your argument of 3 kids 1 wife is rubbish. just as bad as all those people who predict doom because gst goes up. INCREASE IN PRICE, not ABSOLUTE MONETARY TERMS. here we are talking about an increase in expenditure, SINCE your transport costs are SUNKEN COSTS. you pay them no matter what. so suddenly you might have to pay 3 cents more PER TRIP. i am not sure whether you are doing it deliberately, but this is blatant misunderstanding of facts.

7. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by night86mare
actually i did a reply that some may have saw

but i just examined myself

and i realised that there is no point, because there is a gross misrepresentation of facts in that last reply to my counterpoint, displays ultimate ignorance. silence sky, read my argument again. and think in INCREMENTAL terms. that's all i have to say. cheers
Stick to my points while you are doing your rebutal.

Read carefully, I am not saying ERP is a deterance to car ownership.

8. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

I agree that ERP is not going to deter the increase in car ownership since drivers need only pay if the enter the CBD.
In other parts of the island,congestion seem to be getting from bad to worst.

9. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by Aqillies
I agree that ERP is not going to deter the increase in car ownership since drivers need only pay if the enter the CBD.
In other parts of the island,congestion seem to be getting from bad to worst.
some have to pay ERP to go home oso..look at CTE now..jam in the evenings can last till 10+..

10. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by Silence Sky
Stick to my points while you are doing your rebutal.

Read carefully, I am not saying ERP is a deterance to car ownership.
i was responding in general, why so sensitive?

in any case you may choose to reply if you wish, but seriously though, here's what someone said in reference to another person in another thread

Here we go.
If you meet a fool on the street who curses you or your mother, don't bother engaging because it's just a waste of time.
I feel really sorry that these kinds of comments come through this forum, it sounds like a little kid.
Sure signs include the use of more-bombastic-than-usual words

Let's not give the fool more fuel to vent his sad steam shall we?
and

An old expression comes to mind...

Never argue with an idiot. He'll only pull you down to his level and then beat you with sheer experience.
if i take 2 seconds to refute what you take a reasonably longer time to come up with, then this discussion serves no purpose for either party

11. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by blazer_workz
some have to pay ERP to go home oso..look at CTE now..jam in the evenings can last till 10+..

whatever the case, the congestion is damn irritating

there was once i spoilt my tripod and tried to take cab to sim lim to buy new one cos got phototrip planned the next morning

then blardy hell, the cab driver took cte and KENA STUCK IN JAM

and i got PWNED by the cab fare

12. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

In other words, ERP is not totally effective in managing traffic jams, but damn effective in taxing citizens.

../azul123

13. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by azul123
In other words, ERP is not totally effective in managing traffic jams, but damn effective in taxing citizens.

../azul123
not entirely untrue, i give you that

because singaporeans are evil people who try to avoid the erp charges by leaving office late, etc

14. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by night86mare
because singaporeans are evil people who try to avoid the erp charges by leaving office late, etc
True or not?

In my POV, the planners should rethink on how traffic converging from North coming to/passing into town, for people in East/West there are AYE/PIE/ECP.

../azul123

15. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by night86mare
not entirely untrue, i give you that

because singaporeans are evil people who try to avoid the erp charges by leaving office late, etc
When I try to shoot a penalty, the opposition players keep shifting the goal post leh.

Statement: ERP discourages people from going to congested area.
Your response: " is definitely a valid point, this is after all an official reason given, and is intuitive."

Now, you agree with Azul that is not effective in controlling the traffic.

This is the second time I bring up this conflicting idea of yours.

Why bring in references that are totally irrelevant to my points?

Try to stick to the points:
If ERP is ineffective why have it in the first place?
When the ERP charges is not going to change the equilibrium point, what else can shift the equilibrium point in the concept of supply and demand? You are in fact telling me that the demand curve is a vertical line.

Transportation costs are sunk cost, as you said it.
It is not sunk cost until i hope onto the bus and paid my fare. Else I still can choose my mode of transportation, be it by cycling or walking.

I did not argue on the wife and three kids. I merely put forwards a factual figure by calculating their month transportation expenses based on existing fare. You want me to look at it in the incremental term, and I tell you in absolute term "3 cents could be the last straw that break the donkey back".
Let the poeple judge, which is the more accurate terms to used when comes to price comparison.

16. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by night86mare
not entirely untrue, i give you that

because singaporeans are evil people who try to avoid the erp charges by leaving office late, etc
Be specific, what is true and what is untrue.
You have a big ego. It is not entirely untrue, right?
Just like you don't agree to my friend's words but fail to say what you disagree with. hahaha

Leaving office late makes us an evil Singaproeans?

17. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by azul123
True or not?

In my POV, the planners should rethink on how traffic converging from North coming to/passing into town, for people in East/West there are AYE/PIE/ECP.

../azul123

I agree totally with your point.

18. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by Silence Sky
When I try to shoot a penalty, the opposition players keep shifting the goal post leh.

Statement: ERP discourages people from going to congested area.
Your response: " is definitely a valid point, this is after all an official reason given, and is intuitive."

Now, you agree with Azul that is not effective in controlling the traffic.

This is the second time I bring up this conflicting idea of yours.

Why bring in references that are totally irrelevant to my points?

Try to stick to the points:
If ERP is ineffective why have it in the first place?
When the ERP charges is not going to change the equilibrium point, what else can shift the equilibrium point in the concept of supply and demand? You are in fact telling me that the demand curve is a vertical line.

Transportation costs are sunk cost, as you said it.
It is not sunk cost until i hope onto the bus and paid my fare. Else I still can choose my mode of transportation, be it by cycling or walking.

I did not argue on the wife and three kids. I merely put forwards a factual figure by calculating their month transportation expenses based on existing fare. You want me to look at it in the incremental term, and I tell you in absolute term "3 cents could be the last straw that break the donkey back".
Let the poeple judge, which is the more accurate terms to used when comes to price comparison.
3 cents MORE

3 cents due to transport increase
you are the one digressing. 3 cents multiplied by all your statistics is a lot less than \$700 a month. as for 3 cents multiplied by all your statistics, always remember, MAJORITY of people will not be affected by it. the minority will and have to be helped if their donkey's back is broken. didn't a wise man once say that it is not enough to consider individual interest, it is more important to consider the interest of the greater good.

i'm not shifting the goal post, you are immensely selfish to say that i cannot have a side discussion with azul which is unrelated to our current discussion.

i repeat myself for the THIRD time. erp is effective in curbing congestion in certain places at certain times. it is not effective at curbing congestion overall. how could it be, if it is not implemented 24/7?

19. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by Silence Sky
Be specific, what is true and what is untrue.

Leaving office late makes us an evil Singaproeans?
er, do not you have a sense of humour?

do i have to make 100% serious statements?

someone, i believe it was you, told me that we didn't need to be serious all the time, so don't need to be 100% accurate and specific in every statement we made

so that someone must be slapping himself in the face

20. ## Re: Interesting Theory on ERP and Traffic Congestions

Originally Posted by night86mare
er, do not you have a sense of humour?

do i have to make 100% serious statements?

someone, i believe it was you, told me that we didn't need to be serious all the time, so don't need to be 100% accurate and specific in every statement we made

so that someone must be slapping himself in the face
what talking you, a new kind of tactics in debate?

Page 5 of 6 First ... 3456 Last

#### Posting Permissions

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