Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49

Thread: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

  1. #21

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by blive View Post

    Don't be so pessimistic about your children's future. We just have to all work together to ensure our children's future. That's all.

    heal the world, make it a better place, for you and me and the entire human race, there are people dying , if you care enough for the living, make a better place for you and for me.

    guess this song !!
    Objection !!!

  2. #22

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by ninelives View Post
    heal the world, make it a better place, for you and me and the entire human race, there are people dying , if you care enough for the living, make a better place for you and for me.

    guess this song !!
    i know this one

    cannibal corpse - a skull full of maggots?

  3. #23

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    a thousand ERP gantries, a smoother ride .... The Lee government is a brave one, it is better to take bitter pill than to take the sweet candy. Years down the road you will see the wisdom of lee kuan yew's greatest son.

  4. #24
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    What makes you think that the ERP will only be activated during peak periods?

    Of course we will be jumping for joy, since as camera owners, we have so much money that we belong to the group of elites having 3 high powered sports cars waiting in the garage and seldom drive out, saving road tax and ERP at the same time!

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    Presumably ERP is a scheme to discourage car usage? If you don't drive during peak periods, the g-ment can't take a cent off you from ERP. Can anyone explain to me why a scheme to reduce car use should be viewed so negatively? In this era of oil shortages and global warming, I'd would have thought an enlightened liberal bunch such as those frequenting a photography forum would be jumping up and down for joy. Oh yeah, I'm looking forward to a bright future for my children too, one where oil won't cost US$1000 a barrel and SG don't have to put up ruinously expensive dikes to fend off rising sea levels.

  5. #25

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    Of course we will be jumping for joy, since as camera owners, we have so much money that we belong to the group of elites having 3 high powered sports cars waiting in the garage and seldom drive out, saving road tax and ERP at the same time!
    ...and may i point out, in so doing, avoid imposing any negative externality on ANYONE, save the fact that people will be jealous? an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly doesn't affect any driver on the road cursing as the CTE is clogged up once again. an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly isn't contributing to degradation of the environment and spewing of harmful gases. it is YOU, the people with your family cars that you drive that cause the jams, so you mean, you would perceive it as fair that the rich are punished just for being rich? that's ludicrous to me. i had no idea that the singaporean idea of meritocracy had fallen thus far.

    the erp could essentially be viewed in some ways as a pigouvian tax, if you have no idea what that is, check out the wiki article (i expect Silence Sky will now enter and do some econs ra-ra since this is his cue). the fact that a driver on the road actually imposes a lot more social cost (i.e. cost to society) than the price he pays for it, should be corrected in one way or another. this isn't so much of a problem in less congested cities, but undeniably singapore is getting more and more congested. it won't make sense to end up having a road system where you take an hour to get from pasir ris to eunos simply because you kena jam all the way. so how do you do it? you increase the price of driving, so that individuals who gain less from the driving and are able to function well with alternative forms of transport will do so. holding it unchecked is certainly not unlike a nomad letting his cattle graze on a single ground for years on end - the ground later becomes unusable. similarly, if every driver's cost to drive remains unchecked, with rising affluence you can bet it is only a matter of time before our roads become unusable. solutions? build more roads? like we don't have enough. i think focusing on a minority's imaginary crows of delight.. does not serve to alleviate any perceived problem,wherever you are coming from.

    by doing so, you miss the forest for a single tree, and seem to wish to garner popular support by instigating flaming, emotional rants which add no value to any society, even clubsnap.

    what would add value? discussion of why erp implementation in such a manner may do detrimental damage. a government exists to serve the best interests of its people, not the random empowered individual with a car. if you think everybody should think that way, let me crow in absolute delight as i do not own a car and i am happy now that you are potentially less able to drive yours in the future. WHEE! maybe you should rant about that too.. less priveleged people feeling happy that the more priveleged-than-them have to join them on foot, bicycles and mrts. but why don't you do that? because there is no "higher moral ground" for you to take.

    in other words, welcome! welcome to the joyous club!
    Last edited by night86mare; 21st May 2008 at 07:55 AM.

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    What makes you think that the ERP will only be activated during peak periods?
    Poor old vince, never fail to miss the woods for the trees . So nothing else matters except the uncertainty about the activation time for the ERP then?

    Nothing further.

  7. #27

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    1. Cars are a necessary part of the transport infrastructure. It's impossible for everyone to rely on public transport.

    2. Pollution is not the issue, there are green cars. Unless you are a fervent environmentalist who cycles 20 km to work, you contribute to pollution even if you take a bus.

    3. Congestion is not the issue. People in hong kong and other cities can get by without erp, why can't we? Are we so special that we must have erp? Says who? Can they prove their case when there are so many counterexamples?

    4. The govt can already control car population and thus congestion thru coe, so erp is not strictly speaking necessary for congestion control.

    5. So erp serves more as a stealth tax by our govt than anything else, esp given how inelastic the demand curve is.

    6. And this just proves that the people get what they deserve when they make their choices at the ballot box.

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    As I see it, 3 immutable issues:

    1) The cost of driving a private vehicle goes beyond the purchase price of the car. There is the cost of consuming a valuable natural resource (oil), the cost of greenhouse gas production, the cost of the land used for roads and parking, cost of noise pollution etc. Not to mention lives lost to traffic accidents, cost of law enforcement, infrastructure etc. Private car ownership is COSTLY, and not only to the car owners but to many of the other people who do not own cars but have no choice but to live with them.

    2) Due to 1), car ownership, and more pertinently, car usage, cannot keep increasing infinitely in land scarce Singapore. Otherwise, traffic will merely grind to a halt and the assault to the living environment will be intolerable. I still want relatively good driving conditions and some green space for my kids to run around safely.

    3) The way to do this is not to keep building roads, but curtail car ownership and usage. COE and import tax curtail ownership, petrol tax and ERP curtail usage.

    Fine by me.

  8. #28

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    You reckon F1 cars have to pay ERP too? They are using our roads too.

  9. #29

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    1. Cars are a necessary part of the transport infrastructure. It's impossible for everyone to rely on public transport.

    2. Pollution is not the issue, there are green cars. Unless you are a fervent environmentalist who cycles 20 km to work, you contribute to pollution even if you take a bus.

    3. Congestion is not the issue. People in hong kong and other cities can get by without erp, why can't we? Are we so special that we must have erp? Says who? Can they prove their case when there are so many counterexamples?

    4. The govt can already control car population and thus congestion thru coe, so erp is not strictly speaking necessary for congestion control.

    5. So erp serves more as a stealth tax by our govt than anything else, esp given how inelastic the demand curve is.

    6. And this just proves that the people get what they deserve when they make their choices at the ballot box.
    1. is fair enough. refer to my point that by increasing the cost to driving, this will ensure that the people who place the most value on the convenience of driving will be willing to jump through the hurdle and pay the price.

    2. a solution to this is to exempt green cars from erp. but this doesn't resolve the problem of congestion.

    3. you may want to take note that hong kong has asked for erp before. i recall being in hong kong a while back and noting puzzledly in the newspapers there two or three letters in their forum pointing out happily that singapore had erp, so why didn't they have it too? examples like these are never going to hold water, because comparisons are going to be skewed and one-sided. london here has a congestion charge for the city, btw. not unlike erp, and without the convenience either. on the bright side, you can try escaping it by not buying the coupon to the tune of a hefty fine if caught.

    4. apparently it isn't prohibitive enough. in fact, maybe we should just jack up coe prices to kingdom come and watch the resultant complaints that singapore is the one place in the world where nobody can afford a car. like you have pointed out, a car is essential, but not ALL THAT essential. so now everybody can own one, and use it only when necessary.

    5. oohz. and you base this on what logic or basis? if i may so point out, so many people here are happily embracing the BMW concept before anything has been solidified yet, this is just the speculation phase. are you quite as certain that the demand curve is as inelastic as you paint it out to be?

    6. see 5. and i advise you not to go further down this road.

    note that i do not wholly agree that you should build erp all over the place. but i think there is some form of logic going behind it, and it really isn't very fair to just brand it as "stealth tax", or yet another means to collect more money from the people. this is just typical of an enraged voice speaking who hasn't considered both sides of the story.
    Last edited by night86mare; 21st May 2008 at 08:56 AM.

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,021

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    This 1000 ERP thing came up before on another car forum.

    It turned out to be ERP devices for carpark entry and exit scanner things. Not the kind for gantry that goes across roads.

    It is physically impossible to have 1000 ERP gantries across the island. Just think of how much money you have to top into your cashcard just to make cross-island trip during peak hour.

  11. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    1. Cars are a necessary part of the transport infrastructure. It's impossible for everyone to rely on public transport.
    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    2. Pollution is not the issue, there are green cars. Unless you are a fervent environmentalist who cycles 20 km to work, you contribute to pollution even if you take a bus.
    Are you implying that the carbon footprint for one individual out of 80 in the bus is the same as one person driving a car to work?

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    3. Congestion is not the issue. People in hong kong and other cities can get by without erp, why can't we? Are we so special that we must have erp? Says who? Can they prove their case when there are so many counterexamples?
    Congestion control and road pricing is a fact of life in many major cities, including Melbourne and London. The trend is for INCREASING implementation around the world, not LESS.

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    4. The govt can already control car population and thus congestion thru coe, so erp is not strictly speaking necessary for congestion control.
    It is a stated position of the LTA to regulate BOTH car population and car usage. The trick is finding the balance.

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    5. So erp serves more as a stealth tax by our govt than anything else, esp given how inelastic the demand curve is.
    Please cite your numbers. 1% change in income tax levels will far submerge any amount of ERP revenue the govt can gain. They don't need ERP to generate income, not worth it for the amount of angst they get.

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    6. And this just proves that the people get what they deserve when they make their choices at the ballot box.
    Exactly right. An administration that thinks ahead and not afraid to implement unpopular policies that cannot be swallowed by a short-sighted, narrow-minded and self-centred populace. ERP was cited as the forerunner of the London congestion control system, implemented by London ex-mayor Ken Livingstone. Go read a little about him, a Labour 'red' through and through, and he felt it to be a progressive system! Far from it favouring the rich, he thought it necessary to reclaim the streets of London for its citizens and not surrender to the tyranny of the motor vehicle.

  12. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Woody Land
    Posts
    1,743

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    I dont mind giving private transport if public transport is

    (for buses)
    1. efficient
    2. comfortable (more leg room, more seats, not more standing spaces)
    3. better road coverage

    (for taxis)
    1. exemption from ERP charges
    2. more taxis
    3. flat rate charges (see how midnight surcharges effective make taxis disappear before midnight)
    4. cheaper than car ownership.
    It is easier to critique than to create ; www.razin-photography.com
    My studio is available for rent

  13. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by razor View Post
    I dont mind giving private transport if public transport is

    (for buses)
    1. efficient
    2. comfortable (more leg room, more seats, not more standing spaces)
    3. better road coverage

    (for taxis)
    1. exemption from ERP charges
    2. more taxis
    3. flat rate charges (see how midnight surcharges effective make taxis disappear before midnight)
    4. cheaper than car ownership.
    It is your personal choice which mode of transport to use. But it is the role of the g-ment to balance transport usage in the context of moving citizenry around, promoting economic growth, protecting the environment, and prioritizing land use, amongst other considerations. And it will do this in a multi-faceted way, of which ERP is but 1 piece in the puzzle.

    The majority of households in Singapore do not own cars. Its NOT all just about the drivers.
    Last edited by dkw; 21st May 2008 at 10:43 AM.

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Woody Land
    Posts
    1,743

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    It is your personal choice which mode of transport to use. But it is the role of the g-ment to balance transport usage in the context of moving citizenry around, promoting economic growth, protecting the environment, and prioritizing land use, amongst other considerations. And it will do this in a multi-faceted way, of which ERP is but 1 piece in the puzzle.

    The majority of households in Singapore do not own cars. Its NOT all just about the drivers.
    yes its my personal choice, i agree, but that largely depends if the govt play its role fairly to ensure public transport is a good alternative for its citizens.
    It is easier to critique than to create ; www.razin-photography.com
    My studio is available for rent

  15. #35

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by D60D60 View Post
    awesome....the (pay & pay) scheme just gets better & better................

    heard from a quite reliable source, that L?A has plans & already executing their plans, in building almost 1000+ ERP gantries islandwide, to be completed in the next 3 years.

    The compensation?

    July this year, road tax rebate given to motorists.

    Once all the ERP gantries are completed & ready & running progressively 3years later, ROAD TAX PAYMENTS SYSTEMS WILL BE ABOLISHED!
    not sure about the 1000+ gantries and total abolishment of road tax. more like a much reduced road tax which may no longer be tied to engine capacity.


    Quote Originally Posted by D60D60 View Post
    calculating the fact that this system will kick in eventually after 3 years (or later), those 1.6l & below car owners will be on the losing end.
    big cars dont take much more space then smaller cars. so the new system will be more on road usage. the more you drive the more you pay. probably makes more sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by D60D60 View Post
    imagine man, each time you travel every 5 - 10 km maybe, kena whack by ERP. walaueh, if we travel around a lot due to meeting clients, carrying heavy loads of our equipments in our car, bo pien loh.....standby to top up cash card like every 6 hours??
    din they announce soon no need cash cards for erp?

  16. #36
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Poor old dkw, never failed to not check before saying something. Did I say that nothing else matters except for the uncertainty about activation time for the ERP?

    Nothing further.

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    Poor old vince, never fail to miss the woods for the trees . So nothing else matters except the uncertainty about the activation time for the ERP then?

    Nothing further.

  17. #37
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Thank you for writing a long (but irrelevant) essay in my honour - I basically paraphrased a point made by an earlier poster but obviously you only chose to extend your monologue when I am the one doing the posting.

    Good Job

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    ...and may i point out, in so doing, avoid imposing any negative externality on ANYONE, save the fact that people will be jealous? an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly doesn't affect any driver on the road cursing as the CTE is clogged up once again. an elite having 3 high powered sports cars that he doesn't drive certainly isn't contributing to degradation of the environment and spewing of harmful gases. it is YOU, the people with your family cars that you drive that cause the jams, so you mean, you would perceive it as fair that the rich are punished just for being rich? that's ludicrous to me. i had no idea that the singaporean idea of meritocracy had fallen thus far.

    the erp could essentially be viewed in some ways as a pigouvian tax, if you have no idea what that is, check out the wiki article (i expect Silence Sky will now enter and do some econs ra-ra since this is his cue). the fact that a driver on the road actually imposes a lot more social cost (i.e. cost to society) than the price he pays for it, should be corrected in one way or another. this isn't so much of a problem in less congested cities, but undeniably singapore is getting more and more congested. it won't make sense to end up having a road system where you take an hour to get from pasir ris to eunos simply because you kena jam all the way. so how do you do it? you increase the price of driving, so that individuals who gain less from the driving and are able to function well with alternative forms of transport will do so. holding it unchecked is certainly not unlike a nomad letting his cattle graze on a single ground for years on end - the ground later becomes unusable. similarly, if every driver's cost to drive remains unchecked, with rising affluence you can bet it is only a matter of time before our roads become unusable. solutions? build more roads? like we don't have enough. i think focusing on a minority's imaginary crows of delight.. does not serve to alleviate any perceived problem,wherever you are coming from.

    by doing so, you miss the forest for a single tree, and seem to wish to garner popular support by instigating flaming, emotional rants which add no value to any society, even clubsnap.

    what would add value? discussion of why erp implementation in such a manner may do detrimental damage. a government exists to serve the best interests of its people, not the random empowered individual with a car. if you think everybody should think that way, let me crow in absolute delight as i do not own a car and i am happy now that you are potentially less able to drive yours in the future. WHEE! maybe you should rant about that too.. less priveleged people feeling happy that the more priveleged-than-them have to join them on foot, bicycles and mrts. but why don't you do that? because there is no "higher moral ground" for you to take.

    in other words, welcome! welcome to the joyous club!

  18. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    Poor old dkw, never failed to not check before saying something. Did I say that nothing else matters except for the uncertainty about activation time for the ERP?

    Nothing further.
    What's there to check? That was the ONLY line in your post. . I take it from the lack of any further input into the discussion that you were simply bereft of any additional insight into the issue.

    If you want to discuss, then discuss the whole issue. If you want to drop one liners, then don't feel sorry for yourself when you appear clueless.
    Last edited by dkw; 21st May 2008 at 01:03 PM.

  19. #39

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    While the likelihood seems very high, the premise of this thread is a speculative one; and all it's capable of achieving at this point is more grouch and grievance. There's enough to worry on the plate already. I vote for this thread to be closed. Until an official release is made of any sorts.

  20. #40

    Default Re: 1000 plus ERP to be built in the next 3 years!!???

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    Are you implying that the carbon footprint for one individual out of 80 in the bus is the same as one person driving a car to work?
    1. Where did I imply that?

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    Congestion control and road pricing is a fact of life in many major cities, including Melbourne and London. The trend is for INCREASING implementation around the world, not LESS.
    2. You can only implement something if you can sell it to the population. They couldn't sell it in New York, they couldn't even sell GST in Hong Kong.

    There is no "trend" to speak of, one or two cities does not constitute a "trend".

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    It is a stated position of the LTA to regulate BOTH car population and car usage. The trick is finding the balance.
    3. I don't agree with their position. There are many other means to regulate congestion into the city, eg. through mandatory car pooling (like we had before 1975), odd/even car days, etc. none of which are designed to swell govt coffers.

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    Please cite your numbers. 1% change in income tax levels will far submerge any amount of ERP revenue the govt can gain. They don't need ERP to generate income, not worth it for the amount of angst they get.
    4. You can check figures yourself in LTA annual report.

    You may like to note, a 1% change in income tax level will lose huge political support, maybe even put off some "foreign talent" from coming here.

    A 50 cent or $1 increase in ERP can be explained away much more easily, even enable them to score political points among the majority who don't own cars. And yet, 50 cents is such a small amount that drivers really don't alter their habits, so the govt can pocket $$$ without having to raise other fees.

    ANGST? What angst? A few letters to the press is "angst"? A few forum postings is "angst"? A few blog postings is "angst"? In Hong Kong, they had huge demonstrations and marches against GST-- that's angst.[/quote]


    Quote Originally Posted by dkw View Post
    Exactly right. An administration that thinks ahead and not afraid to implement unpopular policies that cannot be swallowed by a short-sighted, narrow-minded and self-centred populace. ERP was cited as the forerunner of the London congestion control system, implemented by London ex-mayor Ken Livingstone. Go read a little about him, a Labour 'red' through and through, and he felt it to be a progressive system! Far from it favouring the rich, he thought it necessary to reclaim the streets of London for its citizens and not surrender to the tyranny of the motor vehicle.
    If the people want a govt that does ERP, so be it. Just because a policy is unpopular doesn't mean it's right. And vice versa.
    Last edited by waileong; 21st May 2008 at 01:14 PM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •