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.
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!
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.
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.
You reckon F1 cars have to pay ERP too? They are using our roads too.
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.
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.
I dont mind giving private transport if public transport is
2. comfortable (more leg room, more seats, not more standing spaces)
3. better road coverage
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.
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.
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.
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.
There is no "trend" to speak of, one or two cities does not constitute a "trend".
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]
Last edited by waileong; 21st May 2008 at 01:14 PM.