Public transport fare hike

[edutilos-]

Because without concessions some groups of people will not be able to enjoy public transport.
Concessions enable these groups to enjoy public transport, hence increasing ridership.

Which groups again? Polytechnic students, NSFs? Low-wage workers or disabled commuters?

I thought the main issue being raised by most voices is that people don't really have a choice and have to take public transport to function in life. For example, if I live in Jurong and work in Bedok.. Certainly it's not going to be a case where (I) I have been walking to work all along and now can afford to take public transport because of concession, or (II) I might not have taken public transport to work because of the hike if there was no concession. Based on your logic, it appears that such a scenario is prevalent (i.e. people actually DO have a choice of an alternative beyond public transport). In which case, I'm not sure how that is possible, especially after looking at these categories. :think:

 

[edutilos-]

This is my problem. Just tell me it is daily 20 cents increase. Those percentage going to confuse me. So layman like me will multiply 20 cents by 30 days. An increase of $6 per month lor. If more then I am cheated.

...And this is how it goes from "4-6 cents per journey" --> "daily 20 cents increase".

The increase in fare by 20 cents is applicable to CASH fares.

EZ Link commuters (assuming you're an adult) will have fares increased by 4-6 cents per journey. So you need to look at how many journeys you're taking per day, multiply that by 30. The highest possible increase in your monthly public transport bill will then be 30(journeys daily) * 6 or 180 * journeys. So if you take 2 journeys everyday, it will be a monthly increase of $3.60 (max). So on and so forth.

 

[lkf73]

i can never understand the need to increase fares when the transport companies are making so much money.

There is no incentive to lower cost and increase efficiency when it is always protected by the garmen. In the end, we just pay more to fatten the pockets of these people.

Transport cost is a basic cost and the multiple effect of an increase will lead to other price increase in society and everybody will just need to increase prices to keep up. Soon taxi fares will increase as well. And really, how many of us gets pay increment of 5% to catch up. Yes, you can afford the $5 increase every month, but then your chicken rice will also increase by 50cts, etc.

And more importantly, why is there no accountability for mistakes and breakdown? The story repeats itself. I do something wrong or poorly, get a small fine which is paid by the company, and come year end I get a fat bonus increment because I continue to get good profits which is guaranteed by the govt??!!!!

 

[ArchRival]

Which groups again? Polytechnic students, NSFs? Low-wage workers or disabled commuters?

I thought the main issue being raised by most voices is that people don't really have a choice and have to take public transport to function in life. For example, if I live in Jurong and work in Bedok.. Certainly it's not going to be a case where (I) I have been walking to work all along and now can afford to take public transport because of concession, or (II) I might not have taken public transport to work because of the hike if there was no concession. Based on your logic, it appears that such a scenario is prevalent (i.e. people actually DO have a choice of an alternative beyond public transport). In which case, I'm not sure how that is possible, especially after looking at these categories. :think:

Dude, have you seen people so poor they don't buy ezlink card, and pay for fares with cash?

 

[lkf73]

On competition, I used to get a ride on express bus to work in Shenton way, pay $3 and it's door to door. I have a seat and do not need to squeeze like on mrt. How come the private operator can do it and smrt cannot?

Guess what? LTA canceled the service last year for unknown reasons.

Now, I found another express bus service near my place, but guess what, it's $4!!!!! For the similar service.

I don't get it why smrt given the scale of economy cannot match the prices of a small operator and very piss off why garmen is forcing down the smaller players and killing competition. And then, we are forced to accept the fare increase. Knn.

 

[edutilos-]

Dude, have you seen people so poor they don't buy ezlink card, and pay for fares with cash?

Aren't you going out of point? If they are paying for their fares in cash, aren't they riding the train or boarding the buses? Where is your increased ridership? I don't see how this addresses my previous queries on your logic. Maybe if you elaborate and take some time to explain, then communication of your ideas or thoughts will be better.

Once again, is it prevalent? A large majority of people definitely tap. Even if your argument is that the concessions make this group of people eligible to ride, the difference is probably going to be minuscule.

 

[ricohflex]

Just for nostalgia. Not saying anything about the current transport costs.

 

[Bukitimah]

...And this is how it goes from "4-6 cents per journey" --> "daily 20 cents increase". The increase in fare by 20 cents is applicable to CASH fares. EZ Link commuters (assuming you're an adult) will have fares increased by 4-6 cents per journey. So you need to look at how many journeys you're taking per day, multiply that by 30. The highest possible increase in your monthly public transport bill will then be 30(journeys daily) * 6 or 180 * journeys. So if you take 2 journeys everyday, it will be a monthly increase of $3.60 (max). So on and so forth.

Thank you for explaining in plain layman term. Of course even layman knows if he travels more daily his transport cost will goes up. While whatever said is not voting to change the decision to increase made long before even PTC sits to evaluates, ordinary commuters now know if the fare increase is what was explained. Hope no new formula to try and justify why more.

 

[edutilos-]

Thank you for explaining in plain layman term. Of course even layman knows if he travels more daily his transport cost will goes up. While whatever said is not voting to change the decision to increase made long before even PTC sits to evaluates, ordinary commuters now know if the fare increase is what was explained. Hope no new formula to try and justify why more.

The formula used by the PTC isn't something that Singapore or someone in Singapore conjured up on their own. If you bothered to read the links I provided earlier, the formula used is essentially a form of "price cap regulation", which attempts to place a cap on the price of public transport linked to inflation and wages. There is also a productivity factor imputed (which lowers the cap). No form of regulation is perfect, this is just one of them.

 

[Bukitimah]

The formula used by the PTC isn't something that Singapore or someone in Singapore conjured up on their own. If you bothered to read the links I provided earlier, the formula used is essentially a form of "price cap regulation", which attempts to place a cap on the price of public transport linked to inflation and wages. There is also a productivity factor imputed (which lowers the cap). No form of regulation is perfect, this is just one of them.

That is exactly what I mean. Most ordinary people and I am one of them will not try to understand the formula. We are only interested how it affect us and by how much. Let the smart people work that out. Just make sure we are not unhappy and can survive.

 

[ricohflex]

The formula is a process oriented explanation of how they computed the increase and why.

In all papers that require approval, they have to give supporting arguments for their recommendation.

To end users, commuters and general public, this is of no interest or of academic interest - because the general public has absolutely NO say in the matter.

Basically it is a case of a decision has been made and if you bother to read, then this is why.

It is after the fact and fait accompli.

 

[ManWearPants]

The formula while look simple enough has a lot going on. For example if you want to dissect CPI, it is more than a man's effort provided he has access to the statistics used.In short, nobody can question these numbers cause the computation is complex. But as far as the people I know, none of them got the 5% WI . Those of them who got more than 5% do not need to take public transport. From a high level perspective, we simply take the value that has been provided. But I am sure if these numbers are all provided in details, the news headline will not be about a young girl not being proud to be a Singaporean.

Edutilos seems to have taken the price increase in his stride. We all do. Afterall, can we not? While the cash increase per trip is 20c and concession is only 4-6c, it must be reminded concession remains what it is - concession prices. Even this concession price inc of 4-6c is unclear. Is it based on the same distance travel or you only arrive at this value after rebate if you get onto another service within the stipulated time? Yes, the concession price is what we really should look at in the short term as this is what affects our daily pocket. However, the nett price fare still has an important part to play as it may form the CPI used next year and has a compounding effect on the percentage increase of fares next year, not forgetting the rollover percentage from this year. Not a good year can be 3.2%. If it is a bumper year, what would be the percentage be like? This annual exercise does not bore well for the long term as there is no solution to make fare prices stable. The old dog only has one trick.

The same link that Edu have provided about HK MTR is an eye opener. Is it something new? No, the parent holding company of SMRT and SBS already owes plenty of revenue generating assets. But that will be another rant. I am back watching my NatGeo documentary.

 

[ManWearPants]

Just for nostalgia. Not saying anything about the current transport costs.

nice.

Thanks for the 4d numbers.

 

[daredevil123]

[video=youtube;waacof2saZw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waacof2saZw[/video]

 

[ArchRival]

Aren't you going out of point? If they are paying for their fares in cash, aren't they riding the train or boarding the buses? Where is your increased ridership? I don't see how this addresses my previous queries on your logic. Maybe if you elaborate and take some time to explain, then communication of your ideas or thoughts will be better.

Once again, is it prevalent? A large majority of people definitely tap. Even if your argument is that the concessions make this group of people eligible to ride, the difference is probably going to be minuscule.

Dude, just making sure you know there are people so poor that fares impact their travelling patterns or lifestyle quite substantially.

Because, returning to your jurong/bedok example, you seem to think if a person lives in jurong and manages to work in bedok, the concession will not impact his traveling habits at all. This is simply not true with regards to low-wage workers getting the concession.

Certainly it's not going to be a case where
(I) I have been walking to work all along and now can afford to take public transport because of concession

Dude, if i have to walk to bedok, i will have to give up the job in bedok. If i'm lucky i can find work in the factories at jurong. I can take private transport, walk, ride a bicycle, or public transport. If i had the concession, maybe i can take the job at bedok, or take a bus to work at jurong. Ridership goes up.

(II) I might not have taken public transport to work because of the hike if there was no concession.

And why is this certainly not a case? If there is a price hike, i may decide get a 2nd hand motorbike, but when concessions are considered, i give up the idea and stick to public transport. And also concessions may induce me to take additional outings during weekends or travel to hang out with friends after work. Ridership goes up.

 

[edutilos-]

Dude, just making sure you know there are people so poor that fares impact their travelling patterns or lifestyle quite substantially.

Because, returning to your jurong/bedok example, you seem to think if a person lives in jurong and manages to work in bedok, the concession will not impact his traveling habits at all. This is simply not true with regards to low-wage workers getting the concession.

Dude, if i have to walk to bedok, i will have to give up the job in bedok. If i'm lucky i can find work in the factories at jurong. I can take private transport, walk, ride a bicycle, or public transport. If i had the concession, maybe i can take the job at bedok, or take a bus to work at jurong. Ridership goes up.

And why is this certainly not a case? If there is a price hike, i may decide get a 2nd hand motorbike, but when concessions are considered, i give up the idea and stick to public transport. And also concessions may induce me to take additional outings during weekends or travel to hang out with friends after work. Ridership goes up.

Getting confused now. So there are low wage workers that can't afford a EZ link card of $5 but can afford a 2nd hand motorbike.

Anyways, you seem to keep shifting the goal post and bringing in more and more types of groups (all of which still don't seem to be a prevalent example to make enough of a difference to warrant the original statement that ridership will go up), I don't think there is a need to discuss this further because it's going nowhere. Cheers and thanks for taking the time to try to explain!

 

[ArchRival]

Getting confused now. So there are low wage workers that can't afford a EZ link card of $5 but can afford a 2nd hand motorbike.

Anyways, you seem to keep shifting the goal post and bringing in more and more types of groups (all of which still don't seem to be a prevalent example to make enough of a difference to warrant the original statement that ridership will go up), I don't think there is a need to discuss this further because it's going nowhere. Cheers and thanks for taking the time to try to explain!

Sorry lah bro edutilos, i thought this is kpt. No need to be so structured.
Admittedly i didn't put much effort into reply. Still a little high from making some profits from smrt stock last friday. What with all the money channeled to smrt, from both taxpayers and from riderships....TH is the biggest winner, but if we follow, small fry like me can still make some pocket money. Not bad right?. A bunch of us took pubic transport out to celebrate last night.

See? another example of how govt concessions help increase ridership. :bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[Jedi]

Still a little high from making some profits from smrt stock last friday.

Congratulations! SMRT share price rallied after the PTC announcement. Investors as well as shareholders must be very happy now.

 

[keithwee]

Actually it's all summed up as:

1. 'Public' transport operators must make decent profits as they are listed companies. (Ya , very logical)

2. Govt works hard to NOT have to invest in them, but if they have to, yes - your taxes goes in for the spanking new bus etc. Don't worry , if they do badly , govt will fine them and keep the money for future 'investments'.

3. They are working very hard to convince everyone that : yes , there are price increases , but it's all manageable and instead of supposed $x , we r only increasing half of $x.

Psychologically it's cute, imagine in 2015 govt says we have to up GST to 10% , people lobby like siao and end up they say ok ok , u win 8.5% instead. Some will be relieved but who's the real winner?

4. Someone has to pay for all these, if the government isn't willing , obviously the people do. Look at the taxi market , it's all screwed

For me,
I'm in category where fares are going to be increased (adult full fare) but when it's a public good worked like a profit maximizing good, this is life. I'm just at least glad from my misery , the poly students , disable and needy get some form of rebates.

 

[ricohflex]

I always like Gerard Ee.. But he really disappoints when he made a statement "from a affordability point of view"

Reminds me of MB Tan... Omg.

Gerard Ee still has a heart.

It would have been a disaster if some one else was to head the PTC committee. People who conjure up COE, ERP, allow evil shoe-box condo units etc.....