A better car ownership system

[Rubberstamp]

I like to make things clear here and not trying to offend you and would like you to take things easy on my nasty remarks.

Firstly A Merry Christmas to you.

 

(1) Increase the price of ERP. Increase it to the level where it becomes painful to cross a gantry. A ballpark figure that comes to mind is something like $8 to $25 depending on time and location

 

Increasing ERP to $25 will affect those middle class people whom drive to work. However political, the ruling party will have to step down as votes will be lost. Just pure milking.

 

@ Yes i agree with you that situation may end up this way.

 

@ Then isn't it silly to give such comments in the first place?

 

 

(2) Increase the number of gantries to other popular roads that are often congested. Roads like Lornie, Loyang Ave, Balestier road etc...this will inevitabley push traffic to other roads. Of course these roads then become congested. But bear in mind these are all mitigating measures which WILL NOT solve the problem as long as population increases.

 

Are your talking sense with your point? Encourage ERP yet mentioning that it will not solve the problem.

 

@ bro, i say mitigate not solve. Idea is to have a greater distribution of cars onto other roads. And to have people think twice before entering this road.

 

Greater distributions is to de-centralize the CBD. However, it is voice down to zoning. Notice how many factories are in the West due to shipping logistics will benefit them. Unless that government can open up areas in the East to encourage massive cntr trucking, it will help in multiply zones to have a multiple effect. But to build a several cntr yard in the North & East? North is congested with housing and East will elities and Marina area? How would it benefit Tourism Board if that every one is seeing so massive industry moving thru CBD area?

Land resources is a problem and not car ownership.

 

(3) Increase the road tax. More increase especially for higher CC cars.

 

Does it make a difference in jam if that you have a QQ infront or a 2.5T car?

Actually the QQ should be tax more as the pick up speed is slow and uses more time on the roads.

Example, a 2.5T car is infront of a QQ at the traffic lights. The first car speed off and the QQ still waiting for christmas?

 

@ tax the rich more than the poor. same as income tax. percentage varies with chargeable income

 

You are talking about ways to curb car ownership. The rich do not bother with minimum increase in road tax as they already can afford 70K for COE. If that current COE is in place, those broderline cases will rule out car ownership. The immediate effect to curb car owership is to do away with OPC.

 

(5) Increase the PARF rebate.

 

= lesser tax/cost = more refund. You mean increase ARF is it?

You can see that car ownership is not affected by prices as many still go to showroom to buy a car with COE at 70K.

Will there be any difference by increasing tax just like COE?

 

But my intention is to make car ownership and usage more expensive. And more so for high CC cars.

So that those who can only marginally afford a car will now no longer be able to afford one. They will then have no choice but to take public transport.

The immediate effect to curb car owership is to do away with OPC then slowly overtime effects will come in.

 

Singapore public transport is already very good. First class has no definition. But as it is, it is easily accessible and easily affordable to the mass public. To me this is first class. You can get to almost anywhere within 90min, and to me this is first class. Trains are clean, are airconditoned, have a good safety record, and to me this is first class.

 

You are stepping back into the stone age.

You had not be in business that every secs count.

Maybe you go treat yourself a movie like Wall Street or Pursuit of Happiness and you understand TIME DOES NOT WAIT FOR NO ONE.

 

@ you are being judgemental here. and yes, my work is in business where time is a critical factor

 

Been to HKG? Visit clients by taking trains? I had visited my clients in HKG and I find travelling within the HKG Mrt have no problems as they are really the first class transport. Comparing with Singapore, How do you cross from Changi to Yishun without going thru town via MRT? If that you notice HKG, they have 3 CBDs which affective makes them first class. Here, 90 mins via PT when a drive is 10 mins.

I give you an example. Upper Aljunied to Portsdown road. Via Bus 90mins. Via Bus~Train~Bus 75mins. Via Car? 15mins.... Another example. Geylang/Upper Sims Ave to Toa Payoh?

 

Got to make this quick as i am getting out of office now.

 

@ Then isn't it silly to give such comments in the first place?

 

Raising it too much may result in the ruling party losing votes. Leaving it status quo will not help in reducing the traffic into congested areas like CBD.

Idea is to find a middle ground where cost sensitve drivers will as a result of the increase in cost reconsider driving into CBD. $5 to $25 is just a figure plucked from the air. Further studies have to be done by the relevant dept.

 

I have been to Tokyo and HK many times. Travelled via car and trains. To be honest, i dun think Singapore PT pales in comparision to them.

 

No offence take bro. This is good debate.

 

Will carry on after my christmas lunch.

 

Wishing all a merry christmas!

Edited December 24, 2010 by Rubberstamp

[Thaiyotakamli]

In my opinion, i think the below will help make the system better. Impossible to get a perfect system.

 

But first to dispel some myths (repeated many times but some seem too blur to actually comprehend)

 

A. With higher COE prices, the govt may not neccesarily make a bigger profit. I have not done the maths but the gain in price is offset by the reduction in the number of COEs. Futhermore they lose out on road taxes and ERP revenue.

 

B. Higher prices doesnt lead to less cars. At the moment govt is still allowing for population growth. So as long as all COEs are snapped up, the number of cars will grow.

 

So i think the Singapore govt should

 

(1) Increase the price of ERP. Increase it to the level where it becomes painful to cross a gantry. A ballpark figure that comes to mind is something like $8 to $25 depending on time and location

 

(2) Increase the number of gantries to other popular roads that are often congested. Roads like Lornie, Loyang Ave, Balestier road etc...this will inevitabley push traffic to other roads. Of course these roads then become congested. But bear in mind these are all mitigating measures which WILL NOT solve the problem as long as population increases.

 

(3) Increase the road tax. More increase especially for higher CC cars.

- Eg: $1 per cc for cars up to 1600cc (per year)

$1.25 per cc for cars between 1600cc to 2000cc

$2.00 per cc for cars between 2000cc to 3000cc

$2.50 per cc for cars above 3000cc

 

(4) Let the COE system remain as it is.

 

(5) Increase the PARF rebate.

 

Feel free to add on - i believe many of you have better ideas.

 

But my intention is to make car ownership and usage more expensive. And more so for high CC cars.

So that those who can only marginally afford a car will now no longer be able to afford one. They will then have no choice but to take public transport.

 

Singapore public transport is already very good. First class has no definition. But as it is, it is easily accessible and easily affordable to the mass public. To me this is first class. You can get to almost anywhere within 90min, and to me this is first class. Trains are clean, are airconditoned, have a good safety record, and to me this is first class.

TS, i got a better idea

 

 

 

we should not increase COE, road tax,ERP, or wadsoever,

 

 

 

just make singapore a hub for European car, restrict the brand of korean and japanese cars and only sell the German or italy brand like ferrari, merc, bmw, audi, etc

intention: to reduce no. of cars in the road as only those can afford luxury car to be in the road and imagine singapore road filled with BMW, merc, jaguar, lambo ,etc, wouldnt it be nice to see??? no offense for some car owners here

 

 

just my four cents

Edited December 24, 2010 by Thaiyotakamli

[Ben5266]

are car ownership and car usage policies your only choice? , think out of the box, mot and lta,

 

the problem is not for mot and lta alone to solve

 

i really don understand why people keep on confining themselves to car ownership and car usage policies

 

decentralisation of city centre and immediate stop to building more office space in city

Ya, URA can easily pass a law stating, for any plot of land in CBD, when build an office space, must also include commercial, retail and apartment withing the same building.

Make it 20% of the people staying there take lift to work.

[Thaiyotakamli]

I like to make things clear here and not trying to offend you and would like you to take things easy on my nasty remarks.

Firstly A Merry Christmas to you.

 

(1) Increase the price of ERP. Increase it to the level where it becomes painful to cross a gantry. A ballpark figure that comes to mind is something like $8 to $25 depending on time and location

 

Increasing ERP to $25 will affect those middle class people whom drive to work. However political, the ruling party will have to step down as votes will be lost. Just pure milking.

 

@ Yes i agree with you that situation may end up this way.

 

@ Then isn't it silly to give such comments in the first place?

 

 

(2) Increase the number of gantries to other popular roads that are often congested. Roads like Lornie, Loyang Ave, Balestier road etc...this will inevitabley push traffic to other roads. Of course these roads then become congested. But bear in mind these are all mitigating measures which WILL NOT solve the problem as long as population increases.

 

Are your talking sense with your point? Encourage ERP yet mentioning that it will not solve the problem.

 

@ bro, i say mitigate not solve. Idea is to have a greater distribution of cars onto other roads. And to have people think twice before entering this road.

 

Greater distributions is to de-centralize the CBD. However, it is voice down to zoning. Notice how many factories are in the West due to shipping logistics will benefit them. Unless that government can open up areas in the East to encourage massive cntr trucking, it will help in multiply zones to have a multiple effect. But to build a several cntr yard in the North & East? North is congested with housing and East will elities and Marina area? How would it benefit Tourism Board if that every one is seeing so massive industry moving thru CBD area?

Land resources is a problem and not car ownership.

 

(3) Increase the road tax. More increase especially for higher CC cars.

 

Does it make a difference in jam if that you have a QQ infront or a 2.5T car?

Actually the QQ should be tax more as the pick up speed is slow and uses more time on the roads.

Example, a 2.5T car is infront of a QQ at the traffic lights. The first car speed off and the QQ still waiting for christmas?

 

@ tax the rich more than the poor. same as income tax. percentage varies with chargeable income

 

You are talking about ways to curb car ownership. The rich do not bother with minimum increase in road tax as they already can afford 70K for COE. If that current COE is in place, those broderline cases will rule out car ownership. The immediate effect to curb car owership is to do away with OPC.

 

(5) Increase the PARF rebate.

 

= lesser tax/cost = more refund. You mean increase ARF is it?

You can see that car ownership is not affected by prices as many still go to showroom to buy a car with COE at 70K.

Will there be any difference by increasing tax just like COE?

 

But my intention is to make car ownership and usage more expensive. And more so for high CC cars.

So that those who can only marginally afford a car will now no longer be able to afford one. They will then have no choice but to take public transport.

The immediate effect to curb car owership is to do away with OPC then slowly overtime effects will come in.

 

Singapore public transport is already very good. First class has no definition. But as it is, it is easily accessible and easily affordable to the mass public. To me this is first class. You can get to almost anywhere within 90min, and to me this is first class. Trains are clean, are airconditoned, have a good safety record, and to me this is first class.

 

You are stepping back into the stone age.

You had not be in business that every secs count.

Maybe you go treat yourself a movie like Wall Street or Pursuit of Happiness and you understand TIME DOES NOT WAIT FOR NO ONE.

 

@ you are being judgemental here. and yes, my work is in business where time is a critical factor

 

Been to HKG? Visit clients by taking trains? I had visited my clients in HKG and I find travelling within the HKG Mrt have no problems as they are really the first class transport. Comparing with Singapore, How do you cross from Changi to Yishun without going thru town via MRT? If that you notice HKG, they have 3 CBDs which affective makes them first class. Here, 90 mins via PT when a drive is 10 mins.

I give you an example. Upper Aljunied to Portsdown road. Via Bus 90mins. Via Bus~Train~Bus 75mins. Via Car? 15mins.... Another example. Geylang/Upper Sims Ave to Toa Payoh?

ur point 3 is

 

by the way i like HONGKONG MTR!!!

[Slowman]

TS, i got a better idea

 

 

 

we should not increase COE, road tax,ERP, or wadsoever,

 

 

 

just make singapore a hub for European car, restrict the brand of korean and japanese cars and only sell the German or italy brand like ferrari, merc, bmw, audi, etc

intention: to reduce no. of cars in the road as only those can afford luxury car to be in the road and imagine singapore road filled with BMW, merc, jaguar, lambo ,etc, wouldnt it be nice to see??? no offense for some car owners here

 

 

just my four cents

 

 

How about motor bike??? Then more motor bike on the road, jam again, restrict motor bike, then go to bicycle. Wah zialat ler, bicycle from Sengkang to Tuas then I have to go to work at 3am???

[Vhtfhwlego]

One of the ways to curb Car Population....

 

1) 30% Downpayment.

Borderline people cannot own cars and need to save up. And by the time the X amount growth, they might feel that they make put the money into bigger use. Also this eliminated those whom have to service their loans even that they don't need the car (I believe that many have to top up).

 

2) Removal of Foreign Talents.

Some of them are really good in what they do however I met one that destroyed my company.

If that he had placed his talent to good use, many lives had been change for the better.

Abused the company as we had grossly under-estimated him as he may pack and go while we can't. We work with him like we work with other locals hence got stabbed badly.

 

3) Makes parking charges skyhigh in CBD & introduce more Park & Ride.

Alot of retail business will suffer and will look for alterative retail places hence de-centralised shopping zones/office.

As many businesses are in CBD, many of which will take PT if that P&R is there for their disposal.

 

Places ideal for P&R,

East: Kallang, Expo.

North: Newton/Toa Payoh & Yio Chu Kang & Woodlands.

West: Redhill/Tiong Bahru, Jurong, Jurong Extension.

 

#2 is being judgmental but how about #1 & #3?

[Vhtfhwlego]

No offence take bro. This is good debate.

Actually I was talking rubbish and nothing constructive and rather offensive .

I just dont like it when you commented on our PT is first class.

90 mins of Travelling will "cost" $36.06 for those earning 50K and above.

Comparing with 15mins via own transport?

 

*52 Weeks X 5 Days X 8 Hours = 2080hrs.

50K over 2080hrs = $24.04 per hour.

Travelling time 90mins = $36.06 .

 

*Time contra off with 13 months, medical and annual leave.

I don't want to be a rocket scientist to work on the actual volume however I believe you get what I mean.

 

I hope to continue the debate as to keep our minds working over the holiday .

 

 

 

 

 

[Requiemdk]

haha...

 

so in your view, Mr. Requiemdk, what will make the system better?

What will you do if you have full autonomy over the system?

care to share?

 

I would have typed a detailed response to this, but I don't need to since many others have already done so. Mustank's posts are a good start. Your problem is that you view car ownership as a problem in itself and not as a facet of a larger problem - transportation, which is in turn part of an even more complex problem - urban planning. You also fail to see why our MRT system pales in comparison to HK's MTR - it lacks scalability and was not designed to cope with a large network with multiple transfers. For a simple example, look at how HK's MTR devotes 2 stations for line transfers to ease up the load on passenger platforms. In short, your proposed solution, if I can even call it that, attempts to address one problem by shifting the burden to another. The basics of what a good and forward-looking solution consists of are all absent from what you proposed and the only thing one can discern from your proposal is that the only tool that you seem to be aware of is money and market forces. I'm sorry, but I dearly hope problem-solving is not part of your job scope at work.

 

But just to add on, one can go on harping about how we have limited land here and therefore must restrict car ownership, but have the same people who spout that line over and over again stopped to think about whether we're making efficient use of that land? If we aren't, and I don't think we are, then why do car owners have to shoulder the blame and fork out money for the mistakes of the urban planners? And if the infrastructure is not up to scratch, then why are we hell-bent on swelling up our population size, not to mention all the other attendant problems of doing so? Oh that's right... money. That's what it's all about, screw the people eh.

Edited December 24, 2010 by Requiemdk

[Thaiyotakamli]

How about motor bike??? Then more motor bike on the road, jam again, restrict motor bike, then go to bicycle. Wah zialat ler, bicycle from Sengkang to Tuas then I have to go to work at 3am???

no motorbike allowed in the road, it will be great huh

[Acemundo]

yeah that is somewhat the system used in japan and hk and i think it works better than our system here

[Requiemdk]

I think it makes more sense too since it combines two things that should be identical in the first place - the right to own a car and the ability to park the thing. After all, how many people own cars but do not need to buy parking space?!

[GLZT]

B. Higher prices doesnt lead to less cars. At the moment govt is still allowing for population growth. So as long as all COEs are snapped up, the number of cars will grow.

 

Bro, if you think higher price doesnt lead to less cars, then almost everything, I meant everything that you suggested is increasing the price.

[Acemundo]

yeah that's why i am no fan of the singapore system to control congestion.

 

to me this model in japan/hong kong is much easier for govt to administer, much easier for user to understand, much fairer to all parties (use and you pay highly for both residential and non-residential parking), less speculative in nature and mroe.

 

the only draw back is less revenue than our infamous COE+ERP+ARF

[Vhtfhwlego]

yeah that is somewhat the system used in japan and hk and i think it works better than our system here

Have you not notice culture for Japs?

Hkg will be the one to be closest for comparison.

[Akazhun]

scrap COE, ERP, ARF and ROADTAX,

 

Car owners need to secure parking lot at home before being allowed to purchase cars. 1st parking lot $150 for sheltered. 2nd lot at $300, 3rd lot at $1000 etc...

 

just use satelite ERP system. You pay you use, you park at home, no charges.

 

I dun see why we should pay the same amount of COE, ARF and rd tax with someone who is driving like 150km a day while most of us only drive to and from office.

 

 

Somewhat agree.

 

In my opinion, COE/ARF/Road tax should be scrapped. More ERP gantries to be built so you only PAY AS YOU DRIVE. GPS tracking people can't feel the effect. ERP gantries beep beep beep can make people 'feel' the pain. ERP should be raised in the range of $10 to $50 so you DRIVE ONLY WHEN NECESSARY.

 

Cars parked at home will NOT contribute to congestion (except take up space). So in addition, season parking fees should be exponential for more than 1 car owned per person (example - parking fees = 90*x^x. means 1 car park lot pay 90, next lot pay 90*2^2=360, 3rd lot pay 90*3^3=2430)

 

Pros:

- This system will allow Singaporeans to fulfill their dream of owning (at least one) car. Whether got $ to drive out of carpark then is see ownself already.

- Car price will not suka suka flunctuate due to COE.

- Pay only when you drive, resulting in drive only when necessary

 

Cons:

Need many car park lots.

[Mustank]

yalor.....now in any piece of land, it seems to be

 

100% retail (orchard road)

100% office (shenton)

100% residential (heartland)

 

cant they put like 30% retail, 30% office, 30% residential

 

but i dont think this is under ura. i think more like land office people

[GLZT]

Somewhat agree.

 

In my opinion, COE/ARF/Road tax should be scrapped. More ERP gantries to be built so you only PAY AS YOU DRIVE. GPS tracking people can't feel the effect. ERP gantries beep beep beep can make people 'feel' the pain. ERP should be raised in the range of $10 to $50 so you DRIVE ONLY WHEN NECESSARY.

 

Cars parked at home will NOT contribute to congestion (except take up space). So in addition, season parking fees should be exponential for more than 1 car owned per person (example - parking fees = 90*x^x. means 1 car park lot pay 90, next lot pay 90*2^2=360, 3rd lot pay 90*3^3=2430)

 

Pros:

- This system will allow Singaporeans to fulfill their dream of owning (at least one) car. Whether got $ to drive out of carpark then is see ownself already.

- Car price will not suka suka flunctuate due to COE.

- Pay only when you drive, resulting in drive only when necessary

 

Cons:

Need many car park lots.

 

One car park lot is about $13k iirc base on the previous news when gahment say wanna build more lots. Its way to expensive for the gahment to introduce that. Unless it is like HK where we have to BUY our parking lots, maybe at 50k per lot? I dont think its too expensive unless its 50k for 10years lease.

[Toothiewabbit]

 

Big Idea No. 1: A 'less-car' Singapore. By Kishore Mahbubani, For The Straits Times.

 

 

Singaporeans should follow current trends in the West and give up the dream of car ownership

 

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/big-idea-no-1-less-car-singapore-20140208