Shimada Clutched June 1, 2012 Share June 1, 2012 I despair after hearing about the furore about COE prices appearing on papers, internet and TV. This is not rocket science, and after many years of trial and error, no one has got it right. The politicians in charge are very worried since the poor showing in the previous elections, and the turmoil brewing on the widening rich-poor gap. As a developed country, there is a need to address the rich-poor gap, human rights, equality, environmental wellness, traffic conditions, and public transportation. The system of COE, ARF, Road Tax, does nothing but line the treasury coffers, hence certain political party got the nickname Pay and Pay. The impending carbon emission tax rebate/charge is a welcomed change however, there is no need for such a complex rule to implement. Vehicles that are modified after sales, or poorly maintained will still produce more carbon than it should. Different driving styles and road conditions will also change the carbon emission by a big margin. We often see many drivers leaving their engines on while idle, how are you going to charge that? There are simple and effective solutions which do not cost a bomb to implement and will also satisfy the lower income group, vehicle sales market, environmental concerns, improved public transport and traffic. 1) Drop the COE - they are not effective. 2) Drop the ARF - no difference from the COE, just another tax that is not effective. 3) Drop the Road Tax - it is not a fair representation of road usage, carbon emissions. 1) Increase fuel prices - you use, you pay simple. No need for satellite tracking, ERP gantries. If the vehicle has high emissions, it will consume the relative fuel. If you can't afford to pay for fuel, you won't drive much. 2) Increase Parking charges - you use, you pay simple. Existing infrastructure, no need to change anything. If you cannot afford parking, you will not drive to the place. If the carpark is at it's maximum capacity, they can command higher premiums. If people cannot afford to park, they would not buy a car. 3) Cars are sold on OMV only, lower income group can afford cars. They have the freedom to use it but of course there's a premium to pay to use it. They can find cheaper parking lots with less demand. 4) Fuel tax, ERP, and parking fees will give the same amount to the treasury, there is no impact. 5) Use taxed funds to support public transport to reduce cost of operation and improve efficiency, not just adding monies to the reserve. It's public transport, the governing body of the public should contribute, not let it be run by "private operators" who are only concerned of profits. These results in a fair vehicle system, everyone has a fair chance to purchase vehicles on their market price, less usage, less payment, leading to less traffic, less emissions. Those who can only afford public transportation will enjoy cheaper and more efficient system. ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mockngbrd Supersonic June 1, 2012 Share June 1, 2012 1. Just me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim 1st Gear June 1, 2012 Share June 1, 2012 (edited) While there is much to grumble about car ownership in Singapore, I think it is working well enough. Those complaining about peak hour "car congestion" in Singapore probably never got stuck with all day long jams in KL or Bangkok. Let's revisit each tax: 1) COE: A lot people dont know why we have a COE, beyond controlling car population. For those old enough will remember the pre-COE days, when a car was genuinely an appreciating investment... buy a car now and the used car can be sold at a comparable or even higher price. That was also the last time Mercedes was the top selling brand in Singapore, in the late 80s early 90s. Mercs were so common practically 1 in 3 cars were Mercs then, if my memory hasnt failed me. Buying Mercs were no-brainer then, since you can buy high and sell higher. COE ensures cars will always be depreciating, never appreciating. What nobody predicted was that COE can go so high to make old car values start appreciating again. 2) ARF is a luxury tax. Although ARF discourages nice options like airbags or sunroofs, cutting ARF over the years is a de facto tax cut for the rich. If you want to address the rich poor gap, ARF should go up, not down. 3) Road tax is also a luxury tax, and it was cut aggressively too, making Ferraris cheaper to own. Road tax should go up, not down, if you want to address the rich poor gap. 4) Petrol tax. We already have a 44 cents per litre tax, and this is actually the best carbon tax possible - there is no question the more petrol you consume, the more carbon you emit. And I agree there is too much aggressive driving and people napping in idling cars to suggest it is too high. But raising petrol tax is guaranteed to lose votes for the government, so I doubt they have the balls to even try. 5) ERP is the most effective congestion tax. The only reason why it doesnt seem to work now is because the prices are set too low, and the gantry location and timing somewhat unpredictable. If ERP prices are much higher and motorists sufficiently informed of the location and timing, ie not changing it willy nilly, it will be much more effective. But like the petrol tax, people will feel more pain with the repeated small cuts ERP inflicts, than the one time big pain COE brings, and the anger will show up at the ballot box. 6) Parking. The news that Golden Shoe and Market Street carparks getting torn down for office buildings is sufficient proof that parking prices in CBD are too low, and the remedy is obvious. Driving into the CBD should strictly be for those who can afford it. Honestly, I cannot see a "need" for poor people to drive and park in the CBD. Edited June 1, 2012 by Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblack Neutral Newbie June 1, 2012 Share June 1, 2012 just a blame game from the educated citizen of Singapore. what solution is also no use when more and more people are required here to support the economy... to me all methods also work as long the cost of driving or ownership become a special for the privilege or those whom make it. Although people don't like to hear this :angry: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KARTer 2nd Gear June 1, 2012 Share June 1, 2012 (edited) I support the idea. When cost of using the roads and parking facilities is high because of congestions, even if I can afford to keep a car, I will use it where and when it's less crowded, ie where/when its less costly. This is assuming that there is a reliable and affordable alternative ie public transport. Edited June 1, 2012 by KARTer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watwheels Supersonic June 1, 2012 Share June 1, 2012 Another blame gahment thread. What's new? The current COE system is actually quite effective and predictable coz the numbers of cars released onto the roads are properly controlled & monitored. It's the car dealers that spoil the market. Out bidding each other no matter the cost and let the customer pay that is disgusting. Gahment dun care as they are the ones reaping the benefits. Another issue is the taxi companies joining in the bidding. Gahment can actually release a fix quota per month just for taxis and let the companies bid, this will not affect private car owners and still allows free play in the bidding system. Raising fuel cost is not a good idea as it will cause widespread inflation. Lower income ppl will be badly affected. The current system needs a little tweaking & updating IMO. It's not a perfect system but it's better dan no system at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gee 1st Gear June 1, 2012 Share June 1, 2012 Make sense. I think the blame is due because someone's mistake has been paid in millions by others.. And it's not enough? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royho1979 Clutched June 2, 2012 Share June 2, 2012 Another blame gahment thread. What's new? The current COE system is actually quite effective and predictable coz the numbers of cars released onto the roads are properly controlled & monitored. It's the car dealers that spoil the market. Out bidding each other no matter the cost and let the customer pay that is disgusting. Gahment dun care as they are the ones reaping the benefits. Another issue is the taxi companies joining in the bidding. Gahment can actually release a fix quota per month just for taxis and let the companies bid, this will not affect private car owners and still allows free play in the bidding system. Raising fuel cost is not a good idea as it will cause widespread inflation. Lower income ppl will be badly affected. The current system needs a little tweaking & updating IMO. It's not a perfect system but it's better dan no system at all. In your post, you said COE is effective but in the same post, you also mentioned car dealers and taxis are spoiling the market. If the COE is effective, how would the market be spoiled? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KARTer 2nd Gear June 2, 2012 Share June 2, 2012 In your post, you said COE is effective but in the same post, you also mentioned car dealers and taxis are spoiling the market. If the COE is effective, how would the market be spoiled? Need to take a rest in IMH? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackRabbit 3rd Gear June 2, 2012 Share June 2, 2012 I give an example of how to reduce cars in the CBD. In Perth, public transport is free within the CBD. Parking is limited and expensive (relatively, since parking is free outside the city) Thus most people choose to take public transport within the city, and traffic congestion is minimised. The streets in Perth are smaller than Singapore - most just 1 or 2 lanes only. Lots of areas segregated for pedestrians and cyclists, and lots of handicap access. Public transport is disabled friendly. No ERP, COE, Road Tax, ARF, etc... Petrol cheaper than SG, cars waaaaay cheaper than SG. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throttle2 Supersonic June 2, 2012 Share June 2, 2012 (edited) The density of population in Perth city center is far far far lower than that of Singapore CBD. In fact the density of population in singapore as a whole is very high. No basis for comparison and therefore wont work for us. Just pushing the problem to another area. We got nowhere to run. Paacked like sardines. The perils and costs of a urbanisation / advancement for a country with no land and no natural resources Edited June 2, 2012 by Throttle2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meanmachine Supercharged June 2, 2012 Share June 2, 2012 I give an example of how to reduce cars in the CBD. In Perth, public transport is free within the CBD. Parking is limited and expensive (relatively, since parking is free outside the city) Thus most people choose to take public transport within the city, and traffic congestion is minimised. The streets in Perth are smaller than Singapore - most just 1 or 2 lanes only. Lots of areas segregated for pedestrians and cyclists, and lots of handicap access. Public transport is disabled friendly. No ERP, COE, Road Tax, ARF, etc... Petrol cheaper than SG, cars waaaaay cheaper than SG. Provided our Transport minister can convince higher level to adopt Aussie system, till then My toe will Lol. Free bus transport in CBD, very hard to comprehend such notion, unless some miracles ( do ) happen, dun here so soon. Our motorist/s don't even give way to cyclist, let alone segregated lane, They will come back and haunt oyu that " There is no free lunch in sunny Sp.", What then, I do not want to share my bus seat with fooreigners ? " Another saga . . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlink83 Neutral Newbie June 2, 2012 Share June 2, 2012 Nice thread. Thanks for sharing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evillusion Supersonic June 3, 2012 Share June 3, 2012 Fark lah...just ask all the foreigner to balik kampung...MY included.....n u will see the real singaporean car ownership. But then who gonna work in all the important industries! We will be a country of 2.1 million with job aplenty n no one to fill every one of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedream 3rd Gear June 3, 2012 Share June 3, 2012 I despair after hearing about the furore about COE prices appearing on papers, internet and TV. This is not rocket science, and after many years of trial and error, no one has got it right. The politicians in charge are very worried since the poor showing in the previous elections, and the turmoil brewing on the widening rich-poor gap. As a developed country, there is a need to address the rich-poor gap, human rights, equality, environmental wellness, traffic conditions, and public transportation. The system of COE, ARF, Road Tax, does nothing but line the treasury coffers, hence certain political party got the nickname Pay and Pay. The impending carbon emission tax rebate/charge is a welcomed change however, there is no need for such a complex rule to implement. Vehicles that are modified after sales, or poorly maintained will still produce more carbon than it should. Different driving styles and road conditions will also change the carbon emission by a big margin. We often see many drivers leaving their engines on while idle, how are you going to charge that? There are simple and effective solutions which do not cost a bomb to implement and will also satisfy the lower income group, vehicle sales market, environmental concerns, improved public transport and traffic. 1) Drop the COE - they are not effective. 2) Drop the ARF - no difference from the COE, just another tax that is not effective. 3) Drop the Road Tax - it is not a fair representation of road usage, carbon emissions. 1) Increase fuel prices - you use, you pay simple. No need for satellite tracking, ERP gantries. If the vehicle has high emissions, it will consume the relative fuel. If you can't afford to pay for fuel, you won't drive much. 2) Increase Parking charges - you use, you pay simple. Existing infrastructure, no need to change anything. If you cannot afford parking, you will not drive to the place. If the carpark is at it's maximum capacity, they can command higher premiums. If people cannot afford to park, they would not buy a car. 3) Cars are sold on OMV only, lower income group can afford cars. They have the freedom to use it but of course there's a premium to pay to use it. They can find cheaper parking lots with less demand. 4) Fuel tax, ERP, and parking fees will give the same amount to the treasury, there is no impact. 5) Use taxed funds to support public transport to reduce cost of operation and improve efficiency, not just adding monies to the reserve. It's public transport, the governing body of the public should contribute, not let it be run by "private operators" who are only concerned of profits. These results in a fair vehicle system, everyone has a fair chance to purchase vehicles on their market price, less usage, less payment, leading to less traffic, less emissions. Those who can only afford public transportation will enjoy cheaper and more efficient system. You say at the start that this is not rocket science, but your solution obviously doesn't make sense. Your solution is to increase fuel prices and no need for ERP gantries. What does this achieve? With your solution, even if people are not contributing to jams, they will be paying a hefty premium. Why are you advocating paying for nothing? Your solution just shifts the burden from the COE to petrol prices. There's no difference from raising ERP prices, except that you force people to pay more even if they are not contributing to jams. If you were actually one of the politicians, you would lose your job (if not your life) in a matter of seconds - and you still say this is not "rocket science"... ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
2024 Suzuki Swift
2024 Suzuki Swift
COE Bidding - January 2025
COE Bidding - January 2025
Australia: Car Rental in Melbourne
Australia: Car Rental in Melbourne
COE Bidding - December 2024
COE Bidding - December 2024
Used Car Dealers Feedback (Part 2)!
Used Car Dealers Feedback (Part 2)!
Used Car, what STA Inspection grade then can buy?
Used Car, what STA Inspection grade then can buy?
Electrical wiring in car - battery drain
Electrical wiring in car - battery drain
Xiaomi EV is Coming
Xiaomi EV is Coming