Search the Community

Do you think gahment's policy for vehicle is a little too optimistic? I think you all should know that the gov set veh population growth to be at 1.5% per annum. Do you think this value is a little too aggressive or too optimistic considering the jam we are facing daily? Although there is work done to improve road system, I don't think LTA can accurately predict the results of these improvements. It may increase car handling capacity by 20-50% or more but no one knows for sure till its completed and we see the results. http://www.lta.gov.sg/corp_info/doc/MVP01-...0by%20type).pdf Stats taken from LTA website shown that we have close to 600K car on the road. 1.5% is ~9K..... thats quite a big number esp. when you consider that distribution of veh is not even. This increase is not distributed evenly to all the road but some roads (esp. highways) will see more increase than other roads esp. during peak hours. And we have yet to include other vehicles. I am just wondering if our road systems (even when upgraded) can handle this annual increase. If you think of 10yrs from now, there will by close to 100K more cars on the road. Do we even have enough parking lots to cater for these cars.... Thus I feel it will a matter of time because gov has to reduce the coe till growth is negative in order to reduce no. of vehicles on the road. IMHO, ERP can only solve the problem to a certain extend, if there are way too many cars on the road, no matter how much you increase ERP, there will still be jams.

Thanks to the flood, we now have this wildly optimistic and unsightly dike along Orchard Rd. Me thinks they should also lay some concertina and put in a GPMG.

Five years? MM Lee's estimate was optimistic WITH reference to last Friday's column, 'Welcome to scary Singapore, land of four million smiles', I could not help but disagree with Ms Lynn Lee. It is na�ve to assume that all human beings can be trusted to do the right thing, and that we should appeal to the public by their conscience and sense of fairness. While it is ideal to strive towards a kinder and gentler society, Singaporeans must be made to realise the world is actually very brutal. Why is Singapore schizophrenic? To me, it is both a modern-day wonder and an insane attempt to push the boundary of human sociology, political science and human ingenuity. With a population of 4.6 million and no natural resources, Singapore is like a 3,000m-tall giant inverted pyramid balancing precariously on a ridiculously small footprint of less than 700 sq km. To further create instability and complexity, the population is a mixture of races, religions and cultures due to its historical immigrant origins. In some ways, Singapore's few short decades of peace may bring hope to a millennium of violence in Jerusalem. On the contrary, I feel Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew is very optimistic when he said recently that Singapore can be unscrambled in just five years. With modern telecommunications and banking infrastructure, trillions of dollars can be transferred out of Singapore in an instant if the current leaders and their policies change overnight. Singapore's economy can become an empty shell within weeks. The grim reality is that global financial investors would have no qualms in rendering us incapacitated in this fiercely competitive world. In many ways, Singapore is a failure due to its own success. Thanks to its ability to provide housing, work opportunities and good economic growth year after year in a First World environment, it is no wonder that most Singaporeans, especially those born after 1965, have bred a false sense of security, thinking modern Singapore is a creation by mother nature. Recently, opposition politician Tan Lead Shake made headlines after a tragic event in his family. But what chills the bones is the fact that in the past three elections, an average of more than 20 per cent of the electorate voted for him or anyone else who stood for election with little consideration of his credentials or abilities. Will Singapore last as long as the 3,000-year-old Great Pyramids of Giza? Very unlikely, when civilisations in history last an average of less than 500 years. But the real answer lies not just in our children but in the choice we make now to ensure a better future for them now. Syu Ying Kwok http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Sto...ory_255634.html anyone still credits the states times with credibility or objectivity? slipper man may not be top political material, but is that what the media should be discussing when he has just experienced a tragic loss? the ST editors must be choking on lightning cum..