Budget 2012 - government buying buses?

[Tjkbeluga]

Actually, I did not want to reply to this thread as the person that I had the discussion with requested for the discussion to stop. But since he broke the tacit agreement, I have every right for a response.

 

I do not support the principle behind the monetary provision but I am against the effects of not doing so which is higher fares esp for those in the lower level of the income pyramid, elderly and children.

 

The very fact that the gov choose to do this is also an admission that SBS infrastructure has reached the laws of diminishing returns if they expand their network further.

 

Here, the net result of the expenditure is a better bus network, stable bus fares, lower waiting time, better comfort and improved travel experience. Best of all, it benefits the hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans that rely on buses as a means of transport daily. If you take the bus to and fro from work. You benefit from it two times a day.

 

Can you tell me why spending on something which benefits hundreds of thousand of Singaporeans on such a bread and butter issue is a bad thing?

 

The theory of motive consequentialism applies in this case. i.e. end justify means.

Hi Bro,

 

While I agree the rationale you explained here, most people (including me) is pissed that public funds is used to fund private business. This itself no matter how it's argued, doesn't not make sense. They should follow what HK did where part of the profit from transport company (be it rental, or whatever) since profit is generated from what that is given by the government and thus have the responsibility to return back to the government. So, rather than asking money from the government, they should have such implementation to use such money when the occasion arises.

[Good-Carbuyer]

Just got back from Hong Kong. Finally I counted the number of carriages of their trains.

Total 12.

how many carriages in our Smrt train?

I think 8?... simple math will tell you our transport companies are to busy counting their money and not doing their job of ensuring enough capacity to accommodate the increase in ridership.

Buying buses is to cope with increase in ridership.

Trying to pull of the numbers from taking MRT.

if the business model is channel profits into increasing more buses and adding carriages to ensure capacity is always ready to accommodate ridership garment don't need to use $1 billion now.

This goes to show and prove public listed companies failed to support public needs when money stand between them and us.

With more and more broken rail clips as the evidence from the lapse in maintenance probably from cost cutting to boost profit.. There will be more rail clippings flying of the tracks...

Thanks to the great former leader of smart.

Many years back, before the first train rolled, they already called themselves SMRTC=Singapore Mentally Retarded Training Centre? Their replies to my previous recommendations more than 6 years ago: observed to be satisfactory, and will be monitoring (no mention until repeated accidents/breakdowns = honest repeated mistakes?)

Edited February 25, 2012 by Good-Carbuyer

[Fitvip]

Just got back from Hong Kong. Finally I counted the number of carriages of their trains.

Total 12.

how many carriages in our Smrt train?

I think 8?...

 

SMRT" 6 carriages only!

Edited February 25, 2012 by Fitvip

[Calford]

HK MTR was designed in the 70s with 9-12 carriages.

SIN MRT was designed in the 80s with 6 carriages.

[Pchmj]

Being a MRT user since the 90s, I feel our MRT can cope with the population. Just need to have <2min interval consistently without any delay. I keep seeing 4-6 min interval during peak hours. Happens mostly to red line. Now the JE extension is in use, it does indeed help when interval is kept at 2min for both red and green line. Any delay will see rapid crowd built up.

 

Also remove the stop at yishun (from town) /marsiling (from JE) bull shi*.

Edited February 25, 2012 by Pchmj

[Davidklt]

Hello all,

 

All the replies are pointing to the fact the the distribution of the funding is wrong (which I already pointed that I agree) but none seems to have concrete and feasible suggestions for better bus network, stable bus fares, lower waiting time, better comfort and improved travel experience which the expenditure would bring.

 

Lets be realistic. Nationalisation is not going to happen. Just like GST and COE would never have a reversal unless the ruling party is changed.

 

Incidentally, the Straits Times today ran a feature on this topic too. There are many people which objected to the funding too.

Edited February 26, 2012 by Davidtkl

[Tigerwoods]

SMRT" 6 carriages only!

Yes I was counting it today and now I understand what went wrong.

HKG has 7.5 mill and SGP has 5.2 mill.

[Scb11980]

Hello all,

 

All the replies are pointing to the fact the the distribution of the funding is wrong (which I already pointed that I agree) but none seems to have concrete and feasible suggestions for better bus network, stable bus fares, lower waiting time, better comfort and improved travel experience which the expenditure would bring.

 

Lets be realistic. Nationalisation is not going to happen. Just like GST and COE would never have a reversal unless the ruling party is changed.

 

Incidentally, the Straits Times today ran a feature on this topic too. There are many people which objected to the funding too.

 

 

without a present solution does not mean the government can throw citizen's money to a private company

 

there are many solutions but the problem is there are vested interest

 

where is the accountability

 

it is like the building of HDB flats

population and lax immigration policies but HDB flats building was significantly reduced and NOT INCREASE in the past 5 years or so

 

 

 

good luck to singapore

[Tigerwoods]

Hello all,

 

All the replies are pointing to the fact the the distribution of the funding is wrong (which I already pointed that I agree) but none seems to have concrete and feasible suggestions for better bus network, stable bus fares, lower waiting time, better comfort and improved travel experience which the expenditure would bring.

 

Lets be realistic. Nationalisation is not going to happen. Just like GST and COE would never have a reversal unless the ruling party is changed.

 

Incidentally, the Straits Times today ran a feature on this topic too. There are many people which objected to the funding too.

David

If you read properly the answers are all there.

this funding is not needed now if the transport companies continue to expand the fleet of buses every year in the past using more of the profits for this instead of paying fat dividends and high salaries to executives and shareholders.

ours is a country that that loves to feed and reward handsomely to a chosen few.

why can't these transport companies take bank loans ? You may say oh..the cost of fares will increase...so no good but who privatize these companies. private firms never sell you cheap.

So many actions taken by it ruling party are patchwork.

[Tigerwoods]

without a present solution does not mean the government can throw citizen's money to a private company

 

there are many solutions but the problem is there are vested interest

 

where is the accountability

 

it is like the building of HDB flats

population and lax immigration policies but HDB flats building was significantly reduced and NOT INCREASE in the past 5 years or so

 

 

 

good luck to singapore

Maybe its was timed to create a bubble so many top guns can sell their properties at the best prices?

Enhance Our pigeon hole values? More like for them...

Edited February 26, 2012 by Tigerwoods

[Wind30]

Hello all,

 

All the replies are pointing to the fact the the distribution of the funding is wrong (which I already pointed that I agree) but none seems to have concrete and feasible suggestions for better bus network, stable bus fares, lower waiting time, better comfort and improved travel experience which the expenditure would bring.

 

Lets be realistic. Nationalisation is not going to happen. Just like GST and COE would never have a reversal unless the ruling party is changed.

 

Incidentally, the Straits Times today ran a feature on this topic too. There are many people which objected to the funding too.

 

People have given a suggestion of Nationalising the bus network. Is that a "concrete and feasible suggestion"? If not, why not?

 

I think nationalisation should be given more thought. Frankly, the minister's arguement of private companies will lead to more cost savings does not make much sense.

 

He says "the profit incentive" of commercial enterprises "spurs efficiency and productivity improvements".

 

If the efficiency and productivity improvement just goes to profit for the private companies and not to lower fares, is it really that useful? After all, you still end up with the same higher fares.

 

"The Transport Minister pointed out that, an entity that depends on Government funding and which operates on a cost-recovery basis, "would have little incentive to keep costs down".

 

Is he talking about HDB? Does it mean all government agencies which are non profit has little incentive to keep cost down?? walao... how can sabo his own colleagues...

 

 

The problem about the bus service is that there isn't really a functional market I think. Firstly, you cannot anyhow set price to your product. You can only cut cost so bus operators will find ways to "cut cost". lousy service, poor freq. After they cut cost, do they lower the fares?? of course not! they put it as profit for the company. Should bus operators invest in new buses, more freq, better service? For what?? They don't have any competitors and neither can they increase the fares for a "better" product.

 

Somehow I think the model cannot work. might as well nationalise it. I think WP is making some sense

[Tigerwoods]

He talks like a mole...

[Tigerwoods]

To read the tells given by Josephine saying the funds are profits of our SWF makes me laugh with tears in my eyes.

there is just this much of Peng wey I can take...

[13177]

After so many questions and questions from the public on govt buying buses for private bus companies, any conclusion ar? Govt still proceed as plan to buy buses, right?

[Hiaceminibus]

Hello all,

 

All the replies are pointing to the fact the the distribution of the funding is wrong (which I already pointed that I agree) but none seems to have concrete and feasible suggestions for better bus network, stable bus fares, lower waiting time, better comfort and improved travel experience which the expenditure would bring.

 

Lets be realistic. Nationalisation is not going to happen. Just like GST and COE would never have a reversal unless the ruling party is changed.

 

Incidentally, the Straits Times today ran a feature on this topic too. There are many people which objected to the funding too.

Since it already been privatize gov shouldn't be involve. It not us or our gov to give them ideas on how to run their company. The CEO, getting paid millions, should come out with idea to bring better service to their customers and at the same time keeping the fare stable. It their job.

[Porche]

To read the tells given by Josephine saying the funds are profits of our SWF makes me laugh with tears in my eyes.

there is just this much of Peng wey I can take...

 

that por lan pah, profits not our $$$ meh.

[themagi]

Since it already been privatize gov shouldn't be involve. It not us or our gov to give them ideas on how to run their company. The CEO, getting paid millions, should come out with idea to bring better service to their customers and at the same time keeping the fare stable. It their job.

 

On the other hand, we know that the transport oligopolies are government-owned. So government stepping in is quite anticipated, although it should not be this way since tax-payers money directly involved.

[Good-Carbuyer]

After so many questions and questions from the public on govt buying buses for private bus companies, any conclusion ar? Govt still proceed as plan to buy buses, right?

I believe we just have to face the truth. LTA got problematic absconding people. Needs bail-out like CPF.