How Long Before COE fall to $20k

[C-K]

If N. Korea decides to nuke S.Korea and Japan, super recession will happen very soon.

[WTF]

If N. Korea decides to nuke S.Korea and Japan, super recession will happen very soon.

Maybe by then car very ex liao 'cos car factories in Korea and Japan kaput liao.......supply not enough...

[TandemAssassin]

Communism.... capitalism..... detriment.... pollution...... negative exernalities...... guys, we have a scholar talking here, so better listen....wahahahahaha

 

Sorry, can't help myself.

 

Balloting it is then......

 

It sounds like you have some thing against people who are more well read or educated than you. Please confirm if that is the case.

 

[Civic2000]

Well majority Sporeans dont own cars.

 

So they are not losing a significant margin.

 

You are right. COE is not going to be an issue for the coming election. Unlike housing, every one need to have a roof over their heads, but not every single one needs to own a car.

 

[Simonsoh]

I know, I already checked with LTA and the insurers. The BOTTOM LINE IS I NEED TO PURCHASE A NEW COE AT PREVAILING COE PRICE in order to drive the replacement vehicle.

 

This does not make sense since what is lost is the vehicle and not the COE. The COE is relevant and peculiar only to sinkapoor and cannot be used anywhere else....there is no reason why I cannot use my old COE for the new replacement vehicle.

 

The only reason is because the LTA wants to force victims who lost their vehicles to spend $$$ to buy another new COE. The rebate on the old COE ets will be miniscule compared to the cost of getting a new COE today.

 

actually it does make sense... cuz if LTA accept ur theory, then if anyone want a new car with my old CHEAP coe, i just need some authority to declare my 4 year old car totalled. then can change new car liao....

 

[Carer]

You are right. COE is not going to be an issue for the coming election. Unlike housing, every one need to have a roof over their heads, but not every single one needs to own a car.

 

Also remember that majority of us already have a flat. And all these people are happy sitting on paper value that has increased so much over the years.

 

Seems like the result is clear for the coming election.

[Atonchia]

lol....

 

see 7:10 to 8:10... actually the whole video is interesting

 

 

 

Deja Vu

[Atonchia]

I dont care if it was an actual miscalculation, real mistake or a lame gahmen conspiracy for election reasons. I am not a politician nor do I care what the gahmen thinks or do. I was merely implying that the fact is our island is tiny and no matter how people try to justify it we simply need to remember cars are not meant to be cheap here regardless of what policy or reasons are used to control it.

 

So if you cannot afford it then drop it and move on. If you think you can do better than the current gahmen then go overthrow them and show the world you are better at it. Dont talk so much.

 

Edit: Btw whoever really believed them to promise affordable car ownership in SG and dare to even dream about it really need to get their heads checked and get slapped to wake up. Get real man...

 

 

The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams.

Eleanor Roosevelt

 

The greater danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that its too low and we reach it.

Michelangelo

 

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then is not an act but a habit

Aristotle.

 

So we should not ask people not to dream.

[Atonchia]

Maybe by then car very ex liao 'cos car factories in Korea and Japan kaput liao.......supply not enough...

 

Proton may become a consideration but then it's parts also from Japan, Maybe Lotus then.

[Ghostami]

Actually if back than they never reduce the coe to 20k levels and continue with the 2000 levels and rules, I doubt the car population would had balloon till current situation.

 

With current coe levels, it will deter more new cars from coming onto the road but the problem is the existing population that is already on the road. A few people say that raising the coe is no use, I agree in short term you will not see the difference as the existing population still exist. Give it a few more years and you will definitely see a difference when more cars start to deregistering, provided that they don't tweak down the coe again and if they revert the rules back to 2000 levels. If they do that I think it can easily wipe out quite a population of car owners.

[Atonchia]

I personally think satellite base is still the fairest

COE is still there to control population, road tax abolished, all base on satellite base on usage and and vehicle capacity, different rate according to category and capacity.

 

Charges should not be linear as longer distance travel should not be penalise thus initial 1km charge is the highest (forgot what curve is that). Because most probably these less than 2km trips type of travel contribute to most traffic build up especially in the morning.

 

 

I guess the ERPs will still exist to control area or sections of traffic.

Edited December 13, 2010 by Atonchia

[KARTer]

All this talk of balloting and controlling car prices just reeks of communism. At the end of the day, free market forces (i.e. competitive bidding) decides who gets to own the limited number of vehicles. If you are rich, you get to drive. If you are not, you don't. That is the whole point of capitalism ain't it? Those who work harder/smarter or are luckier get to enjoy the ripest and sweetest fruits. It is not a basic necessity like food, water or housing so why the need to reign it in?

 

Don't forget, driving a car causes detriment to others. Air pollution, sound pollution, taking up land for roads and parking (instead of building other things), causing congestion (thus slowing down buses), accidents (damage to property and lives). It makes economic sense to price in all these negative externalities by ripping off everyone who chooses to drive instead of going public.

 

Of course, our current system is hardly perfect. But I think it is pretty fair to expect people to pay more for luxuries especially if the luxury causes a detriment. Think of public transport as HDB and cars as private housing. Does anyone think then that we should all ballot for private housing? And that if we buy a 2nd private property, we need to get special permission from the government?

 

Btw, I am also a poor man/marginal car-owner/driver and I am feeling the pinch. I am just trying not to look at things tinted by my own self-interest.

Rich families:- father, mother, sons, daughters all own their own car and their cars add to road congestions.... this is multi-car family. Yes, since they earn the money therefore are entilted to have many cars in the family and enjoy them. We cannot ban 2nd/3rd/4th car etc but can do something about it to discourage them getting extra cars (see below).

 

Another family, not so rich, only owns one car and when the father, mother, sons, daughters go out, they car pool and only add one car on the road, not adding to road congestion.

 

Why not make the multi-car family (most likely rich family) pay for causing road congestion by making them bid for a special category of COEs meant for 2nd/3rd/4th cars in the family. The special cat will have a minimum bid of $100k (or whatever higher baseline sum) to make them think twice before buying a 2nd car. ERP and rdtx for 2nd/3rd/4th cars will also be higher than 1st car.

 

This way our roads will be less congested. And since lta is making much more money from the special cat COEs, they can lower the normal COE prices by giving a discount to the successful bids. Everyone will be happy. The rich can show off their 2nd car telling ppl they can really afford higher COE/Rdtx/ERP. Ordinary owners save some money due to the COE discounts...

Edited December 13, 2010 by KARTer

[KARTer]

I personally think satellite base is still the fairest

COE is still there to control population, road tax abolished, all base on satellite base on usage and and vehicle capacity, different rate according to category and capacity.

Charges should not be linear as longer distance travel should not be penalise thus initial 1km charge is the highest (forgot what curve is that). Because most probably these less than 2km trips type of travel contribute to most traffic build up especially in the morning.

I guess the ERPs will still exist to control area or sections of traffic.

 

Sounds good. But one modification: since the engine capacity of a car has really nothing to do with traffic congestions but the size of the cars has, ERP should be based on size of the cars (especially the length, longer cars take up more road space), and distance travel.

 

Since satellite GPS can also detect car speeds, so road hoggers on lane 1 which travel below say 79kmh for more than 30 sec (or 200m) will be charge extra ERP!!!

Edited December 13, 2010 by KARTer

[Atonchia]

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/sin...1098863/1/.html

 

At least they decided to the the right things.

 

[themagi]

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/sin...1098863/1/.html

 

At least they decided to the the right things.

 

Those motorised bicycles are a real road hazard.

[Coupecabriolet]

All this talk of balloting and controlling car prices just reeks of communism. At the end of the day, free market forces (i.e. competitive bidding) decides who gets to own the limited number of vehicles. If you are rich, you get to drive. If you are not, you don't. That is the whole point of capitalism ain't it? Those who work harder/smarter or are luckier get to enjoy the ripest and sweetest fruits. It is not a basic necessity like food, water or housing so why the need to reign it in?

 

Don't forget, driving a car causes detriment to others. Air pollution, sound pollution, taking up land for roads and parking (instead of building other things), causing congestion (thus slowing down buses), accidents (damage to property and lives). It makes economic sense to price in all these negative externalities by ripping off everyone who chooses to drive instead of going public.

 

Of course, our current system is hardly perfect. But I think it is pretty fair to expect people to pay more for luxuries especially if the luxury causes a detriment. Think of public transport as HDB and cars as private housing. Does anyone think then that we should all ballot for private housing? And that if we buy a 2nd private property, we need to get special permission from the government?

 

Btw, I am also a poor man/marginal car-owner/driver and I am feeling the pinch. I am just trying not to look at things tinted by my own self-interest.

 

free market is one without interference from government. by introducing COE system then allocating a quota for the number of COEs available.. is this still free market?

 

i think there are other ways to slow down car growth or reduce car population.. they are probably yet to be explored or explored already but deemed not useful because they aren't cash-generating cows.

 

minimal interference is the key. i doubt things like economy or such can be free of govt control.. but at least use schemes that are more useful, logical, reasonable and doesn't label the govt as $_$.

[Sgnick]

It sounds like you have some thing against people who are more well read or educated than you. Please confirm if that is the case.

 

Oh, so u more well read or educated than me huh? okie, good for you bro, well done.

[SimonTan]

I would think that LTA fear more people will buy electric bikes, since coe is sky high. Sometimes the news are timed so perfect!

I believe ekectric bike is the way to go. Clean city should promote more clean energy.

More electric bike might means more charginG point offered, perhaps at 7-11.

I Do not think electric bike is a problem on the road or footpath.

I would like to get one someday, as its convenient and has the 'power' to carry load.

Alsp it gives mobility to people with weak legs.