Come Share Your View on "Car-Lite City"

[Soya]

Birthrate already low liao...

In fact, MX-5, S2K and MR-S are better for raising birthrates than say a Camry / 3-er / C....

 

Why? Coz if we go club, and drive the latter range, people might think 1. Papa chia, 2. Not cool.

 

If drive the former range, girls will like more. So = more chance to get the girls.

Next: get the girl already, don't need to ferry other people home so can have private time with the girl.

 

Even if don't boost the birthrate, at least, will have more practice sessions (in order to be better at boosting the birthrates ya)... So, my argument is 2 seater sports cars are better for Singapore's future. LTA FASTER GIVE DISCOUNT ON COE FOR 2 SEATER!!

 

Suppork!

 

See, knew our smart PM had a coded message for all of us.   

[Acemundo]

that is true.  I always detest driving along serangoon road, boon keng road etc for the same reason that traffic there is always slow moving.

I believe travel from Queenstown MRT to Sixth Avenue is faster by car as there are less traffic light.

 

For me to travel from Upper Boon Keng road to Asia Sq, it takes 30mins by MRT or Bicycle.

 

By car, it takes 25 mins.  Total route is no more than 7KM.

 

[Enye]

U r saying i am very pie mia har.

 

Previously, my office in Centennial Tower.  Most convenient way to work for me is kar chia.  By MRT, still need to walk a long way.

 

Now, my office in Asia SQ.  Most convenient way to work is still kar chia.  By MRT, either walk from Raffles Place or change train at Bugis.

 

 

don't dare to say you pai mia

 

because work in centennial tower or asia sq is confirmed ho mia whatever transportation you use

 

[inlinesix]

that is true.  I always detest driving along serangoon road, boon keng road etc for the same reason that traffic there is always slow moving.

 

My place is not next to Serangoon road lah.  It is next to Lorong 1 Geylang.

 

The only reason it is so slow moving is my route has 15 traffic light along a 7km stretch.

[MQX87511]

Drive down the cost of acquisition and expand availability of cars

- car dealers, workshop & ancillaries services are still an important part of the local economy and cap on COE is a cap on the market size.

- it's still an aspirational item as many bro/sis says, "face" device

- plenty of HDB carparks built in new estate or revamp estates, need to cover amortization cost

 

Drive up the cost of use

- Pay by use and distance via ERP GPS

- Increase car park cost at popular destinations

- Increase congestion around popular places

- Increase fuel surcharges

- Increase road taxes

 

Drive up attractiveness of alternative to car as mode of regular transportation

- increase train coverage density

- increase bus coverage density

- increase personal mobility equipment use of public spaces

 

All the goodness of milk (cars) without the fat (congestion).

your points are contradict leh, down the cost of acquisition and expand availability of cars will cause mass traffic congestion,

therefore cause public transport to suffer the congestion too,

[Forte3737]

Here you go again. Don't you ever get tired of being the SAD character?

 

Or is it you feel the need to make some noise again?

I am just asking a simple question. Anything wrong?

[Limwsv]

your points are contradict leh, down the cost of acquisition and expand availability of cars will cause mass traffic congestion,

therefore cause public transport to suffer the congestion too,

 

Remember one of the arguments used by bro/sis here is that the high cost of acquisition is the reason why they felt that they must drive.  After spending that 150K, putting the car in the carpark does not make sense.

 

However, driving down the cost of acquisition to let say 25K (price of Jazz last low).  And driving up the cost of use, let say $100 per trip.  Counterintuitive, people may choose to leave the car behind and take public transportation for regular trips.

 

The car will be reserved for when traveling by public transport is not optimum.  This has been proven in many other countries where the governments cannot even restrict cars like USA.   Low car prices, high public transport density = less congestion.

 

You just need to compare Los Angeles and New York to get a sense of where things will be head if public transport density and coverage is good.  Los Angeles = suburban sprawl, poor public transport coverage/density = massive jams.  New York = compact city, good train/bus network = better traffic.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Limwsv

[kmttan]

car lite means homes closer to destinations such as offices and schools, and connect homes to destinations by sheltered aircon park connectors. 

[edwin15]

I am just asking a simple question. Anything wrong?

 

 

Sorry. I don't like it when the likes of you ask me personal questions in a public forum.

[inlinesix]

car lite means homes closer to destinations such as offices and schools, and connect homes to destinations by sheltered aircon park connectors. 

 

That's so Singaporean!!

[Forte3737]

Asking whther you own a car is a personal question?

Sorry. I don't like it when the likes of you ask me personal questions in a public forum.

 

[edwin15]

Asking whther you own a car is a personal question?

 

 

It isn't?

 

     

[MQX87511]

Remember one of the arguments used by bro/sis here is that the high cost of acquisition is the reason why they felt that they must drive.  After spending that 150K, putting the car in the carpark does not make sense.

 

However, driving down the cost of acquisition to let say 25K (price of Jazz last low).  And driving up the cost of use, let say $100 per trip.  Counterintuitive, people may choose to leave the car behind and take public transportation for regular trips.

 

The car will be reserved for when traveling by public transport is not optimum.  This has been proven in many other countries where the governments cannot even restrict cars like USA.   Low car prices, high public transport density = less congestion.

 

You just need to compare Los Angeles and New York to get a sense of where things will be head if public transport density and coverage is good.  Los Angeles = suburban sprawl, poor public transport coverage/density = massive jams.  New York = compact city, good train/bus network = better traffic.

doubt this principle will work in Singapore, in USA car like a hand phone in Singapore, even a high school student age above 16 can own one, but in Singapore car somehow represent the person's Identity and appearance,

and always a group of motor enthusiasts enjoy driving rather than take public transport, because they don't have enough time driving besides driving to work and shopping  

[Limwsv]

doubt this principle will work in Singapore, in USA car like a hand phone in Singapore, even a high school student age above 16 can own one, but in Singapore car somehow represent the person's Identity and appearance,

and always a group of motor enthusiasts enjoy driving rather than take public transport, because they don't have enough time driving besides driving to work and shopping  

 

Sorry, your arguments don't compute.  The objectives is to make car prices as cheap as USA so even students can afford to own one.  So even a student in Singapore can have a car for his/her identity and appearance.  Just not drive one. 

 

As for the car enthusiasts, whether car prices go down and whether they stop driving or not is not important. They are never the bulk of the population anyway, and we need the bulk of the car driving population off the road and into the public transport.  No one is advocating anyone to stop driving.  Just to make a person think before he needs/wants to drive before he set off.  

 

A diehard enthusiast can continue driving and paying for the privilege to drive.  The super-rich can continue to drive.

[Quantum]

Sorry, your arguments don't compute.  The objectives is to make car prices as cheap as USA so even students can afford to own one.  So even a student in Singapore can have a car for his/her identity and appearance.  Just not drive one. 

 

As for the car enthusiasts, whether car prices go down and whether they stop driving or not is not important. They are never the bulk of the population anyway, and we need the bulk of the car driving population off the road and into the public transport.  No one is advocating anyone to stop driving.  Just to make a person think before he needs/wants to drive before he set off.  

 

A diehard enthusiast can continue driving and paying for the privilege to drive.  The super-rich can continue to drive.

no matter how, COE system can not be abandoned, and cannot increase COE quota anymore, implement OCS soonest,

otherwise Singapore really will become a big carpark, everyone owns a car but cannot drive due to massive jam.   

[Limwsv]

no matter how, COE system can not be abandoned, and cannot increase COE quota anymore, implement OCS soonest,

otherwise Singapore really will become a big carpark, everyone owns a car but cannot drive due to massive jam.   

 

No one is abandoning the COE system, and I don't see why the COE quota cannot be increased?

 

The issue is not with car per se, it's with the congestion cause by cars trying to head towards the same place at the same time.  The right medicine must be applied to the right illness.  If public transport density and coverage is good where most people wants or needs to be, and if cost per trip raise to $100, I think the congestion will solve itself.

[Fcw75]

To me, his definiton of car-lite city mean:

 

Cars are only for the rich and elite, peasants take MRT and buses.

 

Simple.

 

CAPISCE?

Edited December 29, 2015 by Fcw75

[Jman888]

I am just asking a simple question. Anything wrong?

 

 

@Forte3737 & @edwin15

 

if two of you have personal thing to talk, please use PM.