If i were the Minister for Transport....

[Philipkee]

Let's have a thread on this since I believe a lot of MCFers want cheaper cars and I am sure they have suggestions and people who are in the ministry probably will be reading the forums. I start off first.

 

1). Incentivise regular car owners with rebates on their road tax for every calendar week their car does not go through an Erp gantry. I did suggest this but they say that they do not believe in rewarding drivers for not driving.

 

2). Have a 5 year COE instead. This can work like OPC. You bid for your car first using normal channels then of you wish for 5 year COE, you get rebates 50% off COE like how OPC get rebated the $17000.

 

And a 5 year old de registered car can probably fetch a higher value in the export market so its not like a waste of good car.

 

3). Pay as you bid. Similar to my other thread. I think the problem with the shanghai model is that there will be last minute bids. I would suggest a different way. Put up the number of quotas. Do not reveal real time number of bids or current lowest winning amount. Reveal it only after bidding has stopped. This will make bidders more cautious but no jamming of system since even ten seconds before the bid closed, no one knows the winning amount.

 

Anyone has other suggestions?

Edited January 7, 2016 by Philipkee

[Mason016]

Let's have a thread on this since I believe a lot of MCFers want cheaper cars and I am sure they have suggestions and people who are in the ministry probably will be reading the forums. I start off first.

 

1). Incentivise regular car owners with rebates on their road tax for every calendar week their car does not go through an Erp gantry. I did suggest this but they say that they do not believe in rewarding drivers for not driving.

 

2). Have a 5 year COE instead. This can work like OPC. You bid for your car first using normal channels then of you wish for 5 year COE, you get rebates 50% off COE like how OPC get rebated the $17000.

 

3). Pay as you bid. Similar to my other thread. I think the problem with the shanghai model is that there will be last minute bids. I would suggest a different way. Put up the number of quotas. Do not reveal real time number of bids or current lowest winning amount. Reveal it only after bidding has stopped. This will make bidders more cautious but no jamming of system since even ten seconds before the bid closed, no one knows the winning amount.

 

Anyone has other suggestions?

 

Decrease purchase cost, increase cost of use.

[Wt_know]

support 100% ... a brand new Porsche 911 should be priced at usd$90k

can buy keep at home and drive at night or to msia

 

Decrease purchase cost, increase cost of use.

 

Edited January 7, 2016 by Wt_know

[Weez911]

support 100% ... a brand new Porsche 911 should be priced at usd$90k

can buy keep at home and drive at night or to msia

 

ha, if 911 is USD90k, then by the time you drive to 2nd link, it would have cost you S$200 liao via various GPS or ERP gantries.

 

Although it will still be better driving there in a picanto paying the same S$200.

Edited January 7, 2016 by Weez911

[Silklee]

Do nothing, earn my millions and then retire after one term?

[Piyopico]

I will keep the existing system and just tweak it with OCS.

 

 

Maintain the same COE for every year, with a variance of 10% at most. This way, it does not matter when you scrap or change cars. Got moolah, buy. Dun need to time it or have the feast and famine cycle.

 

Cars are luxuries. Rolexes and LVs too. 

 

Itz just that we dun wan to accept it.

 

 

[Wt_know]

it's ok ... i cheapskate ... i will drive out at 1-2am when the erp rate is cheapest ... may be 50% discount? lol

 

ha, if 911 is USD90k, then by the time you drive to 2nd link, it would have cost you S$200 liao via various GPS or ERP gantries.

 

Although it will still be better driving there in a picanto costing S$200.

 

[Soya]

support 100% ... a brand new Porsche 911 should be priced at usd$90k

can buy keep at home and drive at night or to msia

 

Ahemmmm.....the green eye monsters will cry farder marder and say 911 owner shld pay $50 per km for use while their (entitled) needs shld be free or becoz of their (entitled) situation, gahment shld pay them.

[Wt_know]

it's not that we don't want to accept it

it's the roller coaster supply of coe that makes everyone think they can time the market

if coe is at a constant level with a variation of $2k-$3k ... then there will not be so many coe threads liao

although the constant level still can yoyo up/down during crisis but still better than simi coe projection and whats not

best is quota for each category is fixed for 12 months

 

I will keep the existing system and just tweak it with OCS.

 

 

Maintain the same COE for every year, with a variance of 10% at most. This way, it does not matter when you scrap or change cars. Got moolah, buy. Dun need to time it or have the feast and famine cycle.

 

Cars are luxuries. Rolexes and LVs too. 

 

Itz just that we dun wan to accept it.

 

Edited January 7, 2016 by Wt_know

[Ingenius]

I suggest to fulfil Singaporean's aspiration of car ownership and yet don't add to congestion, to have a new category of Off-peak car , in green plate. These green plate cars can only be driven only during off peak only strictly, and doesn't have the option to pay daily license to drive during non-off-peak period under any circumstances.  This will be a win-win situation as people who don't drive to car, can have a car to use for leisure.

[Piyopico]

I suggest to fulfil Singaporean's aspiration of car ownership and yet don't add to congestion, to have a new category of Off-peak car , in green plate. These green plate cars can only be driven only during off peak only strictly, and doesn't have the option to pay daily license to drive during non-off-peak period under any circumstances. This will be a win-win situation as people who don't drive to car, can have a car to use for leisure.

This won't work.

 

There will be too many such cars taking up valuable resources and parking space.

 

An alternative is to slap a tax on cars that are underutilized. Example extra $5000 a year if mileage below 10,000km.

 

For those who need off peak cars, there is always uber and car sharing. Our island simply cannot afford to keep a resident fleet of little used cars.

[Wt_know]

based on The Future Of Us Exhibition ... this aint the plan ... lol

 

I suggest to fulfil Singaporean's aspiration of car ownership and yet don't add to congestion, to have a new category of Off-peak car , in green plate. These green plate cars can only be driven only during off peak only strictly, and doesn't have the option to pay daily license to drive during non-off-peak period under any circumstances.  This will be a win-win situation as people who don't drive to car, can have a car to use for leisure.

 

sharing of resources is the "future of us" ... it's coming ...

if can hdb also share ... like capsule hotel ... you move in ... you move out ... based on period ... lol

good for single professional ... the unit is standard template ... just need to pull luggage in/out

 

This won't work.

There will be too many such cars taking up valuable resources and parking space.

An alternative is to slap a tax on cars that are underutilized. Example extra $5000 a year if mileage below 10,000km.

For those who need off peak cars, there is always uber and car sharing. Our island simply cannot afford to keep a resident fleet of little used cars.

 

Edited January 7, 2016 by Wt_know

[Nzy]

This won't work.

 

There will be too many such cars taking up valuable resources and parking space.

 

An alternative is to slap a tax on cars that are underutilized. Example extra $5000 a year if mileage below 10,000km.

 

For those who need off peak cars, there is always uber and car sharing. Our island simply cannot afford to keep a resident fleet of little used cars.

 

This wouldn't work also. Those who own multiple cars or mileage very low will probably be the rich ppl, they won't mind paying more to keep these cars. And the govt wants to reduce congestion, your idea will make congestion worse cuz some people will have to drive just for the sake of hitting the mileage.

[Daryllim69]

Let me share my thoughts on this matter.

 

I agree with the Government on the control over vehicle growth as we are running out of land to build more roads. Thus, if vehicle growth rate is not controlled, our roads will become more congested. I also agree that regardless the improvements of our public transportation system here in Singapore, car ownership is and shall remain as a national and personal aspiration.

 

The flaw in the current COE system is that it creates more income inequality as the rich, who can afford higher COEs gets to enjoy the luxury of owning more cars than necessary while the not so well to do ones, sweat at staggering car ownership costs. If the government is indeed right to say that the implementation of COE is not the squeeze more money out of Singaporeans but as a tool to control vehicle growth rate, I am suggesting that we scrap the current COE Bidding System. That does not mean that you can buy a car without a valid COE. 

 

I am suggesting that COEs be ration out to all Singaporean families based on family size and not monthly household income. For instance, a family of 4 is given one COE while a family of 6 to 7 be given two. All the COEs ration is to be given out free.   As such, if your family cannot afford a car, then the COE ration to that family can be auction in the open market. If you are rich and need more cars than that of what you have been rationed, go and get one from the open market at a price where seller is willing to let go and buyer is willing to pay for. The transacted COE may last for 10 years and thereafter return to the rightful family. This way, the poor family may get a income boost by forgoing their right to own a vehicle and drive on the road. Because of this, government may also reduce on the amount of subsidies and financial assistance given to families of lower income group.

 

It is a more equitable way of maintaining the income gap between the rich and the poor. The rich gets to pay for more than the bare necessity to the poor that is struggling to make ends meet.

 

 

[Hibeam2]

An institution that I was attached to in US encourage staff not to drive by:

- giving free annual public transport passes to full-time staff without cars (--> those who dont have car will not see the need to have one)

- giving cash incentive to car owners for those who don't work. (--> those who have car are encouraged not to drive). Money comes from those who drive and need purchase season parking each month.

- making cycling safe and enjoyable: dedicated cycling lanes for bicycles around the campus. public transport (all trains and buses) have bicycle racks. enough parking lots for bicycle. 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2016 by Hibeam2

[Jman888]

Let me share my thoughts on this matter.

 

I agree with the Government on the control over vehicle growth as we are running out of land to build more roads. Thus, if vehicle growth rate is not controlled, our roads will become more congested. I also agree that regardless the improvements of our public transportation system here in Singapore, car ownership is and shall remain as a national and personal aspiration.

 

The flaw in the current COE system is that it creates more income inequality as the rich, who can afford higher COEs gets to enjoy the luxury of owning more cars than necessary while the not so well to do ones, sweat at staggering car ownership costs. If the government is indeed right to say that the implementation of COE is not the squeeze more money out of Singaporeans but as a tool to control vehicle growth rate, I am suggesting that we scrap the current COE Bidding System. That does not mean that you can buy a car without a valid COE. 

 

I am suggesting that COEs be ration out to all Singaporean families based on family size and not monthly household income. For instance, a family of 4 is given one COE while a family of 6 to 7 be given two. All the COEs ration is to be given out free.   As such, if your family cannot afford a car, then the COE ration to that family can be auction in the open market. If you are rich and need more cars than that of what you have been rationed, go and get one from the open market at a price where seller is willing to let go and buyer is willing to pay for. The transacted COE may last for 10 years and thereafter return to the rightful family. This way, the poor family may get a income boost by forgoing their right to own a vehicle and drive on the road. Because of this, government may also reduce on the amount of subsidies and financial assistance given to families of lower income group.

 

It is a more equitable way of maintaining the income gap between the rich and the poor. The rich gets to pay for more than the bare necessity to the poor that is struggling to make ends meet.

 

 

if everything have to be ration, then no different from communism liao, this is a free (unfair) world.

[Jman888]

An institution that I was attached to in US encourage staff not to drive by:

- giving free annual public transport passes to full-time staff without cars (--> those who dont have car will not see the need to have one)

- giving cash incentive to car owners for those who don't work. (--> those who have car are encouraged not to drive). Money comes from those who drive and need purchase season parking each month.

- making cycling safe and enjoyable: dedicated cycling lanes for bicycles around the campus. public transport (all trains and buses) have bicycle racks. enough parking lots for bicycle. 

 

 

 

this is initiate by companies not the minister. 

[Mason016]

Let me share my thoughts on this matter.

 

I agree with the Government on the control over vehicle growth as we are running out of land to build more roads. Thus, if vehicle growth rate is not controlled, our roads will become more congested. I also agree that regardless the improvements of our public transportation system here in Singapore, car ownership is and shall remain as a national and personal aspiration.

 

The flaw in the current COE system is that it creates more income inequality as the rich, who can afford higher COEs gets to enjoy the luxury of owning more cars than necessary while the not so well to do ones, sweat at staggering car ownership costs. If the government is indeed right to say that the implementation of COE is not the squeeze more money out of Singaporeans but as a tool to control vehicle growth rate, I am suggesting that we scrap the current COE Bidding System. That does not mean that you can buy a car without a valid COE. 

 

I am suggesting that COEs be ration out to all Singaporean families based on family size and not monthly household income. For instance, a family of 4 is given one COE while a family of 6 to 7 be given two. All the COEs ration is to be given out free.   As such, if your family cannot afford a car, then the COE ration to that family can be auction in the open market. If you are rich and need more cars than that of what you have been rationed, go and get one from the open market at a price where seller is willing to let go and buyer is willing to pay for. The transacted COE may last for 10 years and thereafter return to the rightful family. This way, the poor family may get a income boost by forgoing their right to own a vehicle and drive on the road. Because of this, government may also reduce on the amount of subsidies and financial assistance given to families of lower income group.

 

It is a more equitable way of maintaining the income gap between the rich and the poor. The rich gets to pay for more than the bare necessity to the poor that is struggling to make ends meet.

 

Our government crafts policies based on a) prevent moral hazard b) prevent tragedy of the commons c) minimize administrative rules d) minimize costs e) let the market set the price

 

Family sizes can be gamed. Allowing the "free coe" to be sold back is a tragedy of the commons.  It then makes more people to have bigger families in order to make money. Then when their "free money" disappears, their level of disposable income can drop to levels where the government must then subsidize via work fare or some other mechanism.

 

It also encourages 3 year marriages of convenience where the couple divorces after those 3 years stating not living together and get free COE money.  Not a good idea. 

 

Issue of administrative rules as how to determine what is big family.  Government set COE price? Or buyers and sellers?

 

Lots of headaches for the government.