Punggol East By-Election coming ? MP steps down
-
toddles:
NLB gets around 200 million a year from the govt to promote reading. How much do you think SMRT / Comfort Delgro will need? And how is the government going to fund that? More GST? :evil:
On the portion in purple, I think the NLB is an amazing example of an entity with great performance without profit motive.
Why can't the public transport system be similar? Why must excellence be driven by profit motive? -
Irrelevant:
Gahmen give $1.1 bn to SMRT/SBS transit - where does that come from?
NLB gets around 200 million a year from the govt to promote reading. How much do you think SMRT / Comfort Delgro will need? And how is the government going to fund that? More GST? :evil:toddles:
On the portion in purple, I think the NLB is an amazing example of an entity with great performance without profit motive.
Why can't the public transport system be similar? Why must excellence be driven by profit motive? -
Last time got DBS and posb, after one takes the other got less competition lah but my banking charges increase.
-
toddles:
Hmm... divided by ridership... went to search, the figures I could find were on daily ridership in terms of passenger-trips. Does that mean if I take 25 trips a month, it's $200 of profit they make from me a month, or $2400 profit from one commuter a year?[/quote]2012 Annual report
I did the sums somewhere else before. Divided by ridership, equals something like $8+ per month per person that goes into 'profit'.3Boys:
[quote=\"Irrelevant\"]
What record profits are you referring to? :scratchhead:
I've just checked SMRT's annual report. The relevant revenue and profit for the past 3 years are as follows:
FY2010
Revenue: 895.1m Profit: 162.9m
FY2011
Revenue: 969.7m Profit: 161.1m
FY2012
Revenue: 1,057.2m Profit: 119.9m
That's apparently a big deal for the majority.
Help the poor, certainly, but if you can afford, do your social responsibility by paying up and not demanding subsidies.
http://www.smrt.com.sg/Portals/0/PDFs/About%20SMRT/Investor%20Relations/Annual%20Report/2012_SR.pdf
Train ridership = 654.4 Mn
EBIT attributable to trains = $91.0 Mn
Average profit per ride = 91/654.4 = 13.9 cents
Average profit at 20 rides a week (high?) = 13.9 cents x 20 x 4 weeks = $11.12 per month.
According to this, if you take 20 MRT trips a week, you are contributing $11 profit to SMRT per month. So I was off by $3 per month, sorry!
Put another way, if the g'ment now commits to take over SMRT operations and remove profit motive, then we would have returned to the public at large, $91m, or $26 per citizen, for 2012. :rahrah: :rahrah: :rahrah:
SMRT run by civil service :rahrah: :rahrah: :rahrah: ....... -
toddles:
I hire you to work for me for free, can? Or cost recovery model, I pay for your transport, lunch and dinner if OT. :evil:
On the portion in purple, I think the NLB is an amazing example of an entity with great performance without profit motive.
Why can't the public transport system be similar? Why must excellence be driven by profit motive? -
Wah! You guys went on and on without me. I was going to say something too. But I decided to go drink some liang teh instead... :celebrate:
I will let rip on Sunday, or may Saturday night. :nunchuk: -
3Boys:
Errrr....they've dropped their salaries 20%+.
And who are those who \"really need it\"?Mdm Koh:
[quote=\"3Boys\"]
I agree. But an across-the-board subsidy is not the answer is it? Why should taxpayers money be used to subsidise all and sundry when it's better used on those who really need it?
The Ministers do not really need their high salaries but they're still asking for them. I wonder if Singaporeans have become so selfish that we have forgotten our social responsibility.
Take your pick. I'd say bottom 20% by household income would be a good place to start. They already get GST rebates etc.
Why subsidise the MRT fare of the Credit Suisse regional managing director on the way to Robinson Road from his Draycott condo (example only).
I'm fully aware of my social responsibilities, I call for higher income taxes across the board, to fund social programmes.
But I demand rigour to the process, no wasteful subsidies to public transport, healthcare, education and housing, to be abused by those who do not require it but use their vote to demand it (there are plenty of such Singaporeans, believe me).
Give the money to those who are disadvantaged.[/quote]The Credit Suisse guy probably doesn't take the MRT. I think bottom 20% is fair. Actually I don't think more subsidies across the board is the way to go either. But the status quo isn't working too. Time for bolder reforms? -
3Boys:
That is why ministers must be paid millions if you pay only peanuts you get monkies.
I hire you to work for me for free, can? Or cost recovery model, I pay for your transport, lunch and dinner if OT. :evil:toddles:
On the portion in purple, I think the NLB is an amazing example of an entity with great performance without profit motive.
Why can't the public transport system be similar? Why must excellence be driven by profit motive?
-
Mdm Koh:
I know of at least one bank manager living in district 10 who does......
The Credit Suisse guy probably doesn't take the MRT. I think bottom 20% is fair. Actually I don't think more subsidies across the board is the way to go either. But the status quo isn't working too. Time for bolder reforms? -
Punggolian_888:
总理是个非常聪明的人，我也相信总体上，他是一个以新加坡利益挂帅的人。对于他的同事，我就没那么肯定。。。李显龙总理昨晚在榜鹅东区补选最后一夜的行动党群众大会上，重点说明了自独立以来长期执政的行动党政府，在三位总理领导下的不同施政方向，以此针对刘程强日前抨击行动党政府已经变质提出强力的回应。
刘程强在该党前天的群众大会上影射，从行动党原议员、国会议长柏默出问题导致此次榜鹅东举行补选，可看出行动党自历任总理李光耀到吴作栋，再到现任总理李显龙，其国会议员和候选人的素质已今非昔比。
对于刘程强的评价，也是行动党秘书长的总理形容他“说错了二又四分之三。第一、就理念和目标，我们始终坚定不移；第二，就诚信和‘纯洁度’，我们的坚持也始终如一。
总理细致地描述了行动党展现领导能力，同时顺应时代变化的意愿：李光耀时代体现的是一种“严爱”（tough love），政策侧重自力更生，尽管“苛刻、艰苦，但对新加坡的成功大有助益”；吴作栋时代因应不同世代的要求，政策更加柔性，允许更多的社会参与；到了他主政的时期，社会进一步改变，意味他必须大幅度增加社会开支，尤其是在照顾年长人士及社会弱势群体扶助计划方面的投入。
人民行动党政府这些年始终坚守创党以来的理念和诚信，它在政策方面也没有因循守旧，而是以人民利益为依归，因时制宜。因此工人党秘书长刘程强对行动党的改变没有正确的
认知。
总理也说：“我们的政策都是为了惠及新加坡人，这是我们从政的理由。选民是我们的主人。我们的责任是：我们认为什么政策对你们最有利，我们就去做。”
针对刘程强大力抨击这些年来经历蜕变后的行动党政府，其政策总是以经济利益为导向，使新加坡成为一个高度自私与功利主义的社会，总理反驳说：“我们要创造一个蓬勃的经济，不是因为要经济挂帅，而是因为要改善人民的生活。我们认识到经济是其中一个重要的因素，这其实是民生挂帅。而通过发展经济改善民生，是一个可行、成功的政策。”
总理也说：“所以当有人说，私人企业对新加坡人不利，是赚钱的。我听了糊里糊涂，不知道是真是假，好像说得头头是道，仔细想想其实似是而非。（演讲）很激动人心，但冷静想想，如果真的是这样，中国为什么从毛泽东（的封闭）走向邓小平（的改革开放）？从以前一个完全国营化的制度，变成一个社会主义市场经济，有竞争、有盈利、有人赚钱？”
“我们更应该问一问，如果这么做对新加坡人不好，我们是民选政府，行动党需要人民支持，我们为什么要去做这么傻的事情？我们可能有时做错事，但我想我们没有那么愚蠢吧。”
Do you agree on this?? Your thoughts pls..
关键在于总理所说的“我们可能有时做错事”- 行动党打算如何纠正这些错误呢？那些措施真正对症下药吗？
他也说对了这一点，“我们是民选政府，行动党需要人民支持”- 上个大选，不是很明显的显示人民的心声，人民对行动党的失望？从2006 年的 66。6% 降到2011 年的 60。1%选票，但国会里还占有80：6的比例。。。这是人民要的国会吗？
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login
