What is wrong (or not wrong!) with the PAP nowadays?

[pirate]

3Boys:

Napoleon once said, \"I'd rather have a lucky general than a good one.\"

Ok lah. If he/she can demonstrate that he/she is consistently lucky, I will hire him/her. But remind me to take some money off the table before each bet. :evil:

3Boys:

He also did say, \"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap.\"

Wait. You referring to PAP or RP?

[limlim]

pirate:

limlim:

I would be more willing to pay higher fares IF it is not a private entity but a nationalized entity.


bcoz I can be more sure the money and profit goes into running costs and improving the service and not some :censored: rich pple's pocket.

Both SMRT and SBSTransit are majority owned by Temasek. Which :censored: rich pple are you referring to?

If the higher fares are meant to pay the bus drivers, how does it go into the rich pple's pocket? Surely there can be ways, from the regulatory and management standpoint, to make sure it does not go into rich pple's pocket? It is up to the transport regulators to set adequate standards. The transport regulators can, for example, set the standard that 90% of bus drivers must be Singaporeans. It can set safety standards that drivers should not be permitted to drive more than x hours a week. For that, voters can and should hold the regulators and ultimately the transport minister accountable, no?

I feel that this thing about nationalization is barking up the wrong tree.

You don't control how the money is channeled.

And, if it can be realistically treated as govt owned, why everyday talk about profits? public entity shd talk abt covering costs more..

[limlim]

3Boys:

limlim:

[quote=\"3Boys\"]

Tharman said in a speech some time back, nearly half of garment operating budget comes from investment income. That is a truly staggering figure, an incredible feat of fiscal prudence and foresight and discipline.

Any credit given?

Did he talk about losses by TH? And the Lehman investments by TCs?

Any punishment given?

Why should there be? If your stock broker makes 10 calls for you, loses money on 3 and makes money on 7, and turns in a good profit overall, do you take him to court for the 3 he got wrong?

The whole concept is warped.[/quote]No punishment, no credits.. so.... what's the issue?

If he makes wrong move.. it's part and parcel of investment risk.. If he makes right move.. that's his job.. so, unless he is 100% accurate, why shd credits be given?

[limlim]

3Boys:

They'd rather the operations be paid for out of taxpayers pockets than investors pockets.

Yes. For public facility, why not?

[pirate]

limlim:

You don't control how the money is channeled.

But you can.

limlim:

And, if it can be realistically treated as govt owned, why everyday talk about profits? public entity shd talk abt covering costs more..

Because there is nothing wrong with making profits from people who can afford to pay or from foreigners using the service, and channeling the profits directly to more worthy causes, like low income families.

[limlim]

3Boys:

Aiyah, limlim is allergic to private investors taking a dividend off SMRT profits lah!

I just don't like public transport being run as profit-oriented entity.. It's the way it is run.. not about the investors making money..

Don't anyhow accuse me hor..

[limlim]

pirate:

limlim:

You don't control how the money is channeled.

But you can.

limlim:

And, if it can be realistically treated as govt owned, why everyday talk about profits? public entity shd talk abt covering costs more..

Because there is nothing wrong with making profits from people who can afford to pay or from foreigners using the service, and channeling the profits directly to more worthy causes, like low income families.

Why not just increase the income tax than? much simpler.. top earners pay more..

Those who can afford to pay? If they can well afford, they'll be driving cars or take taxis, not take public transport and squeeze!

[pirate]

limlim:

Why not just increase the income tax than? much simpler.. top earners pay more..

How is it simpler? Tourists don't pay income tax leh. Neither do FDWs. :scratchhead:

limlim:

Those who can afford to pay? If they can well afford, they'll be driving cars or take taxis, not take public transport and squeeze!

That's why they have to buy COE and pay ERP. So, nothing wrong with that going up, right? :evil:

Anyways, PMETs can :censored: afford to pay a couple of dollars to travel to work, and another couple of dollars back.

[Iluvmygals]

Seems like going one full circle…we used to talk about how inefficient government bodies are and how waste of resources they are…so we lobby for privatisation of governement agency…so you see transport being privatise, now energy is privatised…


Then after sometimes…service level dropped (probably will also drop if it is not privatised)…and people start to talk bad about privatisation and want to make it governement body again…

Hmmm…the real issue is not whether it is private or public…it is about how it is being run and how the government authority are governing them. Take for example, the fines that was imposed on SMRT. To me I think it is peanuts. The fine need to be heavy enough, the fine should be equal to the many years of maintenance costs that SMRT didnt spend. And the fine should be in terms of rebates back to commuters, not to the government authority. This will set the service provider thinking whether they should save on maintenance and risk a breakdown that will costs them the same, or should just spend upfront on maintenance. To them either way the money will be spend, it is just which one is better. And the government should not benefit from such incidents, the people who suffered should be compensated. Same goes for the telco…

[sinoboy]

pirate:

limlim:

Those who can afford to pay? If they can well afford, they'll be driving cars or take taxis, not take public transport and squeeze!

That's why they have to buy COE and pay ERP. So, nothing wrong with that going up, right? :evil:

Don't boiling frog syndrome leh. Pay high COE and ERP for too long har. Some ERP roads are such a necessity and no amount of ERP increase can increase traffic flow rate. Maybe that is why no more ERP before Braddell. Similarly COE can also be moderated if there is a will to do it.

Public transport companies can make all the profits but they are obliged to give commuters a reliable (and after which a comfortable) transport. Using cheap cable ties to handle extreme loads when the company is making huge profits from commuters and retail property rental? So who is responsible?