Wednesday, April 14, 2010

PAP Govt gets really ridiculous!

Talk about denial mentality in the PAP. This one really takes the cake.....

After the LTA announced that the COEs quotas will be reduced using a new formula for calculating the number of replacement COEs, the price of COE surged by 30% in anticipation of the reduction in the next round of bidding[Link]. When the number of COEs was actually cut, COE prices surged by another 30-40%[Link].

Here is a report of what Minister Lim Hwee Hua said in One Motoring:

"THE spike in certificate of entitlement (COE) premiums and car prices this week was not caused by changes to a formula to determine the number of replacement COEs, Second Transport Minister Lim Hwee Hua said yesterday.
Instead, there are a host of reasons for the spike in the COE prices, including market forces and economic conditions
" - COE spike not due to change in formula

We are expected to believe that a 30% reduction in the number of COEs has nothing to do with the spike in COE prices. In the past few years, ordinary Singaporeans have to suffer from non-stop rapid increase in cost of living. Many lower middle income families that are already financially squeezed and need cars are now have to endure more financial pain to own one - the cost of car ownship and usage in Singapore is the highest in the world. The minister now insults ordinary Singaporeans by treating them like idiots when she gives such a incredulous and illogical explanation just to deny responsibility for spike in COE. I believe Singaporeans deserve better.

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

If you ask Lim Hwee Hua if she is a woman, she will automatically deny it as well.

PAP is on auto denial mode now.

sgcynic said...

At least Lim Hwee Hua didn't fudge the numbers. LOL. PAP ministers specialise in different fields - Mah's expertise is in numbers, Lim's is in logic.

mr spock's logic said...

Lim Hwee Hua fudge the logic, just like our beloved kangaroos passing it off as legal wisdom.

The more ridiculous implies more desperate.

Anonymous said...

If I were Lim Hwee Hua, Mah Bow Tan and the like, I would talk the same or even more ridiculous things. Because I expect to get 98%seats at the next election again.

It's only natural what, right?

If there are no consequences, human beings will even rape and kill, you know. Just look at the Romanian accident case. It happens all over the world

Singaporean in London said...

While I agree that the comment (or conclusion if you will) made by Minister Lim is flawed by any standards, I am wondering what's the rationale of announcing that the quota will be cut going forward and then not expect the current demand to increase as a result.

On a different note, it's interesting to see that Singaporeans as a whole are really dependent on private vehicles given the small size of the island. I can't help but notice that Londoners are less so despite being three times the size of Singapore when Greater London is taken into account.

There could be two main reasons - either the public transport is more reliable or car ownership is more expensive in London. While the network is a bit more extensive over here, it is way less reliable than the network back home (that I can assure you). However, cars are much cheaper here as well (with no COE equivalent).

That said, the £25 congestion charge implemented years back (modelled after S'pore's ERP) helps. After the flat charge was implemented, the number of Londoners travelling by private cars dropped by quite a bit.

Would the same flat charge helps in Singapore as well? Just thinking out loud. Cheers.

Azz said...

Singaporean in London: Could it be that there are much less parkings available?

Anonymous said...

i'm working full-time taking care of two young children. besides ferrying them to and fro school/child care, there are also ccas and various enrichment courses. not to mention that my job takes me to different places in singapore. i'm only middle income, and i really need the car. read: i'm done a spreadsheet to show total costs incurred with or without the car.

i agree with Lucky's suggestion that some consideration shld be made towards a needs-basis, rather than purely monetary or free economic forces (my ass).

why can't each household be made eligible to own only one car, and subsequent cars be taxed much higher?

i'll tell you why, because pap is all about money money money. they ain't gonna make it difficult for themselves to spend the millions of ill-gotten money from the coffers.

Anonymous said...

i'm working full-time taking care of two young children. besides ferrying them to and fro school/child care, there are also ccas and various enrichment courses. not to mention that my job takes me to different places in singapore. i'm only middle income, and i really need the car. read: i'm done a spreadsheet to show total costs incurred with or without the car.

i agree with Lucky's suggestion that some consideration shld be made towards a needs-basis, rather than purely monetary or free economic forces (my ass).

why can't each household be made eligible to own only one car, and subsequent cars be taxed much higher?

i'll tell you why, because pap is all about money money money. they ain't gonna make it difficult for themselves to spend the millions of ill-gotten money from the coffers.

Anonymous said...

I think the issue is not of need i.e. owning a car. Maybe it is more of a desire.

Though Londoners may not depend on private transport that much to get into the busy areas of London, it does not mean they do not own cars.

I think owning a car is sort of something out of prestige, convenience or other reasons. I feel that the crux of this issue of car ownership is more of a psychological impetus of having choices for yourself.

Researchers sort of agree that being happy in life is being in control of your life or feeling important or purposeful. If you are a Londoner who lives in the outskirts of the city, you can easily drive or decide to take the public transport into the busy areas. That itself, gives the Londoner more choices in life as he could still afford a car.

In Singapore, if you cannot afford, then dun think so much. I feel it is too complex to think about the nitty gritties. But hey, we are all humans! : )

However, I still think it still boils down to quality of life, cost of life etc etc.

Nevertheless, the answer from the Minister is still crappy.

Anonymous said...

Actually its the same logic for COE and HDB. PRs taking 20% of flats do not cause flat price to rise. Similarly, 30% reduction in COE supply do not cause prices to rise. Only when the percentage is 100% will the factor be recognized as a cause for price increase

Anonymous said...

Dear Lucky Tan,

As an avid reader of your blog I do agree on your last sentence that 'Singaporeans deserve better'.

However Singaporeans do not have any options because any politician that stands up to come up with better plans get jailed and/or bankrupted.

Chia Thye Poh - proposed separation of executive powers. 32 yrs jailed

Said Zahari - independent newspaper. Jailed 17yrs.

Marxist conspirators - proposed better working conditions for maids. Jailed and tortured.

JBJ - to amend the land act for equitable compensation. If not mistaken he also talked about threading carefully with GST.

CSJ - human rights issue. Freedom of expression to have different opinions.

Pres. OTC - was stonewalled for trying to quantify our reserves. As a result, He wasn't given a proper sending off.

The Chinese has a saying that to scare away the monkeys kill a chicken.

Some singaporeans don't even have the opportunity to vote!!!

So Lucky Tan, my question is how can Singaporeans deserve better when they are not given any options to choose a different path?

Who is the chosen one to lead us against tyranny ?

Cheers
Economist with a heart :)

Anonymous said...

Lucky is right, that THE spike in certificate of entitlement (COE) premiums and car prices this week was not caused by changes to a formula to determine the number of replacement COEs, doesnt seems to make sense. I think the missing word, alone or sentence, by themselves, shud have been included. Perhaps a slip of tongue?

Anonymous said...

Mr Lucky

//
I believe Singaporeans deserve better.
//

Why?
Singaporeans are getting exactly what they voted for.
Assuming the opposition were targeting the weakest links ... u could say that more than 66.6% are in favor of getting screwed.

Hmm ... maybe thats why Singaporeans are not having sex with their spouses and have more babies?

Anonymous said...

@"Dear Lucky Tan, As an avid reader of your blog I do agree on your last sentence that 'Singaporeans deserve better'. However Singaporeans do not have any options because any politician that stands up to come up with better plans get jailed and/or bankrupted.
Chia Thye Poh - proposed separation of executive powers. 32 yrs jailed ..."

I used to be extremely critical of the quality of the oppositions but having seen what had happened over the years now I would give my vote to any opposition. I feel that anyone who is brave enough to stand for election under the circumstances deserves my vote.

Anonymous said...

I think the main thing is the ridiculous state of SIngapores public transport. A bus loops through an entire estate in an extremely convoulted manner. I bet no other country has a bus service that requires 1hr to link to estates seperated by 10km.

Anonymous said...

Lucky,

Let's be realistic. A new Honda Jazz in the USA costs USD15k. If you add accessories say, plus USD3k, total USD18k or SGD25k.

A new Honda Jazz in Singapore costs SGD85K.

You tell me how much money goes to Honda&Co. and how much money goes to PAP.

Still people are willing to pay and pay while PAP continues to keching!

Anonymous said...

Singaporeans don't deserve better.

We deserve the BEST! With the money we are paying these idiots to run the country, we don't deserve to be fed crap day in and day out.

What we need is a better leader - we need to hire Obama to run this country. Someone who is intelligent, charismatic, and above all, COMPASSIONATE.

Anonymous said...

I feel that some of the points mentioned by Lucky are quite valid, but as a whole this blog look more like a anti-pap blog to me. it'll be good if blogger can provide a more neutral view.

Anonymous said...

Minister Lim Hwee Hua and all her colleagues were never wrong whenever and where they explained their policies.

The sins and wrongs were/are all committed by majority of the voters in the past.

CAN IT BE UNDONE IN THE NEXT(COMING) ELECTION ? THE DECISION IS YOURS TO MAKE.

patriot

Anonymous said...

Dear 14/4/10 23:44,

It is not that Lucky's blog is anti-PAP. But the PAP has been anti-Singaporean. Think about it this way: they made you a NS slave, locked your CPF tighter and tighter due to ill policies, and let in throngs of foreigners to step over you. Look at the recent reply from Merril-Lynch...they lost big on property...and they tell you in the face they are in it for the long term....standard Lee Kuan Yew's reply. Lee sold you to Wall St if you haven't realised it.

What better evidence as anti-Singaporean? Get rid of the PAP, now or never.

Anonymous said...

Lim Hwee Hua cannot make it one. She is in same GRC as George Yeo. During 2006 GE i went to the PAP rally to kaypoh. Both yeo and her are bureaucrats, they are not cut out to be politicians. Rally speeches machiam like corporate briefing and read from paper. Can see she is so uncomfortable on stage, totally weak and uninspiring, unconvincing as a leader.

Anonymous said...

Do people still need cars if public transport is good? Currently, public transport takes 3 times as long as a car and 3 times more uncomfortable. Air vents filled with soot, smelly buses, overcrowding, too many transfers, long winding routes, long waiting times. The problems AND solutions are too obvious, but no leaders are interested in solving them because they need to protect the profits of transport companies. Perhaps they also prefer people to buy cars as it is an easy source of tax income for the government.

Anonymous said...

Each and every time, our parliamentarians come to defend or explain their policies, THEY NEVER FAIL TO SHOW THEIR INCONSIDERATE AND CALLOUS MANNERS. IT'S ALWAYS COLD LOGICS, PRAGMATIC REASONS AND DENIALS.

INDEED RIDICULOUS AND IRRESPONSIBLE! ! !

patriot

run road said...

One correlation-causation thing's for sure: a 30% reduction in PAP's vote will bring about a sea-change in their arrogance towards you and me, the people who pay for their inflated wages and grand lifestyles. It's hardly brain surgery, is it? When the golden rice bowl begins to spring a leak is when you get PAP's undivided attention. In a democracy it is the government that ought to be afraid of the people, not vice versa.

The only question is whether the electorate is willing to drop their me-first greed and vote in politicians who will speak up for them without fear, without favour. There is only one political party that has no fear of LKY and will stare eyeball-to-eyeball at PAP without flinching, and we all know who that is. That is what our moribund Parliament desperately needs. The other opposition parties are the equivalent of PAP pet goldfish - irrelevant. They have achieved nothing in the last decade and will achieve the same in the next.

Really, the ball is entirely in the Singaporean voter's court. Let us see whether the pain of this LHL administration has finally reached an intolerable point or whether there is still some more apathy to be wrung out of the system. When the vote is finally counted in the coming election, Singaporeans will have chosen their fate for better or worse. It will be their last chance to make a difference before being drowned in the tide of FT new citizens.

Anonymous said...

"Singaporeans deserve better"

Yes. HERE!

Have you not had enough, you Strawberries?

Anonymous said...

I think PAP has been quite consistent with their logic (doesn't mean it is right):
1. COE price has got nothing to do with reduction in its supply.
2. Bus fair has got nothing to do with reduction in fuel prices (I guess applicable only when the fuel price is dropping).

Anonymous said...

I don't agree there should be a "needs basis" for car allocation. I suspect those who argue for needs basis are those with children because their little prince and princesses need to be ferried around everywhere for enrichment class A to Z and cannot take school bus. What about singles? They don't "need" cars simply because they don't have spoilt children? What about singles having to fetch their aged parents around or have special interest in cars? Or should we allocate cars to localities with bad public transport system while areas well served like Ang Moh Kio cannot buy a car? A car is NEVER a need - it is a want in a small country like SG. And how much money you are willing to pay for one reflects how badly you wanted it. This is the fairest system. No government should play God and decide who deserve a nice car or not. Let's not go down that slippery path. And school going children can take public tranport or school bus. I used to do that when I was a child. Why can't the children nowadays just learn to cope? But I do agree our government has been VERY SLOW in building out our MRT network - many areas are not covered and you cannot blame people for buying cars when their home area is not well served by public transport.

lim said...

@anon 15/4/10 10:09

>>"A car is NEVER a need - it is a want in a small country like SG."

Wait until you have your own family and you will think otherwise..

Imagine buying bags of groceries, imagine your kid developing a high fever in the middle of the night.. Imagine working in jurong, and rushing to fetch your kid in childcare in sengkang by 7pm..

Sure, you can always argue that there are ways to solve these issues (whether reasonable or unreasonable), such as wait in line for taxis for groceries shopping, call taxi, or ambulance when your kid have fever, call taxi to rush to pick your kid up by 7pm every workday.. Or become a stay-at-home dad/mum, so no need for childcare, or become a doctor to treat your kid yourself, etc...

But for a family with young kids and elderly parents, a car is a necessity..

coming back to lim hwee hua's remark, is it a coincident that coe price should rise just when formula is tweaked?

DidPAPcalledmeDAFT? said...

Anon 21:18 said:

"why can't each household be made eligible to own only one car, and subsequent cars be taxed much higher?"

I agree with this strongly. This can be done if you don't shortchanged Singaporeans by overloading cheap FTs here. As a Singaporean in Japan, I learned that many japanese own a car and a bicycle. Many japanese women ride bikes and some own a bike and a car. I'm talking about people earning 3k sing dollars a month. Japanese can easily buy a second-hand car and keep it for life.

The government has created this COE not to reduce the usage of cars in the country. If they wanted to reduce that, they would not have overtaxed the roads with more and more FTs. If they wanted to discourage road usage, they would have set an example themselves not to buy a car. But they didn't. They are driving cars and being chauffered while you are left on the shelf. Singapore can easily afford cheap cars and second-hand cars for life. Many people in the world do so including Malaysia.

Why the fuck is the fucking PAP hypocrites and liars making use of COEs and ERPs to make money from the people?

One rule for them and another rule for us. The Lee dynasty is getting ruder, bolder, shrewder and stupidier.

Anonymous said...

Maybe someone can ask the old man when he grace the re-opening of Tekka market come this weekend (heck u should see the royal tentage)...but pls don't try to shake his hand - he doesn't like that.

Anonymous said...

How can we have a expensive donkey who doesn't even understand basic of demand and supply ? Who is the sole controller of the supply in COE ? It is none other than the government, and the government who control the supply says that it is nothing to do with the supplier but only blame on those who demand ?

WTF we have all these pappies insulting the intelligence of all Singaporeans. Vote those clowns out please !!!

next, they will tell you that cost of living and price hike has nothing to do with GST increase from 7% to 10% !

Bloody assholes !!!

Anonymous said...

Lim Hwee Hua is correct that the "formula" does not change.

The 30% factor for reduction is called as "parameter".

Not that I am pro-PAP, but this time I have to say she is correct.

Anonymous said...

The PAP are brilliant - they invent the COE formula, Ministerial Salary formula.

Which government in this world does that? It's a disgrace to maths. these assholes are using maths to fatten themselves while screwing you.

Anonymous said...

Our Minister's bonuses are somehow linked to the performance of the COE bids. The higher the bids, the bigger the bonuses.

As far as the motor traders are concerned, it is in their self interest to secure a COE, never mind who is paying for it.

The one who bears the consequences from this system is the one ending up paying for it.

Do you think the PAP Minister will give a damn if the COE goes up ?

Alan Wong said...

The Ministerial Salary formula itself is a real scam abusing the very trust that our PAP govt claims to have earned from its citizens.

Have we ever witnessed any Country, Corporation or Company who claims to practice meritocracy but yet have to announce to the world that they need to peg their Directors' salaries to some outsiders in order to continue performing its duties or responsibilities ?

Isn't this a direct shortcut by hijacking the achievement and sweat of successful professionals ? And they still have the guts to call it meritocracy ?

What a joke, these shameless liars!

Anonymous said...

Dear Lucky,

Lim Hwee Hua did not say the surge in prices had nothing to do with the drop in COE supply. She simply said it has nothing to do with the change in the formula for computing COE supply, i.e. both formulas would have had the same result of reducing COE supply if they worked as intended, and thus prices would surge either way.
However, she neglected to say that the new formula eliminated the key element of LTA's chronic failure to predict the future ==> reduced COE supply ==> surge in prices. Therefore, the new formula is directly responsible for surging COE prices

Anonymous said...

Parking can be an issue in London at times... People who live in the city centre (not only London) like students in rented apartments, loves to sell off the parking that comes with the property (if there is one)...

Honestly speaking, perhaps because Singapore is a small country, the network coverage and accessibility from one place to another is easily done... It is quite reliable as well, generally speaking... In London, trains can get suddenly delayed by 30mins and station closures (impromptu)...

There are pros and cons of the transportation in Singapore thou if comparision to other countries...

But no doubt, when something is in high demand and supply is cut-low, of course the pricing for that something will shoot-up cos everyone wants to grab it or sellers see it as a opporunity to make more money... Its a natural business thing...

Lim Hwee Hua can't deny that the COE jumps is not because of the goverment policy...

Anonymous said...

Hi

Just have to post this here. I support opposition until TOC decides to be a house for bigots and racists. They are silent on bigotry. Look at what they allowed to be posted and this posting of mine was put on permanent hold thus censored.

Posting cewnsored: By A Bystander So Far

TOC, you have incredibly mature discussion here dont you? I like the fact that you allow these idiots to continue to make fools of themselves to the point that they dont dare use the same posting names in other discussions. More hypocrisy, more bigotries. I was feeling sorry for them in the other discusssions, but now I really really just feel sorry for them. Ego damaged so they have to hit out at Dana. I do think this is a place that breeds hypocrisy as one of the postings had pointed out.

qinbincai123 said...

If you were a teardrop; In my eye, For fear of losing you, I would never cry.
And if the golden sun, Should cease to hiehwfdh shine its light, Just one smile from you,
Would make my whole world bright.
Wholesale New Era Hats
Cheap 59fifty Hats
Cheap New Era Hats
New Era Snapback Hats
New Era Fitted Hats

Hebertsmjh said...

I think the main thing is the ridiculous state of SIngapores public transport. A bus loops through an entire estate in an extremely convoulted manner. I bet no other country has a bus service that requires 1hr to link to estates seperated by 10km.