注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

论老子

道,领导也。领导必需要不断呼唤,教导下属以及以身作则。下属的过和错皆因领导懒惰。

 
 
 

日志

 
 

Feedback to ensure greater equity among car buyers  

2013-05-17 14:27:09|  分类: SQ: Selfless Quo |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

SINGAPORE 16 May, 2013, by Woo Sian Boon — “The authorities are looking into improving the existing Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system to ensure greater equity among car buyers, said Minister for Transport Lui Tuck Yew at a visit to the Marina Coastal Expressway this morning.

Views from the public and stakeholders will be sought in consultations starting next month and a final decision made later this year.”

These were extracted from url http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/coe-system-be-improved#inside.

 

I am a Singaporean. Would I be consulted?

Please allow me to be the first to write my unsolicited inputs.

Who are the stakeholders?

In my mind, here is the list of stakeholders: average citizens who use the MRT, bus and taxi, private car owners, car dealers and the Singapore government.

Please let me first spray pepper into your eyes. Please read “When your government robs you in every conceivable ways.” at http://ericwoonct.blog.163.com/blog/static/181911362201210191306338/  This blog explains how the stakeholders who are the average citizens who use the MRT, bus and taxi are badly affected.

Car dealers’ interest is plain simple. The higher the final price of the cars sold the higher the revenue is for them. Even the car sales agents are going to pick up more commissions from the banks based on higher amount of car loans and from the insurance companies based on a much higher value of the sum insured for the cars.

Private car owners’ interest is also plain simple. The lower the final car price (if the COE price is near zero, so much) the better.

Now, what are the interests of the PAP-led government?

1.       CEO has been contributing several, if not tens of billions to its coffer annually.

2.       Car excise duty and etc contribute billions of dollars, if not more than the contributions from COE.

3.       Corporate tax from the exceptionally profitable car dealers.

4.       Blatantly push for profit-maximization on all forms of mostly GLC-owned transport companies despite these so-called public-listed companies are pure monopolies or oligopolies.

Please let me pick this simple definition for “corruption”: Improper and usually unlawful conduct intended to secure a benefit for oneself or another. Its forms include bribery, extortion and the misuse of inside information.

May I ask?

1.       When the PAP-led government intends to secure benefit for itself, is that called, corruption?

2.       The COE is a world-first tool (sadly, passed in a rubber-stamping Parliament) to extort more money from the car buyers. Is this corruption?

3.       The government misuses inside information and hides information that paints a bad picture of the COE scheme. Is this corruption? If you do not understand how this was done, please read “How the Lee dynasty fools its citizens” at url http://ericwoonct.blog.163.com/blog/static/18191136220134202656928/

4.       Minister for Transport Lui Tuck Yew is paid more than a million dollars a year. Is that bribery? I reserve my comment.

Okay! Stop the rubbish talk whether the Singapore government is the most corrupted or not. Note: Corruption does not apply to people only. It applies to any entity; both private and public entity. The government is a public entity. 

You may ask me: “Singapore is so tiny with limited land space to build roads. What would you suggest?”

May I ask aspiring car-owners?

1.       Would you want to buy a car with 100% cash upfront? Pros: I can assure you the car price will be very much lower, comparable to car price sold in North America, or Japan. Cons: Most of you could not afford to buy a car, based on current price level which was artificially jacked up with the slew of government policies that were implemented single-mindedly to rob and rob you in every conceivable way.

2.       Would you like to buy a car with 1$ down-payment, and take a 10 years installment plan car loan? Pros: You can own a car now. Cons: You bear the burden of paying the installment over ten years after signing the contract at sky-high price for your dreamed car.

This is a viable 3-step approach to solve the car ownership problem.

Step 1: All car buyers must pay 100% cash upfront without taking any car loan. The car price will dive to less than one-third, if not a fifth of the current selling price. The successful bid price for COE could be as low as $1.

Step 2: If the number of quota is not filled (say for the last one or three month), lower the requirement to pay upfront cash from 100% to 90%. The balance 10% is in the form of car loan. More aspiring car buyers can afford it. The successful bid price for COE could be near $1.

Step 3: Repeat step 2 by lowering the requirement for cash upfront by 10% (smaller step of 5% if necessary). Please take note of this interesting point. If the successful bid price for COE ranges from $1,000 to $5,000, I assume the percentage of cash up-front payment is about right. In this case, the COE is turned into a tool that helps us (not merely the Singapore government) to monitor the right level of cash upfront payment to buy a car.

This solution definitely achieves the following.

1.       The Singapore government has to drop its intention to rob the car buyers, but focus on ensuring the rate of growth in the car does not cause congestion. This is the true mission of the Transport ministry. Robbing the car buyers is definitely not a noble mission.

2.       The car dealers and banks would not be able to extract bloody obscene profits at the expense of the car buyers.

Let me introduce another solution here.

Bus and taxi should not pay for the COE and possibly, import tax or excise duties. They are public transport vehicle. Since both bus and taxis serve the people, they should not be instruments that serve the government, especially, in enriching the coffer of the government. I do not mind if the number of taxis doubles at the expense of private cars. With more buses and taxis plying the road, fully-satisfied commuters would not think of buying a private car, so long the commuters feel flagging down a taxi and travelling from point A to B is no hassle, say, finding a car park lot or paying for largely expensive parking rate. Excellent public transport system certainly leads to less people thinking of owning a private car.

Please let me bring to your attention this principle. Extracted from

 http://ericwoonct.blog.163.com/blog/static/181911362201331505313606/

LP203]He who leads for the sake of everyone in the world is akin to a game of archery where he shoots arrows with a bow at a target (target archery).

·         [LP203a]To those people whose standard of living is higher than the average, it is necessary to suppress their standard of living a little.

·         [LP203b]To those people whose standard of living is far below that of the average people, it is necessary to raise their standard of living.

·         [LP203c]It is absolutely necessary for the higher income earners to pay income tax. On the contrary,

 [LP203d]The low income earner or people with no income should be supplemented with subsidies or financial help or corresponding assistances.                  
  评论这张
 
阅读(295)| 评论(0)
推荐

历史上的今天

在LOFTER的更多文章

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017