Fare Increase in Disguise

[Goh Meng Seng]

So this is perfect. Even if what GMS says is true, majority of commuters pay less (even if it's only 2.5% less). Minority pay more (according to GMS, it's 25% more). Company makes more. Majority of commuters pay less.

Most people happy. But GMS doesn't understand. He die die wants Company to lugi then he satisfied.

Cass,

I have put forward to you and will say it again, if that is so, why don't just let all fares down by 2.5% since this is the "target" reduction in fare collections by the public transport companies? In so doing, EVERYBODY 100% will enjoy lower fare! You mean you only want your 70% happy but not EVERYBODY? Warp logic.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[cass888]

Cass,

I have put forward to you and will say it again, if that is so, why don't just let all fares down by 2.5% since this is the "target" reduction in fare collections by the public transport companies? In so doing, EVERYBODY 100% will enjoy lower fare! You mean you only want your 70% happy but not EVERYBODY? Warp logic.

Goh Meng Seng

You are the one with the warped logic, Mr Secretary General. LTA did not say: Hey transport companies, we're going to force a losing proposition on you. LTA did not say: hey commuters, we're reducing fares 100% across the board. What LTA said is, transport companies, charge something fairer. Fair usually means some win, some lose. Of course your attempt at popularism, you are not satisfied until the transport company loses.

Why not harp on that at the next GE? Better to make sure you don't get that NCMP seat when there are more deserving people who will research an entire argument through rather than just anyhow hantum like you.

 

[hitower]

I believe that being a Public Transport company should be balance in this way.

A Public Transportation company should Offer the cheapest best transportation for public and the same time surviving during this cause since there is no grant from the government.

And since the public transport company is already proving that they are making money, why the changes, what is their objective? The next question is to ask whether how many commuters really benefits to this scheme.

All the above questions will be answered in a few months time or end financial year. Assuming that the company is making more than is projected then the answer is very clear in this case. Most of commuters do not benefit in this scheme, and the company objective to bring in more profit for the shareholder with the expense of the commuters.

 

[RonRon]

Why not harp on that at the next GE? Better to make sure you don't get that NCMP seat when there are more deserving people who will research an entire argument through rather than just anyhow hantum like you.

Cass, GMS already announced on national TV CNA that he will not take up NCMP seat

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

You are the one with the warped logic, Mr Secretary General. LTA did not say: Hey transport companies, we're going to force a losing proposition on you. LTA did not say: hey commuters, we're reducing fares 100% across the board. What LTA said is, transport companies, charge something fairer. Fair usually means some win, some lose. Of course your attempt at popularism, you are not satisfied until the transport company loses.

Why not harp on that at the next GE? Better to make sure you don't get that NCMP seat when there are more deserving people who will research an entire argument through rather than just anyhow hantum like you.

Cass,

PTC already claims that the overall fare collections will be reduced by 2.5%. So simple, don't need to use such a complicated system which increase direct fares as much as 7% to do such thing. Each and every fare reduce by 2.5%. That does it.

So you still insist 70% of people getting lower is better than 100%?

Goh Meng Seng

 

[UpYoz_olo]

This anomaly is caused by bad city-town planning.

The city-town planning doesn't go round the MRT stations. Land are wasted for some shopping malls without residential flats surrounding these MRT stations. If most flats are built in a way that take MRT stations as the central focus, you and all other people won't be taking feeder bus services.

Even if you want to correct this so call anomaly, the problem lies with the bus companies over charging for feeder bus services. The proper way is to ask them to lower that price and not raising other fares to cover this lower fare.

Get your priority right.

Goh Meng Seng

You are damn good with warp logic. It will be a sad day if sgporeans actually vote you into parliament; even if it's via NCMP. I've not come across any country that builds residential units over MRT stations. Name me one country that do what you suggested. This convinced me your economics knowledge is questionable. Where you graduated from???

Next, you may even suggest HDB to build flats upside down. Who knows, maybe you have a breakthru' there.

I shudder to imagine how the oppo party with you as Sec-Gen will perform in the coming erections.

Please sir, convince me you have an acceptable IQ for a career as esteemed as an MP in Sg.

But I commend your courage - to make a f--l of yourself time and time again.


:oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo:

 

[UpYoz_olo]

This anomaly is caused by bad city-town planning.

The city-town planning doesn't go round the MRT stations. Land are wasted for some shopping malls without residential flats surrounding these MRT stations. If most flats are built in a way that take MRT stations as the central focus, you and all other people won't be taking feeder bus services.

Even if you want to correct this so call anomaly, the problem lies with the bus companies over charging for feeder bus services. The proper way is to ask them to lower that price and not raising other fares to cover this lower fare.

Get your priority right.

Goh Meng Seng

You are damn good with warp logic. It will be a sad day if sgporeans actually vote you into parliament; even if it's via NCMP. I've not come across any country that builds residential units over MRT stations. Name me one country that do what you suggested. This convinced me your economics knowledge is questionable. Where you graduated from???

Next, you may even suggest HDB to build flats upside down. Who knows, maybe you have a breakthru' there.

I shudder to imagine how the oppo party with you as Sec-Gen will perform in the coming erections.

Please sir, convince me you have an acceptable IQ for a career as esteemed as an MP in Sg.

But I commend your courage - to make a f--l of yourself time and time again.


:oIo:

 

[AndroAsc]

You are the one with the warped logic, Mr Secretary General. LTA did not say: Hey transport companies, we're going to force a losing proposition on you. LTA did not say: hey commuters, we're reducing fares 100% across the board. What LTA said is, transport companies, charge something fairer. Fair usually means some win, some lose. Of course your attempt at popularism, you are not satisfied until the transport company loses.

Hey PAP dog, stop barking. Dogs like you should be put down... damn noisy.

In the first place how on earth is the new fare fairer? By my analysis the fare is only cheaper if you need to connect through multiple bus and MRT... and so tell me how is that fairer? If I have a direct trip home, why shouldn't I take it and why should I be penalized with higher fares? Don't forget that the rebate shit only applies within a certain time limit. What if the connecting bus or MRT is delayed by 15-30min and the time limit lapse? Lemme guess higher fares!

You want fair fare? Fair fare is calculated based on start and end location irregardless of route taken. That's called fair. And not to mention simple.

 

[Glaringly]

Some years back, I have a colleague from Sweden working here and he was trying to purchase a monthly card so that he can travel between MRT and buses freely. I told him, it's only available for school children and senior citizens.

He was disappointed and pointed out back in Sweden, Stockholm, a monthly card is available for about S$100 and he can use it to board train, MRT and buses within Stockholm city and it's suburb. And it's about the size of Singapore.

I feel, because of the privatization of basic services like public transportation, these companies are looking at their own backyard. Otherwise, imagine the benefits it could bring to other businesses when people do not have to worry about extra cost and would likely travel out more often then to be cocoon in their home. All this is only possible if there is a more centrally manage planning.

 

[Boliao]

You are damn good with warp logic. It will be a sad day if sgporeans actually vote you into parliament; even if it's via NCMP. I've not come across any country that builds residential units over MRT stations. Name me one country that do what you suggested. This convinced me your economics knowledge is questionable. Where you graduated from???

Next, you may even suggest HDB to build flats upside down. Who knows, maybe you have a breakthru' there.

I shudder to imagine how the oppo party with you as Sec-Gen will perform in the coming erections.

Please sir, convince me you have an acceptable IQ for a career as esteemed as an MP in Sg.

But I commend your courage - to make a f--l of yourself time and time again.


:oIo:

You should read his message again and stop embarrassing yourself. Your comprehension is atrocious and you ridiculed him for not having a high IQ... amazing

*clap clap clap... what a dumb fuck

 

[gbomega]

 

[wahlaneh]

wahlaneh...
fare by distance actually not fair.
it only benefits those who need to change public transports frequently eg bus-train, train-bus, bus-train-bus, mah.
those who only take 1 trip lugi liao lor.

 

[johnny333]

I feel, because of the privatization of basic services like public transportation, these companies are looking at their own backyard. Otherwise, imagine the benefits it could bring to other businesses when people do not have to worry about extra cost and would likely travel out more often then to be cocoon in their home. All this is only possible if there is a more centrally manage planning.

It's nothing to do with "Privatisation" but more to do with "FamiLeeisation"

All the profits made by the gov't/GLCs is being used for bonuses & gambling

 

[aurvandil]

Cass,

PTC already claims that the overall fare collections will be reduced by 2.5%. So simple, don't need to use such a complicated system which increase direct fares as much as 7% to do such thing. Each and every fare reduce by 2.5%. That does it.

So you still insist 70% of people getting lower is better than 100%?

Goh Meng Seng

Remember what was said about how the silent majority is not the stupid majority.

It is silly to assume that people who are paying more will not know it or notice it. Many will notice it and see through the spin. The net result is that the PAP government loses a credubility yet again. Raymond Lim in Bedok is obvously feeling he is untouchable in the elections to proceed with such a dangerous stunt so close to the elections.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Remember what was said about how the silent majority is not the stupid majority.

It is silly to assume that people who are paying more will not know it or notice it. Many will notice it and see through the spin. The net result is that the PAP government loses a credubility yet again. Raymond Lim in Bedok is obvously feeling he is untouchable in the elections to proceed with such a dangerous stunt so close to the elections.

Alas! I am no Monkey God that could split into many and contest everywhere!

Goh Meng Seng