mollymeek (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} mollymeek) wrote,@ 2007-10-12 23:31:00 |
|
Don't politicize transport fare hikes; politicize how good things are.
http://www.repeal377a.com
Molly has been requested to help publicize the petition for repealing thedumb 377A. Do take a look.
Molly hasn't been blogging for a long time. Life isn't getting any easier for the poor bimbo. Things are getting more expensive and bus fares have gone up yet again. So Molly needs to work extra hard on her sugar daddy to maintain her standard of living.
Yes, bus fares. Increase after increase, what improvement in services have I seen? Nothing much. Lower frequencies. Non-aircon buses. Ask for X (which will improve service) and they will tell you that they cannot afford X because it will cost money and they do not want to pass the cost to customers.
Poor bus companies. They are making a lot of profits, but their profits are apparently not from the revenue collected from bus trips, so bus fares need to rise on a yearly basis. Though my advice for these long-suffering transport companies is that if they aren't making anything out of their transport services, then they should just quit the business. It's common sense, really.
Without commuters, I believe transport companies would be making a lot less money - from advertisements, that is. Nowadays, when try to look at the screen that tells me whether the next train is going to arrive in 1 minute or in 11 minutes, I see advertisements being played. (Or at least I think they are ads. I can't even see them from the end of the platform.) How much did it cost to build that structure so that commuters can be bombarded with advertisements, on top of idiotic announcements (such as the one about holding on to the railings) in 50 different languages and 100 dialects. Yes, it's always the useless announcements that are made in multiple languages. One doesn't hear the announcement of what the next stop is in Hokkien or Tamil.
So what rewards do commuters get for providing a free supply of eyes and ears for advertisements in the noisy TV mobile and practically any other place where ads can be put? They are rewarded with yearly fare hikes because . . . because it's better for the customers. Don't ask me why.
Well, given that the transport companies are really business entities, one can still afford to try to be understanding. They are profit-driven by nature. What disgusts me more is what the gahmen seems to think about the issue.
Recently, Transport Minister Raymond Lim told Singaporeans not to politicize the issue of transport fare hikes. Which is abjectly absurd. What ministry is he from again? The transport ministry, right??
Why shouldn't the issue be politicized? Honestly, I think it's really because any issue that might work to the disadvantage of the PAP in the elections shouldn't be politicized. It's not the first time that politicians have said something to the effect of "Shut up!" to something that people feel strongly about. Not that long ago, weren't they telling people not to politicize the issue of elitism lest and engage in the so-called politics of envy?
Amazingly, though, these are the same people who see it fit to politicize upgrading, something for taxpayers and funded by the taxpayers. They see it fit to, covertly at least, time progress packages and whatnot precisely before Elections. Again, that's using taxpayers' money to manipulate taxpayers. And these people are telling us not to politicize the issue of transport fare hikes...
Of course, Raymond Lim's reasoning is impeccable. Don't politicize the issue. Or else, service standards will suffer because the gahmen will then be pressured to disallow fare hikes. [Well, no. It should not be under pressure to increase fares only when it's absolutely necessary. Or do something to keep fares low, such as introducing more competition into the sector.)
From personal experience, though, transport services aren't getting any better despite the almost yearly fare hikes. True, SBS now allows us to find out through the Internet whether we have to wait another 45 minutes for the next bus. Very helpful. And at selected bus stops, there are "real-time" updates of when the next bus is arriving. Though I have noticed that their 2 minutes can be my 15 seconds and buses that are supposed to come at dismal intervals of 14 minutes during peak hour can take 20 minutes to arrive, according to their updates.
I suppose these improvements will help us all write better complaint letters since we are now given more information than before.
Good old Raymond Lim also says that if fares were frozen for four years (someone had suggested that the fares be reviewed every four years, prior to the General Elections), people tend to ask for it to be extended again.
And so the clever alternative is to increase the fares yearly knowing that . . . transport companies willtend to definitely ask for it every year. Hmm... In short, people shouldn't ask for fewer fare hikes, but transport companies can ask for more fare hikes. Don't ask me why.
Well, even if you don't review the fares every 4 years just before the General Elections, it doesn't mean that the fares have to be reviewed every year.
Nevertheless, Raymond Lim must be given credit for his honesty. What we can infer from his reasoning is that the gahmen really does capitalize on people's forgetfulness and there may be a tendency for fares hikes not to be approved just before Elections. We shouldn't politicize the issue or pressurize the gahmen to act in our interests. We should just trust that the gahmen will act in our interests. After all, it's an incorruptible million-dollar gahmen comprising world-class talents.
Lim also talked about a vicious cycle where the freezing of fares will cause the bus companies to be unable to afford new buses (despite their massive profits??) and services will decline. This will then make it necessary to increase fares, but people will protest, saying that fares cannot be increased because the service standard is bad.
True, true. So we should have a different kind of cycle instead. In this better cycle, we simply have the bus companies applying for fare hikes, the PTC approving them, and the service deteriorating nevertheless. At least I still take crowded buses that take forever to come. Despite the new service standards that the PTC has set.
But Molly is being a bitch as usual. She has made faulty assumptions based on her overly subjective personal experience. (She's just unlucky to be experiencing overcrowding and low frequencies.) If you believe the more credible Raymond Lim, you will know that the transport service is really good. And fare hikes have made them good. And that's because the PTC has done a good job. And that's because the gahmen is good. As he says:
And maybe we shouldn't politicize elections too. After all, politicizing elections may lead to a deterioration in the gahmen's standards because some people will then have to spend all their brain cells thinking of how to fix the opposition and buy supporters votes instead of, say, coming up with better excuses to let transport companies continue to make fat profits.
http://www.repeal377a.com
Molly has been requested to help publicize the petition for repealing the
Molly hasn't been blogging for a long time. Life isn't getting any easier for the poor bimbo. Things are getting more expensive and bus fares have gone up yet again. So Molly needs to work extra hard on her sugar daddy to maintain her standard of living.
Yes, bus fares. Increase after increase, what improvement in services have I seen? Nothing much. Lower frequencies. Non-aircon buses. Ask for X (which will improve service) and they will tell you that they cannot afford X because it will cost money and they do not want to pass the cost to customers.
Poor bus companies. They are making a lot of profits, but their profits are apparently not from the revenue collected from bus trips, so bus fares need to rise on a yearly basis. Though my advice for these long-suffering transport companies is that if they aren't making anything out of their transport services, then they should just quit the business. It's common sense, really.
Without commuters, I believe transport companies would be making a lot less money - from advertisements, that is. Nowadays, when try to look at the screen that tells me whether the next train is going to arrive in 1 minute or in 11 minutes, I see advertisements being played. (Or at least I think they are ads. I can't even see them from the end of the platform.) How much did it cost to build that structure so that commuters can be bombarded with advertisements, on top of idiotic announcements (such as the one about holding on to the railings) in 50 different languages and 100 dialects. Yes, it's always the useless announcements that are made in multiple languages. One doesn't hear the announcement of what the next stop is in Hokkien or Tamil.
So what rewards do commuters get for providing a free supply of eyes and ears for advertisements in the noisy TV mobile and practically any other place where ads can be put? They are rewarded with yearly fare hikes because . . . because it's better for the customers. Don't ask me why.
Well, given that the transport companies are really business entities, one can still afford to try to be understanding. They are profit-driven by nature. What disgusts me more is what the gahmen seems to think about the issue.
Recently, Transport Minister Raymond Lim told Singaporeans not to politicize the issue of transport fare hikes. Which is abjectly absurd. What ministry is he from again? The transport ministry, right??
Why shouldn't the issue be politicized? Honestly, I think it's really because any issue that might work to the disadvantage of the PAP in the elections shouldn't be politicized. It's not the first time that politicians have said something to the effect of "Shut up!" to something that people feel strongly about. Not that long ago, weren't they telling people not to politicize the issue of elitism lest and engage in the so-called politics of envy?
Amazingly, though, these are the same people who see it fit to politicize upgrading, something for taxpayers and funded by the taxpayers. They see it fit to, covertly at least, time progress packages and whatnot precisely before Elections. Again, that's using taxpayers' money to manipulate taxpayers. And these people are telling us not to politicize the issue of transport fare hikes...
Of course, Raymond Lim's reasoning is impeccable. Don't politicize the issue. Or else, service standards will suffer because the gahmen will then be pressured to disallow fare hikes. [Well, no. It should not be under pressure to increase fares only when it's absolutely necessary. Or do something to keep fares low, such as introducing more competition into the sector.)
From personal experience, though, transport services aren't getting any better despite the almost yearly fare hikes. True, SBS now allows us to find out through the Internet whether we have to wait another 45 minutes for the next bus. Very helpful. And at selected bus stops, there are "real-time" updates of when the next bus is arriving. Though I have noticed that their 2 minutes can be my 15 seconds and buses that are supposed to come at dismal intervals of 14 minutes during peak hour can take 20 minutes to arrive, according to their updates.
I suppose these improvements will help us all write better complaint letters since we are now given more information than before.
Good old Raymond Lim also says that if fares were frozen for four years (someone had suggested that the fares be reviewed every four years, prior to the General Elections), people tend to ask for it to be extended again.
And so the clever alternative is to increase the fares yearly knowing that . . . transport companies will
Well, even if you don't review the fares every 4 years just before the General Elections, it doesn't mean that the fares have to be reviewed every year.
Nevertheless, Raymond Lim must be given credit for his honesty. What we can infer from his reasoning is that the gahmen really does capitalize on people's forgetfulness and there may be a tendency for fares hikes not to be approved just before Elections. We shouldn't politicize the issue or pressurize the gahmen to act in our interests. We should just trust that the gahmen will act in our interests. After all, it's an incorruptible million-dollar gahmen comprising world-class talents.
Lim also talked about a vicious cycle where the freezing of fares will cause the bus companies to be unable to afford new buses (despite their massive profits??) and services will decline. This will then make it necessary to increase fares, but people will protest, saying that fares cannot be increased because the service standard is bad.
True, true. So we should have a different kind of cycle instead. In this better cycle, we simply have the bus companies applying for fare hikes, the PTC approving them, and the service deteriorating nevertheless. At least I still take crowded buses that take forever to come. Despite the new service standards that the PTC has set.
But Molly is being a bitch as usual. She has made faulty assumptions based on her overly subjective personal experience. (She's just unlucky to be experiencing overcrowding and low frequencies.) If you believe the more credible Raymond Lim, you will know that the transport service is really good. And fare hikes have made them good. And that's because the PTC has done a good job. And that's because the gahmen is good. As he says:
They are doing a very difficult job, (it is) very easy to say these things but they're already trying to take into account the public interest to ensure that at the end of the day, you have a public transport service that is good.Oh, but let's not say that public transport is good because the PAP gahmen has done a good job. They don't want us to politicize the issue. What modest folks.
And maybe we shouldn't politicize elections too. After all, politicizing elections may lead to a deterioration in the gahmen's standards because some people will then have to spend all their brain cells thinking of how to fix the opposition and buy supporters votes instead of, say, coming up with better excuses to let transport companies continue to make fat profits.
