Arofanatics Fish Talk Forums  

Go Back   Arofanatics Fish Talk Forums > The Guildhouse > Chatterbox > Singapore Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28-02-2012, 01:07 AM   #71
zealot
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smellyfish View Post
But you do that they will then try to increase fare. If it is cost neutral to the company, they will have no excuse but roll out the buses.

And in term of what you propose, how is it quicker than what Jo is doing?
The 3% interest suggested is just being cynical. Loan interest rates are low and no harm for interest free loans. But I don't see why the funds for the buses should not be repaid.

With the free buses given, it will of course enable the company to have more resources to meet the demand. Making it as a loan (from the people of Singapore) will however allow the company to remain accountable to the country.

If given free, how can one ensure that the profits will be retained to improve services and not being used to pay out excessive salaries or dividends.

Of course, if the company remains in a loss position, no payment is required.

Last edited by zealot; 28-02-2012 at 01:08 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 01:35 AM   #72
hkh
Arofanatic
 
hkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 113
Default

I think we should trace the problem back to it's creator.... if someone had really considered these negative impacts due to the increase in population....then we don't need to spend this sum of money to buy the buses....
hkh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 10:15 AM   #73
globalcookie
Dragon
 
globalcookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,446
Default

Aiya, despite public funds going towards buying of 550 buses, e bus operator will still up fare, claiming... higher overheads for 1,100 extra drivers (2 shifts), higher fuel cost, more parking bay needed, blah blah blah.

Today's public transport network is a lot more jam packed. There are also more commuters during off peak hours than 10yrs ago. This translate to higher revenue, higher profit.

Does the gov have a share in these operators?
globalcookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 10:46 AM   #74
KAO LUO
Endangered Dragon
 
KAO LUO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 96,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loveikan View Post
When that happen, there will be more red tape, rules and regulations.
good earn business all they join one leg !! haha ...who the big share holder in Spore Smrt !! SBS .. LAST TIMEwe call this ..

Last edited by KAO LUO; 28-02-2012 at 10:48 AM.
KAO LUO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 11:12 AM   #75
six0one
Arofanatic
 
six0one's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 404
Default

seems to me the familee business is at work. Tax payer money going into private institution part-owned by the garmen investment company which is run by familee members...
they way I see it, its time to buy Comfort Delgro and SMRT shares. Heck, I think that's the only way to "get back" what they've taken from you....
six0one is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 11:43 AM   #76
KAO LUO
Endangered Dragon
 
KAO LUO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 96,529
Default

wa...... how about SINGTEL .. START Hub .. and M1 ,,,,, who bigger shareholder .... company name bo shaing ...
KAO LUO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 01:03 PM   #77
smellyfish
Dragon
 
smellyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by globalcookie View Post
Aiya, despite public funds going towards buying of 550 buses, e bus operator will still up fare, claiming... higher overheads for 1,100 extra drivers (2 shifts), higher fuel cost, more parking bay needed, blah blah blah.

Today's public transport network is a lot more jam packed. There are also more commuters during off peak hours than 10yrs ago. This translate to higher revenue, higher profit.

Does the gov have a share in these operators?
they say part of the money going towards operation and maintenance as well. it's effective publictizing 550 buses within a privatized framework. Which is nonsense from a principle and ideology point of view, but they say principles do not matter, and they are being pragmatic. I agree with the pragmatism, but think they really should start listening to Gerald Giam.

govt through temasek will surely have a share.
smellyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 01:30 PM   #78
KAO LUO
Endangered Dragon
 
KAO LUO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 96,529
Default

temasek ?
WHO BIGGER shareholder ? temasek under pte company or gov't ?
KAO LUO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 01:38 PM   #79
BubbleBubble
Senior Dragon
 
BubbleBubble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,401
Default

Report to MOF meaning govt lor. Ha...
BubbleBubble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-02-2012, 01:40 PM   #80
KAO LUO
Endangered Dragon
 
KAO LUO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 96,529
Default

simi MOF .. mother of father ??
KAO LUO is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +9. The time now is 05:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2000-2008 Arofanatics.com (Since 30th August 2000)