bringing down cost of essential services

The Worker's Party has made it their key objective to fight for the lowering of public transport fare. And their reasons are very valid except that the ruling party could not see it that way. Public transportation is a vital industry and affects the economy of the country as well as the wellbeing of the people. It should be treated like education or defence, and made as effective, efficient and at the lowest cost possible without the profit motive. Choking up the transport system or parallysing it by continuously raising fare will affect the quality of life of the people and all other economic and social activities. Opposition parties should be very clear in their objectives and defend the interests of the poorer people by bringing down cost of essential items and services. Transportation is only one of the many essential services.

canned demonstration

In less than a month the World Band and IMF will be in town. And it is time for Singapore to present to the world our canned public demonstration within four walls. The demonstrators, all imported, Singaporeans unlikely to be allowed in, will be given all the freedom to shout, scream and scratch, all indoors. Probably the whole demonstration room will be wired with all the cameras and speakers, to be beamed across the world. Singapore will score another first, teaching the world how demonstration can be allowed, in a canned fashion. And if this is experiment is successful, maybe we can allow Singaporeans to demonstrate in the same way on certain issues. Then there is no need to explain so painfully why 4 is an illegal assembly.

crooked bridge may save Badawi's govt

According to Mahathir, the Badawi govt is not corrupt and will have his blessing if they go ahead with the crooked bridge. But if there is no crooked bridge, then the Badawi govt is corrupt and he will continue to expose them. The balance of whether the Malaysian govt is corrupt or otherwise hangs in the balance of the crooked bridge.

taxis - high operating cost and poor service

Night life in Hong Kong is so very alive. One reason may be that there is no midnight surcharge. Hong Kongers, tourists and business visitors know that they can have a taxi ride home at an affordable rate, however late in the evening or early morning. I also question the $100 daily taxi rental fee imposed, seeing that car rentals to the public range from $40 to $50 a day. And with second-hand car dealers coming into the business, there is talk of even $30 a day. Perhaps the over-size call-booking machinery can be made smaller to cut this $100 rental fee. I suggest that taxi drivers be given the leeway to be their own bosses in their trade with a condition that their vehicles are taken for roadworthiness tests at regular intervals. Perhaps service will improve with this flexibility. Yik Ching Fong (Ms) The above extract is from Straits Times Interactive. It is very obvious why the cost of taxis is so expensive while the taxi drivers are not getting the income they deserved, thus affecting the quality of service. All the booking fees and surcharges should be removed. Better still, taxi drivers should be allowed to rent their taxis from whoever and not be held ransom by taxi companies. When one can get a car for $30-$50 a day, why should taxi drivers be compelled to rent from taxi companies at $100 a day? Allow more competition in the industry, allow private operators to enter the business and provide cheaper taxis and remove all the ridiculous cost. Taxi drivers will benefit from lower cost, more passengers and higher net take home income. Taxi companies that are uncompetitive shall be allowed to wind up. All these monopolies are bad.

myth 52

'The Govt does not have the monopoly of ideas' This is the greatest change in perception after 41 years of PAP rule. The present govt has often acknowledged, fairly recently, that they do not have a monopoly of ideas. This implies that they know that there are better ideas out there and there are people who are just as able outside the govt that can provide equally good ideas. Compare this attitude to that of LKY's govt, it is a big step towards a changing of mindset at the highest level. I quote Seah Chiang Nee in his article posted in Littlespeck.com 'Whereas Kuan Yew relied on superior logic and tough punishment to rule, his son cannot do that. Hsien Loong still needs logic, but he can't use the cane to gain support. Persuasion, yes, but not force.' Seah Chiang Nee suggested that the superior logic approach is no longer workable in a new Singapore of well educated population. And the acknowledgement that the govt does not have the monopoly of ideas also appears to make this reasoning sound plausible. In practice, the way the govt deals with the people and the implementation of solutions to the country's problems, there seem to be little change. It is still the superior logic approach, that the govt knows best.