21–30 of 79 posts
The headline is technically incorrect. Cars will still be added as long as an equal number of cars are removed. Bloomberg has also updated its headline to read: "Singapore Will Stop Increasing Car Numbers From February 2018"
I never really understood why governments insist on restricting vehicles and not access to roads. It seems like the scarce resource is efficient road access, not space for cars (even in sg, where there's not a whole lot of that either).
Which is why Singapore plans to roll out GPS-based road pricing from 2020. http://roadpricing.blogspot.com.au/2016/03/singapore-will-ha...
It seems like they could do more interesting things with it in the future though. :- )
I never really understood why governments insist on restricting vehicles and not access to roads. It seems like the scarce resource is efficient road access, not space for cars (even in sg, where there's not a whole lot of that either).
It's a toll system, that taxes you for driving on key roads during rush hours. Say electronic "Drive on this road before 9.30 and you'll be taxed 2.5 dollar" signs. That feels like a decent idea to me?
I think that many asian cities have the right approach here. Treat cars as a luxury good in a space-challenged context and tax them heavily, while making sure to provide a world class public transport system so as to guarantee no-one actually needs a car. While it doesn't have a COE, tokyo does basically the same thing. You will have to pay $50k upfront for a 10-year car permit in singapore. In Tokyo there's no upfro…
> a luxury for the rich Parents of children under 12 should also be given a pass. (Unless outsourcing the population is a deliberate tactic, of course.)
I think that many asian cities have the right approach here. Treat cars as a luxury good in a space-challenged context and tax them heavily, while making sure to provide a world class public transport system so as to guarantee no-one actually needs a car. While it doesn't have a COE, tokyo does basically the same thing. You will have to pay $50k upfront for a 10-year car permit in singapore. In Tokyo there's no upfro…
> a luxury for the rich Parents of children under 12 should also be given a pass. (Unless outsourcing the population is a deliberate tactic, of course.)
I used to walk to school alone when I was little. When I was a little older I walked my younger brother to his school, then I walked to mine. My parents didn't need a car to do that for us.
However all of us used a car to go shopping once a week. A four people family buys an incredible amount of stuff. Sometimes I walked with my mother to small shops to buy fresh food during the week.
We also walked to health care centers. Everything was in a 20, maybe 30 minutes range.
If cities are planned to place homes close to important locations there is little need for cars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a luxury for the rich Parents of children under 12 should also be given a pass. (Unless outsourcing the population is a deliberate tactic, of course.)
It depends. I used to walk to school alone when I was little. When I was a little older I walked my younger brother to his school, then I walked to mine. My parents didn't need a car to do that for us. However all of us used a car to go shopping once a week. A four people family buys an incredible amount of stuff. Sometimes I walked with my mother to small shops to buy fresh food during the week. We also walked to he…
The headline is technically incorrect. Cars will still be added as long as an equal number of cars are removed. Bloomberg has also updated its headline to read: "Singapore Will Stop Increasing Car Numbers From February 2018"
Well, technically technically it is correct. Replacing isn't adding. The total number will stay the same
My concern was that without reading the article, few people may know that in Singapore, most cars are usually removed (retired) from road use after 10 years.
In other words, I think 'stop increasing' sums up the situation better than 'stop adding'.
I think that many asian cities have the right approach here. Treat cars as a luxury good in a space-challenged context and tax them heavily, while making sure to provide a world class public transport system so as to guarantee no-one actually needs a car. While it doesn't have a COE, tokyo does basically the same thing. You will have to pay $50k upfront for a 10-year car permit in singapore. In Tokyo there's no upfro…
> a luxury for the rich Parents of children under 12 should also be given a pass. (Unless outsourcing the population is a deliberate tactic, of course.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a luxury for the rich Parents of children under 12 should also be given a pass. (Unless outsourcing the population is a deliberate tactic, of course.)
Kids can walk, when not young enough for a trolley. My 5-year old just cycled 4km with me this weekend.
I think that many asian cities have the right approach here. Treat cars as a luxury good in a space-challenged context and tax them heavily, while making sure to provide a world class public transport system so as to guarantee no-one actually needs a car. While it doesn't have a COE, tokyo does basically the same thing. You will have to pay $50k upfront for a 10-year car permit in singapore. In Tokyo there's no upfro…
> a luxury for the rich Parents of children under 12 should also be given a pass. (Unless outsourcing the population is a deliberate tactic, of course.)
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/09/why-are-littl...