Clever boy, first score on
accuracy.
What happened to accuracy
after only two Facts presented ?
If Singapore is the only one of
the major refining centres in the world, should we be importing
refined oil from other sources for domestic consumption
?
Or has it not been the fact that
the Government and the Oil Companies are in cahoots in raping the
pockets of consumers by fixxing prices ?
With Singapore being one of
the major refining centers in the World, is there no benefits
in the Economies of Scale available to the market closest to this
Center ?
Even if the oil is subjected to
Global Price strictures - no one is asking for special price of the
raw crude oil, but surely the retail price of refined oil is
within our control.
Clever point made with
available information and posted with factual
accuracy.
What social spending has
this Singapore Government made - when every cent spent is
recovered as revenues from the fees charged for its use, and
the total amount collected will probably be twice the amount
spent.
Oil is exported by Oil Companies -
is it exported by the Singapore Government ?
What are the 'Premiums' you are
referring to - or are you simply beating about the bush hoping some
straws will fly off the bush for you to catch ?
How are the "premiums" become
subsidies from Oil Companies ?
How do you relate the "premiums"
to become Government revenues for social spending ?
The fact is the Singapore
Government do
not export oil.
Oil is exported by the Oil
Companies at prices determined by the global mechanism, with the
Singapore Government imposing annual corporate tax on the annual
profits of the Oil Companies.
Hongkong's area
of 1,104 sq km is not much bigger than Singapore's
707 sq km - with almost 25% of Hongkong territory being
uninhabitable mountain.
Hongkong has a population of 6.93
million {2007 census}, while Singapore has only 4.589 million {2007
census}.
Yet Hongkong has far more
efficient traffic and road managment plans in placed that are
financially less punitive on the residents there compared to
Singapore.
It is sheer nonsense that
Singapore do not have enough land, when one can see large tracts of
land that the Government has repossessed from the Private
Ownership, and waiting for "appropriate" market prices before the
URA release the land for development - {adding fuel to the hot
property market}.
It is disingeniously misleading to
claim that Petrol Tax only affects car owners, as non-car
owners are similarly affected when the commercial sector will pass
on the cost of their business to all consumers - regardless of
car-ownership.
Only a die-hard carpet beggar of
the MIW will insist that social spending is a benefit from high
petrol tax - without admitting that the bulk of the government
surplus will end up with GIC and Temasek for their wild export
adventures.
What kind of domestic use of oil
and other fossilized fuels are you vaguely referring to in which
you have cleverly classified that it is based on ''free will"
?
If you are referring to
electricity that is powered by oil - do you think that it is not
logical that the Government should provide higher incentives for
alternative energy sources to be installed ?
If you are referring to home
cooking - is there any alternative other then LPG that itself is a
by-product from the gas field, and which the reserves are far
larger than oil.
Only a propagandist will promote
this line that fare increases demanded by transport companies are
not easy to come by.
Have you counted the number of
fare price adjustments since Election 2006 ?
Even the ERP charges have seen its
rates climbing, as well as the number of gantries increased to
cover more entry-exit points, as well as major traffic routes
throughout the island.
Yet, when ERP was introduced -
Minister Mah Bow Tan had stated that when ERP is fully implemented
the 250% Road Tax increases since 1976, will be brought
down.
As matters stand, the Minister was
indulging in half-truths, and lies - as the Road Tax had seen less
then 50% adjustment since the ERP had mushroomed across the island,
with some at the entrance of a Heartland Township.
Is it now an impasse
?
Are you claiming you have inside
knowledge that this Government will be intransigent in not
responding to the hardship of the larger population of non-car
owners, as well as the car-owners ?
Could there be sufficient funds
left if you claim that the same tax revenues are used for your
supposed social spending, and now also to search for alternative
energy resources ?
Are you suggesting that the
Singapore Government is embarking on some pioneering works - via
the GLCs - to search for alternative energy resources
?
Are the existing resources in
Singapore capable to handle such a search, or are we throwing
monies into foreign companies to latch on to their expertise,
without any certainty of any outcome ?
Clever boy, first score on
accuracy.
What happened to accuracy
after only two Facts presented ?
Fact 1: You agreed to this point.
Good girl. Expected, afterall, who to expect from a know-rubbish
only girl who lives in a rubbish bin?
Fact 2:You agreed to this point.
Good girl. Expected, afterall, who to expect from a know-rubbish
only girl who lives in a rubbish bin?
Clever point made with
available information and posted with factual
accuracy.
What social spending has
this Singapore Government made - when every cent spent is
recovered as revenues from the fees charged for its use, and
the total amount collected will probably be twice the amount
spent.
Social spending - You are blind if
you don't see social spending, but then you live in the rubbish
bin. Can't be helped, i supposed.
Oil is exported by Oil Companies -
is it exported by the Singapore Government ?
What are the 'Premiums' you are
referring to - or are you simply beating about the bush hoping some
straws will fly off the bush for you to catch ?
How are the "premiums" become
subsidies from Oil Companies ?
How do you relate the "premiums"
to become Government revenues for social spending ?
The fact is the Singapore
Government do
not export oil.
Oil is exported by the Oil
Companies at prices determined by the global mechanism, with the
Singapore Government imposing annual corporate tax on the annual
profits of the Oil Companies.
Oil is a commodity that is
nationalized by most countries. Their own companies are state
owned. Those private companies that existed before
nationalization have to pay hefty royalties to continue their
operations in those countries. I can write out the entire pricing
and tax mechanisims, but that would be allowing you to laze. Go to
the library and find your answers how the premiums are derived at,
but do have a shower first, for you stink, espacially comming
from a rubbish bin.
To
make it simple and cast off your smokes
that tried cloud the issue, premiums are the over and
above costs of oil that a country can get from exports, on the
litre. Taking msia our neighbour as a comparison and easier
understand, the scrapping of the subsidies are the 'premiums'
they would have earn if they had exported the
oil.
But
then, Atobe, i expect you don't understand. Just don't try to act
smart and cloud the issue, for only your stupidity shows
clearly
Hongkong's area of 1,104
sq km is not much bigger than Singapore's 707 sq
km ...... ........compared to Singapore.
I don't even want to rebut on
this. You are more stupid than i can ever describe you. Go speak to
Thomas Chow,Deputy Secretary for the Environment, Transport
and Works, SAR if he believes their road is better
managed.
It is sheer nonsense that
Singapore do not have enough land, .....for "appropriate" market
prices before the URA release the land for development - {adding
fuel to the hot property market}.
That's nonsense to you, who live
in a rubbish bin, but a reality for many, who faces high land costs
and traffic congestion.
It is disingeniously misleading to
claim that Petrol Tax only affects car owners, as non-car
owners are similarly affected when the commercial sector will pass
on the cost of their business to all consumers - regardless of
car-ownership.
Tell me where i misled, when i
already said transport passengers will bear add-on costs? Your
attempts to smear is pathetic.
Only a die-hard carpet beggar of
the MIW will insist that social spending
......................energy
sources to be installed ?
No, i never use carpet, so it is
irrelevant to me. However, that is your belief, and as usual flawed
for you live in a rubbish bin and blind to all that had happened or
is happening in the alternative energy source search.
Only a propagandist will promote
this line that fare increases demanded by transport companies are
not easy to come by.
Have you counted the number of
fare price adjustments since Election 2006 ?
And the result? Remember we do
have opposition parties in the parliament as well. And thankfully,
not many public transport providers had to fold, otherwise, many
may have to walk to work. But not a consequence to you, after all,
you live only in a rubbish bin.
Is it now an impasse
?
Are you claiming
............into foreign
companies to latch on to their expertise, without any certainty of
any outcome ?
Questions, questions. I have no
wish to infer or assume. You better state your stand if you want me
to respond, otherwise, just crawl back to your bin.
