After reading the articles ‘Cheaper bus, train rides‘ on The Straits Times website and ‘Public transport fares go down by 2.5% from Jul 3‘ on the Channel NewsAsia website, this is my conclusion: Maths has certainly changed since I was in school. *sigh*

How else do you explain this:

Fares go down by 2.5%, but (certain) people can expect to pay up to $16 more a year?

I must have been sick on Topsy-Turvy Maths Day.

The whole thing is riddled with confusing schemes and contradictions. Let me just highlight a few:

“The Public Transport Council, in its latest annual fare review, on Tuesday said it will apply a 2.5 per cent reduction arising from the fare revision formula, which pegs adjustments to national inflation, wage and productivity figures.”

YAY! And then…

“Fare rates themselves however will rise on the whole from July. This is because a 3 per cent temporary rebate offered last year will cease at end-June.”

I know I am a person who is very much into co-existence and compromise, but in this case, fare reduction and fare rises ARE 100% mutually exclusive concepts. Their coming together in this way must be some sort of signal for the imminent collapse of the time-space continuum, leading to the breakdown of the reality vortex.

“Transfer penalty refers to subsequent boarding charges a commuter who makes transfers has to bear. From July 3, the same commuter will be charged solely according to the distance he travels – regardless of how many transfers he makes.”

Cool, so that means that I can change buses/MRT as often as I like and not have to pay more, because I am paying according to the distance I have travelled. (Hehe I wonder what happens if I just travelled between City Hall and Raffles Place MRT stations over and over again… will my fares still go up?) This would benefit those who have to make multiple transfers to get to wherever they need to go. However…

“Commuters may also end up paying more if they make short trips, as the starting fare for both buses and trains will go up under the new calculation. On buses, they will go up 2 cents to 71 cents, and increase 3 cents to either 71 cents or 76 cents on trains.”

Heh? So that means that every time I step on a bus or an MRT I will have to pay a boarding fee? Does this not offset the fact that there is no more transfer cost? Am I missing something here? Did I just save money on transfer costs just to pour it back into boarding fees?

Surely multiple transfers = multiple short trips. So how is this going to work? WHAT IS GOING ON?!?!?!

Also, let me just add this: people don’t take long bus journeys because it is too expensive to do multiple transfers. People take long bus journeys because multiple transfers are an EPIC PAIN IN THE A**.

It goes on…

“Senior citizens and students will continue to enjoy concessionary travel. Their fares will be capped at 7.2 kilometres.”

BUT:

“In this group will be one in three senior citizens, who will have to spend on average $23 more a year on commuting. The other two-thirds are likely to save $37 a year. When the changes kick in, seven in ten enjoying concessionary travel will see savings.”

Now, what I want to know is, how did we arrive in this “one in three”, “seven in ten” numbers. And how are we going to figure out who is the “one” in the “three” and the “seven” in the “ten”? Do we form little groups of concessionary travellers and anyhow lom chiam pass?

If this is going to be so arbitrary, is it really helping anyone when it comes to taking public transport?

Finally… “SMRT has said it supports the implementation of distance-based fares.”

Of course they do. Of course. Because unlike the policy implementers who have probably not taken public transport since they replaced the Brontosaurus with the Mass Rapid Transit, SMRT knows what public transport is like. They know that no one is going to give up their hard-won seat on the bus to sit in the heat and dust to make multiple transfers, just to save 4¢. They know that instead of two-thirds saving $25 a year, it is probably going to be three-thirds paying $16 more a year. Result = shitload more revenue for SMRT.

As my friend Khine suggested to me, if they really want to reduce the fares, why don’t they just give us back the 50% fare hike that came together with TVMobile? TVMobile is now gone, can I have my money back please?

It seems to me that the bottom-line is this (and what should have been the headline of the articles): 2.5% FARE REDUCTIONS FOR ALL! EXCEPT FOR WHEN IT RISES.

Join me again next week on Let’s Make No F****** Sense, where I will be waxing an owl.*

Using the apparent logic of this system, it seems to me that it probably works out cheapest if you got off the bus/MRT every 3 – 5 stops, walked the next 1 – 2 stops, and then got back on the bus/MRT. Multiple transfers, what.

Personally, I’m going to start campaigning for the development of teleportation devices. Or else I’ll just have to be very good and hope that one day I can travel by TARDIS.

* One of my favourite Green Wing quotes, ever. And also one of my most often used.

Kirsten Han

——–

Picture from evilcowtowninc.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Wrongly diagnosed patients forgive KTPH while hospital says it will pay for transport costs incurred

Earlier this month (4 Jan), it was reported that more than 200…

“不负责任行为将加剧困境” 黄循财怒斥驱赶租户房东

国家发展部长兼财政部第二部长黄循财指出,截止2月2日晚上,已经有524人被隔离,其中包括302人在家中进行隔离,而222人在政府机构。 领导跨部门工作小组对抗武汉肺炎疫情的部长黄循财于昨日(2月3日)的国会中指出,决定让人们在家中或政府机构进行隔离,是依据个案决定,而进行隔离检疫的人们将会被限制在指定地点,不得和他人有肢体接触。 和卫生部长颜金勇共同处理武汉肺炎课题的黄循财指出,有些同住一栋公寓的居民要求将隔离人士,以及自中国回国后需要鉴于14天的人士转移到其他地方。“我们还获知有些房东会根据住客的国籍,甚至更糟糕的,针对持有工作准证的中国人进行驱赶。” 他严厉谴责这些“不负责任”的行为,并指有关行为可能会影响政府对抗疫情的努力,而我国至迄今为止,已经爆发了18宗武汉肺炎确诊病例。另外有240宗可疑病例对武汉肺炎检测呈现阴性反应,还有43个病例正在等待检测成果。 “我对国人非常关心自己和家人的福祉感到欣慰,但是若房东开始驱赶租客,那将会导致我们加剧整体的防疫工作,最终也将危及我们自己和他人的生命。” “这结果将和我们的努力背道而驰,因此我们不能对将我国和国人置于更大风险的不负责任行为进行妥协。” 部长表示在这种困难时期,我们不应该让恐惧控制我们,导致我们反应过度,相反的我们应该互相扶持和照顾,共同解决这个问题。 疫情升级将增加预防措施 惹兰勿刹集选区议员潘丽萍询促请黄循财向国人保证,若国内疫情情况升级,会启动更多防疫设施,而相关设施附近的居民却会受到保护。 对此,黄循财提醒国会议员们,被隔离或进行检疫的人们都不一定感染了病毒。隔离他们是因为他们曾暴露在疫情传染的环境下,有感染的危险,隔离是为了确保安全。 他表示,将他们隔离了,总比让有可能染病的人们在四周游荡并传播病毒,而当局就已经采取措施防止类似情况发生。 他指出,接受检疫的人们必须每天报告健康状况三次,工作人员也会随时检查在家中进行隔离的人们,违规者将会受到严厉处罚,包括罚款和监禁。…

圣诞夜袭菲律宾中部 台风巴蓬夺16人命

台风巴蓬(Phanfone)在圣诞节袭击菲律宾中部,导致房屋坍塌、树木倒塌,还夺走了至少16条人命,为这个以天主教为主的国家数百万人带来潮湿、痛苦的可怕假期。 当地警方指出,巴蓬连续两天,逐日袭击两个岛屿,包括长滩岛等热门度假圣地都被摧毁。 在昨日的节庆日(12月25日),成千上万的人滞留在关闭的港口或疏散中心,而该区其余居民的住家也遭大雨侵袭。 而且有些严重受损地区的互联网和手机网络被切断,至今早(26日)尚无法全面评估飓风所带来的的损失。 惟,据灾难机构官员指出,已经确认有至少16名来自米沙鄢群岛的村子和城镇居民罹难。 虽然巴蓬台风不比海燕,在2013年造成了7300人死亡或失踪,但是其途径和海燕类似。 当地警方对《法新社》指出,周三的大雨导致巴拉森一条小溪泛滥成灾,一名父亲以及其三名孩子,还有两名亲戚在大水冲走他们住家时失踪了。 有一名警察在巡逻时,也被大风吹倒的电柱触碰,导致触电身亡。 逾万人被迫疏散中心过夜 民防部队官员指出,当台风于周二登陆时,超过1万6000人被疏散到学校、体育馆和政府大楼的临时住宅中过夜。 灾民艾琳(Ailyn Metran)和其四岁孩子,在其丈夫工作的塔克洛班(Tacloban)国家气象局办公室避难时,告诉《法新社》说,“真的很可怕。玻璃窗都被打碎了,我们躲在楼梯底下”。…

民主党提替代方案 吁公共住宅政策非营利

“李总理国庆群众大会的宣布,远离有根据和仔细的研究考量,让人想起他曾告诉选民公共组屋会增值的假说。这种虚假和不负责任地主张,使新加坡陷入当前庞大的住房和财务问题。” 针对李显龙在本周日提到的数项房屋政策,民主党于今日撰文抨击,与其提出有效的解决方案,人民行动党还在天花乱坠想尽办法争取选票,罔顾国家未来前景堪虑。 文告质疑,如果房子在3、40年后价值归零,住户是否愿意掏钱来翻新即将会贬值的房子? 对于自愿提早重建计划(VERS),该党认为,假设组屋在进行第二次翻新之后10年,就让住户投票决定是否提早出售给政府,似乎不符逻辑,也浪费公共资源。 “出售组屋给政府重建的住户,政府又能赔偿多少?赔偿的款项又从何而来呢?” 文告也提醒,选择性整体重建计划,诱使卖主想从赔偿中获利,同样地,VERS是否也促使人们透过售卖旧组屋套利? 高赔额推高房价 “为安抚住户对99年屋契到期屋价归零的不满,政府在该政策必然提供富吸引力的赔额,然而高赔偿额也将推高转售组屋的价格。” 结果,更多买家掏空他们的公积金来偿还组屋。更何况退休长者,会因为用公积金偿还组屋贷款,影响退休积蓄。 民主党文告指出,李显龙提及的政策,未考量年长住户离开熟悉生活环境和亲友的压力,不要忘了孤独感和无助是导致年长者自杀率高攀的祸首。 “再看看过去,居民为整体重建计划,和邻里冲突争执,为此影响社区的和谐,真的值得吗?” 文告也不忘揶揄,李显龙提出的政策,只是为了减轻公共组屋价值最终归零这个事实,对该党带来的杀伤力。…