A friend of mine once mentioned that the Stooge Times Forum page is one section he never reads and wondered why I get all worked up when I read the rubbish coming from it. I really don’t know why but perhaps, I am a sucker for ’emotional pain’?
Here’s another ‘fine’ example of such another piece of rubbish that got me worked up.
|
Selective upgrading unfair, S&C fees too high IN ‘GIVING a lift to the upgrading debate’ (ST, May 4) writer Ong Soh Chin harbours the same misconception as most HDB residents when she mentioned that ‘Mr Low Thia Khiang of the Workers’ Party has pointed out that his Hougang residents have managed to enjoy free lift upgrading even with the limited funds of its town council’. A town council’s revenue comes from the service and conservancy charges levied on each HDB household, part of which is provided by the government as subsidy. The lift upgrading in Hougang was funded by the money the town council saved, as routine expenditure is significantly less than the revenue it collects, even after providing for sinking-fund retention. The money in the town council, in whatever form, be it sinking fund or excess management fund, belongs to the HDB households within that town council. What is unfair and inequitable, even within each town council, is that the surplus money which is used to fund the so-called free lift upgrading for a few blocks at a time is contributed by all the households under the town council. Those whose HDB block is not selected for lift upgrading should ask the town council why another block was chosen instead of theirs. The justification that a town council cannot simultaneously carry out lift upgrading for every block is no consolation to those whose block is upgraded at a future date, as, by which time, they or the parents may have died or moved. A more equitable method is for the households of each HDB block to pay for the lift upgrading themselves, with the town council allowing them to use their portion of the surplus money in the sinking or management fund from their prior S&C contributions. The talk about surplus funds raises the question: Are the S&C charges too high? It is time the government reviews the collection of S&C charges and their use for selective upgrading, to see how past unfairness and inequity could be remedied. Bin Hee Heng |
I quote: “What is unfair and inequitable, even within each town council, is that the surplus money which is used to fund the so-called free lift upgrading for a few blocks at a time is contributed by all the households under the town council.”
Very funny, because I don’t see Bin looking at it from a grander level, and see his alleged ‘unfairness’ occuring on a national level when the Tali-PAP takes money to fund upgrading for a few districts at all time – not to mention expecting residents to co-pay a small amount – with surplus money contributed by all Singaporeans – one way or another – to the nation.
And going by his logic, then how is it also fair, that Polytechnic students do not get their fare concession, when the transport companies (or was it LTA), consistently argue that the concessions are paid by all other full fare paying passengers? Are full fare paying passengers thus overpaying, because only certain students of a particular age group are given fare concession?
Before the gover-min should even ‘review the collection of S&C charges and their use for selective upgrading, to see how past unfairness and inequity could be remedied’, it should jolly well first review how it spends the state’s revenue to further the ruling party’s very own political agenda!
No wonder Taiwanese legislative councillor Lee Ao thinks that Singaporeans are stupid, and of a bad breed! Does anyone see a reason he would have considered otherwise when reading some of these exceeding dumb letters?!
maybe to him (her) the only fair way is to pay S&C charges (and Tax too?) with respect the size of his belly or the weight of his brain