20 Aug 2012, 4.32PM
A system in which large privileged groups profit from the gains of monoply may be politically much more dangerous than in one where profits go to a limited few. But though it should be clear that, for example, the higher wages which the monopolist is in a position to pay are just as much the result of exploitation as his own profits, and are just as certain to make pooer not only all the consumers but still more all other wage earners, not merely those who benefit from it but the public generaly nowadays accept the ability to py higher wages as a legitimate argument in favour of monopoly.
Even if railways, road and air transport, or teh supply of gas and electricity, were all inevitably monopolies, the consumer is unquestionably in a much stronger position so long as they remain separate monopolies than when they are "co-ordinated" by a central control.
But a state monoply is always state-protected monopoly - protected against both potential competition and effective criticism.
...Where the power which ought to check and control monopoly becomes interested in sheltering and defending its appointees, where for the government to remedy an abuse is to admit responsibility for it, and where criticism of the actions of monopoly means criticism of the government, there is little hope of monopoly becoming the servant of the community.
A state which is entangled in all directions in the running of monopolistic enterprise, while it would possess crushing power over the individual, would yet be a weak state inso far as its freedom in formulating policy is concerned.
The machinery of monopoly becomes identical with the machinery of the state, and the state itself becomes more and more identified with the interests of those who run things than with the interests of the people in general.
Extract from Hayek 'The Road to Serfdom".
It simply means that all monopolies controlled by PAP Government under the guise of privatisation is just that - monopolieis that are beyond criticisms, a law unto itself, and centrally "controlled" by PAP Government via Temasek Holdings...plus the numerous PAP politicans and ex-politicains and ex-civils ervants on tis Board of Directors.
It also means why SMRT adn SBS Transit are immuned from public criticisms and just offered public apologies after public apologies..and business as usual.
I was one of teh coomuted affected by a breakdown at CHinatown MRT Station...I think in Decemebr 2011...witht eh same old annoucnement 'The delay is for a short while..just bear with it, we apologised.." I waited 15 minutes..and finally they told us the MRT trains topped there and we must embarked...
And same old problem occurred again last week isn't it?
And what do cosnumers get "publci apologies after public apologies..blah blah.."..tehn status quo with the interests of the public for a reliable public transportations ervices given short-shift...
HDB Flats "Overhang" of 100,000 dwelling units, "affordable housing" and pent-up demands?
DO the "Public Housing Monopoly" ever listened to consumers?
Ever-escalating Public Transportation Fares?
DO the "Central COordinaiton" BOdy of a pTC ever lsitened do cosnuemrs?
Instead, theri creative genius of a spin-doctor instructed Squealer and its trained herd of sheep to baa-ed: "If we don't increase it now, it will be a bigger increase in the future."
Ever heard of a freeze in fares with stakeholders like Temasek Holdings ploughing back their 60% dividends back to the company to subsidise fares?
If Genting SIngpaore can withheld their dividends, why can't public-listed transportation withheld their dividends?
Only a monoply can increase transport fares when oil prices go up..and never reduce fares when oil prices go down.
E.g. why electricity and gas rates cna go up and down accroding to fuel prices, wehreas transport fares move in only one direction - North andf never south?
And why competitions amongst telco had brought downt eh prices of the monopolisitc SIngTel..whereas
so called "privatised" amongst MRT lines, bus companies and taxi companies had not brought down prices..and worse...encouraged th growth fo cartels where all prices increments moved in tendem with each other?
Town Councils S&C Charges?
Same case as "if we don't icnrease now in small increment, it will be a bigger icnrements in the future."
Excuse, how about talking to CDC Mayors for a bigger share of subsidies from teh obscene profits colected by SLA from land sales of HDB lands, GST and IRAS gaming revenues?
Therefore, the PAP Government Model of Central Planning is broken and does not serve the interests of the concumers but a large group of vested interests that are obsessed with growing the profits from hapless consumers..never to provide affordable public services.
Dear PM Lee, time to put money where your mouth is when you said:
"We ar here to serve you, not to lord over you".
Then, why the heck that all those monoolieis controlled by PAP Government under teh guise of "privatisation" are still lording over hapless and captive consumers called Singaporeans?