"The system tends to cripple anything,
while its self-proclaimed apologists blame it to others"
(Or after reading those who favor increasing fares in LRT, MRT
without looking at the system privatising the entire network)
It was a day ago when this writer read a post that is more of an apologist than getting concerned by the state of it's own mass transport.
In a post, originally written in Filipino, it stated that those who oppose the said fare increase in mass transport are the ones to be blame for all the maladies such as the recent accident a 2 months ago. They even insist that it is for the common good the need to increase fares or even privatise the entire tracked mass transport network rather than support those who are "against the system", particularly the left whom they think of as those who are responsible.
But come to think of this, how come you need to act as if an apologist of the rotten system and its proposal to increase fares? Haven't the noticed that people are clamoring against increasing taxes, of rising costs of goods, much more in fares for they are riding in it thinking it's affordable to ride on? Here are the example of the questions they presented:
"The question is, will it improve if you have to suggest the cancellation of LRT funds?
Can the MRT buy new train if you oppose fare increases?
Can the MRT to enhance and improve the Maintain the system if they opposed raising the fares for its budget?
We should upgrade the MRT and Railway Systems by any means, even increase its fares, just to have good services and for the good of the passenger."
Quite nice to hear their so-called statement, but in reality, the system chose to increase its fares from 15 to 30 pesos as they gave up its obligations to oligarchs like Cojuangco, Ayala and Manny Pangilinan. And prior to the said increase they mismanage the entire network from malfunctioning vending machines to heaty conditions inside the train, much more that in spite of providing million-peso subsidies, it end up in the pockets of the corrupt such as what Transportation and Communication Secretary Abaya did. So why the need to increase its fares than calling for a subsidy to maintain operations as well as to persecute the officials whom treating LRT, MRT, and even PNR operations as its milking cows? Perhaps, these apologetics are actually speaking for the system by trying to speak on behalf of a common passenger, not knowing that the system, on the first place, is acting like the two faced-Janus with the front presenting as benefactor and the back as an exploiter. That Compradores like Ayala or MVP is willing to invest every billion peso, yet on the other hand as controllers of their trusts as willing to cripple knowing that mass transport is also a hindrance to their interest like decades ago in Los Angeles, California (wherein trusts controlling oil and automobiles took over streetcars and turning it into bus lanes, it was also happened in Manila after the war, and likely to repeat since these oligarchs are also crafty to do that kind of silent but wrecking job).
And since there are apologetics then they likely blame those who are against the increase in fares knowing that they are left wingers. That these left-wingers consistently oppose the government whom had ordered to increase as well as giving altogether the operations to the profiteering oligarchs. That also makes most people think they are kissing the arses of the system and its obvious interests instead of making improvements and changes according to their supposed statements. So again, why a need to increase fares than adding additional subsidies and serious adherence to improving mass transport in pursuit of resolving the crisis? Perhaps, this person would say that the system did shit Just to make fares increase and let the compradores take over a supposed public trust. These apologetics, known for its 'red scare' would time and again seeing red out of seeing militancy against rising fares and oligarchs trying to take over, while playing deaf in a system acting ignorant in mismanaging a state-controlled service such as mass transport.
So based from their questions, Did rising fares really brought new trains in the past? No. Did rising fares improved conditions and brought repairs? Not as well. But instead, it was government subsidies, aside from the transit advertisments and stalls in every station brought funds for the train system. Many people rode in every train out of its affordability so why's the need for increasing fares if that's the case? It may sound idealistic to say about increase fares, but since the system is geared towards neoliberalism and letting the crafty private sector to ran over, then sorry to say, profit is its priority than service. Countries like Japan, Korea, both 'Red' and 'Free' China has its train systems subsidised by the state to make it affordable, but the Philippines and its stubbornness to make anything in the hands of crafty businessmen? Good service is all but a façade trying to hid its possible dangers.
Anyways, in spite of those people insisting what the system wanted, the majority, specifically those who ride mass transport out of its affordability chose to be against it, knowing that the system tends to cripple anything in order to keep their interests such as corruption or letting it go in the hands of the greedy few. And that opposition also includes opposing those who afford to blame those who oppose their unpopular moves such as raising fares progressively, privatizing the rail network, or worse, letting the system do its silent sabotage through mismanagement.
So based from their questions, Did rising fares really brought new trains in the past? No. Did rising fares improved conditions and brought repairs? Not as well. But instead, it was government subsidies, aside from the transit advertisments and stalls in every station brought funds for the train system. Many people rode in every train out of its affordability so why's the need for increasing fares if that's the case? It may sound idealistic to say about increase fares, but since the system is geared towards neoliberalism and letting the crafty private sector to ran over, then sorry to say, profit is its priority than service. Countries like Japan, Korea, both 'Red' and 'Free' China has its train systems subsidised by the state to make it affordable, but the Philippines and its stubbornness to make anything in the hands of crafty businessmen? Good service is all but a façade trying to hid its possible dangers.
Anyways, in spite of those people insisting what the system wanted, the majority, specifically those who ride mass transport out of its affordability chose to be against it, knowing that the system tends to cripple anything in order to keep their interests such as corruption or letting it go in the hands of the greedy few. And that opposition also includes opposing those who afford to blame those who oppose their unpopular moves such as raising fares progressively, privatizing the rail network, or worse, letting the system do its silent sabotage through mismanagement.