"Keeping the flames of Patriotism burning."

"Keeping the flames of Patriotism burning."

A Rizal Day Message

This note sends greetings to the folk this celebration of Rizal Day. 

 As any other "National Holiday" would say that Rizal's life should be idealised by many because of his patriotism, what more his courage, talent, and the willingness to sacrifice in pursuit of a greater goal such as for country and people. And like any other person, Rizal himself was a visionary, a man of immense courage and intellect who believed in the power of knowledge to ignite change. People may've known him for his written works "Noli Me Tangere" and "El Filibusterismo", of his "Letter to the Women of Malolos" to that of his contributions durinh his exile in Dapitan. His yearn for reforms to his recognition of the need for revolution has taught every walk of life an unwavering love of country, his fervent desire for freedom, and his commitment to justice that even in this continuing past those truly concerned should continue to inculcate. 

 The current order, as in the past will only be talked out of the country and its people through threat and coercion. That by pretending they're for democracy and human rights, including that of praising Rizal and other heroes obviously these are empty words as opposed to the unjust truths such as silencing those who oppose their self-centered interests. 

 This note need not to be longer. But like Rizal and other heroes and martyrs of the past and present would say that it becomes a duty for a patriot to keep the flames of nationalism burning in everyone's hearts and minds. Quite agreeable that his legacy shouldn't be just limit to his written works being studied, but also heed the call for action- and that includes facing the risk and pain that one has to endure in pursuit of a belief in a society that's just, and by enduring will draw an immense strength that would counter those who oppress.

How about the local assemblers? Will the "Jeepney Modernisation" program revive and promote them?

How about the local assemblers? 

Will the "Jeepney Modernisation" program 

revive and promote them?

By Kat Ulrike

It’s been weeks passed as jeepney drivers and operators welcomed the new year with continued calls for the junking of the “modernisation program”, those who support the program, especially big businesses, are already taking advantage of the loss of traditional jeepney units by importing new “modern jeepneys” to that of investing in electric vehicle companies in the country.  

The modernization program for jeepneys aims to swap out outdated vehicles with safer, more eco-friendly models. While it's true that a large number of conventional jeepneys emit smoke, others are already unsafe for the road, in disrepair, and frequently the reason for accidents.  

But to put these jeepney drivers' livelihoods in jeopardy? That isn't modernization since the absence of inclusion demonstrates that the program serves the interests of the wealthy at the expense of passengers, drivers, operators, and assemblers. It's true that the government has to modernize the jeepney fleet; however, this needs to happen in a fair, inclusive manner that benefits all the sectors impacted by the program, and that includes helping local automakers produce better, safer, and more effective vehicles.  

Speaking of the program, how about the local assemblers? 

Ever since the program has been approved, it became an object of discussion, if not debate whether the program should prioritise local assemblers over that of importers. There were many models offered by local assemblers ranging from locally-assembled minibuses to that of modernised jeepneys. The latter, which most drivers find it well-maintained, find it affordable as opposed to the imported minibuses promoted by the authorities. However, this modernisation program prioritises much of downsizing public utility transport using “consolidation” through corporations and “cooperatives” in order for them to gain modern public utility vehicles courtesy of- importers and supported by bureaucrats.

But how about the local assemblers who offered sound alternatives to expensive, imported vehicles promoted by bureaucrats? According to the Collegian article, PISTON Women's Mira Molino said that there are local manufacturers capable of creating modern vehicles, but these are controlled by foreign owned companies- that according to the Philippine Economic Zone Authority, two Chinese, one American, and one Indonesian-owned enterprise are interested in selling contemporary jeeps in support of the modernisation program.

Some local businesses, though, have made the decision to support the majority. As jeepney modernisation continues to be debated, it becomes an issue for local assemblers to assert their role in improving that said transport system. Especially in a state wherein favours the importers or foreign makers than that of the local assemblers, it is obvious for the current order in having a particular way of "using" or "restricting" them with definite reasons to justify. But, regardless of the order’s skeptical replies, these establishments are open to participating in a transition toward modernizing public transit networks that is equitable, inclusive, and sustainable- for as drivers and operators sought to maintain their means of support and commuters sought reasonably priced transportation, these jeepney assemblers sought to safeguard their businesses even it requires adhering to government regulations regarding the installation of modern engines, and better interiors, to that of air conditioning and surveillance cameras. 

In an instance, Francisco Motors created an electric, updated jeepney that adheres to modern standards while maintaining the exterior design of a conventional jeepney.  Furthermore, the company also offered a budget-friendly alternative to the government’s “modernisation program” that meant more debts to drivers and operators. 

As according to an article in the Philippine Star, Elmer Francisco assured jeepney drivers of financing options with his company's TsuperHero Program.

"With the TsuperHero Program of Francisco Motors, jeepney operators no longer need to borrow money from banks to buy our jeepneys because we have a much better program for them of which they will even earn more than what they are already earning," he said, adding that as of the moment, they are prioritizing their "own jeepney operators who have already consolidated with Francisco Motors before the December 31, 2023 deadline."  Francisco said.

"Other than these, we have already received Letters of Intent to purchase of over 37,500 units from various transport cooperatives and corporations of which we have already received over 1,300 units of purchase orders out of the 37,500 to date," Francisco shared.

For compared to the existing modern jeepneys that costs P1.6 million to P2.4 million, Francisco's jeepney costs approximately P1.8 million less for the first 1,000 units ($985,000). The decreased price provides jeepney operators, drivers, and cooperatives with an inexpensive opportunity to participate in the government's Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program (PUVMP) without incurring debt.

Francisco also sells his e-jeepneys for a P50,000 down payment per unit, with flexible monthly payments of roughly P20,000 per month for only 32 months, as the government already gives an equity subsidy of P280,000 per unit under the PUVMP. 

Will bureaucrats change minds for this? 

Even some bureaucrats expressed the need to support local assemblers like Francisco if the government is serious in its attempt for modernisation. For as the government urges drivers and operators to update their jeepneys, Albay 2nd District Joey Salceda proposed in 2023 that first enough support be provided to local jeepney producers, stating that Filipino-made vehicles may be efficient and environmentally friendly.

In an article from the Philippine Daily Inquirer, the congressman explained his suggestion on the needs of jeepney modernisation:

“I would summarize my proposal in three points: First, support domestic manufacturing of more modern and more efficient, but similarly stylish jeepneys. Second, increase the subsidy per unit to meet the financial viability gap. Third, buy out old jeepneys for cash,” Salceda said. 

“If we can bring the cost of the unit to P600,000 to P1 million, that becomes more realistic for both the jeepney operator, and on a cost-benefit basis. I think the domestic manufacturing sector can do it. But we need to support them,” he added.

Senator Tulfo also expressed support in encouraging local assemblers for the modernisation program as he criticises imported minibuses from China. In an article from the Philippine Daily Inquirer, the senator questioned the decision to import the vehicles from China at a high cost, claiming that the PUVMP "reeks of corruption" because a local jeepney manufacturer could produce the identical units for much less. 

“Our waters in the West Philippine Sea are already being claimed by China. Are we even going to allow them to take over our roads as well?!” Tulfo said, criticising China’s involvement. 

The senator also observed that imported jeepneys from China cost P2.6 to P2.9 million per unit, which is far more expensive than brand new units from local manufacturers, who can produce modernized jeepneys for only P900,000 to P985,000 each. He went on to say that choosing a local manufacturer over a Chinese company will save the government around P1.7 million per unit.   

Not surprising that there are those who are patriotic enough to encourage local assemblers to engage in the venture. Salceda's suggestion of letting the government buy old jeepneys may sound enticing for drivers in order to buy new locally-made jeepneys, while Tulfo's call for prioritising local assemblers provide opportunities in locally-made transport systems but also to revisit the local manufacturing program that's stalled thanks to neoliberalism and cheap infux of secondhand vehicles and spare parts.

To some would say the attempt by local assemblers as costly in comparison to importing. After all, "importing is cheaper" as what they perceive if not importing vehicles will compel local assemblers to “compete” despite having less support from the state nor having no national efforts in industrialising the country. But if one may ask, when was the time the country was serious in undertaking a goal of domestic based development particularly through industrialisation? PUV modernisation is more than just promoting and encouraging local assemblers to create modern transport, but rather as part of the will to pursue industrialisation in order to foster further innovation as to support local needs and effect economic emancipation. Oligarchs and banksters beg to disagree on this given their contentment in commerce and trade- and that includes keeping the country agricultural, resource-extracting, services, and even remittances. 

Honestly speaking, these bureaucrats stated in this note and its concern can also be part rhetoric as the entire establishment chose to continue with that controversial program with or without heeding from the affected sectors- for industrialisation was and is, still seen as a stumbling block into their view of development as succeeding administrations failed to harness further industry for the growing country. 

This note may talked about modernising public transport and the role of a still small local "industry" that's willing to engage in that venture, what more the desire to go even further?

Still, the need for modernisation should be just and inclusive 

Once more, transportation groups are not opposed to the plan to "modernize" public utility vehicles, rather, they are opposed to the "questionable" schemes that initially justified the plan as "anti-poor," such as mandating the replacement of all traditional jeepneys with the justification that "these are no longer working" and the new models—mostly imported or made by large corporations—that bureaucrats are pushing are too costly for these low-income driver-operators. These parties are willing to improve the current jeepneys in order to make them more environmentally friendly and fuel-efficient, if not actively pushing local assemblers to offer more reasonably priced, superior local options to the pricy imports that officials supported. While Francisco, Sarao, and others are prepared to offer their own versions, the real question is whether the government would back local efforts in keeping with its election-year pledge to advance national development at the local level? 

In addition, the government's idea of "cooperatives" may seem like a good way to justify consolidation by offering promises of higher pay and benefits, but as was mentioned in a post a few weeks ago, some drivers are dissatisfied with the program, seeing their enrollment result in nothing but losses in terms of money and meager earnings. These operators and drivers who pooled their funds to purchase these pricey "modern jeepneys" won't even be the proprietors of the vehicles. They therefore see no benefit from a phony "cooperative," but that plan, as insisted by the authorities compels single-unit operators to give up their means of subsistence since it takes away their route franchises, which go to large corporations and "transport cooperatives" as they risk having their franchises revoked for being "colorum" or unregistered. 

How about the local assemblers like Francisco, Sarao, and others who offered just alternatives to the exorbitantly-priced imported “modern jeepneys”? The government may’ve heed their responses, however, this doesn’t mean they affirm, let alone treated as an “option” as bureaucrats chose to side with the importers/or foreign companies (in cahoots wit local bigwigs) that able to “set up shop” with their expensive modern public utility vehicles. Furthermore, local assemblers are willing to create sound developments as they themselves able to to build, refurbish, and run vehicles- so is the capability to dismantle, recycle, and recreate according to the country’s needs. Remember- the country remains stagnant in its quest for industrialisation and it becomes necessary for these small and medium scale industries to be supported by the state in order to harness further creativity and growth. True what Brian James Lu said in an article from the Philippine News Agency that he presumes “the jeepneys shall be considered scrap and junk and we have hundreds of thousands of jeepneys.” The question is, will the modern jeepneys manufactured locally be affordable for the drivers who should replace their “scrap-level” ones? At what price will the government to buy these old jeepneys for the drivers to buy new ones? And, will these scrap/recycling facilities provide jobs and support efforts in developing new and modern transport systems or creating sustainable use of materials for various purposes? Scrap metal is still metal anyway. 

Overall, these worried sectors would remark that, despite articulating simple desires such as preserving their right to livelihood, they sought an alternative to something imposed rather than negotiated and agreed. They wished to improve public transportation, but for the sake of truth, why should they insist on the question "at what cost?" For despite the demonstrators' valid requests, advocates of the program continue to believe that everyone who disagrees should be labeled as anti-environment, anti-commuter, or even subversive and seditious. To these supporters, the government's program is merely an order to follow, by force if necessarily, regardless of the desires of those who oppose it for a fair, inclusive program and the switch to contemporary public transportation. They would even go so far as to call all traditional jeepney drivers and operators "smoke belchers," and others "already decrepit and not roadworthy and are frequently the causes of accidents." 

But will the establishment’s view prevail over those who are affected and concerned? Which is which?

Under a continuity of subservience: there's no social change in that "charter change"

Under a continuity of subservience: 

there's no social change in that "charter change" 

 By Kat Ulrike 

 It is quite easier to blame the constitution for all the woes the country has faced. Be it political dynasties, corruption, to that of "economic provisions", the constitution as what critics claimed, is worth blaming and thus needs amendment if not outright replacement. 

 However, the problem is more than just the constitution itself- but systemic. The issue is itself centuries-past, and it has passed fundamental laws and constitutions, and yet it stays the same: benefiting landlords, big business, corrupt bureaucrats, political dynasties, foreign dominators that for those concerned been sought as the real problems. 

 To blame the 1987 constitution without even thinking the problem as systemic may sound easier to conclude that social change would happen if fundamental laws are to be amended. But reality becomes otherwise as changing it has less fo do with resolving social problems and more to do with aggravating it- especially with those who advocate charter change have more to do with their entrenched interests, alongside the willingness to opon further in the guise of "economic development".

 But nevertheless, interest seekers, local and foreign alike have long kept the Philippines poor and underdeveloped. They have to feign patriotism especially "national survival" to justify their neoliberal/globalist intent, they would even blame the "oligarchs" and yet kowtows to foreign banksters for "investment", if one may ask, since they find the laws not enough be it the Jomes Act or the current 1987 constitution; but did it truly benefit the people? Maybe, maybe not. 

 Perhaps, no matter they change the fundamental law of the land, opened the country to foreigners, yet seeing the same order benefits from it then it's crystal clear bullshit. Nothing's wrong in foreign direct investment tho, but does the country need to rely on so much? Singapore is an exception being an island city-state with its existing port and financial center; China? Deng's opening up is itself a "measure" that's "for a time being" as part of building socialism. However, the needed for foreign investment, according to neoliberals and globalists seemingly taking it to the extreme as that of willingness to surrender sovereignty to banksters and profiteers as that of corrupt bureaucrats and despotic landlords; oligarchs, be it local or foreign alike, will always bleed the people dry in the name of "development". If they afforded to claim they're as patriotic, or even nationalistic as that of the sovereignists, then why the willingness to surrender sovereignty to the whims of the global market? Again, nothing's wrong in accommodating foreign direct investment, but to remove labour and environmental regulations, the right to fair wages, enforced austerity with attempts to cut government spending on social programs? It is bullshit! That neoliberalism which primarily concerned with markets over people has run concurrent with a rise in inequality in both wealth and income, what more the presence of monopolies, which increase the profits of corporations at the expense of benefits to consumers. Hence, the angst against the oligarchs may sound reasonable but to support policies that also benefited the oligarch? Uphold or eveb reform neoliberal capitalism? Again, it is bullshit!

 In short, no constitution, no type of government, and no coterie of sorts will really "change the nation" as long as the sociopolitical order stays the same. The masses demand social justice, industrialization, land reform, respect for fundamental human rights, national freedom, and real democracy instead of continuing in a state of reliance, subordination, and oppression. The people will not stand for the ruling class in Congress coming up with self-serving proposals to amend the Constitution. 

"My Kingdom is Not of this World": Thoughts on the Traslacion 2024

"My Kingdom is Not of this World":

Thoughts on the Traslacion 2024

Source: Inquirer.net

This 2024 commemorates the physical return of the Traslación of the image of Jesus Christ as the Black Nazarene, four years since it was last held before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down the City of Manila and the rest of the Philippines.

Millions of barefoot devotees are expected to touch, kiss, or wipe cloth on the Black Nazarene, a 17th-century image of Jesus Christ carrying His cross, as part of the event commemorating its transfer from the Church of San Juan Bautista in Bagumbayan (present-day "Rizal Park") to its new home, the Church of St. John the Baptist in Quiapo district, Manila. The image is believed to be miraculous.

However, the image being pulled by many is in a glass enclosure, a sound system, and a Closed Circuit Television (CCTV); even surrounded by around 20 "Hijos del Nazareno" members to prevent devotees from climbing onto the image. And yet despite warnings not to get close to it, devotees rather cling to the "tradition" of touching or wiping cloth in its image- for again they still believe in its powers, whether it can heal previously incurable ailments or to bring good fortune to them and their loved ones.

But, despite this popular religiosity, this act of faith shown by most devotees is seen by critics as driven by material wishes than spiritual graces. Of course it is easy to dismiss them knowing that the reasons behind their devotion is that of material- and therefore easy to paint these devotees as fanatics especially when you see the multitude of people scrambling just to touch, to get a glimpse (and therefore disobeying orders for "tradition's sake"); but, cannot blame them on their actions for from these devotee's way of believing in Jesus Christ as the Black Nazarene is itself an authentic faith experience- that those who touch the image, wiping it with cloth, or that they were praying, many were crying or pleading for guidance because something happened to them in their visits, helping to resolve their problems be it spiritual or material. After all, in seeing them it becomes a valid expression of the people’s need to commune with the divine.

As an observer, would say that their devotion tries itself to be genuine, especially after the abuses that have developed through centuries of tradition. As said earlier it becomes less spiritual and more material in their motivation to get close to the Black Nazarene, and thus not from the expression of people’s faith, but from those who manipulate the devotion; it may also become fanatical as some failed to focus on God and Christ and instead into their own self and their egoes, desires. Thus, it becomes a duty for the faithful, aside from the Church for fellow devotees to better understand their faith and to put things in their right perspective- and it takes a long time for people for them to trying to help and guide the people and understand more the catechism and really get closer to Christ as the Black Nazarene. 

 Perhaps, in this current unjust order would say that by making people guide and understand the reason for devotion is more than simply the material want and even spiritual need- that "Christ's Kingdom is not of this world" and that by building a just society on earth as Christ envisioned includes cultivating moral and social virtues in themselves and spread them in society, that includes the need for freedom, justice, solidarity, love, and a lasting peace by any means. After all, it is what the substance of Christ's messianic mission and ministry on earth, which he himself said: 

 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord" (Lk 4:18-19; cf. Is 61:1-2).

 The devotees, as that of the faithful, wanted spiritual redemption so is the liberation from their suffering; they wished and working hard for a life of a world to come to happen on earth as that of pulling the ropes, accompanying the image on top of the carriage for long hours, enduring bump, sweat, and pain to gain the grace as they themselves mostly from the toiling masses and the disenfranchised. Their cries for help towards Christ that is, focused on justice for the poor, as poverty of the exploited and oppressed, the weak and the indigent, as evil; the prophetic tradition that condemns fraud, usury, and gross injustice as causes of poverty (cf. Isaiah 58:3-11; Jeremiah 7:4-7; Hosea 4:1-2; Amos 2:6-7; Micah 2:1-2).  

Pardon to be inspired by the scripture as the writer observed the event, for as the folk are in solidarity and in communion with the divine, their pleas for grace, their desire to fulfill their wishes, dreams, and aspirations; doesn't stop with the event itself or its holy days, the need for awakening and solidarity in this time of struggle becomes necessary as the faithful urges one to enlight and fight against systemic ills for the attainment of the common good. Yes, the Kingdom is not of this world- but it becomes a duty of the faithful to fight the systemic ill that hinders growth and corrupts morality so as to build a just society on this earth for the world to come.

Rekindling the faith to face the struggle

Rekindling the faith to face the struggle 

 By Kat Ulrike 

It's been few years passed as everyone tries to recover after the pandemic. As people from all walks of life working hard for their every lives, so is their effort in rekindling their faith to support their still fragile lives.

Especially in this last day of yuletide season in Quiapo, Manila when devotees of the most holy Black Nazarene converged together to pray, seek forgiveness, and plead for spiritual assistance for their everyday lives. At first would say most of them are driven by material wants as they encounter, pray, and seek help; but as time goes by this note would say that in every devotee they're trying their outmost bests to transcend from their material wants and into spiritual needs- as Jesus Christ himself, through the image of the Black Nazarene instill in everyone, not just the devotees, the need for love, courage, and hope in facing everyday struggles.

But, will these hardships prevail and people be contented? No! These devotees, in walking barefoot from their homes and into Quiapo Church for the Black Nazarene wanted more than seeking, luck, miracles, or redemption as they touch or wanting to wipe their towel in the image; but a desire for liberation. Call it radical this hell of a kind message, but in this current unjust order it becomes justifiable to be enlight and to fight. True that everyday is a Panata, every action is a Traslacion, and in every month is a Kwaresma, but the goal of these is to "cultivate moral and social virtues in themselves and spread them in society." (Compedium). 

And as Christians would say that in cultivating moral and social values includes that of proclaiming the good news of liberation and national and class freedom, and of denouncing oppression and repression as ever more relevant and imperative today in the light of prevailing systemic injustice- for the fact that is the revolutionary legacy of Jesus Christ who stood up against the oppressive Roman Empire and its vassal King Herod while proclaimed the good news of liberation to the poor and oppressed that made the faithful adhere to its liberatative character. For sure everyone recalls the Magnificat, the Beatitudes, and the Acts of the Apostles as basis for this liberatative task.

In witnessing the entire event would say that the desire for redemption itself becomes a need for liberation. Is Christianity all about "spiritual redemption" alone just to justify the existence of a repressive order as what the late Thatcher justified? Not surprising that there are those who once professed to have a just moral social order end capitulated to the whims of society's unjustness, citing "free will" to justify "free market ideas of consumer choice" to that of ambivalence towards democracy. No wonder why Basil Carinal Hume remaked Thatcher as "the lewder who thinks they're infallible." 

 In the case of Philippines, justifying an existing oppressive order using faith makes the belief becoming bullshit the way some clergymen trying to reduce the liberatative task of the church as a mere spiritual one if not supported by some piecemeal "act of kindness". Okay then that act of kindness, but is charity alone enough to suffice the social problems people encounter with? Why not fraternise, solidarise with the poor and the oppressed as to set the foundations of the kingdom on earth? Why not as well expose and oppose the injustices, corription, and oppression that prevailed in this earth for the world to come? The Devotees, mostly poor and downtrodden desired to see Christ and wanting to be cured and absolved, why should they be condemned still in a cycle instead of helping them break the chains that hinder their existence? 

 To cut this thought short, in seeing the events shows that there's a need to rekindle the faith in facing the struggle, what more to support it. And it is the duty of the faithful to guide to the just and right direction- that is a part of building a just and righteous kingdom on earth.

Franchise Consolidation? Sounds like "Intrusion by Entrenched Interests."

Franchise Consolidation?

Sounds like "Intrusion by Entrenched Interests."

Some weeks ago, this writer was reading an article from the Philippine Collegian about the controversial "Jeepney Modernisation Program." 

 The article, entitled "For Jeepney Drivers, Franchise Consolidation Spelled Financial Loss", shows the program, supposed to appear "empowering" with the creation of cooperatives and promises of support from the government to those who join, rather face the contrary- that of disempowered drivers with meagre earnings. Because of the consolidation plan, jeepney drivers operating on a route are required to establish or join a cooperative or corporation in order to maintain their operating license. The PUVMP is opposed by groups because it forces PUV operators to take out expensive loans in order to purchase a "modern jeepney." 

“Emerson Bismonte, 45, has been a jeepney driver for 18 years plying the Pasig-Bagumbayan route. When the government announced that traditional jeepneys would be phased out in 2017, he immediately joined the public utility vehicle modernization program (PUVMP) in 2022 in hopes of keeping his livelihood.” The article said.

“But as his earnings were not enough to sustain him and his family, after three months, he went back to driving traditional jeepneys.” The article added. 

Quite convincing at first for both operators and drivers who wished for improved mass transportation systems such as the Jeepney, or even the UV express; and some were willing to join the program in hopes of keeping their livelihood- with promises of modern jeepneys to use and “better income” would say that the program sound pleasing.
However, with contradictions such as threats of depriving their franchises for not joining, inadequate support, to that of "new" yet "deteriorating" "modern jeepneys", then no wonder protests against that "sham" program and the assertion of just, inclusive, and better alternatives are being called for by these affected sectors. Bismonte’s experience in driving a "modern jeepney" shows an inconvenient truth according to the article- that whereas being a traditional jeepney driver whom he as in charge able to earn P2,000 each day, the “modernisation program” in which modern jeepneys are owned by a “cooperative” or a private corporation, he as an "employee" takes home only P700 even if he earns the P4,000 daily quota. 

If one may ask, is the promise of a better living courtesy of that modernisation program really benefited the drivers? Supporters of the program says that by joining the cooperative/or the corporation, the driver pays well, and there were social security benefits such as PhilHealth, Social Security, and Pag-IBIG Fund to avail housing loans; but as what Mr. Bismonte experienced- that of earning 700 pesos if he earns a 4,000 daily quota, or even lower, isn’t it that a sham? He was promised to be given benefits as stated above, yet still gained none, is the consolidation under the modernisation program really benefited the drivers who at first self-employed to begin with? that sham consolidation and pretentious modernisation doesn’t suffice the problem regarding mass transport what more that of the driver's woes. 

It is not surprising that its supporters talk about sacrifice and the need for contentment but until when drivers had to endure a meagre pay in the face of rising standards of living? That’s bullshit! The profiteers especially bureaucrats reap their profits in that venture called “modernisation” at the expense of the needy driver and commuter! And now that the drivers, operators, assemblers, and even commuters starting to complain and protest about the “modernisation” problem these apologists cry about the environment, “destabilisation”, “terrorism”, or whatsoever just to undermine the just calls for resolving problems related to the program itself- especially with the bogus, anti-driver plan to “modernize” transportation, hundreds of thousands of jeepney drivers and operators will risk losing their source of income and livelihood. 

How much that modern jeepney? More than a million as these are imported from China or Korea/or assembled in the Philippines using imported parts? And yet the driver can't earn better despite reaching a boundary? Most traditional jeepney drivers able to recondition their trusty vehicles to become "workable" and if necessary buy new but affordable from local assemblers. The latter, also affected by that "modernisation" demanded inclusion in the need for improving yet those pretentious "modernisers" rather sided with the importers offering overpriced "modern jeepneys" mostly minibuses! Cooperatives? Is there any fairness in sharing profits like Mr. Bismonte taking home only P700 despite earning a daily quota of 4000? True that Profit-sharing here is not an end in itself, but simply a means for carrying out the cooperative ideal, or maybe that "cooperative" serve as a front for profiteers pretending to be supportive of the driver and the commuter? 

Again, the transport sector questions the program if not asserts the need for an inclusive, sustainable, and better alternative to what profiteers insisted- for the fact that the consolidation under this "modernisation" program is itself an intrusion on public demands for efficient and sustainable mass transport by entrenched interests.