5/28/2007

barking up the wrong tree?

By now the whole machinery to achieve a first class transport system and a first class MRT should be in full swing. So far the idea of a first class transport system includes an MRT that is modelled probably after Tokyo. Tokyo seems to be the best model to take us there. I just hope first class does not mean sardine class, where commuters are squeesed, tit to tit, inside a jam pack train. The concept of first class invokes a sense of classiness, comfort, space and a little pampering, something similar to first class air travel or A class hospital wards. If that is the definition of first class, then it makes sense. And don't forget that such first class public transport comes with a first class price tag. Who can afford such services? The top 10% of the population will not be bothered with first class or world class public transport. They have their own classy private transport which they cannot part with. Maybe the next 10 percentile may consider such an option. Or perhaps the lower 5 percentile of the this group. Those who can afford the comfort of private transport will want to keep themselves away from the masses. The 80% of the population are unlikely to take it kindly to a first class price tag. They will love to have the first class service. But many would not be able to afford it or would opt to save the extra dollar for something else. Maybe a business class equivalent rather than a first class MRT to cater for the 20 percentile group at the top. It cannot be for everyone. Half the population will not be able to afford it no matter how affordable it claims to be. Let's hope that the system of first class travel will not be imposed on the population like the hospital ward system where eventually you will get first class and economy class travel. And if not enough takers for first class, means testing will be introduced to ensure that more people pay for first class services that they do not want. It must not be a 'What the provider wants is what the commuters must pay' system.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

that jesus quote has often been misused. 'serts or sinners' dont have the capacity to throw stones - remember, he came to forgive and save them and in any case, they should know better.

the ones that were 'throwing stones' are the 'scribes,lawyers and pharisees' - these are the ones jesus rebuke instead( the irony).these are the 'learned ones' who abuse the laws and run people's lives and worse, for PROFITS and POWER.

and what are 'stones'? go figure that out and not let some 'organize institutions' screw you when they dont even live by it and would instead, oppress the people with it.

sinners dont have that kind of privilege to condemn others. but if you go by the weight of the scriptures, who do you think the master hold accountable(weight of guilt) for the crap in the world huh? who do you think are the real 'murderers' huh?

redbean said...

actually jesus was saying that all those who were there condemning the woman were all hypocrites, that they too had sinned as much as the woman whom they condemned.

no one is sinless. no one is righteous.