BWorld 215, Urban mobility index and transport disruption

* This is my column in BusinessWorld last week, May 24.

As incomes rise around the world, they tend to stay within cities, urban hubs, and rural areas on the cusp of urbanization. Congestion follows as a result, even if property developments are done vertically.

After searching for an international transportation or mobility index that includes Metro Manila or the Philippines, I found one made by the Arthur Little Consultancy. They developed the Urban Mobility Index, a point system with 100 points as the perfect score.

The index is composed of three groups of urban mobility systems: Maturity of the system (36 points), Innovation (24 points), and Performance (40 points), with nine topics in each group. These are: Transport-related CO2 emissions, NO2 concentration, PM10 concentration, PM2.5 concentration, Traffic-related fatalities, Increase share of public transpo (PT) in modal split, Increase share zero-emission modes, Mean travel time to work, and Motorization level.

The second biggest group, Maturity, and its nine topics are: Financial attractiveness of PT, Share of PT in modal split, Share of zero-emission modes, Road density, Cycle-path network density, Urban agglomeration density, Public-transport frequency, Urban mobility initiatives, and Urban logistics initiatives.

About 100 cities worldwide are covered. Surprisingly, Metro Manila has scored moderately and not in the lowest group of cities (see Table 1).

People may wonder why Metro Manila has ranked higher than Osaka or Sydney or Kuala Lumpur. Perhaps the surveyors and researchers covered only the EDSA area where a train — however cramped — exists and jeepneys and tricycles are banned. Vehicles move along at slow speeds during rush hours.

Disruption in urban mobility was first made by MRT/LRT a few decades ago. However, an increase in capacity was few and far in between, resulting in a persistent “transport crisis.”

The second round of disruption was made by vans and UV expresses, which help ferry passengers from high density locations and help them avoid taking multiple rides to their destinations.

However, this local initiative was restricted by the government via the LTFRB as it severely limited the franchising of UV express vehicles and heavily penalized vans that were “colorum (unregistered).”

A third round of disruption was introduced by a multinational company, US-based Uber. It was so successful, it inspired a regional competitor, Singapore-based Grab, to offer the same service.

Unfortunately, the LTFRB kept to its antiquated regulations, restricting the number of cars to serve both Uber and Grab. It later penalized Uber with a substantial fine.

Plagued with its own financial issues, Uber later decided to quit Southeast Asia and merge with Grab.

Meanwhile, actions of the LTFRB leave much to be desired.

Of the 19,000 Uber drivers, only 11,000 were absorbed by Grab since these were the only ones accredited by the LTFRB.

Some 6,000 former Uber drivers are still waiting accreditation and are unable to drive for Grab because they are not in the LTFRB master list while some 2,000 ex-Uber drivers have possibly given up (see Table 2).

Grab Philippines Country manager Brian Cu brought this up during his presentation during the BusinessWorld Economic Forum 2018 on May 18 at Grand Hyatt Hotel, BGC in Taguig City. The forum’s theme was “Disruptor or Disrupted: The Philippines at the Crossroads.”

Ride-sharing and TNVS scheme are disruptors in urban mobility system and thousands of commuters have benefited. The LTFRB and government bureaucracy have disrupted this in their own way, resulting in increased inconvenience for TNVS passengers.

To this day, the LTFRB continues to control fares and cap surge pricing, a move that discourages drivers from getting incentives for picking up passengers even in inhospitable areas. This, despite the fact that the agency has already limited the number of accredited drivers, as discussed previously.

Providing comfortable, convenient, and safe transportation is not a crime and government has no business limiting this kind of entrepreneurship. Government should instead further expand competition, stay away from price and fare control, and allow commuters to have more choices.

---------------

See also:

BWorld 207, Fare control and surge cap are wrong, May 10, 2018

BWorld 213, Disruption, inflation and taxation, May 23, 2018 

BWorld 214, Disruption in global economic power, May 24, 2018 

BWorld podcast 2, TNVS fare and surge control are wrong, May 26, 2018

BWorld 186, Land use bill and Asian urbanization

* This is my column in BusinessWorld last February 8, 2018.

Urbanization, like technological innovation and mass production of mobile phones and other gadgets, is among the important reasons why people’s lives have become more comfortable. Many necessities like schools and work offices, supermarkets and groceries, hospitals and clinics, are nearby. People no longer need travel for hours or even days just to get to the nearest health facility.

Vertical structures like residential and office condominiums immediately free up huge tracts of land for other purposes such as public parks, stadiums, and sports facilities. Subways and elevated train tracks, underground tunnels, elevated roads, and interchanges for vehicles significantly improve traffic flow.

Urbanization and more dense cities therefore, is good. The continued rise in urban population is proof that despite complaints of congestion, people realize that the advantages trump the disadvantages of living in big cities. Urbanization therefore, should continue and expand, not restricted and bureaucratized.

The Foundation for Economic Freedom (FEF) organized a lecture on “National Land Policy in the Philippines” in late October 2017 at Ascott Makati. The main speaker was Arturo G. Corpuz, a noted Urban regional planner and FEF Trustee.

In his presentation, Art said that the proposed National Land Use Act (NALUA) under HB 5240 (the Senate versions have similar provisions with it) suffer from biases and restrictions. Among these:

1. Supply side bias. The underlying philosophy is that land should be used based on what it is “physically suitable” for regardless of demand. Art says the world works differently from this bias, the reality is that land value and demand determines land use and hence, land suitability.

Food self-sufficiency policy leads to locking up irrigated and irrigable land, alluvial plains, croplands, highlands instead of focusing on raising productivity and farmers’ incomes, like allow or encourage land consolidation for farming economies of scale.

2. Protection focus. Dominance of protection in HB5240: (a) Protection land use prevails over any other activity, all other uses are residual to protection. (b) 8 of 13 policies/principles are about protection. (c) The departments of agrarian reform, agriculture, and environment and natural resources control the supply of land and these three agencies plus the National Economic and Development Authority, the Department of Interior and Local Government, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council, the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board, the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority, the League of Cities of the Philippines, and the 12 sector representatives are members of National Land Use Policy Council (NLUPC). (d) DTI, DoT, DoTr, DPWH, DoF are not members.

Art says there is nothing wrong with protecting and using land only for forests and agriculture but it has to be balanced with the requirements of growth. Otherwise, corruption is encouraged as legitimate growth is not accommodated legally and incentives to do things illegally are created. And restricting growth especially in large cities can lead to more land conversion somewhere.

3. Planning structure/bureaucracy. Agencies responsible for determining supply are not the same agencies responsible for accommodating demand. They should be the same, like NLUPC = NEDA Board.

The Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) is the ground zero of land use planning and regulation, basis of zoning ordinance. Only 22% of 1,634 LGUs have approved CLUP (2017) and local zoning is used for rent-seeking through negotiations regarding land classification, parking requirements, building heights/densities, and reclamation. There is a need to increase transparency among LGUs.

I checked urbanization numbers in Asia and one thing surprised me — the Philippines is experiencing de-urbanization. While almost all countries have rising urbanization rate through time, the Philippines has a declining rate (see table).

Problems #2 and #3 — protection-focused and bureaucracies — discussed by Art above would be the most feasible explanation. Urbanization is taking place on a nationwide scale but many are listed as “illegal” by the various agencies. As a result, many land areas covered by their corresponding population expansion are still considered as “rural areas” and hence, not urbanized.

Government as “referee” should address competing land use of the country through legislation but it should free up and liberalize, not restrict and bureaucratize, land conversions.

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is President of Minimal Government Thinkers, a member-institute of Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia.

-----------------

See also:
BWorld 183, Why low or zero income tax can mean more development, February 09, 2018

BWorld 184, ERC paralysis and implications for consumers, February 11, 2018 

BWorld 185, Lower taxes via more mineral exports, February 06, 2018

Transport Econ 20, On traffic and road sharing

My former teacher at UP Diliman, Prof. Segundo "Doy" Romero posted one hour+ ago about road sharing. Part of his post,

"...As a people we should resolve to now be moving people, but we are moving private vehicles instead. Emergency powers are being readied to deal with the traffic crisis. Meantime, it's everyman and everywoman for himself. The answer to the mobiity crisis? Buy another car! This is to dodge the number coding restrictions.

This is where political will is supposed to be needed. It is time for radical solutions, like Tony Oposa's idea of road sharing -- half of all lanes for motorists, half of them for pedestrians and cyclists. Or steep congestion pricing...."

I commented on it, I wrote,

"half of all lanes for motorists, half of them for pedestrians and cyclists." Lousy proposal sir. You mix cars and buses with bicycles and skateboards and pedestrians in one road? and if one wayward bus or car hits any of those bicycles, pedestrians, who's to blame, Oposa? the bus/car driver? the pedestrians?

Sir Doy clarified that it's half of all lanes (e.g. 4 out of 8 lanes). Then a certain Benjamin de la Pena replied, 

"Nonoy Oplas, that's a ridiculous comment. Who said anything about "mixing" - you build sidewalks, protected bike lanes, and transit only lanes."

I replied to both: "precisely sir. Edsa is 6 lanes, 3 for cars/buses/trucks, 3 for bicycles, skateboards, pedestrians. There will always be impatient drivers on the motorists lane, especially on an emergency trip or night time, etc. and will sway to the 3 lanes of bicycles, etc. Accidents will happen there. Who's to blame, Oposa and supporters? MMDA? drivers...?

Benjamin, you build sidewalks in the middle of EDSA? hehehe"

Then see the succeeding comments of Benjamin, calling me as "minimal thinking" which for me is an insult.

I am regularly engaged in a number of debates, past and present. I always make a distinction to criticize an idea or comment, not the person. Shoot the message, not the messenger. Like "that's a lousy idea" and not "Mr. X is lousy." Now see succeeding comments from this man. Explicitly saying that he was insulting me then claim later that he was not attacking me.

Sir Doy said that "Benjie is one of our foremost Filipino urban and mobility specialists in the country." His fb profile says that he also graduated from UP, studied Urban Planning at Harvard U, lives in Miami, Florida.

Fine, and if I criticize an idea -- mixing cars, buses, bicycles, pedestrians in Edsa -- he can personally insult or attack people who disagree with the idea? It speaks of his character.

Meanwhile, back to the issue. I notice that many people are actually forced to drive their cars because of the inconvenience and some dangers of multiple rides. Take someone living in UP Village or Batasan Hills in QC, working in Buendia, Makati or BGC, Taguig. Four rides: (1) tricycle from house to Philcoa or Sandiganbayan/Commonwealth, (2) jeepney from there to MRT station in Quezon Avenue, (3) MRT to Buendia or Ayala station, (4) jeep to office in Buendia or bus to BGC.

Four rides going to work, four rides going back home, 8 rides, daily. If one has to wear a formal corporate dress daily, or carrying a laptop, other important documents, or some big cash, it is very inconvenient to make those multiple transfers being exposed to street robbers, dust, heat, smog, or rain in between rides, the hassle of walking-waiting-standing between rides, etc.

Because of this inconvenience of public transpo, many middle class and rich people are forced to drive their cars or motorcycles, or take Uber/Grab/taxi, which means more private vehicles on the road, more traffic congestion. Even if the most modern MRT trains are available tomorrow, many people will still avoid those multiple rides and will use their cars or motorcycles.

One solution here would have been those air-con vans that act like school buses. Pick up passengers from the nearest points from their house, if not in front of their house, bring them to their offices in one convenient and comfortable ride. But LTFRB disallows this, they only allow point to point vans, which means people must walk or ride tricycles to the vans' terminal, then walk far or ride a jeep to their offices or final destinations, reverse the process going back home.

Those aircon vans were market solutions to the traffic problem. No taxpayers money, no new government bureaucracies will be committed to provide such solution, just allow the van owners/operators and commuters to decide the dynamics such service in terms of pricing/fare, service quality and safety.

This is not to say that I do not support the development of mass transport system, I support it. It's just that while it will take years if not decades to have a modern integrated transpo system, this house-to-office aircon vans transpo is the easiest, quickest, least distorting transpo solution to traffic congestion.

The road-sharing as proposed by Oposa, et al? No. Children, babies, oldies, physically disabled, pregnant women, those carrying important and heavy luggage, should be riding in comfort as much as possible, not pedaling or skating or walking in Edsa and other major roads. Thus, these roads should not be constricted via forced "road sharing"

Update:

Benjamin posted this on twitter, bragging that he insulted me.

Ahh, arrogant id___. Good that he lives in America, meaning one less arrogant soul in the Philippines. One disease of central planners is the tendency to be arrogant and "all-knowing" and their patience for contrary views is low.
----------------

See also:

Transport Econ 17, On banning provincial buses in Edsa, August 21, 2016 

Transport Econ 18, E-tricycles in Manila, October 11, 2016 

Transport Econ 19, On taxi fare contracting, December 17, 2016

BWorld 75, How to profit from urban congestion

* This is my 2nd article in BusinessWorld special Anniversary issue last Monday.

------------

Worsening traffic congestion in Metro Manila and other big cities in the Philippines has led people to believe that this will negatively affect people’s health, temper, and eventually, the economy. Thus, the solution is to decongest heavily urbanized cities and spread out development and modernization to the peripheral cities and provinces.

This subject was partly tackled during the first BusinessWorld Economic Forum last July 12, 2016 during the panel discussion about succession and transition. Among the speakers were Ernesto M. Pernia, Socioeconomic Planning secretary; Kevin L. Tan, senior vice-president & head of Megaworld Lifestyle Malls, Megaworld Corporation; Bienvenido V. Tantoco III, president of Rustans Commercial Corporation; Nina D. Aguas, CEO of Insular Life; and Wilfred Steven Uytengsu, Jr., president and CEO of Alaska Milk Corporation.

Although the focus of the discussion was about how companies prepared for smooth corporate succession, the speakers also provided a wider perspective and tackled some national issues and transition. All agreed that Metro Manila is very congested and that developments should be driven to less urban and rural areas. Mr. Tan in particular highlighted that many real estate developers are going out of Metro Manila because there are more developments in several provinces and big cities, more BPOs, other businesses.

If we look around the world, each country has one or more political and/or financial capital and these places experience congestion where the demand for certain services outpaces the supply. This happens because congestion is natural and part of human nature’s demand for socialization and interaction. It is faster and easier if the office, the kids’ school, the bank, grocery store, car repair shop, etc. are just a few kilometers away instead of dozens or hundreds of kilometers.

Let us check the degree of congestion of the Philippines compared to other ASEAN nations, and from two small, highly congested neighbors. A 50-year gap, 1964 to 2014, table is constructed. The per capita income in purchasing power parity (PPP) valuation over a 30-years gap is also shown.

What the above table shows are the following:

1. Highly-congested Singapore, Macau, and Hong Kong also have very high per capita income. There are many explanations for this and the efficiency gains of having almost everything nearby is definitely one of them. Brunei is a different case, small population but relatively big land area rich with energy resources for export, like natural gas.

2. Less-congested Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos also have low per capita income of only $5,100 or less. Again, there are many reasons for this and the inefficiencies and inconvenience of being far from various economic units like big banks, big grocery stores, etc. should be one of those reasons.

3. The Philippines is second most congested country in the ASEAN after Singapore. Its population has more than tripled over the past 50 years.

Let us check the numbers for Metro Manila. From 636 square kilometers originally, the megacity now has a land area of 644 square kilometers (owing to reclaimed areas at the CCP-SM MOA) and a population of 12.877 million, as of the August 2015 census. Based on these numbers, its population density is 19,995 persons/sq. kms., comparable to that of Macau.

But one report says World Bank data shows that Metro Manila has a 1,300 square-kilometer land area as of 2010. Or a population density of 9,906 people per sq. km. in 2015, still higher than those in Singapore and Hong Kong.

So if congestion is natural for people, how can we optimize and benefit from the presence of many people per square kilometer of land?

ACDimatatac-301. More land reclamation. The 800 or so hectares in the CCP-SM MOA-Entertainment City have created lots of businesses and jobs for Filipinos. The planned additional reclamation projects in Manila Bay should proceed, and at a fast rate.

Aside from creating new lands in the sea, there is also a need to remove huge volume of silt, mud, and solid wastes in river beds of the Pasig, Las Piñas, and Marilao rivers that drain into Manila Bay. These smelly solid wastes cannot be brought to dumpsites where most LGUs declare a “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) policy.

2. More skyways, elevated interchanges and U-turns, tunnels. Traffic congestion is an engineering problem with engineering solutions. Such solutions should veer away from hiring more traffic officers and officials, avoid having more stoplights. Instead, officials should build more hard infrastructure that can provide service to the public and motorists 24/7 for decades to come.

3. More trains, LRT/MRT, running along C5 and C6, above ground and underground, extending north and sound, east and west, of Metro Manila. In Tokyo, Seoul, and Singapore, it is common to see multi-level train stations and shops underground. Public Private Partnership (PPP) schemes are already existing to encourage more private funding and construction of these projects.

4. More low-cost medium- and high-rise residential condos. This immediately frees up space for more urban forestry and public parks, unlike in horizontal low-cost housing. Multiple regulations and taxation by both national and local governments should also decline. These are costs that are ultimately passed on to condo unit buyers and renters, that make vertical housing less affordable to the poor and lower middle class.

People and businesses respond to incentives and disincentives. If there are many disincentives and inconvenience in taking (often multi-ride) public transportation, then more people will drive their cars or motorcycles, which contribute to heavy traffic congestion. Government taxation and regulations that distort the market for urban transportation, housing, and other services should be reduced.

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. (@noysky on Twitter) is a Fellow of SEANET and President of Minimal Government Thinkers.

----------------

See also:
BWorld 72, Economic integration and disruption, July 25, 2016 
BWorld 73, Transco and the big beneficiaries of feed in tariff, July 27, 2016
BWorld 74, Pres. Duterte's anti-corruption programs and Transparency Intl., July 30, 2016

Inequality 10: On Urban Congestion

Urban congestion is happening in almost all countries around the world. Hundreds of thousands, or millions of people, are cramped and congesting themselves in a relatively small land area. So residential condo buildings have to be high to accommodate more people on small land space. Skyways, tunnels, subways, elevated ramps have to be constructed to reduce or eliminate traffic build-up in major road intersections.

One friend in facebook, Arcy Garcia, posted below in his fb wall. See the succeeding exchanges. Arcy gave me implicit permission to post the exchange in this blog. We also have an earlier discourse about capitalism vs. socialism, see Political Ideology 8: Diskurso sa Kapitalismo, Sosyalismo at Gobyerno last November 15, 2011.
-------

Arcy Garcia

ganitong mga proyekto ang halimbawa ng bultuhang SOP, at paggaya sa development model ng Kanluran-semento, bakal, semento. yayaman na naman ang mga contractor. at para na naman sa mga pribadong sasakyan tulad ng skyway..magastos. sisirain na naman ang mga bundok at delikado sa lindol. at lalong nag-aanyaya na magsiksikan tayo sa mga lungsod. ang kailangan ay efficient na public mass transport system- at pagtatayo ng mga ikabubuhay sa mga probinsiya na nakakalat...upang lumuwag ang Metro manila at iba pang siksik na lungsod. Chairperson Tolentino, kuha mo?

MMDA proposes skyways along Metro Manila's esteros - InterAksyon.com

www.interaksyon.com

The Metro Manila Development Authority is planning to build elevated roads or skyways alongside esteros (creeks and streams) in the next two years to ease traffic congestion in the metropolis.

 ·  ·  · Share · Tuesday at 4:33pm · 

• 
  

  Arcy Garcia 
  
  
  
  

  sana maka-isip naman at makapagbalangkas kayo diyan sa MMDA ng isang makataong siyudad.....konsultahin nyo naman ang mga arkitekto at inhenyerong matitino, at hindi mga taga construction companies....Jun Palafox, yung magaling na arkitektong intramuros, etc; balikan nyo mga plano ni Imelda (kahit maganda yun, may mga kakaibang plano yun!); yung holistic; yung kasama ang watershed ng Rizal, at katubigan sa north NCR- para maisama ang climate change effects sa plano.

  
  

  Tuesday at 6:11pm · 

• 
  

  Nonoy Oplas Arcy, anywhere in the world, people want to congest in big cities. Kaya they are building skyscrapers, skyways, subways, tunnels under the river under the mountain -- HK, Bangkok, Taipei, Seoul, KL, Tokyo, Jakarta, Sing, Beijing, etc. Gusto talaga ng mga tao nagsisiksikan, wala namang tinutukan ng baril sa ulo para isiksik nila sarili nila sa big cities, they went there on their own di ba.
  

  Yesterday at 10:49am · 
• Floro 
  
  
  
  

  Mga kapatid, may mga pull factors kung bakit siksikan tayo sa siyudad!Kailangang madevelop ang ibang lugar para mabawasan ang tao sa mega cities tulad ng Manila at Cebu. Agree ako sa efficient Mass Transport. Yung Countryside Development hinid umuubra kasi binubulsa and CDFs. YUng tulay sa probinsiya imbes na malaki ginagawa ay mga overflow na kayang sirain ng baha. Para magkaroon ng bagong project ulit! Ang decongestion mangyayari lamang kung madevelop ang ibang regions at magkaroon ng economic opportunities sa ibang lugar! Anf irony, puro pulpul na politko at mga sipsip sa pulitiko ang mga naiiwan sa mga probinsya na binoboto naman ng mga nabubuhay sa patronage largesse na galing sa corrupt na systema. Edukasyon ng masa ang kaialngan ngunit di natin magawa. Siguro ang pwede lang ay rebolusyon na kinatatakutan natin!

  
  

  Yesterday at 11:12am · 
• 
  

  Nonoy Oplas 
  
  
  
  

  Madali naman siguro mag rebolusyon doon sa may gusto. Hahawak sila ng baril, magsisigaw sa kalsada, tapos barilin mga sundalo, politiko at pulis, pati mga sibilyan na di naniniwala sa causa nila, pipilitin mag contribute at pag ayaw, siguro babarilin din. Sa HK, Tokyo, Seoul, Bangkok, etc., super-siksikan mga tao, sisiw mga flyovers natin kumpara sa kanila, pero doon, walang nagtatawag ng rebolusyon, bagkus lalong lumalaki at dumadami tao sa mga syudad nila.

  
  

  Yesterday at 11:15am · 
• 
  

  Arcy Garcia 
  
  
  
  

  Noy, dahil nga sa akala nila, andun ang trabaho. pero pag tumagal, nakikita nila na kulang na kulang pala. pero siyempre, sa anyo ng develoipment model ng buong daigdig (na kapitalista), mas ok na sa siyudad kaysa naman sa bukid at probinsiya. kaya nga dapat even development. dapat gobyerno manguna sa pagdevelop sa ibang lugar na hindi pa developed. para hindi tayo magsiksikan dito. hindi dahil ganyan ang Bangkok, Taipei, Suingapore at Malaysia, ganun na rin tayo dapat. naniniwala akong may isang mas matino at mas makataong kaunlarang modelo kaysa sa tinatahak ng mga bagong yumayaman (ngunit hindi ibig sabihin agad ay umuunlad) na mga bansang Asyano. Lalong hindi ang modelo ng US at UK. sa dulo, agrikultura ang dapat pagtuunan ng pansin ng bansang ito upang tugunan ang kahirapan- hindi mas maraming higanteng tulay, fly-overs, skyways, etc; at mga higanteng gusali.

  
  

  Yesterday at 1:12pm · 
• 
  

  Arcy Garcia tama ka Fkoro. countryside development. kailangang seryosong paunlarin at ituon ang kaunting pera natin sa lalawigan. pagpapaunlad ng agrikultura ang unang assignment ng administrasyong ito. (na sa kasamaang-palad ay hindi niya ginagawa).
  

  Yesterday at 1:13pm · 

• 
  

  Nonoy Oplas 
  
  
  
  

  The convenience is larger than inconvenience in people congestion in big cities. For instance, you live in mandaluyong bec your office is in makati, your children's schools are in pasig and QC, etc. Matraffic, true, but it's shorter compared to living in Laguna or Rizal then work in makati. Maski mahihirap, gusto nila sa big cities kasi madaming opportunidad basta masipag ka lang: maging jeepney or taxi driver, waiter, salesladies in malls, etc. No one is forced and coerced to live in big and congested cities, one can always go to the smaller provinces.
  
  Also, if things are still convenient in Metro Manila, then its population will not just be 10-12 million, it will swell to 15 M or more. Congestion and its inconvenience are the "natural" checks by which people will decide, "will I swap my conveniece here in the province with M.Mla's congestions but bigger econ opportunities there?"

  
  

  Yesterday at 2:59pm · 
  
• Ado  
  
  
  
  

  ‎@ Oplas, sa HK, Bangkok, Taipei, Seoul, KL, Tokyo, Jakarta, Sing, Beijing, etc.. tama ka maganda ang development diyan kasi hindi mga kupal ang namumuno... dito sa atin nangangarap ng kung anu-anu eh wala naman pondo.. Kung sana ang Gobyerno nalang ang nagpagawa ng NLEX, SLEX at Skyaway sana taong bayan ang makikinabang sa 65m na collection diyan araw-araw at pwede pondohan ang guni2 ni Tolentino... Ang TransCo kumikita ng 35B na net income ang gobyerno yearly benenta pa.. ngayon sila Henry Sy ang nakikinabang..

  
  

  Yesterday at 3:09pm · 
• 
  

  Nonoy Oplas 
  
  
  
  

  Ado, sa tutoo lang, madaming pera ang gobyerno. Every year, ang interest payment binabayad nila sa public debt, both foreign and domestic, is about P330 B per year, average for 2010-2012. Klaro na may pera ang gobyerno, pero ang mentalidad, utang pa ng utang total future admins naman ang magbabayad. Dyan pa lang talo na tayo.
  
  Kaya Ars, be careful what you wish for. When you wish for more govt involvement, govt will give you and me more debts, more pork barrel for legislators, more corrupt officials.

  
  

  Yesterday at 3:15pm · 
  
• Ado  Pag ang pera mo ay pangbayad lang sa utang hindi mo pera yan, pera na galing buwis ni Juan de La Cruz.. marami din pera ang mga GFI natin pero kanino pinapautang? sa mga capilista at mga Politiko na nagpapahirap sa taong bayan at mga manggagawa.. Hindi malinaw ang direction ng ating gobyerno..
  

  Yesterday at 3:31pm · 
• 
  

  Arcy Garcia 
  
  
  
  

  Precisely Pareng Nonoy, dahil nga wala nang kabuhayan, wala pang matinong social services at edukasyon, hindi pa convenient. Pero hindi ba dapat gobyerno ang nag-iisip kung paano ikalat ang convenience at ikabubuhay. kapag kapitalista langtulad ni Henry Sy ang hahayaan nating magpasiya- pati Bagiou at maliliit na burol, tatayuan niya ng SM Mall, kahit pa man magkalubug-lubog tayo sa baha. kasi siya, safe sa kanyang palasyo...

  
  

  15 hours ago · 
• 
  

  Nonoy Oplas 
  
  
  
  

  Pero di ba ginagawa ng malalaking kapitalista ngayon tulad nila henry sy, gokongwei, ayala, etc. Nasa davao, cebu, bacolod, iloilo, baguio, pangasinan, CDO, Bulacan, Tarlac etc na ang SM, Robinsons, ayala malls, etc. Yong SM sa Rosales, pangasinan, nalubog ng todo sa baha nong 2009, typhoon pepeng. Pag sila nagkalat ng malls or subdivisions or call center bldgs nila, walang taxes kinukuha sa atin. Pag gobyerno namudmod ng pork barrel sa mga congressmen at manuhol sa mga goernors and mayors, puro tax money natin yon. Eh kung ginastos lang nila yon sa mga personal na bagay at pamumulitika, wala rin. 
  Meanwhile, not only the mall developers, but also the various franchised companies (jollibee, chowking, mang inasal, starbucks, generics pharmacy, etc. are in many provinces now, not only in big cities but also in small cities and municipaliities. ALL at no cost to us taxpayers. It's really the govt that really wastes than spend wisely our money.
  7 hours ago · 

It may sound "heartless" to justify urban congestion where social inequality is more pronounced and more visible. But the point is that people flock on their own to urban centers voluntarily -- poor, middle class, rich, government agencies -- because of various convenience: proximity to better healthcare facilities, educational and cultural institutions, commercial and financial centers, airports and seaports, trains, etc.

It's also a case of people voting by their feet, beyond the ballot and elections. Moving from the provinces or rural areas to big urban centers, and/or moving to other countries, where they think better economic and social opportunities will be more available to them.

Government central planning in business and economic development should be avoided as much as possible. Government should focus on promulgating the rule of law. Go after thieves and carnappers, both private and government. Go after kidnappers, killers and murderers, both private and government. Go after extortionists and land grabbers, both private and government. Go after scammers and violators of transactions and contracts, both private and government.

When people are assured that what they enter into will be transparent and respected up to the future, they will have peace of mind. They can invest in rural agri-business, resorts and tourism centers in far away areas, other business enterprises, knowing that contracts with various people and enterprises will be upheld, knowing that corruption and extortion in government is minimal or zero. Then rural development as advocated even by those who dislike urban congestion will slowly materialize.
--------

See also:

Inequality 5: Comments to Why Inequality is Good, May 11, 2011
Inequality 6: On Social and Class Dominance, May 13, 2011

Inequality 7: Roger Federer, Manny Pacquiao and Free Market, June 19, 2011

Inequality 8: On Sustainable Inclusive Growth, June 23, 2011

Inequality 9: CMFR Forum on Inclusive Growth, September 22, 2011