Article Name: Hiked flagdown by Jan. 24 only for complying cabs
Retrieved: January 22, 2010
URL: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/video/business/01/20/11/hiked-flagdown-jan-24-only-complying-cabs
May resibo, sticker at naka-calibrate na ang metro — ito ang mga kailangan bago maipatupad ang dagdag-singil sa flagdown rate ng taxi.
Sa Enero 24 sisimulan ang recalibration.
Uunahin ang mga taxi na may plakang nagtatapos ng 1 at 6.
Ibig sabihin, ang ibang taxi, hindi pa puwedeng maningil ng bagong flagdown na P40 at P3.50 sa kada susunod na metro.
"Kunyari eh gusto nilang mas murang pasahe... Huwag silang sasakay sa taxi na ending 1 at 6," sabi ni Bong Suntay, presidente ng Philippine National Taxi Operators Association.
Payo ni Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board, puwedeng tumawag ang mga pasahero sa kanilang hotlines para ireklamo ang mga abusadong drayber.
"Tignan niyo lang kung may sticker na iyong taxi na... it's colored yellow. It's A4 size, nasa left windshield ng taxi," ani Atty. Nelson Laluces, chairman ng LTRB.
Nakipagpulong naman ang ilang transport group kay Laluces para igiit ang pisong provisional increase sa pasahe sa jeep.
Malabong pagbigyan ng LTFRB ang hirit na agahan pa ang paglalabas ng desisyon kaya nakiusap sila sa mga transport group.
"Huwag muna kayong gumawa ng unnecessary action. Give us time," sambit ni Laluces.
Nangako ang Pasang Masda na hindi magra-rally basta ibigay ang pisong umento sa katapusan ng Enero.
"Wala munang pagkilos na gagawin ang aming samahan hangga't hindi natatapos ang buwan ng Enero," ani Obet Martin, pangulo ng Pasang Masda.
Tiniyak naman ni Laluces na merong pagtataas sa pasahe pero ayaw niyang sabihin kung aabot ito ng piso.
Reaction:
As my reaction in the stated article above, I want to have my comment in both parties --- taxi passengers, and taxi drivers and operators.
As a passenger, the P40 flagdown rate with P3.50 for every succeeding kilometer or 250 meters is too much. The rich people won’t mind about this price hike not because they can afford it but because they have their own cars where they don’t need to ride a taxi unlike the ordinary people. As one of the ordinary people, I think the old price is expensive enough. I live in Bangkal which is a bit far from downtown, and if ever I ride a taxi I usually pay more or less P100.
In the part of the drivers and operators, I think it’s unfair to just let the taxi cabs with plate numbers ending with 1 and 6 to have the price hike. Just like all employed people, taxi drivers also look forward to that price hike to increase their income. So it’s unfair to have it only to few of them. What’s the ratio with the taxi cabs’ plate number ending with 1 and 6? 2 to 10? That’s too small even if we calculate it using any kinds of math formula.
In conclusion, both parties can have its own ups and downs. But for sure, because taxis already have its share in the price hike, others will follow.
>>> DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT HERE <<<
Other same articles:
-LTFRB says, it'll be staggered taxi fare hike
-Jeepney, bus rate hikes to follow taxi fare hike
-Taxi Fare Hike in The Philippines
-Taxi fare hike hit
Clarin Economics
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Create your own Icon!
There are applications that let's you create a customized icon but there is another way to create your own icon in a simple way. The least you'll need is the Windows MS Paint and and follow the steps that follows.
First: Open the Windows MS Paint.
Second: Click the "File" located in the top menu bar, and click "Open" from the file menu.
Third: A window will open. Locate the image file you want to be your icon. Click "Open" button
Fourth: Resize the image by 16x16, 32x32, 48x48, 64x64, 72x72, 96x96, or 128x128
         Tip: You can resize the image beforehand
Fifth: Click the "File" located in the top menu bar, and click "Save as"
Sixth: Indicate the File name of your icon then add the .ico (eg. sample.ico)
Seventh: Choose "24-bit bitmap" in the "Save as type" then click "Save"
There you have it! Your own customized icon!
First: Open the Windows MS Paint.
Second: Click the "File" located in the top menu bar, and click "Open" from the file menu.
Third: A window will open. Locate the image file you want to be your icon. Click "Open" button
Fourth: Resize the image by 16x16, 32x32, 48x48, 64x64, 72x72, 96x96, or 128x128
         Tip: You can resize the image beforehand
Fifth: Click the "File" located in the top menu bar, and click "Save as"
Sixth: Indicate the File name of your icon then add the .ico (eg. sample.ico)
Seventh: Choose "24-bit bitmap" in the "Save as type" then click "Save"
There you have it! Your own customized icon!
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
December Economic Issue
Article Name: Roadworthiness is a concern
Retrieved: December 23, 2010
URL: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/opinion/editorial-roadworthiness-concern
FOR weeks on end now, we see passenger multicabs with computer printout messages protesting what is called the "multicab phase-out."
Occasionally, we see rallies outside the Land Transportation Office and the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board protesting the same.
The message sent is that by next year, all multicab vehicles serving as passenger jeepneys will be phased out, and the public says, that should not be so.
A closer inquiry on what the problem is, however, shows a skewed perspective on what public transport should be.
In the middle of the protest is Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC) Department Order 96-963 on "Modernization of Public Transport Services."
"No unit shall be the subject of a new application for franchise, for extension of validity of Certificate of Public Convenience (CPC), for substitution of unit, and for increase of number of unit(s), if said unit is more than the minimum age requirement as specified below by the time of expiration of the covering CPC," the department order says.
For buses and minibuses including shuttle and school buses, it's 15 years from date of initial registration with the LTO.
For taxis, vehicles for rent, garage services and limousine services, the model of the unit should not be more than ten years old.
For what DOTC calls "filcab" or what is commonly known in Davao as multicab, it says, "The unit should not be more than ten years old reckoned from the date of initial registration with the LTO.
Meaning, the riding public is being taken for a ride by those protesting. It is not just multicab phase-out, it's phase-out of multicabs that are already more than a decade old.
The order was made in 1996, and thus the multicabs given franchise on that year should be 14 years old by this time, and still the order cannot be implemented. How old should public utility vehicles then be before operators and drivers allow these to retire? To think that these are already reconditioned and rebuilt units. No multicab is brand-new, and yet they are considered new when first registered. Now drivers and operators are saying they want to squeeze out more than a decade worth of service from these units?
It's back to the arguments that saw the deaths of passengers of uso-uso drivers. Drivers who were not above saying they have to drive at top speed so as to earn more because rice prices have gone up, food prices have gone up, and oil prices have gone up, never mind if they endanger the lives of their passengers in the process.
This is the same argument being used by payong-payong drivers who disregard traffic laws and drive along main thoroughfares when their existence have long been tolerated for as long as they only serve side-streets and subdivisions. They are poor, they have to earn, they would say. Never mind if their vehicles are not roadworthy and never mind if they are packing as many as 15 pupils in one payong-payong. They are poor, they have to earn. Never mind if even cars are not designed to carry 15 people.
This is all about roadworthiness, and not about depriving the poor. Public transport has to be serviced by roadworthy vehicles and this is what the LTFRB should make sure of.
Published in the Sun Star Davao newspaper on November 04, 2010
Reaction:
I think it is not about the vehicle age that the LTO, DOTC or CPC must phased-out the multicab vechiles. There are other certain things that they must look closer like the condition of the vehicle. Let’s say there are two vehicles that age 5 years and 15 years. The 5-year-old vehicle is already in bad condition – the engine always gets stuck or something – while the 15-year-old vehicle is still in good condition despite of its “old age” because it is well maintain. If we based it in the DOTC Department Order 96-963, then the vehicle that is 15 years will not be renewed. But if we based it in the vehicle’s condition, then the 5-year-old vehicle will be the one who won’t and must not be renewed because mainly because it’s not capable anymore of transporting the passengers.
Another thing is about the “uso-uso” vehicles. As a regular jeepney passenger especially multicabs (because it gets full easy because of its limited seating capacity), I never, even once, experienced riding an uso-uso multicab. Well, I experienced fast multicab drivers but being a fast driver is different from reckless driver. And as far as I know, the common uso-uso vehicles are the big ones not the small ones like multicab.
Overall it’s not right to just phased-out the multicabs. They must not look at the vehicle as a multicab, bus, or whatsoever. They must look at the condition of vehicle and maybe its past records like if this vehicle often gets an accident or the driver of this vehicle is not a good driver. And with this no driver will lost his job because he is driving a multicab.
>>> DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT HERE <<<
Retrieved: December 23, 2010
URL: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/opinion/editorial-roadworthiness-concern
FOR weeks on end now, we see passenger multicabs with computer printout messages protesting what is called the "multicab phase-out."
Occasionally, we see rallies outside the Land Transportation Office and the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board protesting the same.
The message sent is that by next year, all multicab vehicles serving as passenger jeepneys will be phased out, and the public says, that should not be so.
A closer inquiry on what the problem is, however, shows a skewed perspective on what public transport should be.
In the middle of the protest is Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC) Department Order 96-963 on "Modernization of Public Transport Services."
"No unit shall be the subject of a new application for franchise, for extension of validity of Certificate of Public Convenience (CPC), for substitution of unit, and for increase of number of unit(s), if said unit is more than the minimum age requirement as specified below by the time of expiration of the covering CPC," the department order says.
For buses and minibuses including shuttle and school buses, it's 15 years from date of initial registration with the LTO.
For taxis, vehicles for rent, garage services and limousine services, the model of the unit should not be more than ten years old.
For what DOTC calls "filcab" or what is commonly known in Davao as multicab, it says, "The unit should not be more than ten years old reckoned from the date of initial registration with the LTO.
Meaning, the riding public is being taken for a ride by those protesting. It is not just multicab phase-out, it's phase-out of multicabs that are already more than a decade old.
The order was made in 1996, and thus the multicabs given franchise on that year should be 14 years old by this time, and still the order cannot be implemented. How old should public utility vehicles then be before operators and drivers allow these to retire? To think that these are already reconditioned and rebuilt units. No multicab is brand-new, and yet they are considered new when first registered. Now drivers and operators are saying they want to squeeze out more than a decade worth of service from these units?
It's back to the arguments that saw the deaths of passengers of uso-uso drivers. Drivers who were not above saying they have to drive at top speed so as to earn more because rice prices have gone up, food prices have gone up, and oil prices have gone up, never mind if they endanger the lives of their passengers in the process.
This is the same argument being used by payong-payong drivers who disregard traffic laws and drive along main thoroughfares when their existence have long been tolerated for as long as they only serve side-streets and subdivisions. They are poor, they have to earn, they would say. Never mind if their vehicles are not roadworthy and never mind if they are packing as many as 15 pupils in one payong-payong. They are poor, they have to earn. Never mind if even cars are not designed to carry 15 people.
This is all about roadworthiness, and not about depriving the poor. Public transport has to be serviced by roadworthy vehicles and this is what the LTFRB should make sure of.
Published in the Sun Star Davao newspaper on November 04, 2010
Reaction:
I think it is not about the vehicle age that the LTO, DOTC or CPC must phased-out the multicab vechiles. There are other certain things that they must look closer like the condition of the vehicle. Let’s say there are two vehicles that age 5 years and 15 years. The 5-year-old vehicle is already in bad condition – the engine always gets stuck or something – while the 15-year-old vehicle is still in good condition despite of its “old age” because it is well maintain. If we based it in the DOTC Department Order 96-963, then the vehicle that is 15 years will not be renewed. But if we based it in the vehicle’s condition, then the 5-year-old vehicle will be the one who won’t and must not be renewed because mainly because it’s not capable anymore of transporting the passengers.
Another thing is about the “uso-uso” vehicles. As a regular jeepney passenger especially multicabs (because it gets full easy because of its limited seating capacity), I never, even once, experienced riding an uso-uso multicab. Well, I experienced fast multicab drivers but being a fast driver is different from reckless driver. And as far as I know, the common uso-uso vehicles are the big ones not the small ones like multicab.
Overall it’s not right to just phased-out the multicabs. They must not look at the vehicle as a multicab, bus, or whatsoever. They must look at the condition of vehicle and maybe its past records like if this vehicle often gets an accident or the driver of this vehicle is not a good driver. And with this no driver will lost his job because he is driving a multicab.
>>> DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT HERE <<<
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Review Questions (Chapter 3) for Econ111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Review Questions (Chapter 2) for Econ111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Review Questions (Chapter 1) for Econ111
1. Government policies designed to promote efficiency:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE: answers are in bold and underline
My Other Blogs
Eruditing Idiot
http://eruditingidiot.blogspot.com
Entertainment Games
http://entertainmentgames09.blogspot.com
Earn Money Here!
http://earnsilvermoney.blogspot.com
Portable Applications
http://portableapps09.blogspot.com
Be a Computer Programmer
http://computerprogrammer09.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)