Quote Originally Posted by nicolodeon View Post
The Philippines is a arguably a "poor" nation so therefore what would be good for the masses would always outweigh the good of the few, in this case "few" pertains to private vehicle owners who bring their vehicles to work on a daily basis. So as Dr. Kamiya had pointed out, PUVs occupy roughly the same space on the roads as private vehicles and can ferry more travellers/passeners than a four-seater car. If one looks at EDSA's gridlock during rush hour, private vehicles far outnumber public utility vehicles. This may or may not be the case in other major roads, though.

In a country where having a private vehicle is a luxury and not a necessity, drastically lowering the number of public transport vehicles plying the roads would have an adverse effect on the lives of people. Case in point: a three day PUV strike or the government cutting down 30% of PUVs plying their on a daily basis. While some of the private vehicle owners out there shout "Hurrah! No traffic!", a lot of the commuting public would not be reaching their destinations. Some of the effects are: production slowdowns/delays because workers are not able to report to work, children being left behind class subjects because they were not able to go to school or being late for school, people loosing potential job placements because they did not arrive at interviews, a poor pregnant housewife loosing her child because she had no PUV to flag down and so on.

However, I do agree that something must be done to ease traffic along major thoroughfares and that something has to be done to improve traffic discipline of all motorists, regardless if one drives a private vehicle or a PUV.

If and when an improved coding scheme would be applied in the future, I think is should be applicable to all types of vehicles on the road - no exceptions.
Question: Are you a lawyer? Or do you just write really well..hehehe...enjoyed reading that...parang after that...CASE CLOSED!
hahaha