In this post, I just want to highlight a possible worst case senario which puts the behaviour in doubt and disappointment. By the way, whatever i am going to elaborate on are actual events that happened, just that i brought them all together to happen on the same day. In particular, I am not very please with the way some people behaviour on public transport.
At the very instant when the bus arrives at the bus stop, you will see the crowd swamping towards the door. The annoying thing to see, is people trying to squeeze their way infront of you as people board the bus. Even more surprising, there was several times when I see parents telling their little children to squeeze up and "chok" a seat. If this is the case, it will be no wonder that these children will grow up to be like those that cut the queue. Personally, I don't see any desperate need to have a seat unless any of the following reasons apply:
- There are empty seats
- I am pregnant or an elderly
- I am ill or feeling unwell
Afterall, how long will the average bus journey be? For those long journey trips, there will always be people alighting mid-way and numerous seats are available. So what for rush to get a seat, making yourself appear rude to the public?
Like most usual cases, people will usually make use of a variety of transport to their work place, and the next most common mode will be the MRT. The yellow lines drawn on the platform at every exit of the train is a good move done by the appropriate authorities. It does not signify the lack of "give way" attitude of commuters, but instead, they make it more easy for people to follow and ease the flow of exits and entries into the individual doors of the train. Many years back without these Y shaped lines, people would just crowd around the entrance, like when you board the bus. It is a principle where one follows suit upon seeing the others doing so. Imagine the train approaching, and one guy just step up closer to the entrance, if you don't follow, you can well be the last to enter. Or maybe not if the train is packed, and there is understandable because its human nature. However, what puts me off is that despite these lines, some people still do not adhere to the "guidelines". While majority do not do so, which is indeed a good sign" those who did brought about huge inconvenience to the people boarding and alighting the bus. Selfishness has resulted in greater inefficiency and difficulty boarding a train at peak hours. Probably only a fine will help to deter them, because such occurance are quite common.
So on the train, there are several ill behaviours that people can demonstrate. Firstly, I really wonder how some people can switch on the music from their mobile phones and play it like nobody's business. Naturally, you will have the gut feeling that your action annoy the public. Look around and you will see faces of displeasure staring at you, or there are also faces of hope, taking it positive that you will come to realise that your actions disrupt the peace on the train and you will switch that off. Sadly, these people who do so do not realise that, or rather, they choose not to. And the group of people who exhibit such behaviour are the same bunch who speaks loudly in public and misbehaves. If you know who are those i'm referring to...In most cases, I do not want to get a seat on the train for the following reaons:
- You will have to give it up anyway when there is a elderly or pregnant lady.
- It will be an awkward situation when you offer to give your sit up but they are not willing to take it up.
- You do not need to rush into a train so that you can get one
It can get very embarrassing too when two people rush to get a seat. There was once when i witness 2 old man going towards an empty seat. One was just standing right infront of it. The other was further away and hence, he ran towards it and managed to get the seat. Afterwhich, he mumbled to himself and sat on the seat with much arrogance. I pitied the other old man, because he deserved it, but well, at least he showed some dignity.Recently in the news, there have been reports on the increase in the minimum fund for the CPF lifelong fund. I believe the whole idea of the the lifelong fund is ridiculous. I have been wondering for quite awhile, is this actually benefiting the goverment. From what i have learnt from economics, the CPF is similar to the central bank, so if people have to increase their contribution, that means there will be more funds available for the goverment to actually loan out, or use as investment. Nonetheless, literacy level in Singapore has been increasing exponentially over the years, so is this scheme actually necessary. As a relatively educated community, people nowadays do know how to manage their funds and save for the future. If the goverment have it for the interest of its people, i think it is redundant. If its for other reasons, then i think the people should push for it to be abolished. The fact about it being compulsory brought about alot of unhappiness among the citizens, and i do voice my unhappiness because i'm a future generation who would be soon affected by it. Isn't it silly to work so hard to have to contribute to CPF? So now you probably know why Singapore is not in debt like the US because the former borrows from its own people. If you are wealthy and have ample of cash at home, it may have a lower impact on you because what difference will these little money make. On the other end, the average Singaporeans will feel the pinch because you will get even lower than the barely manageable salary you get. Considering inflation that is inevitable, it is a serious cause for concern. Even the contribution has to keep up with inflation, hence the increase in minimum fund. What a irony.. So you barely make it there during your days as an employee, so that you will have just sufficient to live when you are old. There is an endless debate going on. But personally, i feel such a scheme is not necessary and it should not be imposed on the citizens.
Besides that, a rise in ERP gantry charges is up on the way. The goverment says, this is so that a faster travelling route can be provided to those that actually pay. So does that mean that those who don't not have to be penalised in the sense that they have to waste more time? We need to bear in mind that we are Singaporeans travelling on the roads of Singapore. Not to forget all motorist actually pay for COE and road tax. Isn't the above sufficient to ensure that everyone is at an equal level of fairness in treatment? It is simply atrocious, first being the increase in number of gantry which is subsequently followed by a increase in charges. Singapore is one of the few countries to have such a system put in place. It is definitely not a wise solution to traffic congestion because people will simply avoid ERP routes, resulting in congestion on the other areas of Singapore. So, they might set up additional ones there and very soon, ERP will be on every major road exits and entrance. Ultimately, you will have to pay whenever you travel by cars because they are unavoidable, unless you have cars with wings to fly over them. I simply cannot imagine the times when Singapore will come to such circumstances. Soon is what i'm sure of.
So now, where is the rise in wage to cope with all the above increases?