Propose A Law

[skitz]

batibut,

 

No, I don't think that squatters like where they live. Pero that is no excuse for anarchy. And I am all for helping the poor... pero they must help themselves too! Ngayon, may proposal na relocation site at the cost of 1 pack of cigarettes a day lang ang bayad, ayaw pa! Dahil sanay na ng walang bayad... at tuloy pa rin ang paninigarilyo ng jobless na tatay...

[Podweed]

If I may be permitted to indirectly reply to these comments.  Do you really think, the homeless enjoy living under flyovers?   The conditions they live in are inhuman.  They are there not because they want to make our lives miserable. They are there because, they are living miserable lives.  

 

Again.  The Lina Law is a form of social welfare legislation.   The government enacted that law because it recognized its obligation to provide shelter to the homeless.   We should celebrate that recognition.   At least, by some token, the government is able to live up to their duties and obligations to the poor.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Counsellor, when results of implementing that law have been far from the intention, shouldn't we concern ourselves now with measures to properly rectify deficiencies? So noble a piece of legislation has failed. We recognize squatters' abject poverty and abysmal circumstances and we do not begrudge them what little dignity they have. We give to charities and fund-raisers intended for them whenever we can. What we are saying is unless the Lina Law is repealed altogether, no half-measure will be enough to prevent the problem from getting worse.

Edited March 10, 2005 by Podweed

[Podweed]

batibut,

 

No, I don't think that squatters like where they live. Pero that is no excuse for anarchy. And I am all for helping the poor... pero they must help themselves too! Ngayon, may proposal na relocation site at the cost of 1 pack of cigarettes a day lang ang bayad, ayaw pa! Dahil sanay na ng walang bayad... at tuloy  pa rin ang paninigarilyo ng jobless na tatay...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's the kind of mentality the Lina Law failed to see would develop and is now fostering. Gusto libre lahat. That's not right. How long has that law been on the books? Too long. If that's the cause, get rid of it. They should've nipped it in the bud when things obviously were going awry.

[Jourdan]

If I may be permitted to indirectly reply to these comments.  Do you really think, the homeless enjoy living under flyovers?  The conditions they live in are inhuman.  They are there not because they want to make our lives miserable. They are there because, they are living miserable lives. 

 

Again.  The Lina Law is a form of social welfare legislation.  The government enacted that law because it recognized its obligation to provide shelter to the homeless.  We should celebrate that recognition.  At least, by some token, the government is able to live up to their duties and obligations to the poor.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

one reason y the phils can't move forward is that we have so many people who r willing to wear their hearts on their sleeves and use them more than their heads...arguing on the basis of compassion, etc rather than thinking logically on what could be the BEST ALTERNATIVE.

 

just admit it, in any imperfect, especially developing economy, there will be the have nots and the haves...

 

u leave out the haves to themselves and u try ur best to take care of the have nots...however, taking care of the have nots do not require the gov't to abandon development...bec in the long haul, DEVELOPMENT IS A STRUCTURAL SOLUTION RATHER THAN A MERE TREATMENT OF SYMPTOMS, w/c is what LINA LAW is all about.

 

homeless? and then what? allow them to stay for some more UNTIL u find them "decent" places to live??? and did u ever think the poorest of the poor benefited??? GET REAL. for one, most relocation sites are very far removed from civilization...ergo, no jobs for those relocated...y??? the poorest of these men are unskilled people so they obviously need to be in places where there are a lot of labor-intensive factories and production plants employing people w/ their level of skills...and believe me, most relocation sites are VERY VERY NEAR the urban centers...yeah, hell yeah...like gazillion miles near the potential places of work. tsk tsk tsk now, u have a house, u don't have a work...tough luck!!! yeah, the gov't really has helped them...so what happens??? they sell the house, move back to the city and put up a shanty on gov't soil...and the drama continues...u want this solution??? good one.

 

secondly, there such a thing called PRECEDENCE...u allow one, then everyone will follow...and how will u differentiate between a REAL poor and a hawkish PRETENDER??? virtually impossible or perhaps can be virtually impossible with the aid of bribes. so u let the "professionals" take advantage of the law and "allow" them to put "apartments" albeit rudimentary and all...at the expense of what??? the poor who will then "rent" these "apartments"...now u ask me, how come i know??? well, i' ve been to those places...as part of an NGO, and i could see the "mayores" of those places...virtual royalties over their "humble" kingdoms.

 

thirdly, this has put an enormous burden on the gov't enough to force the gov't to put a new department, and institute another bureuacracy that would turn into another "graft and corruption" center....great, this is really helping us all. evidence??? have u ever been to a relocation sites??? see the houses, and then CHECK the tabs...the price tags...notwithstanding even that some, if not all, houses have been put up with help from NGOs and private individuals...see how "cheap" these houses are...they're so cheap u'll be tempted to ask the money for the gov't and spend it building a nifty bungalow...m i being sarcastic??? hell yeah.

 

u want to implement social welfare??? them implement LAND REFORM. make the countryside liveable to people...then u solve the problems of the influx of people to urban centers only to become homeless.

 

ADN REPEAL THE LINA LAW.

 

and what abt the squatters at this point???cordone them off..no more influx of new people...no more putting up of new houses...inventorise their income levels, and assets, and expenditures...set paramaters that if u go exceed these parameters, u don't qualify to stay anymore. u forcibly get these people out. no compensation. nothing...

 

then implement stringet rules of family planning..set a max no. of kids allowed. exceed and then force them to give up the excess to orphanage...

 

point is, no convenience should be for free. and a free rent is essentially a convenience.

[hsmeilop]

jourdan: "then implement stringet rules of family planning..set a max no. of kids allowed. exceed and then force them to give up the excess to orphanage..."

 

this will be opposed by the catholic church. like whats happening now in the ligtas buntis program of the government. i read somewhere that the health workers working on that program are even BANNED from having communion!! the church view hasnt changed. to the detriment of our country.

[hsmeilop]

i would like to propose a law that the FORCE department stores to price their goods in .25 centavos increments. And they should give change!!!

 

like i buy winstons in my local grocery. they priced it at P20.30 per pack. i give them P21 but they only give .50c change. that's CHEATING!!! 20 cents might be small change. but if you count all the people who buys winstons.... that's a lot.

 

My wife used to work for SM before. and she told me that SM supermarket averages P30,000++ of change! that's from all the "kulang ng sukli". Grrr....

 

With this law, Central Bank can also stop minting those buttons called the 5 centavo and 10 centavo coins!

[skitz]

i would like to propose a law that the FORCE department stores to price their goods in .25 centavos increments. And they should give change!!!

 

like i buy winstons in my local grocery. they priced it at P20.30 per pack. i give them P21 but they only give .50c change. that's CHEATING!!! 20 cents might be small change. but if you count all the people who buys winstons.... that's a lot.

 

My wife used to work for SM before. and she told me that SM supermarket averages P30,000++ of change! that's from all the "kulang ng sukli". Grrr....

 

With this law, Central Bank can also stop minting those buttons called the 5 centavo and 10 centavo coins!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I second the motion!

[skitz]

EXPAND THE LATERAL ATTRITION ACT TO COVER ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

 

I know that the current law is specifically written for the BIR. Pero, konting adjustments lang niyan, pwede na sa lahat. Ganun naman talaga dapat e. Sa private sector, if you don't do your job, or if your job is no longer relevant, you get fired.

[hsmeilop]

yeah. para mabawas naman mga government employees na nangungurakot!

[batibut]

batibut,

No, I don't think that squatters like where they live. Pero that is no excuse for anarchy. And I am all for helping the poor... pero they must help themselves too! Ngayon, may proposal na relocation site at the cost of 1 pack of cigarettes a day lang ang bayad, ayaw pa! Dahil sanay na ng walang bayad... at tuloy  pa rin ang paninigarilyo ng jobless na tatay...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's the kind of mentality the Lina Law failed to see would develop and is now fostering. Gusto libre lahat. That's not right. How long has that law been on the books? Too long. If that's the cause, get rid of it. They should've nipped it in the bud when things obviously were going awry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Please do not look over the fact that I recognize "squatting" as an invasion and violation of legitimate property rights exercised by private individuals. Hence, my proposal to merely amend the law to exclude privately owned property.

 

The law does not state that the people to be relocated should be able to stay in the relocation area rent-free. The law only provides that before they are evicted and their homes demolished, the government first provide them another place to live. Precisely to prevent them from living in the streets and under bridges and flyovers.

 

The problem is massive, you need not point out that fact to me. Yes, the homeless must also help themselves, alongside the assistance provided by the government. I recognize that there are, as everywhere else, bad apples in the bushel. There are professional squatters. There are the lazy poor, who think that the world owes them a living. I do not deny their existence. In the same token, I want you to recognize, the existence of the legitimate poor, who because of the circumstances of their birth and the lack of available opportunity for betterment are kept in the quagmire of poverty no matter how hard they struggle to get out. These are citizens for whom the State is duty bound to care. Do you mean to tell me that because of the bad apples, you will take away the assistance the government is willing to provide them? Let us not forget that what is in issue here is not simply a square meter of earth or concrete. It is shelter, which serves not only as protection from the elements, but also as their homes.

 

I know that the Lina Law of and by itself will not solve the problem of homelessness and squatting in our country. But the law was enacted to protect those, who are unable to protect themselves. For our country is one which believes that he who has less in life need not be less in law. This is not merely compassion, this is equity.

Edited March 11, 2005 by batibut

[Podweed]

Please do not look over the fact that I recognize "squatting" as an invasion and violation of legitimate property rights exercised by private individuals.   Hence, my proposal to merely amend the law to exclude privately owned property.

 

The law does not state that the people to be relocated should be able to stay in the relocation area rent-free.   The law only provides that before they are evicted and their homes demolished, the government first provide them another place to live.   Precisely to prevent them from living in the streets and under bridges and flyovers.   

 

The problem is massive, you need not point out that fact to me.   Yes, the homeless must also help themselves, alongside the assistance provided by the government.  I recognize that there are, as everywhere else, bad apples in the bushel.   There are professional squatters.   There are the lazy poor, who think that the world owes them a living.   I do not deny their existence.   In the same token, I want you to recognize, the existence of the legitimate poor, who because of the circumstances of their birth and the lack of available opportunity for betterment are kept in the quagmire of poverty no matter how hard they struggle to get out.   These are citizens for whom the State is duty bound to care.    Do you mean to tell me that because of the bad apples, you will take away the assistance the government is willing to provide them?   Let us not forget that what is in issue here is not simply a square meter of earth or concrete.   It is shelter, which serves not only as protection from the elements, but also as their homes.  

 

I know that the Lina Law of and by itself will not solve the problem of homelessness and squatting in our country.   But the law was enacted to protect those, who are unable to protect themselves.   For our country is one which believes that he who has less in life need not be less in law.   This is not merely compassion, this is equity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We concede the finer points that, in fact, the Lina Law means well. However, when the reality on the ground is that squatters are now so bold it has become very difficult and prohibitively expensive, even for government, to evict them because that law is heavily in their favor, it is time to think about drastic solutions. Perhaps, to match how drastic the situation now is.

 

The present activities of the squatter-syndicates will alienate even the biggest bleeding hearts, who, ironically, think they're helping all those people by coddling them. This will only embolden informal settlers to resist sincere government efforts to alleviate their plight since they know a noisy minority stands ready to block any move intended to better them. Misplaced concern, to say the least. This produces a situation where both parties have each other by the balls and curlies.

 

Counsellor, we cannot and do not argue against the potential of the Lina Law. But that begs the question, what happened? Its principal author whose grand pronouncement we are all familiar with happens to be Secretary of the Interior. If he is not up to the task of fully implementing his pet measure, who then, how then, when then will we take the painful but necessary steps to right where that law went wrong?

 

The problem of squatting has been politicized for far too long now. That has effectively turned every attempt to solve it into a fool's errand. A charade even. It's high-time politicians listened and made their hearts bleed for the affected land owners. It may be a shot at the moon, given the number of votes informal settlers are ready to deliver (their only insurance), but at the very least, large swathes of our cities, once a feasible solution is arrived at, can finally be properly developed, while relocatees are made to realize government will help them but they cannot have their cake and eat it, too.

 

I read in one opinion column that currently, "disturbance fees" on prime public land, though not mandated by law, sometimes reach Php. 450,000 per squatter. That's crazy. At that rate, solving the problem by giving in to this kind of blackmail will bankrupt our government. To the detriment of us all. That is the Road to Hell. Paved with the best intentions.

 

That must stop. No matter what a particular measure intended.

Edited March 11, 2005 by Podweed

[coolestboy]

I propose two laws - timely for the summer....

 

(1) a law creating the Boracay Island Development Authority (BIDA) - patterned after Republic Act No. 4850 (Charter of the Laguna Lake Development Authority), this law seeks to remedy the narrow minded thinking of some officials of Aklan province, host province of Boracay island. Just imagine, in a span of more than 30 years, those idiots failed to develop the following basis infrastructures and safeguards: an honest to goodness pier at the Caticlan jetty port suitable to world safety standards (i remember a foreign tourist turning back when he saw how dangerous it is to board those pumpboats); No safe mode of transportation to the island; Crazy system of pumpboats berthing at beach front where thes primitive boats tend to bleed oil and injure swimmers, No lifeguard; No decent hospital for emergency response unit (a foreigner died there due to lack of hospital facilities; No honest to goodness tourist police (PNP stationed there are either twerps or combat shellshocked M16 toting punks destroying the scenery); No regulation as to the foreshore limit of huts and shanties which dot the white beach, No decent water treatment system; No decent garbage dump or disposal system; no anti-drug enforcement team (hell boracay is a big drug paradise without it), No control on alcohol sales (hell even 15 year olds can drink the worse alcohol); No decent zoning ordinance and building ordinance (look at those crampy cottages). GEZZZZZ what did the former Congresswoman do about these problems during her term? We thought she is a resort owner pa naman. I pray that the current Congressman Miraflores can author this bill to save Boracay Island. If not tourist should be advised to put on anti-bacterial lotions before bathing in stinky boracay waters.

 

(2) Highway Safety Act - A bill which places criminal and civil liability on parents who let their children roam dangerously in roads -whether city or provincial roads and highways. This law will penalize parents who push their children to peddle pamunas, newspapers, cigarettes, beg, etc. along and in the middle of the road (yong nagpapatintero sa mga truck at sasakyan). Come to think of it - abandonment of minor children and to allow them to roam around dangerously in busy streets and highway. The bill also takes away any presumption of negligence from the motorists when they get involve with accidents and the victims are minors who are unattended by parents or guardians.

[Podweed]

A law to truly revive Laguna de Bay. That lake used to the bluest of blue, and now, it's brown.

 

The Laguna Lake Development Authority lists several uses of that body of water. They are: as a source of fish, (future) source of potable water, transport route, reservoir for flood water, power generation, non-contact recreation, irrigation, industrial cooling, and waste sink. Though these are normal for any large body of water in close proximity to a major urban center, I don't have the exact figures on their ecological impact or if current monitoring and other programs geared for sustainability are enough.

 

a. Severely limit or cut back on large-scale fish pen cultures. Even from a moving vantage point like a car on SLEX, one can make them out. Let local fishermen who have the most at stake benefit from the lake's shrinking abundance of fish.

 

b. Reduce by a third, and eventually by half, the 23 barges plying the lake carrying an average of 75,640 barrels of oil and oil products to various supply depots daily. Let's not take comfort in not hearing about any spills. If there was one and even if a clean-up was successful, the Pasig River will still have to drain it. There goes efforts to revive that waterway as well.

 

c. Use it as a major transportation highway. They say it already is. I say I don't even know where the ferry-points are located. If travel across the lake is easy, people will start thinking about relocating to the countryside. You then encourage development there and at the same time, ease the congestion of Metro Manila. Let us hope that with the windfall of more taxes, those towns will grow with the preservation of the environment high on their to-do list.

 

d. Slap penalties on lakeside plants that use it as a huge waste sink or give them incentives to find other ways to dispose of industrial waste. The watershed currently is also a dump for solid and liquid waste from households and cropland areas in surrounding towns and cities and because not a single municipality possesses an effective sewerage system, pollution carried through run-off find their way to its sub-basin.

 

e. Penalize plants that use its water for industrial cooling and don't come up with ways to temporarily dam the hot discharge (at + 20C degrees) before releasing it back into the lake.

 

f. Why can't we properly develop its tourism potential? In many places I've been, the presence of such a large body of fresh water makes towns and cities scramble to find ways of putting up a marina and lakeside facilities to attract visitors, while at the same time, ensuring that strict regulations against pollution are in place. Having a viable tourist destination will also increase property values around it. That provides residents with a reason to keep their lake (and source of livelihood) clean always. As things are, I've never been able to suggest to my out-of-country hosts that they tour it.

 

g. Double or treble LLDA's funding to give it more teeth in going after violators.

 

All these can be done gradually, so as to limit the economic costs of abrupt changes to affected areas and industries. If measures such as these already are in the works or in place, maybe they can be sped up a little?

 

If what I think aren't feasible, can somebody come up with what are? Thanks.

 

 

Simply beautiful, noh? Sayang, eh.

Edited March 12, 2005 by Podweed

[hsmeilop]

I propose two laws - timely for the summer....

 

(2) Highway Safety Act - A bill which places criminal and civil liability on parents who let their children roam dangerously in roads -whether city or provincial roads and highways.  This law will penalize parents who push their children to peddle pamunas, newspapers, cigarettes, beg, etc. along and in the middle of the road (yong nagpapatintero sa mga truck at sasakyan).  Come to think of it - abandonment of minor children and to allow them to roam around dangerously in busy streets and highway.  The bill also takes away any presumption of negligence from the motorists when they get involve with accidents and the victims are minors who are unattended by parents or guardians.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

s**t!!! I'm for this LAW!!! I run over a kid in Mandaue city reclamation. he was 5 years old. it was 830pm. there were no lights in that part of the reclaimed area. and the kids was playing tag in the middle of the f**king highway. good thing that I was driving a 4x4 pickup. i just broke his left femur. DAMN!!!!

[skitz]

These are citizens for whom the State is duty bound to care. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do not get me wrong. I appreciate where you are coming from. And there is a big part of me who believe in all that. However, the above quote is where you and I differ. I do NOT believe that the STATE is DUTY BOUND to take care of anybody... poor or rich alike. The STATE is not your mother. The State is there to deliver what we are paying for in taxes and to arbitrate between individuals when their "rights" conflict with each other... nothing more.

 

Yung sense of entitlement ang greatest reason kung bakit ang daming mahirap sa Pinas. Believe me, there is no reason to be poor... or to put it more accurately, to remain poor. At age 6, nagtulak ako ng kariton (dyaryo bote).... I know what I am talking about.

 

The State is there to create an environment where jobs can be generated, it is not there to give you a job. At the risk of appearing cold and heartless, let me just say that the more you "baby" these people the less are their chances to improve their lot in life.