Tag Archives: angry mob

It’s a Trap!!!

Remember when you were a kid? You would ask for lots and lots of candy or chocolate or whatever it is you fancy. You know or at least had an inkling that it would make you sick, but you still asked for it anyway. There would even be a temper-tantrum if you didn’t get it. Why have we not outgrown that yet?

Recently the labor groups have asked for a wage increase. The most militant of them asking for the minimum wage to be increased by P 120 . What’s the wage pegged at now? 400 pesos? 410 pesos? They ask for what amounts to more than a 25% wage increase for every person earning minimum. They claim that that wage level is needed to support a family of six everyday while living in the capital.

Before making my main point in the article let me segue a little. Don’t have a family of six! Try a family of three or four! Why have a family of six when you know perfectly well that you cannot support them? This is precisely why we need something like the RH bill.

 Back on topic now. I wonder what would happen to this group if their wish was actually granted. Alright everybody you now make 25% more. How many small and medium businesses would close down? Faced with taxes, competition from bigger companies, and other challenges, would they be able to continue? The big companies that have factories here would be more able to shoulder the burden of adding a quarter to their payroll for the same amount of work. But would they stay here if they had to? Other countries already offer lower wages than us. We are still competing due to other advantages, but add that much expense and most companies here will pack up and leave. Sure some might stay if they think the cost of moving the factory or call center would be too much, but no new factories would be set up. All those children from the family of six would have nowhere to work when they grow up. The people who would be given money by their request would be out of a job next month.

Yet, the labor groups are upset at the “pro-capitalist” administration for denying them the wage increase. Instead only granting a modest 22 peso increase. I get that they might think that that is not enough but seriously ask for something reasonable! How can you ask for something that will almost certainly drive most of your supporters out of employment and then get angry when it is not granted? These groups would appear more credible and garner more sympathy for their cause when they ask a wage increase that could conceivably granted without driving out all business and then get denied for some reason.

Negotiate in good faith. Ask for what you actually want. Instead of using the whole process as a way to garner points with your members. Showing them that you want huge wage increases for them knowing that the government will never grant it. I honestly would like to see these groups given exactly what they ask for one of these days. Then watch as their own members lynch the leaders.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Policy, rants

Christian Jihadi

I’m officially a terrorist! Woohoo! I wonder if I should get one of those “die infidels” fatigue patterned t-shirts. At the very least I should get a red headband. Where should I start? I don’t want to blow myself up immediately. That would be so final. I’m also not sure I will get seventy female virgins. I’m not Muslim so I might get males. That would be bad. Maybe a bus bombing? I could probably kidnap someone too.

Well if you didn’t know yet, this is a colorful way to introduce my topic for today. One of the leading bishops of the catholic church in our country has officially declared that all people who support the Reproductive Health bill are terrorists. Dibs on the name! I haven’t thought of one yet, but I will make sure it is awesome. In fact when it does come out I hope everyone joins my new terrorist organization. Scare the government into enacting the RH bill! Free ski masks for everyone! Bring your own air-soft gun though.

What is a terrorist though? What is more despicable. Someone who kills his victims cleanly? Or cuts off both arms and legs and lets them live. Even releases them to wander in the streets. Even if we assume that everything they say is true and that even condoms kill, the church is even more guilty. At least we only kill. They condemn thousands of unplanned children to live in abject poverty. Wandering from street to street in search of food. The real kicker is we actually have the technology available to prevent this and still the church tells us to condemn them to this. It’s like having the capability to print bibles in all languages but for some reason keeping it all on your own. Preventing the use of new medicines because you thought your ways were best. Oh wait….. they did that too.

But let’s not get sidetracked. The only reason the church is parroting this morality argument is that this is all they have. They can’t argue that its not good to reduce the population of our country. They can’t argue that there are already too many unemployed. They can’t even argue that most of the new children will come from the lower economic sectors. They may try to raise straw-man arguments by saying population density does not equal population growth but any sane person knows that it is only a part of the solution not the entire thing. So they are reduced to making moral judgments.

Which is not even the real reason why they are against it. Like I said in my previous post. The Protestants and Muslims are getting more numerous. For the first time in our history the church is actually in danger of losing its political stranglehold on our country. So while a majority of our people are still catholic its time to make more catholic babies which grow up to support the church.

Well here we are. Fellow terrorists against the church. Feel proud everyone! Wear the badge of terrorist proudly! Join the C.L.F. Go Christian Liberation Front! Don’t like the name? Suggest something in comments!

Leave a comment

Filed under Policy, rants, Religion

Marcos vs Cory! Round XxX!

Well the country is once again divided! Will we bury our former dictator Marcos in the Cemetery for Heroes or won’t we? Will we forgive him for his past trespasses and let him rest in peace? Or will we hold him up as an example that the Filipino never forgets (on some issues)? Will that red line under Cemetery ever disappear if I don’t use spell check! Interesting times!

Of course like everybody else the Isyw blog has its own opinions. Both sides present some valid arguments and have some impassioned speakers representing them. Both spent plenty of time convincing everybody of the correctness of their position. But still I feel that the most important question has yet to be asked. To wit: DO YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO WITH YOUR TIME?

I mean seriously. We have a growing debt crisis. Growing unemployment. Corruption. At least two armed rebellions. And you want to talk about this? What does this matter? The location of his burial is purely symbolic. It doesn’t get us any more jobs, money, etc.You have thousands of other problems to deal with. I would understand if we took this issue seriously if our country was doing very well, we had no looming problems, etc. Then we would really have time on our hands. But debating this useless issue gets us nowhere. Talk about the RH bill. Talk about our budget. Talk about the ARMM elections. Discuss anything which will actually have an impact on our country.

Bury Marcos in a cardboard box. Bury him in the special cemetery. Bury him wherever the hell you want. His final resting place will not have an impact on what he did in history. Everyone already knows what he did. It is already taught in schools, written inside our history books. At the end of the day everyone will make up their own mind about him regardless of where he is buried.

My personal solution is to have him pay for the privilege. Have his family return some of the money that they have stolen/earned (whatever side you believe) and then apply that directly to our debt. Like I said his resting place is not important. At least the country as a whole gets something out of it.

I can already hear the veterans. “But that will mean we did nothing in Edsa!” To them I ask: Really? Were you there protesting that the dictator should not be buried in the national cemetery? Funny I thought you were there because you wanted to remove him from power. And you did it. No matter what happens from now till the end of time, you did what you did. No burial place is strong enough to take that from you.

Of course, the second argument is that with this solution Marcos will have effectively bought his place in the special cemetery. I still don’t really care where he is buried. He isn’t using his body anymore so I doubt he does too. But if it makes you feel better, whatever happened he was still elected president of our country at least once so there is at least some reason for him to be there.

Look at that! That solution took all of what ten minutes? All that remains to be decided is how much we should charge them. Really if anybody is reading this blog. We have more important things to worry about than where some twenty year old corpse is buried!

1 Comment

Filed under Politics, rants

Entitlement

So many topics to blog about and so little time to do it in. I apologize to any readers I have out there for any delay between my opinions and the news.

 

Recently three Filipinos were caught and convicted of being drug mules in China and were sentenced to death. Naturally there was an uproar in our country and a demand given to the Chinese government for the commutation of the death sentence. We even sent our vice-president to negotiate with the Chinese over the issue.

 

First off, if we really wanted to help our innocent countrymen, wouldn’t we be better off sending our best lawyers who are versed in Chinese jurisprudence to appeal their cases? I understand that there were overwhelming evidence against them. Still if we believe in them then maybe we could argue that the drugs were planted? Maybe they were framed? Or it was not their bag and it was just an unhappy coincidence? If they are innocent why send a negotiator to beg for favor when we can send our best lawyers to fight for their freedom?

 

Of course the whole argument is only valid if they are indeed innocent. Which we knew that they were not. We knew they were guilty of the crime and yet we are still angry at the Chinese government for convicting them. We still ask for leniency knowing full well that they broke the law. What arrogance we as a people have. Are we some sort of exalted country, whose citizens are somehow immune to the laws of the nations we visit? It’s a wonder that any nations would welcome us into their borders if we are.

 

I wonder how we would react if a fictional foreigner, lets call him Daniel Smith, came into our country and violated our laws. He then gets caught and convicted. Then asks his mother country to intervene and either commute the sentence or totally exonerate him for it. Would we smile and give way, I wonder? Or would we fight and complain and stress that he broke the laws of our country, hurt our people, and must be punished for it. Why do we think the Chinese should react differently than we would and have? Do we believe that we are inherently better than them? So much so that we believe our citizens have partial or total immunity from laws in places they visit while they have none here? Why should China’s own citizens be punished more for committing the same crimes that ours have? In their own country no less.

 

We then take the low road. Offering snide comments only the small fish are being caught while the big ones are let free. Insinuating bias against our countrymen and implying that they should be set free. Did the Chinese do something wrong in arresting the minions? Were they not supposed to catch the “small fish” while at the same time building a case against the bigger ones? Think of the consequences of the suggestion. What would prevent people from becoming drug mules if there was no punishment involved? What would motivate them to stay in regular law abiding jobs, if they can get so much more pay as drug minions. At no risk to themselves to boot. Would not the kingpins organization prosper at this? They would have so many applicants that they can take the best people and put them to work for the cartel. Whether we like it or not catching the drug mules is part and parcel of going after the kingpins.

 

The whole thing is just disappointing. I have long thought that we have a false sense of entitlement buried in our national consciousness which makes me expect this type of reaction. It probably has something to do with our successes in people power or some other historical occurrence. What is truly disappointing is that not one person had the courage to tell the popular opinion that it might be wrong. It might just be acting like a spoiled brat. Instead you have Binay, Roxas, and the president….. our glorious leader, bending over backward to try and arrange clemency. It is just so disheartening. How can we expect meaningful change with leaders such as these?

 

There is nothing wrong with attempting to help our fellow countrymen. But help them in such a way that shows other countries that we respect them as well. Nations, like people, interact with each other with the expectation of mutual benefit. Remove that from the equation and no nation will want to deal with us again. Like I send earlier. Send in the best lawyers. Prove that they are blameless. But… but… if they truly have wronged then they must bear the consequences. It is what we would demand others do.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

What Would Jesus Do?

So I was flipping thru channels the other day and came upon an old-ish movie: “I Now Pronounce you Chuck and Larry”; a comedy by Adam Sandler (who I must say is one of the best comedians out there). It revolves around two straight guys getting a same-sex marriage to attain the rights of a conventional marriage. And that’s when I began to think. Why is it we don’t let gay people marry? I mean, aren’t they people too? Why should marriage just be between a man and a woman, why not between two men or even 2 women (which my male brain finds extremely hot)?

There are plenty of reasons why we ban same-sex marriage but the main one is that the church says its wrong. Its in the bible somewhere that man should only be married with women. That makes it wrong for the church and therefore makes it automatically banal, period; which is why many countries have never adopted it.

As I watched Chuck and Larry living together, I thought to myself: “doesn’t it go against the very grain of Christianity though, to have a law against same-sex marriage?” I can already hear the angry mob sharpening pitchforks and preparing burning torches but hear me out first.

If you accept the bible at face value you will see that Jesus was an all-powerful being, able to change reality at a whim. He was able to travel across terrain, feed thousands at a moment’s notice, rise from the dead…basically anything Superman could do. And then some.

Now with all that power what does Jesus do? In the numerous instances he is confronted with evildoers; people who want to stone a prostitute, pharisees who try to trap him, even disciples who end up betraying him, does he ever go: “Wait, you guys want to stone the girl?” *snap* “Now ya don’t.” “Whoa! Pharisees want to kill me?” *wiggle nose* “Now you all love me!”

He doesn’t.

What does he do instead? He TELLS people they are wrong. He convinces them that the things they are doing are not according to what his father’s wishes are and explains the consequences of following the wrong path (i.e. Hell). Yes there is a threat, a very heavy one; eternal damnation BUT there is never a blanket ban of “NO you cannot sin”. The threat doesn’t even apply in this life, it’s carried out after you die.

Placing a ban on same-sex marriage is like forcing people to OBEY the bible. Sinners should they so choose, should be free to keep sinning. Preach all you want, tell them why they are wrong, but don’t force them to obey. Even Jesus didn’t do that. Of course we shouldn’t force churches to accept them either as clergy should also have the freedom to accept the values they want to embrace; and if it would be up to anyone it should be up to the government to recognize same sex marriage.

I can hear you already. “Well since we can’t force people to be good and follow the bible, why should we penalize other biblical sins like say, murder? Let’s have everyone free to be a sinner!”. The important thing to remember when comparing something like murder to same-sex marriage is that murder is an exercise of free will that ends up universally hurting somebody else. This applies to stealing and other similar crimes, which is why we have laws about them to live safely. We ban them in order to live peaceful, productive lives; not because a holy book tells us to do so.

The next question people commonly ask is “but doesn’t same sex marriage hurt society’s moral fiber?”. Well the answer to that is. Maybe. I know that many people genuinely believe same sex marriage hurts other people as much as murder or stealing does and those people do deserve to make their case but the the decision on the types of marriages we allow should be based on this “it-hurts-society” debate, not on the dictates of a holy book.

Well, I hope this article quelled the angry mob somewhat though remnants are probably still forming up right as I type (luckily I live in a condo so they still have a ways to climb up). So before  base jump to safety out the window let me leave you with some final words. What would Jesus do? The next time the issue of banning same-sex marriage is brought up at least ask yourself. WWJD. What. Would. Jesus. Do?

Leave a comment

Filed under foreign, Philosophy, Policy, Politics, Religion