fbpx

One reply to “The three levels of responding to the PMD ban

  1. You are talking like an eilte 😀

    It’s like telling a person who can barely manage to get a degree — go get a PHD as degree holders are now a dim a dozen … wash test tube …. etc etc

    1. PMD problem started when the planners think that it makes sense to put vehicle onto footpath, anything is on the table as long as it solves the last mile problem. Unless it’s for an old or handicapped person, else foot path is for people on foot.

    2. There will always be idiots who thinks and behave like idiots (make sense right?) – ridding on road is dangerous for me so I ride on foot path, other people injure or die not my problem.

    3. There are those who need to make a living doing as many deliveries as possible, so will increase their travelling speed as time goes by and gets use to their vehicle. This is a normal human behaviour. Don’t believe, ask the Traffic police after so many years of fine, why drivers still speed?

    4. Food delivery companies have no incentive to limit their hiring, so expect to see more and more people doing deliveries. More vehicle traffic, more chance of accidents. To solve, just ask the companies to
    – provide employment with a decent monthly fixed base salary plus commission (likes salesperson)
    – company have to be liable if accidents happen , aka insurance

    5. Wrong of government/society to view driving grab and/or doing food delivery as a permanent job. If you are old/handicap or have other special reasons (eg single parent), then maybe you have no better choice, but for the society and government to view grab driving and food delivery as a long term employment, is very short sighted.

Leave a Reply

Enjoy our content?Subscribe to our mailing list to get TWS in your email inbox.
close-alt close collapse comment ellipsis expand gallery heart lock menu next pinned previous reply search share star