On radio talk (aka brainless chatter)

Last night I was riding the FX going to the MRT and the radio was tuned to DZMM 630. The reporters were discussing the water shortage due to no rain falling in Angat Dam. And the woman reporter blamed it on the overpopulation. And went on a rampage about how overpopulation is causing climate change etc.

First of all, what is a reporter, who is supposed to unbiasedly read the news, doing inserting her misinformed opinions in a news item about lack of rain? Is it the perpetual fear of radio announcers not to leave dead air doing the talking? Or is it because World Population Day just came and went without fanfare, that reporters are somehow forced to connect at least one piece of news to it? Is that lack of fanfare due to nobody going hysterical about overpop and global warming in this country? And why do they want us to go hysterical over nothing?

I have a theory about AM radio announcers. It seems that being on air everyday has permanently switched on their brain's auto-talk. They say practically anything just to keep talking. I understand the need to fill dead air, but it becomes ridiculous when the fillers are 30 seconds of Diyoskopongmahabagin!pambihirabanaman!mantakinmo! empty banter that dead air would have been better for listener's ears (and hearts).

...and 30 seconds of misinformation? Can you say: waste of time?

Why there are lots of jobs in Singapore

My Ate said she wanted to try out finding a job in Singapore, because she has some friends there already. Why go to Singapore? Is it because there are better offers? And why are there better offers?

Oh look at this article I found from Inquirer:

In the 1960s, Singapore started a “Stop at Two” program. It was so successful that the population of Singapore dropped to dangerous levels.

The working class (labor force) had a difficult time supporting the elderly. The Singaporean government saw this and changed their population policy to “Three or more.” We have to learn from the mistakes of our Asian neighbor.

But the "Three or more" policy doesn't seem to work on a generation raised to think birth control is secret to happy (satisfying? materialistic?) life etc etc. The other solution? Get people from other countries to come over and work there, despite increasing number of citizens complaining about the tighter competition for jobs. (Got this link from WillyJ's blog.)

And what if the countries where these foreign workers are coming from start adapting their own "Stop at Two" program because their legislators think overpopulation is the cause of poverty? (Guess what? It's not.) Give or take, in 30 years there won't be enough people--citizen or no--to compete for jobs at all.

Reading List:
Obsolete Thinking--Again!
Population Sense and Nonsense
They're at Malthus Again

Lovin' the earth

Recently, I canceled a monthly pledge to a pro-environment cause organization, and I think it's about time somebody explained that there's such a thing as "going too green" and why this can go wrong.

Okay, so there's global warming. And we're wasting so many resources. And because of our carbon emissions and pollution, we're killing the earth. I'm all for saving the environment. I'm all for conservation of natural resources. I care about segregating my trash and recycling and choosing more earth-friendly materials.

Loving the earth is what people should really do. We're only given one earth to use and keep, so let's save it, right? Of course.

What made me stop my pledge was the fact that the organization I was funding does a little something on the side: it promotes family planning.

Whoa, whoa, waitaminute--am I overreacting? It's just family planning...

It's not "just" family planning. It's a whole way of thinking that undermines a new person's right to live. It runs on the premise that "there is not much earth to go around; so, let's cut down on people so that we can have more for ourselves." Promoting the use of contraceptives is a part of it... not to mention the use of abortifacients... and (here goes) abortion.

I can't continue funding an organization that insists that whales and baby seals are more important than human life. Because whales, no matter how majestic, are not more precious than a human being. And baby seals, no matter how cute, are no match to our own babies. If you find this confusing and biased, then perhaps you haven't tried understanding why the Jews were insulted when PETA compared the Holocaust to chickens in a factory.

I believe in saving the environment, but I don't want to mix up the priorities. The earth is here to be of use to people; it is up to us if we're going to use it wisely or waste it. What's marvelous is we have intellect; we can use it to make our resources last longer and conserve the earth. So there's no need to prevent births.

Why should we go against ourselves? It's like eating your own hand just so more rabbits can run free in your backyard.We need to live, so we care for the earth. The earth doesn't need us to deplete ourselves so it can live. It isn't alive the way we are; it doesn't have reason, and it doesn't have a soul. When the human race dies out, the earth will go on revolving without a care.

Finally, here's a question to help you see the irony:
Are you really saving the planet for the next generation if you're preventing the birth of this very same next generation?

It takes a flower

Okay, the inauguration is over and done with and I haven't posted anything. I want to share this photo from EDSA 1 because it's a nice reminder to our newly inaugurated president "P-Noy" that the legacy of peace and no-corruption that his mom represented must live on.

President Aquino didn't get my vote on May 10, but I wish him the best and I'll do what I can as citizen to help make this country better.

That said, congrats P-Noy and this is the end of my quick post!