Skip to main content

The Political Economics of Traffic Jams


The discussions regarding the heavy traffic jams that is a regular in Jakarta never comes to end. Different people have different ideas on how to rid this city off its number one problem. Numerous ideas have emerged, we needed MRT, we needed subway, we needed this we needed that. The problem is so severe that even a new mayor has been elected solely on the issue of Jakarta’s unacceptable traffic jams. We all seem to want to live in a traffic-jam-free city.

But really? Do we all? Of course not. There are a huge number of people that would come out be a lot worse off if we are succesful in our anti-traffic-jam iniciative.

If Jakarta manages to get traffic-free, that basically means a huge decrease in the number of cars that are on the road. That means less car sales. Less money for automakers and all the people that work for them. That also means less business for repair workshops, spare part stores, gas stations, tire-patch vendors, and more. The list goes on and on and on. Remember that a lot of the cars on Jakarta roads have a huge chunk of local content. All the people in the auto-business will stand to lose.

All these being said, the fight against traffic-jams is basically down to political economics. It is in the interest of a lot of motorists and commuters that roads be less congested. But it is also in the interest of the auto-industry to maintain and grow the number of cars and bikes on the road. As long as the government listens more to the latter, there is no way roads will be less congested even if massive public transportation iniciatives get under way.

Which of these two groups have more incentive to push for regulations that favor their interest? Obviously the latter. Consumers are never adequately organized to protest and to lobby for their interest.  On the other hand, GAIKINDO (automobile industry association) and AISI (motorcycle industry association) are there for this purpose. The newly drafted Low Cost Green Car incentive for example, will really boost the automobile industry. The ‘move cars not people’ principe in Jakarta with a few new non-toll-freeways also benefit the auto industry dearly.

Therefore, there needs to be a solution to Jakarta’s traffic jams that will be a win-win for both motorists and automakers. A ban on vehicles older than x years might work, as it means older cars will not be on the road. This means car sales to less-wealthy people who plan to use the car for more than x years will go down. Hopefully this will be compensated by the fact that those who can afford it must get a new car sooner than before. Auto industry wins, motorists win.

Who loses? Those who cannot afford to change cars very often. But hey, you can never please everyone.   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ke Gereja Tiap Minggu, Apa Benar Wajib?

Oleh: Nathaniel Rayestu Abdulrachman Semenjak kecil, kita sering didoktrin oleh orang tua, guru, pastor, pendeta, dll untuk senantiasa pergi beribadah di gereja setiap Minggu. Namun, apakah benar hal tersebut wajib hukumnya? Apakah benar jika kita adalah orang Kristen "Natal-Paskah" maka kita bukan orang Kristen yang baik? Mari kita telaah lagi. Dasar kanonik dari wajibnya ke Gereja tiap minggu, berasal dari prinsip dasar iman agama-agama Abrahamik, yakni 10 Perintah Allah yang diturunkan pada Nabi Musa di Gunung Sinai. Perintah ketiga berbunyi "Kuduskanlah Hari Tuhan". Pada jaman Kristus (circa 0 Masehi) perintah ini diinterpretasikan sebagai larangan beraktifitas pada hari Sabat. Pada jaman awal Gereja perintah ini dilakukan dengan pergi beribadah di Gereja selama ber-jam-jam. Sekarang, perintah ini diterjemahkan sebagai kewajiban pergi ke Gereja untuk merayakan Ekaristi. Tetapi, apakah itu satu-satunya cara "menguduskan Hari Tuhan?" Buka

Kurikulum Sejarah Hapalan dan Pola Pikir Feodal, Kunci Elektabilitas Prabowo

Dalam dua bulan terakhir elektabilitas Prabowo seakan meroket. Beberapa alasan tentang hal ini diungkapkan banyak pengamat sepertinya cukup valid: maraknya black campaign terhadap Joko Widodo, buruknya koordinasi dan logistik kampanye pasangan nomor 2, performa pada seri Debat Capres-Cawapres, dan sebagainya. Saya punya dua hipotesis lain tentang mengapa rakyat bisa seakan menutup mata pada fakta-fakta dan seakan terhipnotis oleh sosok Prabowo Subianto. Pertama, kurikulum sejarah di sekolah-sekolah di Indonesia dari Sekolah Dasar hingga Sekolah Menengah Atas cenderung bersifat hapalan. Saya yakin anda yang sedang membaca artikel ini masih ingat bahwa Perang Diponegoro terjadi pada tahun 1825-1830, dan bahwa Perang Dunia I terjadi diawali dengan terbunuhnya Pangeran Franz Ferdinand. Tapi jika kita diminta mengaitkan apa yang terjadi saat itu dengan konteks kekinian untuk melihat ke depan, kita akan kebingungan. Padahal, sejarah seharusnya bukan untuk dihafal, melainkan untuk

Why Fuel Subsidies Might Actually be Pro-Poor

Just a simple thought that flashed through my mind after hearing many people say that fuel subsidies in Indonesia is pro-rich. Yes, I know that more than half of the subsidies is enjoyed by the top 10% income earners, the bottom 10% only get like 2-3% and yada yada yada, but come to think of it, maybe our government just believes in trickle down economics. It’s basically a tax cut to stimulate the economy, right? Here it goes: Fuel subsidy leaves middle-up people a little bit richer, giving them a little bit more disposable income. Now, the richer you are, the more you save, meaning that this extra income for the rich/middle up will lead to more national savings compared to if the money is distributed towards poorer people. Theoretically, a one rupiah increase in national savings should lower interest rates just enough to induce one rupiah additional investment. In another word, more savings also means more money there is in the money market to be borrowed to fund inves