Train’s Logic

(Disclaimer: don’t hate me if this post sounds extremely cynical and not giving solutions. I’m just one of those desperately disappointed customers–or simply observer–who would like to give a wake up call.)

My hypothesis: it possesses none. And by train, I refer to the people behind their desks who decide policies that affect the whole commuting society in Jakarta, Depok, Bogor, and their surroundings.

Assuming they do have it, my experiences conclude that it can never be publicly accepted for its different nature. The logic, I mean. Let’s take a look to several points below; according to the train:

  • Our society is divided into three classes: a) the have–who can pay Rp 9.000 for a Pakuan ride, b) the semi-have–who are charged by Rp 5.500 one way, and c) the poor–God knows if they really pay the budget ticket that costs them Rp 2.000. Instead of being a ‘one for all’ public transportation, the train feels it safe enough to let the economic gap stay that way. Genius.
  • The have have the absolute right to do whatever they want to the poor just because their train takes more money from their pocket. This includes forcing them to wait at Stasiun Depok or Stasiun Manggarai for ‘a while’ after their mighty Pakuan gets ahead.
  • The poor can’t sit on the top of their train on their own risk because it’s dangerous, but the have can violate the rule of ‘no sitting on the floor’ and ‘no extra seats’ inside the coach (which is evidently annoying throughout hectic hours)–because they pay those little seats themselves?
  • Female have should enjoy full protection from those mashers with a gerbong khusus wanita but the same rights don’t go to the female poor. (What? They pay us Rp 2.000 a ride and expect us to protect them? Don’t be silly!)


The scariest gap in our society is that several feet from express train to the budget one. Indonesia needs a change, young minds.

Of course. Really, I just don’t get it.

One day, just a moment in the future, this saddening system should change. Either I take the power myself and enhance better performance in every level of service in public transportation i.e. commuter trains, or I’ll persuade my future students to do so. Someone with vision should take the lead, yo.


One Comment

  1. The problem of one for all public transportation is that it will cost too high, if by it you mean that everybody can purchase exactly the same service with flat price. Put it this way; we throw away the Pakuan and Ekonomi trains, hold only the Ekonomi AC, and charge everyone with same price; 5.500 rupiah, what would happen? Do you think that the poor who used to get the minimum service with 2000 rupiah can afford the ticket price? If they could, they would certainly choose the Ekonomi AC before. Thus, not only throwing away the two other trains, we should also set a price that is both affordable for the poorest and atleast enough source of money for the trains’ maintainance. Thus, the government should subsidize them. How? The easiest way to subsidize the poor is by decreasing the price of the ticket. But, the have also would get the same priviledge, as you couldn’t check them one by one. So, the subsidy finally would go not only to the poor, but also to the have. This is what we call "mistargeted subsidy’. This is the prime source of our state budget leak. i more concern about your fourth complain, about woman protection. I think this policy of ‘female wagons’ is one of the worst policies ever produced by our government. They have totally failed in identifying source of the problem; sexual harrassment is more prone to happen in Ekonomi class train rather than in the two upper classes, just like any other kind of crimes. How could they put those wagons in the more safe classes? Our government really deserves a tight stranglehold for this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s