 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| First World by 2020?
By Antonio C. Abaya Written Nov. 01, 2006 For the Standard Today, November 02 issue It is bad enough that the most vocal proponents of Charter Change in favor of the parliamentary form of government make na�ve and uninformed predictions of economic prosperity once we go parliamentary. Economic success is the result of correct economic policies and strategies, not of the form of government. There is no more eloquent proof of this than the economic success of various countries in East Asia which had/have widely differing forms or systems of government: Malaysia and Singapore (parliamentary); South Korea and Taiwan (presidential); and China and Vietnam (nominally communist). What makes the ChaChaCha even more contrived and therefore not credible is the outlandish claim of President Arroyo that if we were to dance the ChaChaCha with her, she would lead this country into the exclusive First World Club by the year 2020. Or words to that effect. This is pure nonsense. And as a trained economist, she knows that it is. But the fact that she publicly made this preposterous promise at all shows to what lengths she would go to deceive ignorant and uninformed people � such as the 6.3 million signatories of the Sigaw ng Langaw � to support her thinly disguised maneuvers to remain in power beyond 2010. Like Ferdinand Marcos before her, she is an original ULAP � Uma-asang Laging naka-Angkla sa Poder. The terms First World , Second World and Third World became fashionable in the 1980s and were used to categorize the countries of the world into separate clubs based on levels of economic development. First World was the countries of Western Europe , North America (except Mexico ), Japan and Australia/New Zealand, all fully developed industrialized countries that were/are capitalist liberal democracies. Second World was the socialist countries consisting of the Soviet Union and the People�s Republic of China and their respective vassal states, that were wedded to Marxist-Leninist concepts of economic development and socio-political organization. Third World was the rest of the world, notably in Africa , Latin America , the Middle East and Asia , struggling to pull themselves up by their boot straps or resignedly sinking into the quicksand of poverty, tribalism and anarchy. ( Saudi Arabia and some of the Persian Gulf sheikdoms also have First World credentials, but they are not germane to this discussion because their wealth, largely in the hands of the ruling families, is not due to hard work, innovative technology or aggressive trading policies, but solely to the geological accident of petroleum deposits in their territories.) That was in the 1980s. In 2006, the Second World has largely disappeared, after the de-communization of Eastern Europe (1989) and the Soviet Union (1991), and the re-embrace of capitalism and the profit motive by China (starting in 1979) and Vietnam (starting in 1986). Strictly speaking, the only Second World countries left are North Korea , Cuba and inconsequential Laos . Since the 1980s, several Third World countries have graduated into the First World � Israel , Singapore , Taiwan and South Korea � as a result of their adoption of correct economic policies and strategies, foremost among which was the export of manufactured goods and the industrialization that was both the start, and the result of, it. The dividing line between First World and Third World is markedly evident in per capita GDP (GDP divided by population). The �poorest� countries in Western Europe , Portugal and Greece , had in 2004 per capita GDPs of $17,900 and $21,300, respectively. In our part of the world, New Zealand had $23,300, Japan $29,400, and Australia $30,700. The new members of the First World Club have per capita GDPs within this range: South Korea $19,200; Israel $20,800; Taiwan $25,300; and Singapore $27,800. But not even the most developed former communist countries of Eastern Europe have managed to reach First World levels: Poland $12,000; Estonia $14,300; Hungary $14,900; and the Czech Republic $16,800. (All figures, in US dollars, are from the 2006 World Almanac and Book of Facts.) So how does the Philippines measure up against this criterion? About three weeks ago, President Arroyo announced with much pride that our per capita GDP had reached $1,433.(It had been hovering around the $1,000-$1,200 level for about ten years.) This is credible, though modest, economic progress, for which President Arroyo deserves credit, principally due to improved tax collection through the EVAT and increased exports and agricultural production. But part of it is also due to the appreciation of the peso, from P55 to P50 per US dollar. Pesos now translate into more US dollars than they did six months ago. (OCW remittances are inputted into GNP, not into GDP. But their significant presence in the economy does help appreciate the currency and thus help raise the GDP.) But between our $1,433 and Portugal�s (the poorest First World country�s) $17,900 is a wide gap that no one and nothing can bridge in only 14 years, not even if our economy were to grow at the breakneck speed of 10% per annum, like China�s, contrary to President Arroyo�s claim that she can, �if you stay with me until 2020.� Or words to that effect. This merely confirms speculation that she wants and plans to remain in power beyond 2010. Hence the ChaChaCha towards parliamentary. Even if our $1,433 were re-computed on the basis of purchasing power parity or PPP, it would still amount to only about $5,000. The only other country that I know of that used the year 2020 as a benchmark was Malaysia under Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who in the 1980s set the national goal of becoming a fully industrialized country by the year 2020. His government promoted this goal as �20/20 Vision.� To this end, Mahathir geared the Malaysian economy towards the export of manufactured goods, following the examples of South Korea , Taiwan , Hong Kong and Singapore . In 2004, Malaysia �s exports totaled $123.5 billion. Malaysia �s industrialization has included a national car and a national motorcycle whose parts are fabricated from flat metal sheets or milled from raw metal blocks, not merely assembled from imported components, as the Philippines has been doing for the past 50 years. When Gen. Prem Tinsulananda rose to power in Thailand in 1982 via a military coup d�etat, he announced that his economic program would focus on exports (of manufactured goods) and tourism. In 2004, Thailand �s exports totaled $87.9 billion. By contrast, the Philippines � exports in 2004 totaled only $38.6 billion. In 2006, this is expected to reach more than $42 billion, a major increase for which President Arroyo deserves credit. But it is not enough to elevate us in 2020 to the present level of South Korea , Taiwan and Singapore , whose exports in 2004 totaled $250.6 billion, $170.5 billion and $174.0 billion, respectively. And tourism? In 2006, we expect a total of 3.0 million tourist arrivals, compared to 13.5 million in Thailand and 15 million in Malaysia . My point is that despite the spectacular successes of Malaysia and Thailand in exports and tourism, there is no guarantee that they will reach First World status by 2020. Another global economic crisis, like the one in 1997, can wreck even the best-laid plans. On the other hand, having missed out on the exports boom in the 1970s and 1980s, and the tourism boom in the 1990s � and additionally saddled as we are by a scandalously high population growth rate � the Philippines has absolutely no chance of reaching First World status by 2020, even under the most ideal conditions, and even if our GDP were to grow by 10% per annum, like China�s, in the next 14 years. As a trained economist, President Arroyo knows this. Making preposterous claims which she knows she cannot keep, to ignorant and uninformed people, diminishes her credibility and stature as a leader.***** Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles since 2001 in www.tapatt.org OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |
| Reactions to "First World by 2020?"
Dear Mr. Tony Abaya, Based on a annual GDP growth rate of 10%, RP can get a GDP per capita of $17,900 in year 2031 starting with $1,433 in 2005. If we consider 2005 per capita is $5000, then $17,900 is possible in year 2019. If we include OFW remittance, per capita is bigger. More OFW's, more foreign investment, and slower population growth can possibly give us 8-10% growth annually. Never mind if we don�t reach 1st world status in 2020. More power, Ody Lumanglas, [email protected], Nov. 04, 2006 MY REPLY. Easier said than done. How can the Philippines possibly attain a 10% GDP growth rate when it attracts so little (less than 3%) foreign direct investments (FDI)? China , the only country in the world doing 10%, gets more than 25% of all FDI headed for Asia . In 2005, Vietnam drew in $5.4 billion in FDI, Indonesia $5.3 billion, the Philippines less than $1.5 billion. Assuming everything else � exchange rate, etc � remains equal, an average of 7% per annum growth rate � which is really not a bad rate - will elevate the Philippines to the First World Club, but by about the year 2045. Purchasing power parity or PPI, which artificially raises our per capita GDP to $5,000, is not a constant value. As per capita GDP rises, PPP shrinks, until it reaches a value of 1, meaning it loses all meaning, long before we reach the level of Eastern Europe . I agree that, never mind if we don�t reach First World Status by the year 2020. It is President Arroyo who makes the preposterous claim that we will, as long as we dance the ChaChaCha with her, a case of deliberately fooling ignorant people to attain her self-serving goal of staying in power beyond 2010. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony: To people with even just a smattering of economics and history, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's assertion that the Philippines will happily be a member of the First World by the year 2020, if only the people will agree to ChaChaCha, is patently ridiculous and farfetched. It could even be Machiavellian. Given the Philippines' present annual rate of growth of GNP, which oscillates from around 4% to 5%, coupled with the still-rapid annual rate of growth of her population (now at 2.3%) and her low rate of savings and investments, it may actually take the country three or four generations before she can hope to belong to the First World, those countries with GDPs in the order of $25,000 a year or more. President Arroyo has a doctorate in Economics and must be assumed to know that her assertion is false. So, what could be her motive? Considering the fact that she is a politician, and one who must naturally want to hold on to power as many "trapos" do, her motive can only be political. She is pandering to the Filipinoi people. She really wants to hold on to power via the instrument of the ChaChaCha. Tragically, however, the mass of Filipino voters do not even possess a smattering of economics and history. Brutally speaking, they are ignorant of these two disciplines, which makes them vulnerable to the assertions and the panderings of demagogues. They cannot intelligently make the distinction between parliamentary and presidential forms of government, and are ignorant of the consequences of voting for either. My contention is that Philippine democracy is a caricature of what it ought to be. Why? For democracy to work, citizens need to participate actively in the political process--but they have to participate intelligently and purposefully. They have to know and keep abreast of what's going on in their communities and in the country at large; they have to be able to make informed judgments on a wide spectrum of political, economic and social issues. They have to know what their rights and obligations are. In short they have to be good citizens. Do the mass of Filipino voters satisfy these requirements for good citizenship? The answer, honestly and therefore necessarily, is NO. Mariano Patalinjug, [email protected], Yonkers, New York, Nov. 04, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, We are all assuming that the Charter Change is something GMA wants, right? I feel different. She just went along with Joe de V and FVR, but made sure that it wouldn't get through. She doesn't want to share any power for now. Perhaps as we come closer to 2010 then a Cha Cha might be something she would really want to push. For now... Even FVR is awakening to the game. The FIRM was never against her, they are in fact her cohorts in the charades we have been going through. Strictly the observations of a by-stander, MOI! JayJay Calero, [email protected], Nov. 04, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya, You cannot squeeze blood out of a turnip and nothing legitimate can come out of an illegitimate president. The first step to becoming a First World country is for the Arroyos to return the P2.8 billion they stole from the farmers through Jocjoc Bolante's architectural wonder the fertilizer scam.If this money is returned then, the momentum established between 2003 and 2004 that perked our agricultural production from 2.9% to 8.5% may be continued. The second thing she has to do is to stop borrowing money to buy all those NFA rice importations, whose tariff the government pays and thereafter she allows Arthur Yap to sell at a loss. Corollary to this, she should stop the grand importation of chicken at the obvious expense of our poultry producers so that the latter can sell their meat at the wet market at better prices. At the present time, the agriculture department only has enough money to pay its employees, and almost zilch for programs. Ironically, this is the most appropriate area where she should start because 70% of our people depend on rural agriculture. GMA's press-release driven economy sounds as repugnant as her refusal to give up power. Without her, our people stands a better chance to start working towards that elusive First World goal. She is nothing but hot air! Adolfo Paglinawan, [email protected], Nov. 05, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Copy furnished) Hola Fil! El art�culo que copias tiene mucho de raz�n en cuanto a medidas econ�micas. Yo s� poco de la Constituci�n de �ste Pa�s y no soy pol�tico. Pero, sin embargo, como inversor tengo experiencia de la cantidad de trabas legales que existen y que desalientan y hasta aburren y desmotivan el prop�sito de hacer negocio en Filipinas. No solo son pol�ticas econ�micas las necesarias o imprescindibles; hace falta modernizar el cap�tulo legal, la ley de inversiones extranjeras, la voluntad pol�tica de aunar fuerzas por el pa�s y no por el inter�s particular de algunos pol�ticos. Filipinas tiene mucho m�s potencial que el que ten�an otros pa�ses que la sobrepasaron en las �ltimas d�cadas. Hay otro aspecto en el que alguien deber�a tomar "cartas". El idioma!.Ya casi se perdi� el Castellanas, que no se usa m�s que en algunos pocos coloquios sociales. Pocas personas pueden decir que conservan un buen espa�ol. Incluso los hijos de espa�oles puros (nacidos y crecidos en Espa�a) casi no pueden expresarse en el idioma de sus padres. Y si vamos al ingl�s, lo veo perderse poco a poco. y.... si quisieran resucitarlo,.....qui�nes ser�an los profesores? Habr�a alguno cualificado para ense�ar tal lengua, hoy imprescindible para abrirse paso en un Mundo global? Son pues tambi�n medidas pol�ticas maduras y de liderazgo aut�ntico y no populista o nacionalista, las que hay que tomar. En fin, que no todo es econ�mico sino de visi�n a largo plazo y para ello hace falta un aut�ntico liderazgo pol�tico, liderazgo humanista, visi�n econ�mica, amor al pa�s y a su ciudadanos, para guiarlos bajo principios s�lidos que permitan edificar un "edificio" s�lido y no un "bahay cubo" temporal o pasajero. Perdona que te haya aburrido con mis ideales. Pero estoy aqu� porque estoy convencido que el "filipino de a pi�" tiene un enorme potencial, pero necesita gu�a. Gu�a honesta, vocacional y en muchos casos altruista. Las empresas tenemos la responsabilidad de ser peque�as Universidades donde ense�ar no s�lo lo t�cnico sino tambi�n los valores aut�nticos (lucha por objetivos, �tica profesional, fidelidad,...etc.) que pueden llevar al ser humano a alcanzar altas cotas. Si la gente, por humildes o faltos de recursos, no pueden acceder a lo que j�venes de otros pa�ses pueden acceder, son las empresas las que tienen que cubrir, con no demasiado esfuerzo o costo, esas lagunas que los pol�ticos no han sabido o querido llenar con la verdadera agua que calma la sed de la cultura, de la sabidur�a, del bien hacer y del bien ser. Un abrazo. Juan Carlos de Terry, [email protected], Nov. 06, 2006 Director, GOURMET AND WINE EXPERTS, INC , Makati City wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Unedited) President Gloria Aquino is still the leading citizen in the Philippines who is most qualified as the president of the country and none other else. She�s doing well in changing the economic welfare of the country. At least, it�s progressing and not going down. The poor? They have to help themselves and not depend on the government totally. Generous citizens of the country are helping the poor but I think most poor people in the country are lazy. They are just waiting for help from the government. It should not be that way. And the politicians? All they think is themselves on how to grab the wealth of the country. Ugly politicians want to sit positions where it�s easy for them to steal money of the people. The system of the government will never improve as long as the old politicians are the ones governing the government of the people. Buwaya ang nakaupo sa gobyerno. Even if Gloria wants to clean up the government, she cannot do it herself because she cannot pin point who are the buwayas. Once Gloria is no long the president, the Philippines will be a downfall again. Genny Ferrer, [email protected], Nov. 07, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww G. Abaya, Suffice it to say, when this pandak is talking and making claims, it seems that she thinks she is talking to a bunch of ninnies who will swallow everything she says and clap no end.... All she thinks is kaya nyang bola-bolahin ang tao...Maybe she was absent when the idiom "the fish is always caught by its mouth" (or something like it)... was taught and she might not even understand what it meant... Thank you very much for this email. Haven�t been able to get in touch with the rest of the "gang" in Ellen's blog due to globe's DSL�s on-going repair in our area in Bangkal for the past week. .. Thank you again and more power. May your tribe flourish Soleil, [email protected], Nov. 08, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi, Tony. Haven't you heard of the saying, "aim high and hit the target." So what goal do you want the government to set? Best regards. Bobby Tordesillas, [email protected], Nov. 08, 2006 MY REPLY. Actually, President Arroyo said she expects a GDP growth rate of 6.5% in 2007 and 7% in 2008. Given the present circumstances � low savings, low direct foreign investments, high population growth rate � 7% is a credible and achievable goal. As far as I can recall, since 1960, the Philippines has reached this growth rate only twice: once during the watch of President Marcos, and the other time during the watch of President Aquino. But an average GDP growth rate of 7% will not elevate the Philippines to First World status until about the year 2045. To reach First World status (at least $20,000 per capita GDP) by the year 2020, the Philippines has to grow by an average of about 15% per annum, or one and half times the present rate of China. Clearly an impossibility, as Economist Arroyo surely knows. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya: Thank you for that incisive piece. I wish you success in all your endeavors. With the coming Yuletide season, I hope that we can all have a quiet mind and finally close our mouth. But what the heck! �Tis a season of politics and deceiving pronouncements. Abaya for 2007! Niel Enrile Narca, [email protected], Nov. 13, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww The Chinese are Coming Move over, America... the Chinese are coming! AND, in a big way quite unprecedented, by any measure. From 2001 to 2005, trade with China grew at an annual rate of 41.9%. In 2005, bilateral trade amounted to almost US$17 billion. Our top exports to China are semiconductor devices, machinery parts and accessories, electrical and electronic machinery, and electronic micro-assemblies. Now, roughly a third of our total electronics exports are skewed towards the Chinese market. Imports to the Philippines from China in the first 7 months of 2006 totalled US$2.103 billion, while exports to China hit US$2.352 billion. While the Philippines has foreign exchange reserves of US$21.56 billions as of end-Sept 2006, China has US$$987.9 billions in forex reserves as of end-Sept 2006, the world's largest! By contrast, the mighty United States only has US$65.9 billions in official reserve assets as of Oct 20, 2006, a pitiful half of what tiny HongKong has as its own reserves - US$130 billions as of end-Sept 2006. After pledging (in July 2006) US$6 billion in soft loans (20 years at 3% p.a. interest) to finance GMA's mega-infrastructure projects for her "super regions," China's Jinchuan Non-Ferrous Materials Corp and China Development Bank have extended a US$1 billion technical and financial assistance to Philnico Industrial Corp's Nonoc nickel project in Surigao del Norte and Pacific Nickel Philippines Inc. This will be the biggest single Chinese investment in the country. And after granting US$400 million to finance the construction of the NorthRail Project, Phase 1, Section 1, an additional US$500 million funding will be extended by China for the North and South rail projects in the Philippines. 3 ethanol fuel plants will be set up by China in the Philippines, involving the development of thousands of hectares of land for sugar cane, the main ingredient in ethanol production. o 2 ethanol plants in Negros island will be developed by BSBM Biofuels Corp and the Southern Negros Development Corp: one for 120,000 liters/day in Murcia, Negros Occidental; the second, an ethanol distillery with 150,000 liters/day capacity in Camugao and Camansi in Kabankalan City, using sugarcane molasses as feedstock. Some 10,000 to 12,000 hectares of land will be developed for these projects. o A third ethanol plant will be built in Zamboanga del Norte by a joint venture with state-owned China Machineries Engineering, with a production capacity of 150,000 liters of ethanol daily, in line with the administration's goal of achieving at least 60% energy self-sufficiency by 2010. US$10 million has been committed in a mineral production agreement signed by Adnama Resources Inc., Fulim Global Mining & Export Corp., and Fujian Wahang Stainless Steel Co Ltd., for the exploration, development and utilization of 4,568 hectares of mineral property in the Philippines. The railway system in the island of Panay (composed of the provinces of Iloilo, Capiz, Aklan and Antique) will be rehabilitated and developed by the China Shenyang International Economic & Technical Cooperation Corp in partnership with Panay Railways Inc. Century Properties Inc and the LEE World Group formed a joint venture firm to engage in the production and marketing of construction materials. First Metro Investment Corp and Donghai Securities Co signed an agreement of cooperation in the field of securities, trading and investment banking services. Another joint venture company to pursue real estate development in the Philippines and China was set up among Haisheng Real Estate Co., Century Properties Inc and FederalLand Inc. An agreement was signed between the FFCCCII and All China Federation of Industry and Commerce, to increase business facilitation between the 2 countries. An agreement was also signed between the FFCCCII and the Fujian Normal University, to establish a Filipino-Chinese language institute for professionals and overseas Filipino workers who want to learn the Chinese language. Starting next year, the Philippines will be sending the first batch of 1,000 senior nursing students to China for a one-year tour of duty to share their knowledge in nursing care and expertise in hospital work with their Chinese counterparts. Already, 2 big nursing schools in China have expressed interest in hiring Filipino nurses to teach there. Before the end of 2006, China will be setting up a second Consular post in Laoag City, Ilocos Norte (next to Cebu, outside of Manila), in anticipation of increased trade, tourism, cultural affairs and business transactions within the so-called "Golden Triangle," linking the Philippines, Taiwan and China, as proposed by the FFCCCII headed by Francis Chua. The Laoag International Airport has been bustling with nearly daily flights to Manila and Basco, Batanes (construction of the P10 million Basco airport terminal building has been completed), and thrice weekly international flights to Kaohsiung, Taiwan and Guangzhou, China, and 6 times weekly flights to Hongkong. Something is definitely cooking! Remember that the North Luzon Agribusiness Quadrangle is being eyed as a food exporter to North Asia, with Cagayan province focusing on agriculture production. The Philippines and China (joined in by Vietnam) have just finished joint seismic research in the disputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. Soon, joint exploration will be conducted, to turn an area of possible conflict into an area of cooperation. Funding should not be a problem, should a major discovery be made. China's biggest power distributor, State Grid Xiamen Electric, which supplies 88% of China's total electricity load and posted an US$89 billion net profit in 2005, will be bidding for the Philippine National Transmission Corp (or Transco) which will be privatized this December 2006 to bring down power rates. Should the Chinese company, in partnership with Monte Oro Resources & Energy Inc. (an affiliate of publicly-listed A. Brown Co. Inc.), win the bid, it should put an additional check on the transfer-pricing between Meralco and its IPPs. My advice to my friends: Get out of the U.S. dollar WHILE you can, and get into the Chinese Yuan WHEN you can. Victor N. Arches II, [email protected], Oct. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I just finished reading your First World/Third World article and this comes in from my daughter-in-law; What an embarrassment and such a sad state if our countrymen fall for this. Part of our problem is that so many of those who have the resources behave, like Imelda, not just first world but totally in another illusionary world - perhaps ignorant and certainly self-centered. Too bad the media gives her any attention at all, even if just to make fun of her. Cayo Marschner, [email protected], Moraga, California, Nov. 07, 2006 Imelda Marcos to launch gems collection By TERESA CEROJANO, Associated Press Writer Mon Nov 6, 1:56 PM ET Imelda Marcos � notorious for her extensive shoe collection and eye-popping jewels accrued under her husband's dictatorship � is launching a jewelry collection using castoffs from her wardrobe and, she claims, flea market finds. Marcos, known for her shopping trips to ritzy shops in New York while the country wallowed in poverty, says she made the pieces from her old accessories and clothes, mixed with newly bought stones and other materials. Her daughter, Rep. Imee Marcos, said that unknown to many people, her mother shops for trinkets and accessories at flea markets, and keeps earrings with a missing pair or brooches that have some missing stones. Using a glue gun, scissors or pliers, her mother "can combine them with her vintage items in a way that comes out beautiful," Imee Marcos told journalists Monday during a promotional photo shoot for "The Imelda Collection," which is to be launched Nov. 18 in Manila . The 77-year-old widow of Ferdinand Marcos reclined on a divan in the seaside garden of a Manila hotel to pose for photos Monday, modeling several chunky necklaces, rings and bracelet sets for a brochure of the collection. Pointing to a set of matching earrings and brooch made of blue imitation tiger eye stone she was wearing, she told reporters, "This thing I wear now is something I recycled." She said the jewelry collection was the idea of her grandson, Martin "Borgy" Manotoc, who told her, "You are creating beautiful things, like jewels from practically garbage." The first designs are only for jewelry and will "not yet" include shoes, her daughter said. But an aide said there are plans to expand the collection to include shoes, clothes and possibly furniture. Describing how the collection came to be, the former first lady recalled, "One day my grandson came to me and said, `Mama Meldy, I would like to use your collection to tell the world the real Imelda and the spirit of my grandma.'" "What we are selling is not something valuable, but ... it is something invaluable because it's only beauty that can feed the spirit," she said. Marcos said the items would be inexpensive, costing from $20 to $100. But her daughter said prices and details about the collection are still being ironed out. "The accessories are just an excuse. It's just a visual and tactile reminder of this attitude she wishes to share, the Imelda spirit, the Imelda way and that's what it will represent," Imee Marcos said. The jewelry collection is a far cry from the dozens of suitcases of genuine diamond tiaras, ruby brooches, emerald necklaces and other jewels the government confiscated from Marcos and which officials plan to auction off. The Marcoses have been accused of amassing ill-gotten wealth and were driven out of the presidential palace by a military-backed nonviolent "people power" uprising in 1986. The ousted strongman died in exile in Hawaii three years later. The government has recovered about $1.6 billion in cash and assets from the Marcoses and their associates, including Swiss bank deposits now worth about $680 million. Ricardo Abcede, a member of a commission recovering the Marcoses' wealth, said about $4.4 billion worth of assets are tied up in criminal and civil cases in the Philippines. The total amount of the Marcoses' assets abroad is unknown. Copyright � 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. Copyright � 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Questions or Comments Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Lest we forget the extent to which Erap Estrada enriched himself while in office, please read this article the staff of PCIJ wrote before he was deposed from office on 20 January 2001 . Estrada was President for exactly two years, six months and twenty days. Read the attached annex for the other houses he got to own. Ben Sanchez, [email protected], Nov. 08, 2006 A Transaction Marred by Fraud by SHEILA S. CORONEL, YVONNE T. CHUA, LUZ RIMBAN and VINIA M. DATINGUINOO, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism Nov. 28, 2000 SHORTLY AFTER their wedding in September 1999, presidential daughter Jacqueline Ejercito and her husband Manuel 'Beaver' Lopez became the proud new owners of a choice 3,000-square meter property at 518 Buendia Street in snooty Forbes Park, Makati, the most exclusive among all the gated communities in the country. The property was purchased from the Bank of Commerce, to which it had been mortgaged by the film director Luis Nepomuceno. The tag price: A cool P120 million. The sale was unusual�and not only because it involved a celebrity couple and a large amount of money. The purchase, which was conducted in haste and utter secrecy late last year, also involved falsification of records, a mysterious and probably fictitious bank account, and tax evasion on a fairly large scale. The key to all these is Edward S. Serapio, the former political affairs undersecretary who is also said to be President Joseph Estrada's personal lawyer. It was likely, various sources say, that Lopez and his wife had little knowledge of the intricacies of the sale. It was Serapio, according to Bank of Commerce president Raul de Mesa and Serapio's former law partners at the De Borja Medialdea Bello Guevarra & Gerodias law firm, who worked on the papers involved in the transaction. It was also Serapio, they said, who was ultimately responsible for forging public records and working with a syndicate at the Register of Deeds in Makati to transfer the title of property to the newlyweds without paying some P9 million in taxes. Asked why Serapio would resort to such measures, Pablo A. de Borja, the senior partner at the firm, said it was a case of "plain arrogance and recklessness." He described Serapio as a reclusive and secretive lawyer who took advantage of his association with the firm to work out illicit deals on the President's behalf. Serapio, for example, asked his partners to form six shelf companies for clients that he would later refer. Without the firm's knowledge, said de Borja, two of those companies were eventually used to acquire property that was subsequently linked to the President�the New Manila, Quezon City mansion now known as "Boracay" and a 2,300-square-meter lot on Stanford Street in Wack-Wack Mandaluyong, which is adjacent to presidential mistress Laarni Enriquez's current residence. Serapio also used the firm's address to form the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation, which is the recipient of P200 million in jueteng payoffs. The rather sordid tale of the acquisition of the Forbes Park property for a President's daughter is one story whose basic facts are contested by those who are involved. There is consensus only on Serapio's involvement and the forging of documents in order to evade taxes. But the consensus falls apart when it comes to the complicity of other players. There is even no agreement on who actually paid for the property. Bank of Commerce sources interviewed for this article say that the network of complicity extends beyond Serapio and Malaca�ang. De Mesa and the de Borja law office, they say, participated in a transaction that is not only marred by fraud but also shocking in its brazenness. De Mesa insisted, however, that the sale of the property was above board. In an interview, he said that he offered the property to Lopez in August 1999, as part of an overall effort by the Bank of Commerce to sell off foreclosed property. But other bank officials interviewed for this story say that the bank president negotiated directly with Estrada for the sale of the Forbes Park property. (Lopez was supposed to be interviewed by PCIJ and ABS-CBN's 'Correspondents' on this issue last Saturday but he backed out.) "It was a Malaca�ang transaction," said a bank executive who asked not to be named. "De Mesa was often in Malaca�ang, and it was he who insisted on this sale despite the objection of bank officials." Ilocos Sur Governor Luis 'Chavit' Singson, the ultimate Palace insider, confirms de Mesa's frequent visits to the President. He said that de Mesa and Bank of Commerce chairman Antonio 'Tony Boy' Cojuangco were meeting regularly with Estrada in late 1999, when the Bank of Commerce Investment Corp. was negotiating with a group of investors the takeover of the Mimosa resort and casino at Clark . "Pag gabi, nakikita ko silang dalawa doon (I would see them there at night)," he said. This was also the time when the sale of the Forbes Park property was being worked out. The Mimosa deal fell through but eventually, Cojuangco's group invested in the adjacent Fontana resort, together with Estrada crony Lucio Co, who also runs the duty-free shops at Clark . That was also not the first time the President struck a deal with the Bank of Commerce. The year before, Estrada, with de Mesa's help, negotiated the purchase of an 800-square-meter lot at 6 Hayes St. in North Greenhills . The land was bought from the bank for P26 million and was intended for one of the President's brothers, Paulino Ejercito, who is now having a house built there. When de Mesa broached the sale of the Forbes Park property to the bank in November 1999, some bank officials objected. They pointed out that the bank, which had foreclosed the property and then bought it at an auction for P135 million in October, was selling it just weeks later at a loss of P15 million. Moreover, there was a P50-million mortgage, this time to Equitable-PCI Bank, attached to the property. A lawsuit was pending with PCI Bank and the property could not be sold until the case had been settled. In an interview, de Mesa defended the sale price, saying that P120 million was reasonable considering the slump in real estate prices. He also said that the Equitable-PCI Bank lien on the property was moot once the Bank of Commerce had foreclosed it. Bank insiders, however, said that de Mesa had assured bank officials that Equitable-PCI Bank chief George Go, who was known to be close to the President, would withdraw the claim on the land. De Mesa said Lopez put a deposit for the property as early as August 1999, and that it was the President's son-in-law who paid for the purchase in several installments in succeeding months. But two bank insiders say that the payments for the property were made by Becks Resources Corp., one of the shelf companies put up by the de Borja law firm at Serapio's behest, and an Allied Bank check signed by one Kevin Garcia, believed to be a fictitious account. Allied Bank is controlled by Lucio Tan, another presidential crony. In fact, knowledgeable bank sources say that the original deed of sale drafted by the bank for the property showed the buyer to be Becks, instead of the Lopez couple. "That was the original approach to layer the ownership of the property, but it was never followed," said a bank executive. Instead, Becks was used as a corporate vehicle to acquire the Wack-Wack property supposedly for Enriquez. If this is true, then the trail of payments leads toward Malaca�ang, rather than the Lopez family. The role subsequently played by Serapio leads further credence to the Palace's involvement in the transaction. After the deed of sale had been signed on December 8, 1999 , said de Mesa, his bank dealt with Serapio, who was known to both the bank and the Lopez couple. "We issued two to three checks amounting to P7 or P8 million to pay for the transfer," he said. "The checks were made payable to the de Borja law office because Ed Serapio was connected with that office. We gave the documents and the checks to Ed on the understanding that it would be their law office who would handle it." De Borja, for his part, admitted that the money�a check for P4.5 million and another for P3 million�was deposited in the firm's account, but denied that his office was in any way involved in the transaction. He said that Serapio, who was once the firm's partner for finance, had the checks deposited in the office account and then asked one of the firm's associates to withdraw the money. The firm allowed this, various partners said, as a courtesy to Serapio, who was also allowed to retain his office and to make use of the firm's facilities and staff even if he was by then employed by Malaca�ang and no longer in the partnership. "We had no official engagement (with the bank) at all," said de Borja. "We had no record, we have no file open, no billing, and except for these two checks which came in and out, no money came into the firm." De Mesa, however, contested this. "The billings were made by the De Borja law office because otherwise, why would we issue the checks to them? As far as I knew, Ed was still part of the De Borja law office. The understanding was that the money was going to be used for all the taxes and to process the documents that would be given to the owners." This detail is important, because it establishes the trail of responsibility for the tax evasion. It is clear that the money for the taxes was released by the bank and deposited in the law firm's account, yet the taxes were not paid. Where did the money go? Subsequent events provide clues. On December 14, 1999, six days after the signing of the deed of sale, de Mesa said he signed a certificate that showed Nepomuceno had redeemed the property from the bank for P135 million. The bank president explained that the certificate was issued so the property could be sold without waiting for the one-year period during which the owner can still redeem it from the bank. There was nothing anomalous about this, he said, as it was merely a paper transaction. The Nepomucenos were also made to sign an agreement with the bank that the proceeds of any sale of the property would go to the Bank of Commerce. The certificate of redemption was merely a document to fast-track the sale of the land. The problem was that the certificate of redemption was subsequently used to draft a deed of transfer, dated December 24, 1999 , in which the Nepomucenos transfer the title of the property to the Lopez couple. De Mesa knows that there is a deed of transfer. What he denies knowledge of is that the deed carried fake signatures of Luis Nepomuceno, Lopez and his wife. This is obvious to anyone who compares the signatures in the document with the genuine signatures. Yet it is this fake deed of transfer that is on file with the Register of Deeds in Makati . The genuine deed of sale was never submitted to the Register of Deeds, but it is what was kept in the bank record. Instead, a certificate of tax exemption supposedly issued by Edmundo Vasquez, Revenue District Officer of South Makati, was filed with the office. The certificate says that the property was exempt from tax because "it was a present�to the newlyweds." That certificate is also a forgery. "The document is fake and my signature is fake," said Vasquez. "There is no record at all of this transaction in this office. Besides, Nepomuceno cannot transfer the property without paying taxes. If it is a donation or a present, taxes would amount to 30 percent of the value of the donated property." Moreover, the Nepomucenos, who are heavily in debt, were not in any position to redeem or to donate property. The Forbes Park house was also special to the family. "It's a place we called home," said a member of the family. "Do you think we would give it away just to win political favor? Besides, the family does not have any money to give away." In the end, records show that the only dues paid to transfer the title to spouses Manuel Lopez and Jacqueline Ejercito was P150,000 in transfer fees. Ordinarily, such a sale would have been subjected to rather hefty taxes: the government normally collects six percent of the sale price as capital gains tax and another 1.5 percent is charged for documentary stamps. Altogether, the taxes alone would have cost nearly P9 million. Vasquez blamed a syndicate in the Makati register of deeds for the forgeries "There's a big syndicate there that is able to transfer property using fake documents, forging people's signatures just to transfer the property without paying the correct taxes," he said. Mila Flores, the register of deeds, denied this. She said it was not her responsibility to check on the authenticity of the documents submitted to her office. "Our office exercises purely ministerial functions," she said. "It's the BIR resident officers in the land registry offices who are responsible for checking on the documents. That is not my duty." When asked, the BIR resident officer and the examiner in the Makati registry said that they processed the papers on the insistence of a Dr. Chiong, who said that he was from Malaca�ang. It was this man, they said, who brought the papers and said that they had the endorsement of Palace. At one point, remembered examiner Corazon Ching, Dr. Chiong even used his mobile phone to call the presidential palace and speak to a certain attorney. De Borja cleared up the mysterious Dr. Chiong who, it turns out, is Kelvin Chiong, a Chinese Malaysian who is the husband of the firm's associate Michaela Rosales, who was employed by the firm on Serapio's recommendation. It was Rosales who withdrew the money paid to the firm by the Bank of Commerce, said de Borja, and who assisted Serapio in the processing of the Forbes Park papers. "Ed asked her to handle it and Ed was coordinating directly with her," said the lawyer. "If there was any forgery or falsification, we had no hand in it." Chiong died of cirrhosis of the liver last April. "I don't even know the guy," said de Borja, "I only saw him at the wake, but apparently he had connections to the BIR." Those connections served Chiong well, as the papers were processed with the minimum payment to the government and in record time. It can be surmised that those who assisted in the forgery and the processing got paid for their efforts. But who else shared the P7.5 million that was paid by the bank for the transfer fees is a secret that Chiong carried with him to the grave. ***** A Trail of Houses 2 100 11th St., New Manila Registered owner: St. Peter Holdings Corp. Fair market value: P328 million (land alone) Bought by Jose �Sel� Yulo, who now says he is a nominee of Jaime Dichaves; Laarni Enriquez�s temporary residence from August to October 2000 39 Vicente Madrigal St. Corinthian Gardens Registered owner: Fair market value: Estrada�s gift to daughter Jacqueline on her wedding in September 1999 73 Swallow Drive Green Meadows Registered owner: Rodrigo & Teresita Enriquez Fair market value: P38 million Current residence of Joy Melendrez; sale arranged by Jaime Dichaves and Lucio Co 1 Woodlands Drive Tagaytay Registered owner: Mercury Ventures Fair market value: P75 million Bought by Jaime Dichaves in 1998; Estrada supervised the construction and spends weekends there. Log Home #1 Camp John Hay Registered owner: Manta Equities Fair market value: P40 million Manta is owned by Manuel Zamora; Estrada and pal Charlie �Atong� Ang stayed there recently. 30 Paterno St. Baguio Registered owner: Baguio Leisure Corp. Fair market value: P75 million Company is owned by Manuel Zamora; log cabin is used by Estrada and Guia Gomez when they are in Baguio. Cosme St. Pagsanjan Registered owner: Joseph Estrada Fair market value: P47 million (land alone) Ejercito�s ancestral house renovated by Chito Antonio; Contractors were �supplied� by DPWH regional director Promeo Panganiban. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww First World by 2020? By Antonio C. Abaya Written Nov. 01, 2006 For the Standard Today, November 02 issue [ACA] It is bad enough that the most vocal proponents of Charter Change in favor of the parliamentary form of government make na�ve and uninformed predictions of economic prosperity once we go parliamentary. Economic success is the result of correct economic policies and strategies, not of the form of government. [My reply] At first glance, what you say sounds right to uninitiated and not-so-informed or not-so-analytical readers. But please remember that the form of government can also determine how fast a country can react to changes in the economic environment (domestic or global) so that it can come up with correct (read: appropriate and timely) economic policies that would be relevant for the period in which said policies are envisioned, deliberated upon, and implemented. Each form of government works based on a particular "algorithm" and not all algorithms are the same. One system wastes too much time with so-called "checks and balances" which end up causing gridlock and contention, and oftentimes paralyzes the entire system instead of supposedly acting as a mere "check and balance." (Watch out! This is a SPOILER for those who haven't watched the Prestige yet!!!!) As with the recent movie "The Prestige", two different methods were employed by two different Magicians to come up with a similar end-result in the eyes of the audience, but ONE OF THEM COST SO MUCH MORE than the other! (One "Transported Man" approach used up millions of dollars in travel and accommodation costs and in having a human copying machine made, and it wasted a human life every time the trick was performed! The other method simply meant that two identical men would have had to share "a life" by deception and disguise. Which one cost more???) (Of course the type of system [or a methodology] has a lot to do with success! And Form of Government is all about Systems and Methodologies. Choose the right system or methodology (or algorithm) and you can succeed and perhaps save money at the same time. Choose the wrong one, and you may fail miserably. Or perhaps you may still "succeed" but only marginally, due to such a high cost where perhaps you may still end up failing.) You also forget that part of what makes a policy "correct" is its appropriateness and timeliness. If a country decides that the world economy is currently pointing in a particular direction, and if it moves too slowly to make the right changes, it could very well be that its "correct policies" end up too late. You also forget that since too many cooks (some of whom represent NO ONE) can spoil the broth, so that while some really good economic proposals are put forward, some of them end up watered down, morphed, weakened, or worse, totally disregarded and ignored ("vetoed") so that these proposals never become official policy. In short, the FORM OF GOVERNMENT still has a major influence on how a country's economy can either decline, stagnate, or improve. Think of it this way, Mr. Abaya. The Form of Government can very well be analogous to a vehicle's maneuvering system. Having a system that is difficult to maneuver (one that is hard to steer) can mean that the vehicle may be unable to evade other vehicles or objects that suddenly come in front of the vehicle in question. If you did your research, you'd have already found out that the Parliamentary Sytem has been generally described by foreign political scientists and academics as being the more FLEXIBLE system that can more readily respond to the outside environment, while the Presidential System (especially one with a strict separation of powers) has been described as RIGID, resistant to change, and prone to gridlock. Aren't you at least going to acknowledge that fact? I know for a fact that you have always been stating in the past that you are a proponent of the Parliamentary System. Please don't tell us that it's all about "not wanting GMA to stay on." [ACA] There is no more eloquent proof of this than the economic success of various countries in East Asia which had/have widely differing forms or systems of government: Malaysia and Singapore (parliamentary) ; South Korea and Taiwan (presidential) ; and China and Vietnam (nominally communist) [My reply] It isn't at all eloquent, Mr. Abaya. For one, I can very well tell you that South Korea and Taiwan "got up to speed" (and achieved the necessary momentum and "escape velocity" to get out of the "Third World rut") under Military or Authoritarian Regimes which were singularly focused on improving their respective economies. That they later on reverted to a democratic Presidential System after their economic momentum was already fast enough to continue propelling them towards greater prosperity DOES NOT score points for the Presidential System, nor does it prove your point that "The Form of Government does not matter." The same goes with China and Vietnam who, because they are "nominally communist" and are now in fact capitalist and market-oriented, can thus be described as having the same type of government that Kuomintang Martial Law-ruled Taiwan and Gen. Park-led South Korea had when they propelled themselves to achieve the necessary "escape velocity" for them to get out of "Third Worldism." What do present-day China andVietnam, on the one hand, and previously martial law-ruled South Korea and Taiwan , on the other, have in common? All have (or had) capitalistic market-oriented economies, that were singularly focused on the overriding goal of developing their economies directed by economy-oriented authoritarian governments backed up by military muscle. Malaysia and Singapore , on the other hand, are largely credited by international observers as having been two foremost examples of countries that DID NOT REQUIRE Military or any declaration or shift to Martial Rule and instead continued on with an unbroken implementation of an already existing democratic system in order to achieve economic prosperity. Sure, naysayers will say that "M'sia and S'pore are/were autocratic", but that is the beauty of the Parliamentary System! Extremely competent leaders who are extremely charismatic will end up with de facto semi-autocratic powers due to their superior leadership skills and ability to convince their fellow parliamentarians of the merits of their proposals and arguments, while - at the worst case - "ordinary leaders" end up acting as mere facilitators among the rest of the parliamentarians. On the other hand, incompetents cannot end up as Prime Ministers, since party members (and consequently members of parliament) will obviously not select an incompetent from among their ranks to act as their leader. Let me explain: In a parliamentary system, in theory (as it is often in practice), the Parliament - not the Prime Minister - is considered to be the real power behind the government. It is truly the Parliament, acting as a single entity, that gives personality and direction to the country's government. However, as in any group, there is a supposed "leader" - and in this case, it's the Prime Minister. In theory, the Prime Minister is supposed to be "Primus Inter Pares" or "First Among Equals" which means that while all members of Parliament are supposed to be of equal standing, the Prime Minister is the member who is given the responsibility of facilitating and coordinating the discussions and debates in Parliament as well as heading the cabinet. That being said, a "normal" Prime Minister's actions, decisions, and intentions are very likely to be under scrutiny, review, or deliberation by the rest of the Parliament's members. However, an exceptionally astute Prime Minister with superior intellect, superior eloquence, superior leadership skills, and many other areas of superiority will end up "heads and shoulders" above all the other Members of Parliament. Most especially since the Prime Minister's Party or coalition will be the one which enjoys a majority, the Prime Minister's superior skills in all or most fields will cause him or her to easily convince his party or coalition mates to agree with any solid proposal he or she puts forward. The lack of any challenge or opposition gives that Prime Minister a "de facto" set of seemingly autocratic powers since there is hardly anything that will come his/her way in terms of opposing the passage of laws or coming up with major decisions. Since the Prime Minister heads Parliament, and Parliament is both the Executive and Legislative branches all-in-one, there is no conflict. What the Prime Minister wants will easily get done, especially since by virtue of his superior skills, no credible opposition within his party or coalition will be able to second guess his /her decisions. In truth, it is through this mechanism that Parliamentary democracies are often able to get things done much faster than in Presidential Systems which feature a separation of powers. Again, simply think of it this way: A normal Prime Minister may receive some opposition and/or friction (giving parliamentary proceedings a touch of "democratic debate" and democratic opposition), while a very convincing Prime Minister with superior intellect and superior leadership skills can and will enjoy de facto "autocratic powers" due to the seeming absence or dearth of opposition (because it is hard to oppose proposed policies and decisions that are very well presented and extremely logical). If you wonder why Mahathir, Lee, and even Thatcher were thought of as "autocratic", it wasn't because of any declaration of Martial Law or military intervention. These leaders just happened to be "heads and shoulders" above their peers in parliament in terms of competence and intelligence and anything they said or put forth was difficult to challenge due to the watertight logic and facts backing their arguments and proposals. In any case, the Parliamentary System is generally looked on as being faster than the Presidential System, because while it is in the hands of an "ordinary" Prime Minister, the speed of legislation is - at worst - the same speed as that of the legislature in a Presidential System. But since the Parliament is both the Legislature and Executive, implementation does not go through the same "checks and balances" or gridlock (and delays) that the Executive or Legislature does on the other branch. In total, the Parliamentary System does away with at least one unnecessary step which does much to slow down the Presidential System. It is this efficiency which causes the observation that the Parliamentary System is the better form of democratic system towards moving up the economic ladder. To be sure, it is a general but unspoken consensus - often tacitly acknowledged even by people from the Democracy-loving First World - that an authoritarian and non-democratic form of government, provided that it is singularly-focused on improving the economy and chooses the right economic policies, is the fastest-moving form of government that can lead a country from third world to first. But among the two forms of democratic government, namely the Presidential and the Parliamentary, it is the Parliamentary System that can mimic or come close to an authoritarian government in terms of speed and efficiency - provided its leader is dynamic, of superior intellect, of superior competence, having superior leadership skills, and is highly charismatic. [ACA] What makes the ChaChaCha even more contrived and therefore not credible is the outlandish claim of President Arroyo that if we were to dance the ChaChaCha with her, she would lead this country into the exclusive First World Club by the year 2020. Or words to that effect. [My reply] Actually, it's not really too far off if Filipinos do get together and unite. Admittedly, that is difficult, thanks to the nature of what being Pinoy is - with all the crab mentality, mudslinging, rumor-mongering, back-biting, and bickering that Pinoy culture is laden with. Charter Change might not necessarily get the Philippines to the First World Club in 2020, but based on how efficient such a system is when compared to the Presidential "separation-of-powers" System combined with a unitary centralist state that has a constitution that is full of protectionist laws designed to serve only the elites whichwe currently have, the proposed changes are clearly a step in the direction of greater speed towards becoming First World. Maybe not 2020, ok. But with Charter Change, we'll achieve our goals much faster than without it. Are you somehow suggesting that the status quo, with all the anti-Foreign Investor provisions placed in the constitution designed to keep out competition and limit the domination of the country to lethargic and complacent rich types who want to just keep earning passive incomes through privileged contracts is BETTER than changing the laws to allow more foreign investors to come in and provide jobs as well as provide models for "First World" behavior? Are you suggesting that the Presidential System, which has already been exposed by far too many Ivy-League political scientists to be inferior, less efficient than the Parliamentary System, be allowed to continue on? Are you suggesting that the Philippines continue on with a system that chooses a SINGLE CENTER for the country ("Metro Manila") and neglects the rest of the country? Charter Change is talking all about changing all of those flaws which we all know haven't worked. But so far, your only real beef with Charter Change is your claim that it's all about "extending GMA's term." Well, as I told you before: NO REAL PRACTICAL PINOY GIVES A SCHEISSE about whether she extends her term. What truly practical Pinoys care about is whether our economic prospects and our lives improve. If she extends her term and concurrently, the economy improves, then we're all fine with that!!! Heck, if Marcos continued on for 40 years and each of those years brought about greater prosperity, no ordinary practical-minded Pinoy would have really cared! What got practical-minded Pinoys rooting for the Opposition was when Marcos' economic mistakes caused massive inflation and a major currency crisis. [ACA] This is pure nonsense. And as a trained economist, she knows that it is. But the fact that she publicly made this preposterous promise at all shows to what lengths she would go to deceive ignorant and uninformed people - such as the 6.3 million signatories of the Sigaw ng Langaw - to support her thinly disguised maneuvers to remain in power beyond 2010. Like Ferdinand Marcos before her, she is an original ULAP - Uma-asang Laging naka-Angkla sa Poder. [My answer] Again, staying in power? Who cares?!?!? If she stays on but brings home the bacon, then well and good!!!! It's if she stays on but doesn't deliver any improvements and instead makes things get worse. From this article of yours, I've seen that you are apparently giving her some of the credit that she is due. You may try to belittle it by saying that while she may have kept things from turning out so bad, or that she improved certain things in the economy but "not as much as we would have wanted", you might as well remember that she's got so much friction going against her. Friction such as the stuff spewed out by the incompetent opposition. Now please don't add to that. If anything, perhaps by helping her out, you might aid her in coming up with better results. [ACA] The terms First World , Second World and Third World became fashionable in the 1980s and were used to categorize the countries of the world into separate clubs based on levels of economic development. First World was the countries of Western Europe , North America (except Mexico ), Japan and Australia/New Zealand, all fully developed industrialized countries that were/are capitalist liberal democracies. Second World was the socialist countries consisting of the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China and their respective vassal states, that were wedded to Marxist-Leninist concepts of economic development and socio-political organization. Third World was the rest of the world, notably in Africa , Latin America , the Middle East and Asia , struggling to pull themselves up by their boot straps or resignedly sinking into the quicksand of poverty, tribalism and anarchy. ( Saudi Arabia and some of the Persian Gulf sheikdoms also have First World credentials, but they are not germane to this discussion because their wealth, largely in the hands of the ruling families, is not due to hard work, innovative technology or aggressive trading policies, but solely to the geological accident of petroleum deposits in their territories. ) That was in the 1980s. In 2006, the Second World has largely disappeared, after the de-communization of Eastern Europe (1989) and the Soviet Union (1991), and the re-embrace of capitalism and the profit motive by China (starting in 1979) and Vietnam (starting in 1986). Strictly speaking, the only Second World countries left are North Korea , Cuba and inconsequential Laos . Since the 1980s, several Third World countries have graduated into the First World - Israel , Singapore , Taiwan and South Korea - as a result of their adoption of correct economic policies and strategies, foremost among which was the export of manufactured goods and the industrialization that was both the start, and the result of, it. The dividing line between First World and Third World is markedly evident in per capita GDP (GDP divided by population). The "poorest" countries in Western Europe , Portugal and Greece , had in 2004 per capita GDPs of $17,900 and $21,300, respectively. In our part of the world, New Zealand had $23,300, Japan $29,400, and Australia $30,700. The new members of the First World Club have per capita GDPs within this range: South Korea $19,200; Israel $20,800; Taiwan $25,300; and Singapore $27,800. But not even the most developed former communist countries of Eastern Europe have managed to reach First World levels: Poland $12,000; Estonia $14,300; Hungary $14,900; and the Czech Republic $16,800. (All figures, in US dollars, are from the 2006 World Almanac and Book of Facts.) So how does the Philippines measure up against this criterion? About three weeks ago, President Arroyo announced with much pride that our per capita GDP had reached $1,433.(It had been hovering around the $1,000-$1,200 level for about ten years.) This is credible, though modest, economic progress, for which President Arroyo deserves credit, principally due to improved tax collection through the EVAT and increased exports and agricultural production. But part of it is also due to the appreciation of the peso, from P55 to P50 per US dollar. Pesos now translate into more US dollars than they did six months ago. (OCW remittances are inputted into GNP, not into GDP. But their significant presence in the economy does help appreciate the currency and thus help raise the GDP.) But between our $1,433 and Portugal's (the poorest First World country's) $17,900 is a wide gap that no one and nothing can bridge in only 14 years, not even if our economy were to grow at the breakneck speed of 10% per annum, like China's, contrary to President Arroyo's claim that she can, "if you stay with me until 2020." Or words to that effect. This merely confirms speculation that she wants and plans to remain in power beyond 2010. Hence the ChaChaCha towards parliamentary. Even if our $1,433 were re-computed on the basis of purchasing power parity or PPP, it would still amount to only about $5,000. The only other country that I know of that used the year 2020 as a benchmark was Malaysia under Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who in the 1980s set the national goal of becoming a fully industrialized country by the year 2020. His government promoted this goal as "20/20 Vision." To this end, Mahathir geared the Malaysian economy towards the export of manufactured goods, following the examples of South Korea , Taiwan , Hong Kong and Singapore . In 2004, Malaysia 's exports totaled $123.5 billion. Malaysia 's industrialization has included a national car and a national motorcycle whose parts are fabricated from flat metal sheets or milled from raw metal blocks, not merely assembled from imported components, as the Philippines has been doing for the past 50 years. When Gen. Prem Tinsulananda rose to power in Thailand in 1982 via a military coup d'etat, he announced that his economic program would focus on exports (of manufactured goods) and tourism. In 2004, Thailand 's exports totaled $87.9 billion. By contrast, the Philippines ' exports in 2004 totaled only $38.6 billion. In 2006, this is expected to reach more than $42 billion, a major increase for which President Arroyo deserves credit. But it is not enough to elevate us in 2020 to the present level of South Korea , Taiwan and Singapore , whose exports in 2004 totaled $250.6 billion, $170.5 billion and $174.0 billion, respectively. And tourism? In 2006, we expect a total of 3.0 million tourist arrivals, compared to 13.5 million in Thailand and 15 million in Malaysia . My point is that despite the spectacular successes of Malaysia and Thailand in exports and tourism, there is no guarantee that they will reach First World status by 2020. Another global economic crisis, like the one in 1997, can wreck even the best-laid plans. On the other hand, having missed out on the exports boom in the 1970s and 1980s, and the tourism boom in the 1990s - and additionally saddled as we are by a scandalously high population growth rate - the Philippines has absolutely no chance of reaching First World status by 2020, even under the most ideal conditions, and even if our GDP were to grow by 10% per annum, like China's, in the next 14 years. As a trained economist, President Arroyo knows this. Making preposterous claims which she knows she cannot keep, to ignorant and uninformed people, diminishes her credibility and stature as a leader.***** [My answer] Well, there is such a thing as aiming higher than normal to compensate for the trajectory. I agree with you that perhaps some of the goals may seem a bit aggressive. But sometimes, having goals that are too low makes certain people lax. With Filipinos, just as with Malay Bumiputras in Malaysia, broadcasting to everyone the need to aim high will yield better results than broadcasting to everyone that we should just "do better than what we're doing now." Malaysia 's planning has often involved making claims that seem lofty and unattainable. The creation a special affirmative action scheme for Bumiputras was originally envisioned with very aggressive goals. Originally, it was planned to go for only 3 decades, but apparently, this has had to go on. Moreover, the original goal was for a certain high percentage of Malays to become scholars/scientists and successful businessmen, but until now, the percentage of Bumiputra scholars/scientists and successful businessmen remains comparatively low when put side by side with the originally high target. That being said, had they not aimed aggressively, they would have ended up with very mediocre results. If, for the sake of argument, long ago, the percentage of successful Bumiputra businessmen was just around 1 percent out of the total number of successful businessmen, where maybe 80 percent would have been ethnic Chinese, and the rest ethnic Indian and other non-Bumiputras, and the target was to bring the number of successful Bumiputra businessmen to say, 30 percent of the total number of businessmen, the actual achievement might have just been around say, 14 percent. That being said, 14 percent is a lot better than the original 1 percent. And if the government had only trumpeted the more realistic goal of say "moving from 1 percent to 10 percent" instead of "1 percent to 30 percent", the actual results might have been disappointingly low. Orion Dumdum, [email protected], Nov. 09, 2006 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |