When all is said and
done, ours is a borrowed page: the US trickle-down economics?
Admittedly there are aspects of it that we hate and those that we
unwittingly love? The dichotomy wasn’t lost to Mahathir when he
spoke at UST sometime ago. And in his case the one thing that he
learned to love is their capacity to invest and bring technology.
Simply, Mahathir urges us to discriminate instead of shooting
ourselves in the foot? He dislikes the West, particularly George
Soros who raided the ringgit, but he craves their wealth and
technology . . . and can use them.
We inadvertently
subscribe to US trickle-down economics and thus miss that the
condescension – or American arrogance – that comes with
unfettered free enterprise mirrors our cacique structure? We had the
1% anomaly even before Occupy Wall Street dreamt of it? The human
condition, as in greed, travels with ease and so even Europeans, long
critical of US-style capitalism, succumbed to it thus aiding and
abetting the collapse of the global financial system? And worse,
their banks were more vulnerable than US banks.
And it makes Mahathir
truly prescient; and being a doctor it was not surprising given his
training in cause and effect? We may not be unanimous about the role
of government versus that of the private sector in economic
development. But we ought to be more perturbed about our failure in
power generation; we appear nonchalant because the private sector (or
our favorite big boys) would do what is good for Juan de la Cruz?
PSALM wallows in debt. Does that mean we’re getting closer or
farther away from fixing our energy dilemma? Our neighbors, on the
other hand, knew that government had to provide leadership in
economic developed as exemplified by Singapore and Malaysia? And both
Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir bin Mohammad offered us unsolicited advice.
The problem with US
trickle-down economics when applied to PHL is that we don’t have
the infrastructure and the ecosystem of a developed economy like the
US. And thus the flaws of their model don’t represent our own
challenges. The issue of inclusiveness in a US environment versus
ours is not the same. Our inclusiveness challenge is largely due to
our underdevelopment. [Yet we have produced billionaires that have
dominated our economy and thus its lopsidedness. And because of their
influence – that could be owed as much to our acceptance if not
embrace of a hierarchical structure – we have become party to
protecting oligarchy via the closed economy that has characterized
PHL and thus starved of foreign investment and technology.] We ought
to be comparing ourselves to neighbors that were once poor like
Thailand: they have appreciably reduced poverty simply because they
are more developed than we are, i.e., their GDP per capita (at
purchase price parity) is $9,500 against our $4,100. [And poverty to
us means making less than one or two dollars a day. In the US poverty
thresholds are used depending on the size of the family and the ages
of the members: for example, in 2012, a family of five, with two
children, their mother, father, and great-aunt, has a threshold of
$27,010; and the family is classified as poor if it misses said
threshold.]
When
we compare apples to apples, our concern must be to drive our
economy. Simply put, we have to focus on building our economy like
our neighbors have done. And it starts with basic infrastructure –
from power and beyond – and prioritizing the pursuit of strategic
industries and their requisite ecosystem or clusters as economists
would call them. For example, the seven strategic industries
identified by the JFC (Joint Foreign Chambers) must be our concern,
meaning we must set up the support industries that will make these
strategic industries viable. Agribusiness is one of them. Beyond
talking about a “comprehensive agrarian reform program,” we must
be focused on making agribusiness a viable economic undertaking –
from the inputs to the outputs and ensuring that throughout the
process they are efficient, productive and competitive.
Because
of our inability to step up to the plate, we’re confusing our
challenges and not surprisingly are in a maze that shouldn’t be
there in the first place: CCT, land reform, minimum wage
legislations, etcetera have not made a dent in our poverty efforts!
Why? We keep taking our eye away from the ball!
No comments:
Post a Comment