The writer remembers a
conversation with a tycoon and like all successful enterprises, like
in athletics, these folks 'are in a zone.' "We're
heavily committed to the nation as you will note, yet we are always
reminded that our economy remains underdeveloped . . . There are many
things that are undermining our progress but as entrepreneurs we have
to navigate around these obstacles."
Given that we
substantially lag the investment levels of our neighbors, as night
follows day, we likewise substantially lag in economic output. While
we have a handful of tycoons and countless smaller entrepreneurs,
collectively, we only have very little to show investment-wise. And
given the multiplier effect of investment, our entrepreneurs are
wealthy especially because of our large population base and the over
$20 billion in OFW remittances. Yet investment in the 21st century is
diametrically opposed to our cacique past when goods and services
were very basic. It still works in an underdeveloped nation like ours
and yet it explains why our marketing community recognizes that our
products can’t travel outside our shores. It is not about
advertising or exports per se; it is about competitiveness. We are
unable to export our products – to the much bigger global market
that could raise our national income substantially – because they
don’t deliver higher value-added benefits. And which is why
investment in this day and age has to be coupled with technology and
innovation. The old paradigm no longer applies. And the biggest
fallout is Juan de la Cruz paying the price for his disorientation in
the 21st century world?
The paradox,
unfortunately, is that the supposed positives we see in our economy –
wealthy entrepreneurs, large population base and robust OFW
remittances – create their own ecosystem that for those in the
establishment makes our economic fundamentals strong. Yet there is a
large segment of the population that is marginalized thus breeding
elevated poverty – and consequently our fight against poverty and
call for inclusiveness. But there is a wide fissure between the
rhetoric of inclusion and its reality. As Harvard professor emeritus
Edward O. Wilson postulates, unless we have more groups that are
altruistic, Juan de la Cruz would be sitting pretty owing to our
'strong economic fundamentals.' And while we are critical of the US
model of trickle-down economics, we in fact have mirrored the model.
The big difference is the US is a highly developed economy and thus
their growth trajectory is not as appreciable as our potential being
an underdeveloped economy.
The bottom line: we have
to steer off the complacency of ‘strong economic fundamentals’
simply because there is only one Juan de a Cruz. We can't define our
economic fundamentals strictly for those within the establishment –
or we shall in fact be frozen in time, i.e., in our cacique
ecosystem! “On a roll, but not quite,” quips the
iconic Solita Monsod. [Philippine Daily Inquirer, 6th Jul
2012.] “The Philippines is in the bottom 25 percent (4th
quartile) of the 180 economies measured in so far as attractiveness
is concerned, although it is in the top half (2nd quartile) of
countries with regard to potential. Not surprisingly . . . we are
performing “below expectations.” The Philippines is among the
least attractive of countries to inflows of FDI, and the FDI it
attracts contributes the least (relative to other countries) to our
development.”
While international
agencies have their share of the blame for the underdevelopment of
many countries, life was never meant to be fair – as countless
would have read from the story of the young Henry Sy. And as the
writer would hear from the stories of his Eastern European friends –
the past does not predict the future because the human spirit fuels
self-improvement. [Reality was a lesson the writer struggled to learn
from his Jesuit friend – May he rest in peace! It was many years
later before he appreciated it and then understood why the friend
kept the topic alive for so long.]
If we are not blaming
international agencies we are blaming bully countries – because it
is not easy to articulate why the successful efforts of our
neighbors, for example, and founded on a broader economy with high
levels of foreign investment and technology, don’t apply to us or
that they violate our faith or our culture? The sun shines on
everyone and thus the future is fair game. Juan de la Cruz is capable
of growing up?
No comments:
Post a Comment