They are – individually and collectively – a microcosm of why we are the regional laggard, even a fourth-world country?
“[W]e have been shooting ourselves in the foot almost every step of the way. We simply cannot get our act together … Unless we do so quickly, we will eternally remain a third world economy and run the risk of being marginalized and relegated to a fourth world country … God forbid!” [PH a fourth-world country (?), Francis Lim, Point of Law, inquirer.net, 19th Oct 2017]
For example, “THE Foundation for Economic Freedom (FEF) said the Senate should review its version of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) bill, the projected revenue for which will be inadequate for the government’s infrastructure program.
“Expected revenue is ‘less than the overall goal to raise around P134 billion’ and ‘will barely cover the estimated cost of the government’s public service programs and the requirements of the Build, Build, Build program,’ the FEF said in a statement.” [FEF says Senate tax reform bill inadequate for infra program, Arjay L. Balinbin, BusinessWorld, 28th Oct 2017]
But the administration assures us there is always the debt mechanism available to us. “[T]he DOF and the BTr are keen on issuing renminbi-denominated bonds and global bonds ‘sooner than later’ to prepare for the administration’s spending program in 2018.” [DOF eyes Samurai bond issuance in 2018, Mary Grace Padin, The Philippine Star, 30th Oct 2017]
And assuming we can generate the funds to support the administration’s spending program, are we in fact poised to execute Build, Build, Build? “One reason why I no longer want to attend public discussions of this administration’s transport infrastructure program is that I get terribly bored. I hear the same old stories of grand plans. I am aware of hindrances to the projects like right of way issues that I know are not being addressed.
“NAIA is hopelessly congested and inadequate. It is now handling over 40 million passengers a year when its rated capacity is 30 million … It is clear that if government really wants to deliver its grand infrastructure plans, they have to tie up all loose ends.” [Same old story, Boo Chanco, DEMAND AND SUPPLY, The Philippine Star, 30th Oct 2017]
But let’s get back to the risk of being a fourth-world country. “The PSE only has 269 listed companies compared to Bursa Malaysia (901), Singapore Exchange (753), Stock Exchange of Thailand (667), Indonesian Stock Exchange (555), Hanoi Stock Exchange (379) and Ho Chi Minh Exchange (340).
“In terms of average daily value turnover, the PSE only trades $138.2 million compared to the Stock Exchange of Thailand ($1.2 billion), Singapore Exchange ($864.8 million), Bursa Malaysia ($530.9 million), Indonesian Stock Exchange ($394.6 million) and Ho Chi Minh Exchange ($147.05 million).” [Lim, op. cit.]
At the end of the day we can also turn to foreign aid – but which apparently carries its own risks. “It is inappropriate for the EU to pour resources into organizations that directly or indirectly support the NPA and deliberately undermine people’s trust in the government. Considering the EU’s strictness as far as the Philippines’ adherence to the protection of human rights is concerned, it is ironic that other aid from the EU might actually lead to increased violence and rights violations.
“Of course, the government – national as well as local – is guilty of failing to provide basic services, not least education, to marginalized populations in far-flung areas.” [On aid and sovereignty: Who is worse – China or the EU (?), Marit Stinus-Cabugon, 30th Oct 2017]
We indeed have our hands full. And the blog offers a quote from a recent post. “Then think why we have been left behind in: (a) infrastructure development; (b) in industrialization; and (c) in innovation and competitiveness. Instead of stepping up to the plate, we accepted OFW remittances and more recently the BPO industry as the path to progress, growth and development – aka “pwede na ‘yan.”
“Where we have been left behind – surprise, surprise – are the requisite development levers espoused by the new UN SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals).
“Yet instead of taking stock of what we did – and failed to do – we are injecting form of government, for example, in our hypothesis [yes, it’s what it is, not a fail-safe solution] reminiscent of what we did with land reform. That it was the be-all and end-all.”
It appears even our best efforts won’t suffice to get us over the hump. What are we missing? We’re caught in the continuing dilemma, which comes first the chicken or the egg.
And given our culture of impunity, we’re not quite equipped for self-government. And yet we must elect leaders from among us. In similar cases in other countries, despots have thus emerged. And it appears that is what some of us are counting on? Better be careful what we wish for.
And why the blog shares the writer’s experiences living and working in an ex-Soviet satellite state. And they give him firsthand knowledge that people can and do change – that even ex-socialists born and raised under communist rule can embrace democracy and the free-market system, including the challenge of innovation and global competition. But not Juan de la Cruz?
Beyond our brand of Christianity which the blog has raised, i.e., why our nature is not one of dynamism, is the influence of higher education – not only in PH but globally. As discussed in an earlier post, education reforms call for a growth mindset as opposed to a fixed mindset; and beyond teacher-directed learning is learning through discovery – i.e., developing one’s own hypothesis and experiment.
They are meant to move us away from logical, linear and incremental thinking ... and hone our foresight. For example, in working with his Eastern European friends, the writer introduced model thinking – a carryover from his MNC background where industry was critical of Western higher education. And so, progressive companies developed their own education and training curriculums – because for an undertaking to yield sustainable outcomes, it must mirror a virtuous circle. And the solar system is the best example – aka an ecosystem.
It applies to both private and public sectors. If it isn’t obvious yet, the writer guides his Eastern European friends through a series of principles on how to develop their own hypotheses and experiments, e.g., from understanding human needs in product development and innovation to beating the hell out of competition. And they are subsets of the bigger [virtuous] circle that must also hone their foresight, i.e., to constantly imagine and visualize their vision to be the best in the business – that in turn informs their efforts.
It is beyond logical, linear and incremental thinking. Which historically Western higher education assumed as the be-all and end-all, and why countless researches aren’t worth the paper they’re written on (as a columnist recently discussed.)
And as far as the public sector is concerned, the Asian Tigers come to mind. They went beyond (consistent with the models in the program, “From poverty to prosperity: Understanding economic development,” offered at Oxford University and discussed in an earlier post) the conventional wisdom of monetary and fiscal policies – and rapidly grew their economies.
On the other hand, what do we have to show? See above re TRAIN, etc. In other words, when will we demonstrate: (a) the unequivocal commitment to infrastructure development; (b) the hard-nosed drive to industrialization; and (c) the dogged pursuit of innovation and competitiveness? [And we wonder why we have a trifling 269 listed companies in the PSE?] They are the subsets of the bigger [virtuous] circle of sustained economic growth and development that we must constantly imagine and visualize – that in turn must inform our efforts.
Unsurprisingly, well into the 21st century, Boo Chanco writes “Same old story” re infrastructure development. And we worry about the EU undermining people’s trust in the government. Recall the blog has repeatedly raised that Lee, Mahathir and Deng begged for Western money and technology. Ergo, had we become a first-world nation like the Asian Tigers, we won’t rely on foreign aid. Likewise, we worry about the direction of technology (e.g., AI) because we could face even greater economic challenges.
These concerns are a microcosm, that we are behind the curve, not ahead. It’s called foresight. For example, the 21st century isn’t about modernizing the jeepney. It is about an efficient public transportation system. Sadly, we are a generation behind, if not more. And we only have ourselves to blame.
“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? And that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]
“Now I know why Paul dared to speak of ‘the curse of the law’ (Galatians 3:13). Law reigns and discernment is unnecessary, which means there is little growth or change in such people. When you do not grow, you remain an infant.” [Faith and Science, Open to Change, Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation, 23rd Oct 2017]
“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]
“National prosperity is created, not inherited. It does not grow out of a country’s natural endowments, its labor pool, its interest rates, or its currency’s value, as classical economics insists . . . A nation’s competitiveness depends on the capacity of its industry to innovate and upgrade.” [The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Michael E. Porter, Harvard Business Review, March–April 1990]
“Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.” [William Pollard, 1911-1989, physicist-priest, Manhattan Project]
“Development [is informed by a people’s] worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]
No comments:
Post a Comment