Ang tuwid na daan ay dapat tunay na makatotohanan at hindi puro salita at persepsyon lamang.
I'm overly alarmed by the claim of the Aquino government that the growth of our economy is only attributable to their efforts in the four months time they have occupied the seat of Malacanang.
(Source: http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/insideNews.htm?f=2010%2Foctober%2F8%2Fnews2.isx&d=2010%2Foctober%2F8%EF%BB%BF)
President Aquino has always been harping in his speeches, more over, that “We have fixed in just 100 days what the former administration was unable to do in 3,448 days." But the succeeding phrases were merely motherhood statements, rather than hard nosed facts about what specifically he has done to trigger that kind of growth.
Yes, I would agree that there have been changes. The corruption index in the country has improved since his occupation of the Presidency, and there are indications that the overly rewarding payrolls of GOCC's is nearing its end.
But after that, where are we exactly heading? What are our growth targets? Where do we want our macro-economic indicators to lie?
Most importantly, have there been real manifestations already that there is an expected growth in any macro-economic figure, because of these early moves? I'm not saying it must already be there, but perhaps, it is too pre-mature for the President to say we've achieved economic growth, because we have already eliminated some, if not of all, of the barriers towards making that possible.
Inclusive Growth- Making Growth work for everyone
Inclusive growth is what everyone desires to experience in this country, because this is the immediate need of every Filipino family. The challenge is to how make growth work for everyone.
Where does that lie in any of his speeches? Is there any manifestation or indication of that?
Governance is not just about restoration of faith, but converting that faith of the people into something that would make them productive, and at the same time, responsible and accountable for the fate of our country.
Improving the Economic environment in the Philippines does not only require establishing a sustainable fiscal position. It must embody a climate that makes business less costly and employs measures that improve productivity. It must also empower the government to generate new wealth in the market, free from the bondage of the usual borrowing schemes and over reliance on foreign aid/grants.
But most importantly, the success of any Economic Program is not dependent on trust ratings of any President, but it is indicated in statistics that bare poverty and hunger incidence in this country, as well as figures that bare the Confidence rating of potential investors in the Philippines.
Improving Expenditure Management is a good start, but at what cost?
The President said that his close scrutiny of state spending had saved hundreds of millions of dollars for the country. Yes, it is good that we are able to save money, but at what cost did we do that?
Didn't we reduce the budget for the TESDA, where as the potential of technical and vocational education in the country is great?
Didn't we reduce the budget for farm to market roads, where we see farmers earning more, free from the bondage of abusive rice traders?
Didn't we reduce the budget for State Universities and College, where as we see education as the long term solution to poverty?
The question is at what cost do we save? This is another ploy by the government to cover up the gaps in other areas, without the knowledge that it is creating another one in the process.
This is my problem about polices on wealth re-distribution in the country, since it is normal in any kind of economy, that people's unlimited needs and wants will continue to expand. There will always be a correlative expense by satisfying a particular interest in the economic sphere, if we keep on re-channelling funds supposedly for agriculture to welfare programs, for an instance, where as both have correlative needs for their respective budgets to be increased.
The reality is, we have to create new wealth, new sources of funds, new ways to incorporate new money into the economy. We cannot be in a perpetual state of relying overly on foreign aid, or even in foreign borrowing.
The Arroyo administration should also be credited for a portion of the current economic growth
The Philippines was one of the few countries in Asia to avoid a recession in 2009. In 2009, we managed to grow by almost 1 percent in line with the reduced growth target of the Government of between 0.8 to 1.8 percent. . Part of the reasons for this success is the set of fiscal (E-VAT) and monetary reforms (inflation targeting, consolidated, risk-based banking supervision) we put in place before the crisis and the fiscal (economic resiliency plan) and monetary (policy rate reduction by 200 basis points, 2 percent reduction in the reserve requirements) stimulus.
While these public interventions cost money, we were able to maintain a manageable debt to GDP ratio (percent) and deficit to GDP ratio of less than 4 percent. Inflation remain subdued at 3.2 percent for the whole year of 2009 even as commodity prices, particularly of oil, started to surge up. [Source: Gov. Gabby Singson]
This is an area that the current administration may be aware of, but nevertheless, they continue to mention that the corrupt free perception that President Aquino has shown to us and the world is solely the reason why the economy is moving forward in a positive direction.
Considering the increasing size of the debt stock, this administration must continuously institute deliberate policies to mitigate the further increase of our country's total debt. It must admit that we were able to avert of recession because of certain fiscal and monetary policies we were able to put in place during the previous administration, while continuing to pursue new programs and measures that would allow government to address its current fiscal deficits and create a policy environment which would stabilize the macro-economy, not only focused on sound fiscal discipline, but also on financial and monetary management.
Improving the Investment Climate as a long term solution
Investments are very crucial at this point, and this is probably the most effective way we can generate new money into the circulation. It is true that PNoy's take on corruption is important to generating investor confidence in the country, but it is only 1/3 of the solution, and I do not even think corruption has been solved in half, though reforms have been initiated.
Coupled with the premium government places on corruption, the current administration should also focus one easing the regulatory concerns of investors here in the country. The cost of doing business in the country is still a major concern. The Philippines is still generally considered to have a restrictive regulatory regime for setting up businesses, hiring and firing of workers, enforcing contracts and closing a business.
What the current Aquino administration must endeavor to do is to creative a productive regulatory and competitive environment, which allows harmonious entry and exit of players in the market.
There should be a balance of competition, regulation and supervision in the market.
The Straight Path
The true straight path or "tuwid na daan" must not only show the perceived weaknesses of a political rival, just to gain more political capital, which further fosters disunity in the country.
A true conqueror of a straight path must be humble enough to admit that there have been good programs on the economy that was instituted by the previous administration, and that should be done regardless of political party or affiliation.
But a true conqueror must also be courageous enough to show real facts of claims that indeed the economy is really gaining through his own effort. It is not enough that there are moves and efforts to curb the barriers, but there must be economic manifestations, that indeed, there is movement in growth because of what was done to allow such to happen.
I am patient, like many Filipino's, about these results, but the President must also be patient first before saying he has achieved what the former has not. Like all of us, he must wait for the right time before he strikes there is indeed a manifestation of the economic growth he claims to own.
Aaron Benedict De Leon
Yes, I would agree that there have been changes. The corruption index in the country has improved since his occupation of the Presidency, and there are indications that the overly rewarding payrolls of GOCC's is nearing its end.
But after that, where are we exactly heading? What are our growth targets? Where do we want our macro-economic indicators to lie?
Most importantly, have there been real manifestations already that there is an expected growth in any macro-economic figure, because of these early moves? I'm not saying it must already be there, but perhaps, it is too pre-mature for the President to say we've achieved economic growth, because we have already eliminated some, if not of all, of the barriers towards making that possible.
Inclusive Growth- Making Growth work for everyone
Inclusive growth is what everyone desires to experience in this country, because this is the immediate need of every Filipino family. The challenge is to how make growth work for everyone.
Where does that lie in any of his speeches? Is there any manifestation or indication of that?
Governance is not just about restoration of faith, but converting that faith of the people into something that would make them productive, and at the same time, responsible and accountable for the fate of our country.
Improving the Economic environment in the Philippines does not only require establishing a sustainable fiscal position. It must embody a climate that makes business less costly and employs measures that improve productivity. It must also empower the government to generate new wealth in the market, free from the bondage of the usual borrowing schemes and over reliance on foreign aid/grants.
But most importantly, the success of any Economic Program is not dependent on trust ratings of any President, but it is indicated in statistics that bare poverty and hunger incidence in this country, as well as figures that bare the Confidence rating of potential investors in the Philippines.
Improving Expenditure Management is a good start, but at what cost?
The President said that his close scrutiny of state spending had saved hundreds of millions of dollars for the country. Yes, it is good that we are able to save money, but at what cost did we do that?
Didn't we reduce the budget for the TESDA, where as the potential of technical and vocational education in the country is great?
Didn't we reduce the budget for farm to market roads, where we see farmers earning more, free from the bondage of abusive rice traders?
Didn't we reduce the budget for State Universities and College, where as we see education as the long term solution to poverty?
The question is at what cost do we save? This is another ploy by the government to cover up the gaps in other areas, without the knowledge that it is creating another one in the process.
This is my problem about polices on wealth re-distribution in the country, since it is normal in any kind of economy, that people's unlimited needs and wants will continue to expand. There will always be a correlative expense by satisfying a particular interest in the economic sphere, if we keep on re-channelling funds supposedly for agriculture to welfare programs, for an instance, where as both have correlative needs for their respective budgets to be increased.
The reality is, we have to create new wealth, new sources of funds, new ways to incorporate new money into the economy. We cannot be in a perpetual state of relying overly on foreign aid, or even in foreign borrowing.
The Arroyo administration should also be credited for a portion of the current economic growth
The Philippines was one of the few countries in Asia to avoid a recession in 2009. In 2009, we managed to grow by almost 1 percent in line with the reduced growth target of the Government of between 0.8 to 1.8 percent. . Part of the reasons for this success is the set of fiscal (E-VAT) and monetary reforms (inflation targeting, consolidated, risk-based banking supervision) we put in place before the crisis and the fiscal (economic resiliency plan) and monetary (policy rate reduction by 200 basis points, 2 percent reduction in the reserve requirements) stimulus.
While these public interventions cost money, we were able to maintain a manageable debt to GDP ratio (percent) and deficit to GDP ratio of less than 4 percent. Inflation remain subdued at 3.2 percent for the whole year of 2009 even as commodity prices, particularly of oil, started to surge up. [Source: Gov. Gabby Singson]
This is an area that the current administration may be aware of, but nevertheless, they continue to mention that the corrupt free perception that President Aquino has shown to us and the world is solely the reason why the economy is moving forward in a positive direction.
Considering the increasing size of the debt stock, this administration must continuously institute deliberate policies to mitigate the further increase of our country's total debt. It must admit that we were able to avert of recession because of certain fiscal and monetary policies we were able to put in place during the previous administration, while continuing to pursue new programs and measures that would allow government to address its current fiscal deficits and create a policy environment which would stabilize the macro-economy, not only focused on sound fiscal discipline, but also on financial and monetary management.
Improving the Investment Climate as a long term solution
Investments are very crucial at this point, and this is probably the most effective way we can generate new money into the circulation. It is true that PNoy's take on corruption is important to generating investor confidence in the country, but it is only 1/3 of the solution, and I do not even think corruption has been solved in half, though reforms have been initiated.
Coupled with the premium government places on corruption, the current administration should also focus one easing the regulatory concerns of investors here in the country. The cost of doing business in the country is still a major concern. The Philippines is still generally considered to have a restrictive regulatory regime for setting up businesses, hiring and firing of workers, enforcing contracts and closing a business.
What the current Aquino administration must endeavor to do is to creative a productive regulatory and competitive environment, which allows harmonious entry and exit of players in the market.
There should be a balance of competition, regulation and supervision in the market.
The Straight Path
The true straight path or "tuwid na daan" must not only show the perceived weaknesses of a political rival, just to gain more political capital, which further fosters disunity in the country.
A true conqueror of a straight path must be humble enough to admit that there have been good programs on the economy that was instituted by the previous administration, and that should be done regardless of political party or affiliation.
But a true conqueror must also be courageous enough to show real facts of claims that indeed the economy is really gaining through his own effort. It is not enough that there are moves and efforts to curb the barriers, but there must be economic manifestations, that indeed, there is movement in growth because of what was done to allow such to happen.
I am patient, like many Filipino's, about these results, but the President must also be patient first before saying he has achieved what the former has not. Like all of us, he must wait for the right time before he strikes there is indeed a manifestation of the economic growth he claims to own.
"Let us allow hard facts, not just perception, to shape the opinion of our countrymen about the efficiency of our governance when it comes to the economy. Economics is both a positive and normative science."
Aaron Benedict De Leon
No comments:
Post a Comment