7.1% growth is not due to Aquinomics, it’s a continuation of GMA’s use of Keynesian Economics

Inquirer editors doing what they do best
It’s beginning to look at lot like Christmas. ‘Tis the season to be jolly. Filipinos are known for being a little too indulgent during the festive season. This could very well be the reason why the Philippine government and the business sector have been trumpeting good news about the economy through various media outlets — to get consumers to open their wallets and spend.

Keeping consumers happy is a good strategy. After all, businesses both big and small need to keep the people constantly satisfied and distracted from reality. When people are joyful, they continue to celebrate and spend; when people spend, businesses are happy. All that spending does help keep the Philippine economy afloat — for now.

The term ‘Aquinomics’ does not go down well.
President Benigno Simeon Aquino also realized the advantage of spending after the economy only grew by 3.2 percent in the third quarter of 2011. The significant drop in growth the previous year compared to the 7.3% growth in 2010 compelled some of the President’s critics and members of the Makati Business Club (MBC) to strongly advise him then not to put on hold public infrastructure projects and, instead, “to pump prime the economy” with government funds. The records show that economist Benjamin Diokno even gave BS Aquino some advice that the President would later use but would never acknowledge:

Earlier in his administration, Aquino had been criticised by economists like Benjamin Diokno former budget secretary Benjamin Dioknofor adopting austerity measures instead of continuing his successor, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s strategy of using stimulus spending to prevent the economy from entering a downturn.

Spending to stimulate the economy: John Maynard Keynes
A year ago, President BS Aquino didn’t realize that putting a hold on the infrastructure projects that were initiated by the previous government would backfire on his own administration. Some people even saw through his so-called “austerity measures” as vindictive and just a ruse to make people believe that he is unlike his predecessor Gloria Arroyo whom the President claims to have “depleted” the national budget through its alleged overspending.

President BS Aquino accused the previous administration of corrupt dealings and vowed to review government projects that were already approved because he believed that public funds were merely redirected to someone else’s pockets. But his accusations were based on hearsay and worse, were counter-productive because not only did they anger the foreign contractors the previous government signed with, BS Aquino’s government simply sat on some of the projects.

This included the cancellation — seemingly out of spite — of GMA’s PhP1.9 billion worth of various flood control projects as well as the P18.7 billion Laguna de Bay dredging project signed during her term. Some say that this resulted in the disastrous flooding that brought many industries — including the vital financial services industry — to a standstill for more than a week in the beginning of August this year. Worst of all, the Belgian company, Baggerwerken Decloedt en Zoon (BDC) who was contracted to do the dredging job filed a lawsuit against the Aquino government for the cancellation of the deal. This is something that media outlets owned and operated by family and friends of the President don’t seem to highlight in any of their networks. His lack of professionalism does put the whole Philippine society in a bad light in the international community.

The lack of activity from the time he was elected did slow the economy in 2011 and forced BS Aquino to do something. He quickly authorized additional government spending to stimulate the economy. His government has reportedly increased spending by 12 percent — “a record this year while seeking more than $17 billion of investment in roads and airports.”

Without admitting he was wrong, BS Aquino took credit for what GMA already started doing — which was to stimulate the economy through infrastructure projects and poverty alleviation programs such as the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) – during her term. The former President was even forced to highlight her achievements when the economy went sluggish in 2011 while President BS Aquino continued to blame her for it. In a paper she wrote while under hospital arrest for the charge of electoral sabotage, she outlined her disappointment:

The economy I turned over

Countless studies have shown that rapid increases in average incomes reduce poverty. Policy research, notes economist Stephan Klasen, has shown that “poverty reduction will be fastest in countries where average income growth is highest.”

When I stepped down from the Presidency in June 2010, I was able to turn over to the next Administration a new Philippines with a 7.9 percent growth rate. That growth rate capped 38 quarters of uninterrupted economic growth despite escalating global oil and food prices, two world recessions, Central and West Asian wars, mega-storms and virulent global epidemics. Our country had just weathered with flying colors the worst planet-wide economic downturn since the Great Depression of 1930. As two-thirds of the world’s economies contracted, we were one of the few that managed positive growth.

If you look around you in our cities as you drive by the office towers that have changed the skyline, if you look around you in our provinces as you drive over the roads, bridges and RORO ports where we made massive investments, that is the face of change that occurred during my administration.

By the time I left the Presidency, nearly nine out of 10 Filipinos had access to health insurance, more than 100,000 new classrooms had been built, 9 million jobs had been created.

We built roads and bridges, ports and airports, irrigation and education facilities where they were sorely needed. To millions of the poor, we provided free or subsidized rice, discounted fuel and electricity, or conditional cash transfers and we advanced land reform for farmers and indigenous communities.

No amount of black propaganda can erase the tangible improvements enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of families liberated from want during my decade at the helm of the nation. But these accomplishments have simply been part of the continuum of history. The gains I achieved were built on the efforts of previous leaders. Each successive government must build on the successes and progress of the previous ones: advance the programs that work, leave behind those that don’t

I am confident that I left this nation much stronger than when I came into office. When I stepped down, I called on everyone to unite behind our new leaders. I was optimistic and I was hopeful about our future.

However, the evidence is mounting that my optimism was misplaced. Our growth in the 3rd quarter of 2011 was only 3.2 percent, well below all the forecasts that had already been successively downgraded. The momentum inherited by President Aquino from my administration is slowing down, and despite his initial brief honeymoon period, he has simply not replaced my legacy with new ideas and actions of his own. .

It is such a shame that President BS Aquino and his minions continue to credit only his administration for the latest glowing economic growth statistics or for whatever projects that were finalized or something that he is just continuing but obviously were initiated by the previous administration. His public relations team is hell-bent on painting him as the architect of the country’s perceived good performance compared to its ASEAN neighbors. They even brand it as “Aquinomics”. They think the people are gullible enough not to know that the economic policy he is using is actually based on classic Keyenesian Economics of spending, which GMA used during her term.

And let’s not forget the Overseas Foreign Workers who are the backbone of the country. Without their remittances, which is said to make up “the equivalent of about 10 percent of GDP, surged to a record $1.8 billion in September”, our economy would collapse. Even Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile reportedly credits the OFWs contribution to boosting the economic numbers:

Our biggest export is OFWs. That is export. That’s why I’m against RH. What will improve our economy is the excess population that is used to accepting jobs that others don’t want to handle.

The question now is, how is President BS Aquino going to invite these OFWs back home when the economic growth they are boasting about is mostly fuelled by household spending and by government spending using public funds? Evidently, the economic growth he is trumpeting is not inclusive; meaning, it hardly makes a difference to the poorest members of society. Likewise, it is not sustainable under the circumstances because the population keeps growing. Like what I’ve said before, if the country’s population keeps growing, any economic growth achieved will not mean much for the additional mouths to feed.

Judging by the way Malacañang spokesperson Edwin Lacierda congratulates President BS Aquino’s administration for a job well done, the rest of the country can rest assure that this government will continue to think that they do not have to do much to find a more sustainable solution to the economic and social issues facing the nation. ‘Tis the season to be jolly for them, indeed.

print

90 Comments on “7.1% growth is not due to Aquinomics, it’s a continuation of GMA’s use of Keynesian Economics”

  1. *readies belt and paddle to spank vincensus ignoramus in his ass until it turns tomato in case he trolls another great article like this again*
    If those dumb flips thinks that that highest economic growth is such a great news for them, do they even think that they’e making progress with their sorry state and dysfunctional attitude? If their answer is yes then either they’re living in the lala land or like were hypnotized by Kaa the snake singing “Trust In Me” to be eaten by him.

    1. Oh and pnoy is once again a retarded credit grabber again like in Portal 2 where Wheatley stole GLADoS’ control on her test chambers with the help (and then betrayed by him) by Chell and then claims that it’s his own.

  2. Great article Ilda. Boo Chanco himself a writer on business for Philippine Star says such supposedly “good news” as a 7.1 % GDP in the 3Q may be misleading . It is consumption rather than investment driven and sustainability over the long run is questionable. The legion of the unemployed is still growing and the hordes of the beggars in the streets are ever skyrocketing. Poverty has never been as glaring as it is now. How will that 7.1% GDP growth explain the exodus of our countrymen to work abroad?

    1. @RF Garcia

      Thanks! I have yet to read Boo Chanco’s article.

      I don’t know why Aquino and his supporters think the growth is a big deal. It’s either they do not know what they are talking about or they are just trying to fool the people. Either way, it’s bad.

  3. Are you sure it’s actually “classic Keynesian economics”? Didn’t Keynes teach that when the business cycle goes into it’s inevitable downturn the government should increase spending proportional to the downturn, then reduce that spending as the economy recovers? What I see is just spend, spend, spend, consume, consume, consume and then try to call that Keynesian economics. Besides that, Keynes was wrong.

    1. Keynes did say “In the long run, we are all dead.”

      The key here is the Keynesian principle of government control over the economy based on the belief that they (government planners) know best and that they have the most effective infrastructure to manage and stabilize the economy. Decades of experience with Philippine GOCCs and failed strategies to “pump prime the economy” however, only serve to highlight the incompetence of our leaders.

      The focus should have been on developing a diversified economy founded in solid democratic institutions. That means promoting investment, innovation and entrepreneurship and allowing more competition, not the protectionist racket we have now that usually consists of handful of companies supposedly “competing” with one another but actually offering the same products and services at the same price.

    2. @T4Man

      The article didn’t say whether Keynes was right or wrong. The article is saying that both previous and present administration is using Keynesian economics. Of course there is already a deviation from the original theory. It is my understanding that in Keynesian economy, government intervention is supposedly only during recessions, meaning it is temporary and not a permanent policy. It seems like the Philippine government’s CCT program is going to be a permanent thing for example. Only a President who doesn’t care about his popularity will cancel that.

      The term “classic” in the article was just used as an expression. It’s like when people say “a classic case of Noynoying.”

      1. What we have is more a case of “It worked once, so let’s try it again.” The reason being that it seemed to work well for FDR, it should work again. And if it did well that back then, maybe it should be permanent. The Democratic party in the US certainly seems to think government intervention is the way to go. They’ve been making a go of it since FDR. And it forms the cornerstone of Barack Obama’s domestic policy. In both cases (here and in the US) they have proven ineffectual. And the most growth either economy has achieved is when the market is allowed to operate freely, devoid of government manipulation.

        1. @Johnny Saint

          I think sticking to the same policy that has been proven to work in the short-term is just a sign of desperation. The GFC called for immediate action on the part of the Bush and Obama administration. Anyone in that predicament had to give this impression that they were doing something. But I think that if a business doesn’t have the ability to survive, the government should let it die. The consequences can be devastating but the system would eventually correct itself.

        2. Agreed. But that hasn’t stopped our economic planners from inserting government fingers where they have proven to be consistently incompetent. From the PCGG to any number of GOCCs, the most significant thing that government managers have done is to enrich themselves at the expense of the taxpayer. Across the Pacific, the Obama administration still uses the “economic stimulus” and “too big to fail” arguments and, lately, the initiative to create “green businesses” to involve American taxpayer money in risky investments.

  4. Good morning.

    I just graduated from a university and I am not really familiar with ever issue in our country.

    This website is very informative and gives me new perspective in a lot of things. I only wish that there are more people who could read these kinds of articles so their eyes could see the truth behind the acts of our government.

    Anyway, sorry to digress, this article is written well and provides information or data that could support the main idea. It helps me reflect on WHAT could the government really do and SOLVE a lot of our problems in the future. We need better politicians who would think and fight for our country.

    1. @Surge

      Thanks for the compliment. We can only hope that one day soon, more people will be interested to understand what is really going on in the country.

  5. Enrile: “Our biggest export is OFWs. That is export. That’s why I’m against RH. What will improve our economy is the excess population that is used to accepting jobs that others don’t want to handle.”

    I have no problem with large population if that population is smart, wise and work ethics. If these population are just “palamunin”, forget it.

  6. “Our biggest export is OFWs. That is export. That’s why I’m against RH. What will improve our economy is the excess population that is used to accepting jobs that others don’t want to handle.”

    The ignorance contained in that comment is enough to make me scream out loud. Is he seriously supporting the notion that the Philippines should be a “baby factory” so foreign countries can have maids and janitors?

    1. @T4Man

      You could say that Enrile enjoys the status quo. His solution is to keep sending Filipinos abroad. Never mind that there are serious consequences particularly when children of OFWs are left behind.

      The economic policy of exporting laborers as a response to our economic woes has to be addressed in the long-term. PNoy is probably thinking that he doesn’t have to work on the economy because he can rely on the remittances anyway, but as a country we cannot be too dependent on OFWs forever. In a study, Canadian professor Prod Laquian concluded that the export of workers has prevented the Philippines from advancing as a self-sustaining nation. He also likens the country to a man who “has become lazy because he receives remittances from a wife working as a domestic worker abroad.” Furthermore…

      He noted that the Philippine government adopted the labor export program in 1974 as a stop-gap measure to ease unemployment and foreign exchange problems.

      However, after 37 years, the Philippine economy has become heavily dependent on remittances, he said.
      Almost ten million Filipinos are currently working overseas, mostly in North America, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Europe, he noted.

      Laquian stated that the most serious negative effect of Philippine labor export policies “has been the neglect of domestic production and poor investments in infrastructure, agriculture, mining, export promotion, and social development because of the easy availability of funds from remittances.”

      “The country may be likened to a man who has become lazy because he receives remittances from a wife working as a domestic worker abroad,” Laquian said.

      “For the government, the easy money from foreign remittances is a major cause of its inability to pursue sound economic development programs,” he added

      1. It’s actually worse than just lying around waiting for the money to roll in. The NSCB also provides information tracking the Peso-US Dollar exchange rate. As of October 2012, we are at PhP41.45 to US$1.00, down from PhP43.62 at the start of the year. If the this continues, BS Aquino spin doctors will be trumpeting the improvement of the Peso vis-à-vis the US Dollar. The brainwashed yellow zombies will be all giddy thinking about how many imported items their money will buy.

        What it actually means is that the money being sent home is WORTH LESS. It also means our Dollar reserves are WORTH LESS. And without a diversified economy to shore up the difference we’ll be in an even bigger mess than before. We won’t even be able to rely on outsourced jobs because with a higher value Peso, foreign companies will be less interested to work in an increasingly expensive market. And that is when the bottom falls out from under us with no end to the free-fall.

        1. @Johnny Saint

          The OFWs might as well come back home once the peso is worth more than the dollar they are earning abroad. Because if or when that happens, they won’t be able to justify their sacrifices.

        2. Not an option either. Check the editorial from the link posted by Thomas Jefferson which quotes economist Benjamin Diokno:

          “Economist Benjamin Diokno, a former budget secretary, noted an imbalance in the economy. The peso is gaining strength because of positive economic news, which means local prices will be tempered, especially on products that are import-dependent. A strong peso, however, discourages exports and encourages imports, says Diokno.

          ” ‘The result is higher unemployment. [A] strong peso reduces the purchasing power of overseas Filipino workers’ families, thus resulting in lower consumption, depressed demand and higher unemployment again,’ Diokno said.”

          The best advice would be get out as soon as you can. And stay out. You don’t want to get caught in the storm that’s coming.

        3. I can only see a miniscule effect of peso exchange rate with unemployment fluctuations. Not unless of course if one will consider 0.1% and 0.1 peso fluctuations as very significant:

          Exchange rate of Peso to USD Jan. 2008 PHP41.9/USD
          Unemployment Rate: 7.4%

          Exchange rate of Peso to USD Jan. 2009 PHP47.2/USD
          (Unemployment rate should go up since Peso goes up as to USD exchange rate.)
          Unemployment Rate: 7.7%
          (5.3 pesos up, 0.3% unemployment up)

          Exchange rate of Peso to USD Jan. 2010 PHP46.2/USD
          (Unemployment rate should go down since Peso goes down as to USD exchange rate.)
          Unemployment Rate: 7.3%
          (1 peso down, 0.4% unemployment down)

          Exchange rate of Peso to USD Jan. 2011 PHP43.7/USD
          (Unemployment rate should go down since Peso goes down as to USD exchange rate .)
          Unemployment Rate: 7.4%
          (2.5 peso DOWN, 0.1% unemployment UP)

          Exchange rate of Peso to USD Jan. 2012 PHP43.8/USD
          (Unemployment rate should go up since Peso goes up as to USD exchange rate .)
          Unemployment Rate: 7.2%
          (0.1 peso UP, 0.2% unemployment DOWN)

          http://www.tradingeconomics.com/philippines/unemployment-rate

          There is also the inconsistencies.

          I didn’t bother to have an expanded date coverage analysis for more accurate result. But then, I don’t know where Diokno got his facts.

        4. @ ilda

          From my POV as an OFW, if the value of the peso exceeds that of the dollar,coming back home would not be an option. Maybe if the Philippines could provide us with stable jobs. But you see OFWs my age are considered overage there. They would rather hire 30 year-old engineers with 5 years local experience than a 40 year old engineer with 15+ years of overseas experience. So I am choosing between coming home and having my family starve or working abroad despite a lower income, but a more stable flow, family survivies. Or better yet, just leave Pilipinas kong mahal and settle with my family somewhere else.

        5. @joeld

          Of course. It’s not just about money. The environment in the Philippines at the moment is not something that some OFWs can tolerate again. After being exposed to orderliness elsewhere, OFWs are can get culture-shocked when they spend some time in the Philippines again.

          At the end of the day, you need to look out for number one.

        6. Trosp,

          Looking at the Unemployment Rate chart, it looks like it takes into consideration the whole of the economy. Of course it will show that unemployment remains at around 7%. Those figures include the employment from the outsourcing sector which to date still enjoys massive windfalls.

          The scenario Diokno describes is the actual experience of other countries, notably the Netherlands, and the consequences it will have on a non-diversified economy such as the Philippines.

          Have you heard of the “Dutch disease” or the “resource curse?” The phenomena describes the conditions in the Netherlands in the 1960s when the Dutch discovered natural gas in the North Sea. First, the value of their currency rose thanks to the sudden influx of revenue from oil. The strong currency in turn raised the prices of their goods to foreign buyers, making their manufactured exports very non-competitive and imports cheap for their citizens. Dutch citizens, flush with cash started buying cheaper imported goods without restraint. Eventually, the domestic manufacturing sector gets wiped out. If not for oil bringing in revenues, the country would be completely bankrupt.

          Like the Dutch, Filipinos suffer from “resource curse.” We rely almost entirely on the exports of human/intellectual capital. Unlike the Dutch, we have virtually NO other industry, domestic or export-oriented, to support the economy. Like the conditions under FDR’s New Deal that boasted high employment rates, there is no real sustainable economic activity. Back then, employment was due primarily to the war effort. Today, we have high employment but we produce nothing.

          The higher valued Peso means the remittances being sent home will buy less in the Philippines when converted. That equals lower consumption and lower demand. And eventually it will result in greater unemployment as businesses are forced to lay off workers or shut down because of lower demand.

          It also means that the Philippines becomes that much more unattractive to foreign companies looking for cheap labor for their outsourced business processes. That translates to fewer seats filled in the call centers. Again contributing to the unemployment rate.

          That is the phenomena Diokno is describing.

        7. J. Saint,

          What I’m debunking is Diokno’s claim:

          “[A] STRONG PESO reduces the purchasing power of overseas Filipino workers’ families, thus resulting in lower consumption, depressed demand and HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT again,”

          I’ve presented the data that a strong peso has nothing to do with unemployment fluctuation.

          Perhaps, Diokno can present a data where low OFW remittance creates higher unemployment rate. Or he can even show a data where low OFW remittance is due to lower peso exchange rate against USD.

          Here’s another data from http://www.bsp.gov.ph/statistics/keystat/ofw.htm

          (The data covers OFW remittances that are coursed through banks.)

          From 7.6 M in 2003 to 20.1 M in 2011. A growth rate of 5.1% according to their data.

          And what is the unemployment rate?

          I can say it is almost pegged to 7.5% compared to the big increase in OFW remittance on those periods.

          I have been, for four years, an OFW. Here’s what I have observed with respect to OFW remittances:

          > Remittances are higher in the months of Nov. and Dec. (due to Christmas season and OFW ae receiving their 13th month/bonuses). One can take a cue here to check the unemployment rate.

          > Remittances are sent within three days after being received by OFWs. OFWs might grumble about the low exchange rate but they will not wait for a higher exchange rate to remit. (Who the heck will know whether it will go high or low the next days or weeks.)

          There might be other factors that are related to unemployment rate but from the data that I have viewed, definitely, it’s not the peso exchange rate nor the OFW remittance volume.

        8. Trosp,

          I agree. Definitely, the Peso value alone will not directly lead to increased unemployment. What I wanted to highlight was that a higher value currency will lead to other consequences in our economy.

          Ask any businessman and they will tell you that the real market conditions show business is down. People aren’t buying or are buying less. This runs contrary to the generally held belief that the the public is buying more because they are flush. It’s these kinds of conditions that lead to businesses rethinking investments for the coming fiscal year. And that will lead to less employment. Not just those directly affected by lower sales but companies down the line that support them.

          Also, as you pointed out — other factors affect employment statistics. All these factors working together will cause problems in the long run. Its the false picture of productivity presented by the BPO industry that masks the actual state of the economy. We may have thousands of call center seats filled, but we still do not produce anything of value nor do we have any sustainable industries that will replace the BPO and human resource export sectors. Those are the key factors. Eventually these human resources will no longer be marketable — again because they will be too expensive due to the high Peso value.

          For now government figures will show a high job fill rate. But they fail to take into account the long-term effects predicted by our existing economic policies that eventually lessen marketability of our main business sector. These, based on other countries’ experience, will be eventual high unemployment and the failure of the meager domestic industries we have now.

          Hopefully, there will be the beginnings of newer homegrown businesses that emerge as a consequence of the current cash inflows. In fact, going back to the experience of Europe and the Middle East, a diversified economy with a desire for better governance and democratic reform become the focus once people start realizing the industries are failing and the money supply is drying up.

        9. J. Saint,

          As I’ve been telling the comment readers here, I’m debunking Diokno’s claim about peso exchange rate correlation with unemployment rate. No more no less.

          Is my data not convincing?

          Talking about data, you claim –

          “The higher valued Peso means the remittances being sent home will buy less in the Philippines when converted. That equals lower consumption and lower demand. And eventually it will result in greater unemployment as businesses are forced to lay off workers or shut down because of lower demand.”

          IMO, fluctuation in peso value, if applied to individual remittance is negligible. Meaning, it will not result to lower consumption and lower demand.

          The exchange rate in 2008 peaked at PHP49.66/USD and to present at PHP40.79/USD.

          Has it caused any rise in unemployment rate? (It is pegged to 7%.)

          How about you providing us the data of your claim. We’re discussing Philippine situation.

        10. Trosp,

          So lets just agree to disagree.

          You cite data to refute Diokno’s statement. I submit that your thesis isn’t as simple as the picture presented by employment stats vis-à-vis the currency exchange rate as it disregards the other conditions of the phenomenon in the Philippines.

          As a rule of thumb in economics, there is an observed relationship between the unemployment rate and loss of production. I think it’s called Okun’s Law — the higher the unemployment rate, the lower the potential GDP of the country. This is, as I said before, more of a general rule of thumb. The actual relationship between GDP, employment, currency, etc. is more complicated.

          It has also been observed that an appreciating currency leads to unemployment. You may discount the phenomena, but the “Dutch disease” concept in economics is appropriate in the context of the Philippines as it refers to “any development that results in a large inflow of foreign currency, including a sharp surge in natural resource prices, foreign assistance, and foreign direct investment”. The decline of the manufacturing sector in the Netherlands after the discovery of a large natural gas field in 1959 came about precisely because of their appreciating currency. Like the Dutch, the Philippines, with its reliance on a single natural resource, shows signs of the “resource curse” according to this study by the University of Cambridge

          http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/teach/mohaddes/RMC.pdf

          Incidentally, Diokno isn’t the first to express concern over the appreciation of the Philippine Peso. GMA News did a story on the same topic back in 2007.

          http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/69158/economy/strong-forex-inflows-now-hurting-economy-bsp

          The source they cited is the BSP.

          Even if we consider the OFW salary increase, the value of their money still continues to fall while the costs rise in comparison. The general state of the economy will still show a danger of lower demand.

          And like the Dutch experience, the BPO sector (human/intellectual resource) will assume an ever increasing portion of GDP as other sectors shrink or post only marginal gains.

          The fact that the BPO sector is so far able to cover any losses in productivity that are incurred by the other sectors of the economy, thereby masking the adverse effects of our economic model, is our good fortune. What I would caution against is the assumption that this can go on forever. Even the BPO sector admits the projected targets for 2016 new job opportunities will be short of the actual requirements — 700,000 as opposed to the actual 900,0000 required.

          http://business.inquirer.net/82370/more-growth-drivers-of-the-economy

          I think it is foolish to be overly focused on certain facts that may suggest one scenario without considering other factors and their probable consequences and discounting them or assuming they are wrong.

        11. J. Saint

          What you’re giving us is a narration. It could be correct but where is the validation in Philippine situation?

          Are you comfortable with a claim that is not supported by data. Without a validation?

          Hit the bottom line and nothing could be simpler.

          And according to the available data, your narration still has to happen in the Philippines.

          If you claim that peso high exchange rate against dollar and lower GDP, according to your narration, results to high unemployment in the Philippines, then put out the data that shows it really has happened.

          It’s not hard. It’s simple. Put out your data rather than a narration.

          I’ve read one of your previous comments lecturing one commenter the importance of data/facts if I’m not mistaken.

          Data for me and not for thee?

        12. Trosp,

          (Thought this was over with? 😉 )

          That is correct. The key to what we are arguing about is that the course of events that I described HAVEN’T happened yet. And the events in the Philippines, as they are unfolding now, DO NOT PRECISELY FIT into a model that will predict EXACTLY the outcome that economists describe — namely unemployment and an eventual economic downturn. Economists will admit that the actual market conditions never conform precisely with their models.

          I’ve always maintained that the opinion I posted (and I believe that of Mr Diokno as well) is based on the HISTORICAL experience of other economies. The Dutch situation of course, which was where the term was first coined. There’s also the economic conditions of Russia (massive export revenues since oil hit US$70 a barrel), Azerbaijan, Nigeria and other post-colonial African nations, Canada (which has an increasing emphasis on heavy crude and shale export), and, closer to home, Indonesia.

          That the Philippines still enjoys significant growth in spite of the fact that there is evidence that suggests “Dutch disease” or the “resource curse” is our good fortune. These conditions point to the fact that the successes of the sector driving the economy — namely the BPO industry — are enough to maintain a positive impact for the immediate future. We should be thankful for this.

          The more important thing I would like to emphasize is — given the probability of the adverse effects of “Dutch disease” — the need to diversify the economy and promote entrepreneurship and innovation. That’s where the long term economic planning should focus.

          That idea isn’t even new. The BSP warned of the possible ill effects of the appreciating Peso against a depreciating US Dollar.

          http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/69158/economy/strong-forex-inflows-now-hurting-economy-bsp

          The Management Association of the Philippines urges the development of more “growth drivers” for the Philippine economy.

          http://business.inquirer.net/82370/more-growth-drivers-of-the-economy

          And just recently, James Robinson (author of “Why Nations Fail”) of Harvard was in Manila to discuss the development of ideas, harnessing creativity and promoting innovation as keys to national prosperity.

          http://philstar.com/opinion/2012-12-03/879177/vicious-circle

          In the end, that is where I would like the Philippines to be. Not as the “concierge” to the world, pretending that the current growth trend is all that is needed, while the majority of the masses still wallow in poverty. Historically, that form of economic growth (such as the trend in China) is not sustainable. I would rather be like South Korea, whose current level of industrialization and prosperity were achieved because it ended the stranglehold of elite politicians and their cronies, allowing all its people to participate and contribute their creativity to the economy.

        13. J. Saint

          Perhaps we can have a meeting point.

          I can be convinced the Peso exchange rate has a correlation with unemployment rate provided that the any significant unemployment fluctuation occurred first instead of the other way around.

          The same is true with OFW remittances, low remittance = fluctuation in exchange rate and not the other way around.

        14. No problem.

          Just be open to exceptions to the rules of thumb that economists present as explanation. Especially when there are historical precedents to suggest it.

          Besides — when you look at any economy, there’s always some level of unemployment. Even when times are good. Likely due to natural “ebb and flow” in the labor market.

          Come to think of it — that idiot LA702 sounds like one of the unwashed, unemployed, “occupy Wall Street” cowards who blame everything on a faceless conspiracy so they don’t have to take responsibility for their lives. And then go and live on government handouts.

      2. This is all so scary… Don’t you all think that Enrile, the big corps, politicians, and the big players in the country know this? No matter how deep all their pockets are, I’m sure they too will be affected by the impending shit storm they’re creating. Then why keep fooling the simpletons? I don’t see how even they would get anything out of this, or do they just want to watch this country burn?

        1. @Josh

          I’m afraid most of the politicians do now have foresight. They just enjoy the privileges they have now but do not care about what happens in the future. These politicians will be the first to go out of the country when the mob decide to charge their gated communities. Some of them have houses in other countries where they can stay after their escape.

      3. Trosp,

        I can’t provide data pointing specifically to the high Peso value as the direct cause of unemployment. That one factor isn’t the whole picture. And I don’t believe that it was Mr Diokno’s intent to convey that either. He would have done well to expound on the issue to explain it better.

        I will maintain that the Peso’s appreciation will have consequences that are detrimental to the Philippines. And this is based on the experience of other countries going back 40-50 years. The scenario would likely unfold this way:

        The current upturn in the GDP relies mainly on two things — the surge of the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) sector and the Overseas Foreign Workers remittances. Between the two, the BPO/service industry has the largest contribution at 50-54% of GDP.

        I made the analogy that this “export” of our human/intellectual resources is akin to the oil exports of the Netherlands and the Middle East. As in Philippines, the currency rose as a result of the sudden influx of cash from the sale of the one resource (oil in the Middle East, human services in the Philippines).

        Dutch products eventually became non-competitive on the world market owing to their high prices, eventually wiping out domestic manufacturing. This lead to Dutch citizens importing cheaper goods from abroad. Likewise, Gulf States produce nothing domestically; virtually everything is imported. The only thing they sell is oil. Similarly, the Philippines depends heavily on imports. Even our rice supply is supported by Vietnam and Thailand.

        The critical part now is the fact that most of what we use is, as Diokno says, dependent on imports and that we are using Dollars (remittances) to do our purchasing locally. With the higher Peso value, local prices are tempered. When the OFW’s family converts the remittances to Pesos they will discover that the value is lower, i.e. the take home pay is lower. So they end up purchasing less. The net effect is lower consumption, a slower business environment and eventually, higher unemployment.

        Why isn’t this being reflected by statistics from the BSP? If OFW Dollar remittances vis-à-vis the rising Peso were the only factors to consider, unemployment would follow without question. But our economy doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The majority of GDP is drawn from the BPO industry; remittances aren’t even explicitly cited in the BSP’s statistics when considering GDP. This sector also provides the majority of employment — 50-52%. This is where I believe Mr Diokno should have expounded on his explanation. The majority of the BPO business comes from foreign companies. Companies who have to pay in Pesos. Companies who will start noticing that they are paying more for their BPO contracts the higher the Peso rises. Companies that will eventually move their operations elsewhere if the Peso proves too rich for their bottom line. This is where the real danger lies.

        Right now the BSP says we don’t need to worry.

        http://business.inquirer.net/82386/bsp-stronger-peso-poses-no-threat-to-bpos

        But that assumes that our BPO customers don’t have an alternative venue. The moment they find one, the Philippines’ high Peso costs will drive them away. And that leads again to unemployment.

        So — is it solely the OFW’s weakening buying power that causes unemployment? Definitely not. But taken as a whole, the net effect of the strengthening Peso will have adverse consequences on the economy as a whole with the end result being rising unemployment.

        1. J. Saint,

          So here we are again.

          I was pointing out the inconsistency of Diokno’s claim based on Philippine unemployment situation.

          And you’re telling us about Netherland. I would tell you that that is not an apple to apple comparison.

          Ok, let’s discuss GDP’s correlation with unemployment and peso exchange rate since you brought that up.

          As you’ve commented:

          “The current upturn in the GDP relies mainly on two things — the surge of the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) sector and the Overseas Foreign Workers remittances. Between the two, the BPO/service industry has the largest contribution at 50-54% of GDP.”

          Which factored in unemployment rate according to you.

          There’s no upturn in our GDP when BPO and surges started in 2006. Actually, our GDP in 2005 was 6.7% and has dipped to 5.2% in 2006.

          Take note, at that time prior to 2006, the unemployment rate is fluctuating from 10 to 14%. Then dipped to around 7% in 2006 (employment rate increased) but GDP dipped from 6.7% to 5.2%.

          Then, it is not true that if employment rate is high, GDP must be high also.

          Again, for me,no correlation of GDP with unemployment rate.

          You may correlate that with year 2009 and 2011 where GDPs are 1.2 and 3.7% while 2008 and 2010 were 4.2 and 7.6 respectively. And unemployment rate is steady at 7%.

          Go figure…

          BTW, my knowledge in economics or anything related with it is only based on what I can interpret from “available” data and their correlations.

          BTW again, contrary to Diokno’s claim –

          “[A] STRONG PESO reduces the purchasing power of overseas Filipino workers’ families, thus resulting in lower consumption, depressed demand and HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT again,”

          From http://fxtrade.oanda.com/learn/top-5-factors-that-affect-exchange-rates

          “An increase in unemployment signals a slowdown in the economy and possible DEVALUATION (currency exchange rate going up) of a country’s currency because of declining confidence and lower demand. If demand continues to decline, the currency supply builds and further exchange rate depreciation is likely.”

          From that, it seems that businesses have to closed first then the peso exchange rate goes up instead of it going up first then businesses have to close.

        2. Trosp,

          Respectfully, your quote from OANDA actually supports Diokno’s statement.

          A slowdown in the economy accompanied by an eventual devaluation in the Peso is caused by lack of confidence and lower demand. Meaning people aren’t buying. As Diokno stated — consumers can’t or won’t buy because their money doesn’t buy as much. And why doesn’t their money buy as much? Because right now the Peso value is high and the US Dollar is depreciating against Asian currencies. OFWs and their families are paid in Dollars. A weak Dollar means that when you convert the money into Pesos you get that much less. On 08 December 2006 the exchange rate was PhP49.63 to 1 USD. Today the exchange rate is PhP40.89 to 1 USD. If an OFW sent home USD1,000.00 in 2006 his family would have PhP49,630.00 to spend for Christmas. Today, that family will have only PhP40,890.00 for the season. A difference of PhP8,740.00. That means they would be spending that much less. Multiply that by 9-12.5 million OFWs/families who will be spending LESS in the local economy. That’s a loss of up to PhP109,250,000,000.00 in consumer spending.

          LESS MONEY = LESS CONSUMPTION/DEMAND.
          LESS DEMAND = LESS CONFIDENCE = ECONOMIC SLOWDOWN = LESS INVESTMENT = UNEMPLOYMENT.

          And eventually the Peso loses its value following the laws of supply and demand.

        3. J. Saint

          Diokno’s claim: a strong peso results to higher unemployment.

          “[A] STRONG PESO reduces the purchasing power of overseas Filipino workers’ families, thus resulting in lower consumption, depressed demand and HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT again,”

          (Take note: peso getting stronger then higher unemployment.)

          Oanda’s claim or supposition: higher unemployment results to weak currency.

          (Take note: unemployment to occur then currency devaluation.)

          “An increase in unemployment signals a slowdown in the economy and possible DEVALUATION (currency exchange rate going up) of a country’s currency because of declining confidence and lower demand. If demand continues to decline, the currency supply builds and further exchange rate depreciation is likely.”

          Read them again.

          And according to you:

          “On 08 December 2006 the exchange rate was PhP49.63 to 1 USD. Today the exchange rate is PhP40.89 to 1 USD. If an OFW sent home USD1,000.00 in 2006 his family would have PhP49,630.00 to spend for Christmas. Today, that family will have only PhP40,890.00 for the season. A difference of PhP8,740.00. That means they would be spending that much less. Multiply that by 9-12.5 million OFWs/families who will be spending LESS in the local economy. That’s a loss of up to PhP109,250,000,000.00 in consumer spending.”

          And it didn’t significantly affect the unemployment rate buttressing my claim.

          Our discussion if you can recall is about Diokno’s claim that peso strength results to high unemployment rate which I’m refuting.

          As I’ve said in my first comment –

          “I can only see a miniscule effect of peso exchange rate with unemployment fluctuations.”

          I rest my case.

        4. Can’t help it if your interpretation of the economic data is incomplete. That mistake can lead to erroneous conclusions. You tend to isolate ONE single factor out of an entire system and assume that it is supposed to explain everything. Economists will be the first to tell you that economic theory is not all black and white. It is intuitive to think that there is a natural relationship between changes in employment, production, GDP and currency. Economists will also confirm that the exact nature of their interaction and the form it will take are complicated problems that GO BEYOND A SIMPLE RULE OF THUMB provided by economic theory. It is not as simple as you make it out to be.

          “An increase in unemployment signals a slowdown in the economy and possible DEVALUATION (currency exchange rate going up) of a country’s currency because of declining confidence and lower demand.” This does not mean that they are mutually exclusive nor that one (devaluation) necessarily follows the other (unemployment). A more accurate analysis of the statement is that rising unemployment and a currency devaluation ACCOMPANY a slowdown in the economy. (YES, these events CAN HAPPEN AT THE SAME TIME!) An economic slowdown is often characterized by lower production output; and that is driven in turn by lower demand. Meaning — people aren’t buying and therefore manufacturers stop producing.

          You completely ignore the reason WHY OFW families would stop buying. I will reiterate that the rising value (appreciation) of the Peso adversely affects their purchasing power. Its simple — the less money they have from a weaker Dollar means they have less money to spend. This is the point I was making and the same statement Diokno made. Expounding on this point — if the amount of money in OFW families’ hands continues to decrease, the number of purchases they make also continues to decline. Over time (it was never claimed that this is an instantaneous event), this means that manufacturers and/or sellers will produce/sell less. That causes the slowdown as a result of declining confidence, which in turn brings unemployment ALONG WITH a currency devaluation. Let me emphasize — the last two do not necessarily follow one after the other.

          I will also reiterate that these phenomena have been documented in other countries. This is why I mentioned the Dutch experience in the 1960s to illustrate it and caution against its ill effects.

          The other mistake you continuously make is the tendency to disregard the effect of certain economic components in favor of others. You should approach the analysis from the perspective that the economy is not an isolated system. Economic development is influenced by several factors which should be given critical consideration.

          You cited the statistic that the Philippines maintains a 7% unemployment rate even with the drop in consumer spending from OFW families. But you didn’t correlate that fact with the effect of BPO employment, which makes up the bulk of the Philippines’ economic drivers (50-54% of GDP). Analysis of the BPO sector will show that the phenomenal success of this industry can more than make up for the employment requirements and consumer spending lost to lower OFW consumption. This is what accounts for the statistics as presented by the BSP and NSCB. The BPO sector is largely responsible for the local high employment, the majority of production output, and IN COMBINATION with OFW remittances, higher consumer spending and the continuing appreciation of the Peso. Neither of these two are mutually exclusive.

          I mentioned the Philippines in the context of a country (like the Netherlands) relying too heavily on ONE resource to drive the economy. An article by the Management Association of the Philippines (MAP) makes the observation that while the BPO industry and the OFW remittances have a positive impact on the economy, “we are paying too high a price” for their success. It goes on to call for the development of other products and services as economic drivers to ensure the Philippines’ competitiveness.

          http://business.inquirer.net/82370/more-growth-drivers-of-the-economy

        5. J. Saint,

          I’m suppose to rest my case but I’ll totally rest it after this one.

          My take two.

          Let us put it this way:

          All my claims and suppositions about peso exchange rate correlation with high unemployment, the crux of my argument against Diokno’s claim, are supported by related data.

          It seems to me that you are misdirecting the comment readers in presenting other factors aside from peso exchange rate vis a vis unemployment rate.

          Again, refute my data with whatever data you have and not by your narration.

          Just show us a data that when peso exchange rate is down, unemployment is down. Peso up, unemployment up.

          Since you mentioned GDP, show us the data that when GDP is down, unemployment is high in Philippines situation.

          If you can’t find any data to support your claim, well, if it’s my case, I don’t go to any argument without any related data to counter argue a point.

          What else, let’s see…

          “A more accurate analysis of the statement is that rising unemployment and a currency devaluation ACCOMPANY a slowdown in the economy.”

          That’s not my argument. My argument is peso exchange rate has no correlation with high unemployment. No more no less.

          Your telling us NOW that the rising unemployment and rising devaluation ACCOMPANY a slowdown in the economy. (Where is the strong peso results to high unemployment now?)

          I suppose even a person with no knowledge in economy will not argue against that. And you’re telling us that it is a more accurate analysis! (Am I an idiot not to even aware of that one.)

          Ugh!

          “You completely ignore the reason WHY OFW families would stop buying. I will reiterate that the rising value (appreciation) of the Peso adversely affects their purchasing power. Its simple — the less money they have from a weaker Dollar means they have less money to spend. This is the point I was making and the same statement Diokno made.”

          You forgot that those OFW’s salary is being increased annually by their employers. It’s simple.

          So, using your data of the peso appreciation against USD from 2006 to 2012, that will be an average PHP1,456 difference/month salary for an OFW earning USD1,000.00 a month.

          A mere 3% factor.

          Do you have any idea of how much an OFW, with the exception of DOH, salary is being increased annually after their performance appraisal? I might be wrong, but last time I checked, it’s about 5%. Bigger than the peso appreciation.

          (OFW who don’t perform to expectation are sent home.)

          Even neglecting their salary increase, can you explain to us the 3% individual is a significant factor…

          Never mind, let’s just stick with me refuting the claim that strong peso results to higher unemployment in the Philippines according to Diokno.

          Well, it’s just me. I don’t have so much knowledge about economy but I can interpret data.

  7. Why do you say T4Man that Keynes was wrong? President Roosevelt used Keynesian economics to lift the USA from the depths of the depression. He implemented among other projects, the building of thousands of hospitals, schools, playgrounds, airfields, bridges and 1.1 million km of roads. The schools employed thousands of teachers. Can you imagine the huge impact of this on unemployment? From 1933 to 1941 unemployment in America plummeted from 24.9 to 9.9 %. That is using money to generate employment(not a doleout). It is Atty Lacierda’s Aquinomics that is wrong, not Keynesian economics.

    1. That is using money to generate temporary employment in government projects, and private-sector employment did not grow at a pace even close to being able to take up the slack, until World War II provided some opportunities.

      Nonetheless, even if you disregard the whole economic benefit of war thing, it’s still a lot better idea “Aquinomics”. People should not repeat that word, btw. It’s not even a thing.

    2. I didn’t intend to start an economics debate but since you ask….

      I will grant that Roosevelt used Keynesian principles but it’s a continuing erroneous assumption that this lifted the US out of the Great Depression. The depression actually continued on past the end of the war and it wasn’t until government spending was cut back, taxes lowered and entrepreneurs used the built-up infrastructure to create jobs that it ended.
      Personally I prefer Murray Rothbard’s theory on the Great Depression but this is now off-topic.

    3. RF, BenK, T4Man,

      At the very least you will have to agree that FDR’s “New Deal” was necessary to address an economic crisis that was deemed “too huge” at the time for normal market forces to correct. That is — too many people would have suffered before things settled down and the effect this would have had on society was considered unacceptable.

      Historically, the view among economists is that the Great Depression ended with the advent of World War II. Rearmament in Europe and subsequent troop mobilization helped stimulate the economy and brought unemployment rates down. In the United States, economic growth rates doubled but this is again attributable to massive war spending. The increased manufacturing output at this time comes from multiple government contracts and cannot be given credit for the recovery which does not begin in earnest until AFTER the war. Worse, this economic activity, singularly directed towards the business of war, masks the actual effects of the Depression, the rising national debt the war was incurring and the new taxes that were passed to cover the expenses of the New Deal.

      The era did produce a number of significant changes in government policy. Most notably, the US created the Securities and Exchange Commission and introduced Social Security. These and a host of other new government agencies are designed to oversee and regulate business and provide for safety nets for the public in times of economic crisis.

      Another significant result of the New Deal was that it set a precedent for big government intervention in business and the economy. And this is what affects us most today. Successive administrations have implemented variations of FDR’s New Deal to “pump prime the economy” and all of them have failed to uplift the lives of the majority of the Filipino people. At best, government management of the economy has been mediocre. They all completely missed the fact that economic liberalization in the 1950’s after the Marshall Plan was implemented was what shaped Germany’s economic future. Or that under Truman, the US Congress dropped price controls, instituted deregulation and slashed taxes to create near full employment.

      This is where we need to be. The Philippines needs to foster an environment that allows business, innovation and entrepreneurship to grow.

      1. The last paragraph goes from Germany to Truman and on to the Philippines. IDK if what is happening here in the Philippines qualifies for a comparison.The de-regulation of the U.S. banking sector,the passing of the banks PRIVATE debts on to the PUBLIC sector,the repeal of Glass-Steigel act,and the assinine ZIRP have bankrupted the economies of the West and if it happens in the Filippines,and ZIRP is already here,the country will certainly go down the drain even further than it already is.It wont happen.Banks in the Fils are the tightest,cheapest,money grubbers I have ever encountered and exposing themselves to any risk is out of the question.But to make advances you must be willing to take chances and the banks in the Philippines do not have the balls it takes to take chances.The rich are going to ride the wave in the Philippines,and get richer.The ‘massa’ is going to stay poor,keep having babies it cant feed but hopefully one of them will grow up to be the visionary that you had and one day,AND one day maybe he/she will be embraced and given a chance to succeed,but I doubt it.Those people are one in a century types,and you missed the last one.
        To up-lift the economic conditions of the ‘massa’ in the Fils?Higher wages need to come here,NOW,but will not.The whole ‘outsourcing’ policies of the West depend on slave labor in countries like the Philippines,so just forget it.The smoke and mirrors game of how things are getting better and the new ‘Asian Tiger’ is ‘rising in the east’,HA HA HA,I have to laugh when I see the Jeepneys belching,polyester clad office workers,and the whole rest of the the daily going on and see nothing changing and certainly never for the better if it does change.I would not even show up for work if I was going to make $7/day.I would rob banks all day long,until I got caught and then I would escape from the jail they put me in and die in hail of bullets. People would say,for about fifteen minutes…”There was a MAN who did not take the shit they tried to force him to eat.”. Pretty bleak,huh?

        1. This is a common argument for more government intervention, not less. Complaining about the government then asking them to increase regulation and force employers to increase wages is an oxymoron. It is government interference on behalf of the power mongers that stifles the economy and makes the poor poorer and the rich richer.

        2. I think we are becoming too focused on the speculation over who pulls the strings of the president or how much our congressman received in bribes and kickbacks. Lets focus on what can actually be measured and observed. And that is — a deregulated, diversified economy brings in the most profits.

  8. Industrialization now!

    Livelihood programs and projects now!

    Jobs generation now!

    Direct investments now!

    Infrastructure development projects now!

    Export development plan now!

    Mechanized and scientific farming now!

    Strategic/natural resources development now!

    Streamlining and re-engineering process, procedure and workflow in all government offices now!

    Genuine anti-graft and corruption program now!

    1. @ Thomas Jefferson

      Your 10 point demand is a shout in the wilderness, almost lamenting for something which I think in the eyes of the reality makers and bankers of this world are utopian, that is, if you have an idea how the banking system and government operate. But they can make it happen and make all nations on earth prosperous if they wish to do it.

      I have enjoyed reading all these “pontifications” and generalizations from these commenters but unless people understand how the banking system and government operates, how and why there are wars, religious conflicts, urban conflicts, famines, poverty, diseases, joblessness, maleducation, crime and everything that affects society today and in the past, it is because of the international banking systems grip on government affairs. What is happening in the world today are not coincidences…they are planned. You guys need to do your homework.

      1. LA,

        You are all talk.

        So explain to us your idea on how the banking system and government operates.

        Show us your homework kid. Don’t forget to include to cite your source.

        1. @ Trosp & Johnny S

          I will not explain how, that is your homework, but here’s one clue that will guide both of you.

          Jacob Rothschild: investment banker, estimated family fortune: over $500 Trillion USD…have saved nations from bankruptcy including the US…financed wars around the world…can feed the entire planet for 100 years without hurting his family fortune. Here’s a good start and I would advise both of you to stop reading junks like Tribune, Manila Standard, CNN, ABC etc., they will make you stupid. You know what I mean? LOL!

      2. LA702,

        It must be comforting to envelop yourself in conspiracy theory. The beauty is that even with your admonition to other commentators here to do their “homework” conspiracy theories by their very nature cannot be proven. It’s probably what appeals to the people who believe in them in the first place — the idea that they belong to something bigger without having to bear the responsibility for its consequences. And spreading them is just irresponsible and dangerous.

        Go get a life and stop looking over your shoulder for something that isn’t there.

      3. So — your “homework” is based on popularly repeated Internet conspiracy theories that can never be proven and your arguments consist of name-calling.

        Rothschild? Really? You are using the same reasoning Hitler and the Nazis used to justify the murder of 6 million Jews.

        So now your true colors come out — another FUCKING DEGENERATE RACIST!

    2. LA,

      “I will not explain how, that is your homework, but here’s one clue that will guide both of you.”

      Idiot, that is your homework.

      You’re the one who is spreading dishonesties here which you didn’t support with facts. Instead, you want us to do the fact searching for you!

      Idiot!

      In your Rothschild thing, cite the link where you got that moronic claim. Don’t just give us a narration. The link.

      Idiot!

      1. Trosp,

        He’s citing some old, hoary — and long DEBUNKED — Internet conspiracy theories. The fact that he would specifically point to Rothschild makes me think this idiot is anti-Semitic.

        1. Are the Chinese part of your conspiracy also? Did the Jews pay them to make your life miserable? Perhaps it means the Rothschilds are out to silence you since your brilliant mind discovered their master plan to dominate the world.

      2. @ Trosp & Johnny S

        What did I tell you people? Stop reading Tribune, Manila Standard or listening to Kris Aquino, you two are thinking just like her. LOL! Now boys…lazy bastards, do your homework asap! LOL!

        1. Why are you so obsessed with the Tribune and the Manila Standard? And why mention the diseased sister of the president? What does she have to do with this? Why do you pigeonhole anyone who has a contrary opinion to your marginalized, delusional, hate mongering diatribe as readers of the Tribune?

          Stop inhaling your flatus. It’s corroding your synapses. Making you prone to hallucinations about black helicopters and Rothschilds hacking your files.

        2. @ Johnny S

          I don’t think a Chinese nuclear bomb can blast your thick skull my friend…Try to figure out…LOL!

        3. LA702: Why? That’s because you can’t accept the fact that you are just ‘trolling’?

          Go figure.

        4. @ Trosp

          I told Johnny S that both of you have thick skulls a Chinese nuclear bomb can’t blast. Help yourself old man…LOL!

        5. Is Kris Aquino part of the global Sino-Jewish-miltary-industrial-complex plan to keep LA702 poor?

        6. LA,

          Where are the sources of the garbage you’re spewing here?

          I can imagine you’re an overweight person who just rises from a bed late afternoon everyday.

          Eating breakfast at lunch time while trolling. I’m certain your everyday breakfast is what your mama leaves you before she goes to work.

          A stale pan de sal and you would even make a coffee for yourself.

          Typical.

          Lunch and dinner are taken at the same time. Whatever in the fridge plus the cold stale steamed rice.

          (A dude like you would not know what is stale and what is not. Just by reading your posted comments, it’s very obvious.)

          (But then, I might be wrong. You could be an internet cafe overseer.)

          Then sleep late in the evening on the bed that was made up a couple of months ago…

          To wake up the next day trolling again.

          You’re shameless!

  9. Figures do not mean anything. You just look around you. Many prople are poor….too few people are rich. Most of them political leaders… Prices of basic commodities are goin higher and higher…

  10. The credit for the economic growth in S.E.Asia is due to the ‘outsourcing’ of any job that can be ‘outsourced’ from the hands of a well-paid worker in the West to a low paid worker in S.E.Asia,PERIOD. Who ever wants to take credit for it is just an attention seeker.
    It is completely laughable to think that without the complete selling out of the people in the West,by their elected representatives and at the hands of the Corporations,that the East,either as a whole or country-by-country, would be propering as it is. There is no way it would be happening. When the workers in Asia start to organize and get higher wages, the last bastion of poor under-paid workers will be tapped into by the Corpoartions,Africa.If you think the quality of your products sux now,well wait till the “Bruthas” in Africa start making them.
    “Yo,chromey,whats da fug is a wratchet?”. “I donts kno ma nig,anywayz…watschewz bees lookins dat,mang?”.

  11. Going back to Enrile’s outrageous comment: It’s bad enough that Filipino men demonstrate their manliness by continuously impregnating their wives and a mistress or two but now they can claim it’s good for the economy!

    On the OFWs: I’m pretty sure most if not all of the OFWs would prefer staying home and finding a job. Rather than celebrating and calling them “heros” people should be P.O.’d about the fact that their family members have to leave them and go overseas (sometimes into volatile areas) just to get a minimal income job.

  12. Increasingly a two tier society – the minority who covet americana, and the majority who pay for and pave the road through their serfdom.

    analysis shows that the growth rate is neither sustainable or inclusive and no doubt fuelled by ofw’s buying overpriced shoddy rabbit hutches and chinese borrowing at 1% in hong kong and taking over the condo rental market in manila/makati.

    enrile as usual shows he is well past his sell by date with his stupidity.
    if he knew how to use a computer he could do some research before displaying his ignorance of macroeconomics.

    1. new jobs in the bpo sector will only be created if firstly there are adequate skills and secondly if the industry moves up the value chain and away from low margin call centres.
      simple extrapolation is pure political propaganda – jam tomorrow, but without a cohesive strategy the new players on the block will take the plum contracts leaving the crumbs to the philippines.
      additionally companies/customers are not only moving into more automated forms of channel marketing but also startung to differentiate on quality of service as opposed to cost of provision.
      the next wave of bpo needs and opportunities will be far more demanding in terms of attracting and retaining overseas clients.
      and south korea has a plan to become the asean hub – hence all tge english language training, and i wouldnt bet against s korea in favour if philippines.
      the bottom line – tge philippines will lose its position and slide down tge league table. sounds like a repetitive pattern of the past.

      1. Correct. There’s also the probable entry of China in the BPO market. Also starting to develop their English speaking skills. And we know for a fact that they can drive the price down.

        I’ve always been in favor of diversification of Philippine industries. And promoting entrepreneurship and innovation. This is the proper way to ensure the sustainability of the economy.

  13. when it was arroyo’s time grp will give her credit for growth numbers. now its aquino in malacanang, growth is due to “other factors” hehe

    1. I got a better question Bernie. Are you part of the Malacanang Communications Group? How’s the new hardware? Sorry, that was two questions. I’d ask you a third question like how does it feel to cover up for a moron but you won’t be answering that anytime soon. Troll harder.

  14. This called growth is not true at all, yhe basis of growth should be the available jobs for it’s citizenry which is stable and wages that can afford the services and commodities in the country, however this called growth of GMA and Pnoy is killing OFW and it’s families stop this hallucinations these are just statistics that cannot be felt by majority of filipino family..!!

  15. Data in the Philippines can be pen by anybody..how the country’s GDP increase when it’s citizenry is seeking jobs abroad and how they can tax it’s people when they cannot provide jobs..Government in the Philippines is daydreaming..!!!

  16. 7% growth my ass. Just because there is an enormous condo building bubble which will burst due to the over priced properties.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.