Philippine GDP up by 6.4% in Q1

[albertus magnus]

Spending is just one hand. Revenue generation is another. It is likewise a given fact in this modern age that a heavy tax on income is regressive while tax on spending (VAT) is better. Philippines is the only country in the southeast which relies its revenues heavily on income tax. VAT is even easier to implement while income tax has a lot of loopholes.

Parekoy, Income tax can be progressive. While others considered VAT as regressive which taxed and burdened the lower income groups more. VAT is already on tollways(tax on top of tax), on oil, on electricity, and on plain stupidity, there's even VAT on system loss. From 10% VAT it goes way up to 12% and their planning to go up to 15%. Just imagine that increased will affect our competitiveness to attract investors and decrease the competitiveness of our local industries with higher costs of electricity, oil, transport/freight costs. And with the rampant smuggling, these are surefire to kill our local industries. With higher power cost(we are the highest in Asia), that energy intensive industries or factories are fleeing to where energy costs is cheaper. It is because of power concerns that our local garments industried died out. Mining investors can't invest on more more energy intensive ore refining/processing. And thus, they export unprocessed sand/gravel/rocks rich with minerals like rare earths/iron/copper/gold and pay unsubstantial tax(almost like technical smuggling) to be refined elsewhere. Whereas if they processed it here, the gov't will get better revenues.

Congressman now Governor Tet Garcia, an accountant by profession, said that it is the other way around that VAT has more loopholes. Tax on Gross is according to him more simpler while VAT has many loopholes and leakages which cost the Gov't a 50% revenue loss. He said the Gov't doesn't have the enough manpower or the technical structures or facilities to check all those receipts. While in the interview by Ding Pascual, he stated that it's actually a 75% loss. It is for this reason they expanded the coverage of VAT to include oil, tollways and electricity, from 10% to 12&. And now they are planning to make it 15% as said before after SIN tax.

The government will collect practically the same revenues from the 10-percent Value-Added Tax as from a straight 3-percent sales tax on the same goods and services.

The big difference is that forcing VAT on the market will raise prices by about 10 percent, and possibly kick up a mini-storm – while a simple 3-percent sales tax will nudge prices by only 3 percent.

Another big difference is that VAT entails a complicated process of collecting a 10-percent "output" VAT from the buyer then allowing the seller to deduct from it 70-percent of the "input" VAT that he had paid his supplier – and remitting the difference (around 3 percent) to the government within three months.

In contrast, if a 3-percent sales tax were imposed instead of a 10-percent VAT, the sales tax would simply be slapped on the goods, period, and the tax collected is forwarded to the government without crawling through a minefield of opportunities for cheating.
http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/hom...unconscionable
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx...AprnerUW-rScwA

And Philippine economy relies mainly on consumer spending because of OFW money, and that's the reason since the beginning, the services sector is the one that's growing fast. Depreciating the peso is very crucial in this strategy. For example, taking the $20B that the OFW brought home last year, in every peso depreciation, there would be an additional Php20B added money on the economy. The idea that the inflation would erode the gains brought about by the depreciation of peso is a product of a stupid mind. Needless to say that the depreciation of peso will even decrease our reliance on imports which will then lead to increase in local manufacturing and thus will create jobs. And more spending, more VAT.

There's a technical difference between depreciation and devaluation, right? What will be the effect of depreciation in our debt principal/interest and payments thereof? As the people on the Larouche movement keep on saying on the radio, that the onerous debts, we actually don't received, keep on increasing simply by banker's arithmetic(peso devaluation)...

As the system of “floating-exchange” rates , implemented in 1971-72, provided the mechanism for the world’s rapacious creditors, represented by the IMF, to impose periodic and continuous devaluation of our currency, thereby automatically and onerously increasing our foreign-debt stock and immoral payments thereof;

Then, in the speculative binge against the Asian currencies in 1997-98 by George Soros and his hedge fund allies, the Philippine peso was driven down to less than half its 1997 value. In 2005, an EIR study of the effect of this looting process showed that the foreign debt in 1998 was $46 billion. Over the next six years, the government paid $47 billion in debt service, forced to exchange increasingly devalued pesos for dollars in order to pay that foreign debt. EIR calculated that, if the peso equivalent of the debt paid in those six years were calculated at the 1997 exchange rate, before the forced devaluation, the nation would have paid $89 billion in debt service—i.e., nearly twice the total debt owed. And yet the nation ended up owing more than it had in 2007!

This illegitimate debt has been paid, on time, by subservient governments right up to today, through two primary means: the virtual enslavement of the brightest of the Philippine youth, including many college graduates, as service workers for the imperial powers, doing 12-hour overnight shifts in “call centers,” serving the customers of Western banks, computer companies, and other corporate structures. In the past such persons were called “house slaves.”

The country’s second source of foreign exchange income is the export of its skilled and unskilled work force, in most cases forcing men and women to leave their families to work abroad as maids, nurses, drivers, and so on. Their remittances provide about $17 billion annually for servicing the foreign debt. While millions of nurses have been sent abroad (and even doctors who switch to nursing abroad to make enough money to support their families), over 100 hospitals have been closed in the Philippines due to lack of staff and adequate resources. Most poor Filipinos never see a doctor or a hospital in their entire lives.

Almost half of our budget, goes to debt servicing. And thus some countries give way to the austerity measures imposed by IMF-WB. And so we have reduced spending on public services such as health, infrastructures, agricultural support, etc. Thus our Gov't rely on PPP for the infrastructures and CCT as token dole outs for public service. For PPP, the Gov't spends the bulk, while the private sector eventually owns those assets. We don't even need to borrow anylonger accdg to Herman-Tiu Laurel, the GIR/SDA is big enough to pay all our foreign debts at one go.

We should follow the example of Kirchner of Argentina which turned their country around from crisis into highest growth second only to China by saying no to the greedy loansharks. The people of Iceland said no also to this form of financial terrorism http://rediceradio.net/radio/2012/RI...icrane-hr1.mp3 . What the loansharks do is simply a form of legalized Plunder which an insider, a former self-confessed economic hitman, John Perkins, termed as Predatory Capitalism of the Corporatocracy. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ar...omichitman.pdf

[drhenry4]

double post, sorry

[drhenry4]

albertus magnus:
Peso depreciation/devaluation will lead to more purchasing power of OFW money. Citing my example of the $20B remittances in 2011, 5 peso depreciation would give Php10B more OFW money power. And that's if the remittances in terms of $ would stay constant (meaning, no growth).
Depreciation effects on debt payments would be ominous if there are no tax reforms to fix govt's fiscal position. As I understand, VAT is the same as sales tax, as it is applied directly on gross sales. So basically, the 3% sales tax that you're proposing is 7 percentage points lower than the current VAT and 12 percentage points than what the progressives are proposing. I don't have statistical data which Cong. Garcia has but here is what Diokno proposing:
- An increase in 15% VAT with a decrease to 20% income tax (from the current 30%) - This will increase the purchasing power of the local workers.

Basically, since present economy is consumer-driven, take advantage of that by implementing a more simplified form of tax like VAT. Give more power to OFW money so it can contribute more on the economy. Depreciation of peso would lead to less import-dependent consumer goods and in effect increasing the output of our locally manufactured goods. This will create more jobs.

Regarding electricity, the problem is we are using more of diesel and coal to produce power. We have enormous amount of natural gas that can fire power plants. In Thailand, 70% of their power needs are from natural gas. Can't we do that also? Mind you, in Batangas Onshore gas plant of Shell, they need to have a large flare just to burn excess natural gas from Malampaya because they don't have facility to stock them up. That's a lot of energy we are wasting. Nuynoy need not to wait for Lopez to put up that BatMan project. That project is overdue. If Lopez doesn't have money then give that to the one who has. Kaibigan kase.

[pillowcase]

moody's says the 5.4% GDP due to good governance, move against corruption, investor confidence and infrastructure development.

--------------

Moody’s unit raises Philippines growth forecast




Cites anti-corruption drive, infra program

By: Michelle V. Remo
Philippine Daily Inquirer
1:12 am | Thursday, June 7th, 2012


Workers climb scaffoldings of a building under construction on May 31, 2012, in Manila. Moody’s Analytics, the economic research unit of credit watcher Moody’s, said in its latest paper on the Philippines that the country “kicked off 2012 at a blistering pace,” prompting it to upgrade its economic growth forecast for the Philippines in 2012 to 4.7 from 4 percent.

The research arm of Moody’s Investors Services has raised its economic growth forecast for the Philippines this year to 4.7 percent from 4 percent, citing the government’s ant-corruption drive and big push for infrastructure development that will aid efforts to attract investors.

The revision of the forecast came after the Philippines posted a 6.4-percent growth in its gross domestic product in the first quarter, beating most expectations. It was the second-fastest growth rate for the period in Asia after China’s 8.1 percent.

“The Philippines kicked off 2012 at a blistering pace. This prompted an upward revision to the growth forecast,” Moody’s Analytics, the economic research unit of credit watcher Moody’s, said in its latest paper on the country.

It said the Aquino administration’s focus on good governance was tickling the interest of investors on the Philippines, which used to be out of the radar screen of most foreign firms.

The research firm also expressed confidence that the promotion of public infrastructure among potential investors from the private sector would significantly boost investments in the remainder of the year. The Aquino administration has promised to speed up the implementation of its Public-Private Partnership (PPP) program this year.

“The investment environment in the Philippines has improved over the past year as President Aquino’s plans have begun to take effect, with a focus on infrastructure development, stamping out corruption, and the seemingly obligatory chastisement of his predecessor, Gloria Arroyo, who now sits in jail on charges of electoral sabotage,” Moody Analytics said.

It credited the business confidence resulting from good governance for the recent favorable performance of the Philippines’ stock market. It said that the Philippine Stock Exchange index (PSEi) was so far up 12 percent this year and this growth was faster than most Asian stock market indices.

“These twin policy arms, lifting infrastructure and reducing corruption, should also help to shore up both domestic and foreign direct investment, lifting the economy’s long-term growth prospects,” it said.

The 4.7-percent growth projection of Moody’s Analytics, however, was below the government’s official target of 5 to 6 percent. It said the gap between its projection and the government’s was the view on exports and remittances.

good news pero madami pa ring dapat gawin para sa economy ng bansa.

[paenggoy]

Depreciation works both ways, i.e., more purchasing power but also more expensive imports.

[albertus magnus]

albertus magnus:
Peso depreciation/devaluation will lead to more purchasing power of OFW money. Citing my example of the $20B remittances in 2011, 5 peso depreciation would give Php10B more OFW money power. And that's if the remittances in terms of $ would stay constant (meaning, no growth).
Depreciation effects on debt payments would be ominous if there are no tax reforms to fix govt's fiscal position. As I understand, VAT is the same as sales tax, as it is applied directly on gross sales. So basically, the 3% sales tax that you're proposing is 7 percentage points lower than the current VAT and 12 percentage points than what the progressives are proposing. I don't have statistical data which Cong. Garcia has but here is what Diokno proposing:
- An increase in 15% VAT with a decrease to 20% income tax (from the current 30%) - This will increase the purchasing power of the local workers.

Basically, since present economy is consumer-driven, take advantage of that by implementing a more simplified form of tax like VAT. Give more power to OFW money so it can contribute more on the economy. Depreciation of peso would lead to less import-dependent consumer goods and in effect increasing the output of our locally manufactured goods. This will create more jobs.

Regarding electricity, the problem is we are using more of diesel and coal to produce power. We have enormous amount of natural gas that can fire power plants. In Thailand, 70% of their power needs are from natural gas. Can't we do that also? Mind you, in Batangas Onshore gas plant of Shell, they need to have a large flare just to burn excess natural gas from Malampaya because they don't have facility to stock them up. That's a lot of energy we are wasting. Nuynoy need not to wait for Lopez to put up that BatMan project. That project is overdue. If Lopez doesn't have money then give that to the one who has. Kaibigan kase.

[/quote]
An increase in VAT will negate those advantages of depreciation because that will add further to their burden as people would have to pay more for higher prices of goods and services. VAT increase will increase further the prices of electricity, water, oil, transportation, tollways. etc. Decreasing further our competitiveness to attract more investors to invest on energy intensive industries or the competitiveness of our local industries to compete with cheaper imports negating the positive effects of depreciation. It would be better if first, their will be prior VAT excemptions on oil, tollways, electricity, transportation.

Ang masama pa ang hayagan ang smuggling at technical smuggling kung kaya't bilyon bilyon pisong revenues ang nawawala habang pinapatay naman ang ating local industries particularly mga farmers. Parang maniniwala na ako na beholden ang gobyernong ito sa mga bigtime smugglers na bigtime sponsors nila sa kanilang political campaign. Gaya ni Puregold's Lucio Co manloloko daw through Purisima.

Tungkol sa pagbawas sa income tax. Karamihan naman sa mga mahihirap nating mangagawa ay nasa underground economy, meaning yung mga sari sari store, mga peddlers o street hawkers at iba pa di kasama sa mga regular na nagbabayad ng buwis. Ilang porsyento lang daw talaga ang mga Regular workers sa total employement numbers.

Parekoy, ang may panukala ng 3% yan ay si Tet Garcia, example lang yata niya yan. Syempre pwedeng taasan pa yan. Ang understanding ko sa mga binanggit ni Tet Garcia dun sa mga link na nauna ko nang naibanggit ay mas maraming loopholes ang VAT kesa sa Sales Tax kaya mas malaki ang leakage from 50 to 75 percent LOSSES accdg to his computations kumpara sa outright kaltas sa gross kung Sales Tax. Bilyon bilyon din ang nawawala dyan kumpara sa Sales Tax na madaling bantayan.

So depreciation, would indeed have ominous effects on our debts kung bilyon bilyon ang mawawalang mga revenues unless better fiscal reforms gaya ng nabanggit mo biruin mo ang laking nawawala sa atin sa VAT at smuggling. Kaya ba yan ni Idol na solusyonan kung ang boss niya o nila ng kanyang mga economic managers ay ang mga kano at ang mga oligarchs. Lipservice lang na tayo ang boss niya. He he

Kaya maganda ang ginawa ni Nestor Kirchner, sabi niya, I don't want to genocide my own people kaya nag debt moratorium sya. Na activate din nila ang kanilang Nuclear. Ngayon bayad na utang nila at highest growth pa sila next to China.

Btw, parekoy, paano ba gagawin ng gobyerno o ng BSP ang pag depreciate o devalue sa peso? Buy other currencies like the funny money(American dollar)o gaya ng America na zero interest o mag print ng mag print ba ng pera kaya nag overprint sila kaya parang funny money na lang ito? At delikado ang sitwasyon nila pwedeng mag collapse. Pwede daw mag collapse ang Financial system by September.

Agree ako dyan sa panukala mong increase sa Gas dependence instead of Oil, ang problema kung magpapagoyo pa rin tayo sa mga Multinational gaya ng Shell, Chevron-Texaco na syang humahawak ngayon sa Malampaya na parang 10 percent of the 10percent stake lang ang nakukuha natin ay pinambili pa natin sa bulok na barko ay wala din. Sa 10 percent ay binabawas pa sa mga foreign consultancy kuno at kung ano pang upkeep pero ang mga foreigners tibang tiba habang ginogoyo tayo. Kaya nga wala silang pakialam na sayangan yan at maubos dahil wala silang pakialam sa national patrimony. Stupid pa ang gobyerno ito na nasoft touch operation na iextend ang kontrata sa Malampaya imbes na bumalik na sa full control natin yan. Naalala ko tuloy sa Radyo ni Ka Mentong, gustung gusto sana tayo tulungan ng Venezuela na magbenta ng mas murang langis kaso dahil daw sa privatization nawala sa atin ang Petron, ay ang makikinabang lamang daw ay ang mga foreign investors at local oligarchs na majority o bulko ang share sa Petron dahil itataas din nila ito sa competitive pricing(profit maximization) at hindi taong bayan ang makikinabang sa mas murang presyo kung sakali ito ay Nationalized ulit. So kung Nationalized ang Oil company na magextract sa Natural Gas at Oil sa Liguasan Marsh sa Mindanao o Sulu o Palawan o sa Recto bank o sa Spratlyes, naku'y tiba tiba talaga tayo. O kahit na Foreign consortium pa yan mapa China o Western gaya ng mga naibanggit na ganid pero 50/50 share gaya ng sa Venezuela o Argentina o Malaysia sa kanilang oil/gas hanggang sa ma-nationalize ang mga ito. Kaso napakadaling ma soft touch operation ng mga Kano itong present Hocus Pcos president na gaya sa kanyang ina na syang pumirma sa Malampaya deal na masyadong lopsided. Kailan kaya tayon magkakaruong ng mga nationalist and not pro-globalist na presidente gaya nina Hugo Chavez, Kirchner atbp presidente sa Latin America na may mga political will na itataas ang sovereignty ng bansa para sa interes ng mas nakakaraming mga mamamayan at hindi ang interes ng mga banyaga o ng iilang naghaharing uri.

[drhenry4]

albertus magnus:

Yes, smuggling is a problem but let's not solely put the blame on corruption why Custom revenues dwindled in the past two decades. It's because of globalization. From Ramos admin up to now, import duties of almost all essential items were down to 0-5% from as high as 50%. But I agree that there's a lot to fix in BOC but I wouldn't hope for better revenues.

And there's really a better advantage if the govt will take majority control of companies extracting our oil, gas and minerals (mining). We have to admit that extracting these has environmental costs. That's why the govt has to have sources of revenues to control risk on our environment. While if we leave the fixing of our environment to the private (less regulation), it will always lead to less performance and a higher cost for our children's future.

And I really don't how the BSP can maintain our currency to be depreciated against the dollar but I know they know how to do it. It's only a matter of a push button from Malacañang, meaning it depends on the policy of Nuynoy which shouldn't be stupid.

But whatever tax strategy, there should be only one aim: a tax that's should be equitable and the most simple to apply (less loopholes). Income tax is NOT the one.


paenggoy:

Yes, works both ways but which one would be the best?
A depreciated currency will lessen your dependence to imports and will force you to manufacture your own needs. For a long time, we have been negative on our balance of trades, and OFW money is the one that saving us. This will definitely reverse once peso is depreciated to a value that is competitive for everyone.

[albertus magnus]

albertus magnus:

Yes, smuggling is a problem but let's not solely put the blame on corruption why Custom revenues dwindled in the past two decades. It's because of globalization. From Ramos admin up to now, import duties of almost all essential items were down to 0-5% from as high as 50%. But I agree that there's a lot to fix in BOC but I wouldn't hope for better revenues.

And there's really a better advantage if the govt will take majority control of companies extracting our oil, gas and minerals (mining). We have to admit that extracting these has environmental costs. That's why the govt has to have sources of revenues to control risk on our environment. While if we leave the fixing of our environment to the private (less regulation), it will always lead to less performance and a higher cost for our children's future.

And I really don't how the BSP can maintain our currency to be depreciated against the dollar but I know they know how to do it. It's only a matter of a push button from Malacañang, meaning it depends on the policy of Nuynoy which shouldn't be stupid.

But whatever tax strategy, there should be only one aim: a tax that's should be equitable and the most simple to apply (less loopholes). Income tax is NOT the one.

Agree ako dyan, parekoy lalo pang nagpahirap sa bansa ang Globalization ni Ramos na naging sunudsunuran sa kanyang globalist masters(Financial cartel) na mag Privatization, Deregulation at Liberalization. Nung kay Cory, nagsimula yung more than a hundred basic commodities ay hinayagang tanggalan completely o bawasan ng napakalaki ng custom duties sa mga imports. Ang hallmark ng magiindustrialize na bansa ay protectionism o high tariffs sa imported basic commodities. Kahit mga Kano nuong una ay kopya ng kopya, ganyan din ang mga hapon, koreano at lalong lalo na ang mga ****** sa ngayon habang dinedevolop nila ang kanilang industriya. Bakit kailangan nating mag import ng gatas o ng diaper, pwede naman tayo magdevelop ng sarili natin magpadami ng mga baka, kalabaw at kambing. Nasaan na ang Cotton farming na sinimulan ni Makoy. In short, mag Import substitution to lessen dependence on imports.

Tungkol sa gas at langis, bakit di tayo gumaya sa Vietnam, humingi ng tulong sa India at Russia sa technology knowhow at capital investment par magdrill. Ang mga inhenyero natin ay worldclass, dahil sa kakulangan ng trabaho dito, dun nla nagagamit ang kanilang expertise(BRAIN drain), handa silang umuwi at paandarin ang Nuclear plant basta may ayuda ng gobyerno. Kung may nationalized na Oil company tayo, handa silang magdesign, magfabricate ng oil platform at magdrill sa gas at oil rich fields dito. Ang iba kasi dyan may INFERIORITY COMPLEX at colonial mentality, walang bilib sa kapwa nating Pilipino. Bakit kailangan pa mag own ang Private companies, foreign o local oligarchs para sa Infrastructure. Pwede naman mag hire ng foreign consultant o they can give them the contract to build and operate pero gobyerno pa rin ang magmamay-ari. Corruption daw at inefficient pag gobyerno ang hahawak. Bakit nakayanan sa China at sa buong Southeast Asia na halos 2/3rd ang mura sa kuryente at efficiente ang service delivery kahit na nationalized ang kanilang power sector. Bakit ayaw natin mag hire ng the best at bigyan ng sweldo na mas mataas pa sa pribado para hindi na matukso sa mga suhol at lagayan. Alam kasi ng mga nasa pribado na karampot ang sweldo sa ngayon sa gobyerno at GOCC kaya madaling nila itong tuksuin para bigyan sila ng pabor. Ganyan sa Customs. Gagastusin ng gobyerno pero ang ownership sa Pribado(Corporatocracy). Uutangin din naman nila (Foreign investors at local oligarchs) ang mga ito at magsecuritize ang mga ganid na loansharks gaya ng Goldman-sachs na front ng Global Financial Cartel(Inter-Alpha group, Bilderbergers, C300). Lahat din naman ng burden ay ipapataw sa mamamayan sa pamamagitan ng mas mataas na presyo. Kaya dapat ang kuryente, tubig, tollways, langis at iba pang public utility ay publiko na kinakatawan ng gobyerno ang hahawak gaya ng dati. Pati ba naman gov't hospitals gusto isapribado. Genocide ba talaga gusto nila, para maraming mamatay sa gutom at sakit na mahihirap. Habang pakonti ng pakonti ang middle class dahil sa tindi ng tax burden at sa taas ng bilihin at serbisyo.

Masyadon ngang mataas ang burden sa income tax kailangan na just at equitable ang ating tax strategy na di regressive at di pumapabor sa iilan lamang. Ang tax strategy sa ngayon ay lalong nagpapaliit sa middle class habang dumadami ang mga mahihirap at ang iilan ay lalong nagin billionaire dahil higop sila ng higop sa masa. Contractualization, too much middlemen sa agriculture na bumabarat sa mga magsasaka, daya sa pagbayad sa VAT at iba pang tax dahil sa inherent loopholes, ganyan yumaman ang mga ito. Gaya ng sa mining, i classify as sands, gravel at rocks gayong napakayaman nito sa mineral ores gaya ng Rare earths, iron, copper at gold, tapos iexport. Talo tayo sa duties o tax kung ikumpara kung dito na naiprocess yan. So, technical smuggling na naman ang nangyayari. Habang wala silang pakundangan sa Kalikasan dahil alam nilang inutil ang gobyerno natin. At madaling masuhulan o ma soft touch operation(konting panakot).

Bilib kasi mga ekonomista natin sa neoliberal policies(Free trade o liberalization, deregulation at privatization). Madaling mauto at magoyo dahil sa angking inferiority complex at colonial mentality. Basta puting foreign consultant o think tank, saludo kaagad sila at yes master. Ang iba naman dyan ay na soft touch operation at nagtrabaho sa IMF WB o sa mga big multinational companies gaya ng mga past economic managers- Gerardo Sicat(Marcos' NEDA), Buenaventura et al at mga current economic managers at department heads(lalong lalo na sa DOE, DOF, BSP, NEDA) natin sa ngayon. Kaya pabor sa big multinational o local oligarchs mga desisyon nila. Yung kay Cesar Buenaventura na naging Central Bank head noong panahon ni Cory. Dating Shell executive yan at umamin ang mga kaliwa gaya ni Satur na tumanggap sila ng pondo mula sa mga multinational oil company para sa Anti-Nuclear power campaign. Itong dating Shell executive ay naging economic adviser ni Tita Cory. Syempre advice nya i mothball ang pinaggastusan Bataan Nuclear na sana'y nagbigay ng murang kuryente sa Pilipinas at nagjumpstart sa 11 industrialization programs ayon kay Nationalist economist Alejandro (Ding) Lichauco. Si Cesar Buenaventura din ang nag advise na iabolish ang Department of Energy at ang maraming energy programs ni Makoy kaya nalugmok tayo sa Blackouts, maraming naluging negosyo kaya namatay garments industry natin at maraming nawalan ng trabaho. Ilan lang yan sa mga sell outs sa gobyerno dahil karampot lang kasi sweldo sa gobyerno kumpara sa pribado. Yung pagpasa sa EPIRA(privatization of the power sector) na naglobby ang ADB, marami daw mga sell out tongressman ang tumanggap dyan. Tanungin niyo na lang si Belmonte. Yung K12, RH bill kasama sa Millenium development goals ng mga loanshark na mga donors kuno. Magaling din mga globalista, mixing noble goals(eradicate poverty, improve education and women's health) sa Globalization goals nila(Free trade). Eradicate poverty nga ba ang gusto nila o eradicate the poor (neomalthusian genocide) kasi mga patakaran nila lalong magpapadami sa mahihirap habang lumalaki naman ang utang natin sa kanila para mapatupad ang kanilang mga programa.

[paenggoy]

paenggoy:

Yes, works both ways but which one would be the best?
A depreciated currency will lessen your dependence to imports and will force you to manufacture your own needs. For a long time, we have been negative on our balance of trades, and OFW money is the one that saving us. This will definitely reverse once peso is depreciated to a value that is competitive for everyone.

For PH, that would be depreciation, but it will also mean a higher cost of living, lower earnings (as more have to go back to factory work), lower returns in finance (as more investments will be made in capital-intensive projects), and generally the destruction of a middle class lifestyle.

Many of the things that are part of PEX, and likely PEX itself, will not be possible.

Finally, the peso has been depreciating since after WW2, from a peso to the dollar to the current rate.

[albertus magnus]

For PH, that would be depreciation, but it will also mean a higher cost of living, lower earnings (as more have to go back to factory work), lower returns in finance (as more investments will be made in capital-intensive projects), and generally the destruction of a middle class lifestyle.

Many of the things that are part of PEX, and likely PEX itself, will not be possible.

Finally, the peso has been depreciating since after WW2, from a peso to the dollar to the current rate.

Depreciation aside, about manufacturing driven economy;
Manufacturing at agricultural sectors will serve as the bigger market or the main driver for the sustainability and the growth of support service sector. In short middle class will grow. Parang sinasabi mo na pagiging inhinyero, factory worker at farmer businessman ay mababang sahod. Di mo ba alam mas nauubos ang middle class ngayon sa sitwasyon ngayon dahil sa pagbaba ng purchasing power at pagtaas ng buwis para lang makabayad sa utang.

Wala na po tayo sa 19th century na factory workers lang ang karamihan ng trabaho. At di rin tayo sa komunista, na iisa lang ang lifestyle.

[albertus magnus]

Kaya tignan natin ang ating consumer driven society na dependent sa imported manufactured and agricultural products, ang baba ng sahod kahit pa ang mga lawyer, doktor, narses, pati nga sa mga call center na naging fad pababa ng pababa ang sahod.

Hindi sustainable ang ganyan klaseng setup tignan natin ang amerika, lumilipat manufacturing nila sa China, kaya't marami walang trabaho, lumalaki ang kanilang utang. kaya gusto nila ng gyera para ma boost ang military industrial complex.

Lahat ng umuunlad na bansa ay production driven kahit ang Singapore na animo'y consumer driven ay malakas din ang manufacturing sector nila kaya nga malakas ang demand sa mga inhinyero natin duon (may mga gumagawa ng oil platform para sa pagdrill at extract ng langis). Sa production driven society, tumataas ang sweldo ng mga tao mapa magsasaka, factory worker or nars dahil dito lumalakas ang middle class.

Pero tama ka na ang bansa natin ay panay depreciation o devaluation yan ang patakaran sa atin ng IMF-WB-ADB, for their ulterior motive, manatili tayo sa debt trap. Syempre sunud sunuran lang mga tuta nila sa BSP. Di pa ba tayo natuto na ang IMF-WB ay synonymous to counter development.

Dahil sa patuloy na pagbagsak ng almighty dollar na funny money(quantitative easing/bailouts), akala natin ay tumataas ang piso. Sobra lang talaga ang pagbagsak ng dolyar. Kaya sinasabayan lang natin ang pagbagsak ng dolyar dahil sa pag fix ng BSP sa piso vis a vis sa dolyar, kaya tumataas lahat ng presyo ng bilihin at serbisyo o lumiliit ang value ng ating salapi. Tignan ninyo ang gold price vis a vis peso and dolyar.

Kaya maganda ginawa ni Mahathir na currency controls ganyan din sa Tsina. Sa case ng Malaysia di sila umasa sa IMF-WB kaya walang pressure na austerity at neoliberal policies. Iba kasi plano ng tptb sa Malaysia kumpara sa Pnas. Kailangan ng mas malakas n bansa sa southern border natin para maging source ng pondo ng mga Muslim secessionists on their divide and conquer tactics sa SEA.

[drhenry4]

For PH, that would be depreciation, but it will also mean a higher cost of living, lower earnings (as more have to go back to factory work), lower returns in finance (as more investments will be made in capital-intensive projects), and generally the destruction of a middle class lifestyle.

Many of the things that are part of PEX, and likely PEX itself, will not be possible.

"higher cost of living" - I agree with that but inflation would not be due to depreciated currency but more of workers' increase income due to industrialization

"lower earnings" - ??? where did you get that? That did not happen to China, South Korea and Japan

"lower returns in finance" - yes, because we will go to a more "real" economy than "financial" economy

"destruction of middle class lifestyle" - off-tangent analysis. The increase in middle class income would not lead to this.

Your economic principle is neoliberal. I don't care much on the inflation if there's an increase in workers' income. It's a neoliberal thinking that low inflation, low interest regime increase investments. THIS DID NOT HAPPEN. Never it did happen. It's a naive theoretical logic. China has been in a high inflation regime for a long time but her growth is unstoppable due to continuous investments and exports. The same thing that happened in S Korea. But S Korea is too greedy relying to investments and exports for growth. Her inflation was too hot to handle which China knows that's why the latter increased her interest rates recently but still controlling yuan to a competitive level.

Finally, the peso has been depreciating since after WW2, from a peso to the dollar to the current rate.

Better read your history. Peso was maintained by the Americans to be almost equal to dollar to make their products cheap here. That's why for decades, we relied too much on imports to the stagnation, if not destruction of our manufacturing. The devaluation of peso was Marcos' issue against Garcia before. And Marcos' won the seat due to Filipinos' preference to "stateside" products.

Our manufacturing grew when peso devaluated further. But during Ramos' time, when peso gradually "strengthen" again against the dollar, while he was bragging his unsustainable growth, we became import dependent again, and by the time the financial crisis happened, he was defenseless to fight it. Listening to neoliberal US, he increased interest rates to destruction further of the economy since we were dependent on domestic spending due to previous of years low interest regime. Then who saved the economy later on? the OFWs.

During GMA's neoliberal policy regime, Levi's, Eveready battery, Johnson & Johnson, and shampoo manufacturers left Philippines to a more competitive Indonesia, Malaysia, China and Thailand. Read the label of Pantene, where it is made of.

These destroyed the middle class in the past two decades. And now, most of them are out of the country.

[drhenry4]

albertus magnus:
- Thank you for reminding Mahatir in Malaysia. His strategy is similar with that of China.

[albertus magnus]

albertus magnus:
- Thank you for reminding Mahatir in Malaysia. His strategy is similar with that of China.

He he
You're welcome.

Here's the point of view of pro-nation state sovereignty anti-neoliberal globalist on the currency controls of Malaysia which weathered the 1997 crisis from the speculative attack on the various Asian currencies...
Malaysia's Challenge to IMF:
A Lesson on `Method'
by Michael Billington
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/200...sia_v_imf.html

[andresbonifacio2]

But whatever tax strategy, there should be only one aim: a tax that's should be equitable and the most simple to apply (less loopholes). Income tax is NOT the one.

This is something I really like for the government to improve.

I agree that income tax is simply not the way to go. Look at the top income tax payers in the country, most are not even billionaires.

Income tax must be lessened and kept to a minimum level. The more cash-in-hand middle class and lower, the more they will be able to spend. And it is noteworthy that middle-class and lower, are almost always sure to spend all their cash.

Sales tax is the way to do it and equalize things. The greater tax burden are for those that have more purchasing power. The middle class and poor can be further alleviated if taxes for basic goods are kept at a minimum.

I also favor additional sales-tax for, let us say, buying the third car or buying a third luxury condo. Though I admit it might complicate things a bit.

[albertus magnus]

The devaluation of peso was Marcos' issue against Garcia before. And Marcos' won the seat due to Filipinos' preference to "stateside" products.

Our manufacturing grew when peso devaluated further. But during Ramos' time, when peso gradually "strengthen" again against the dollar, while he was bragging his unsustainable growth, we became import dependent again, and by the time the financial crisis happened, he was defenseless to fight it. Listening to neoliberal US, he increased interest rates to destruction further of the economy since we were dependent on domestic spending due to previous of years low interest regime. Then who saved the economy later on? the OFWs.

During GMA's neoliberal policy regime, Levi's, Eveready battery, Johnson & Johnson, and shampoo manufacturers left Philippines to a more competitive Indonesia, Malaysia, China and Thailand. Read the label of Pantene, where it is made of.

These destroyed the middle class in the past two decades. And now, most of them are out of the country.

Tama ka parekoy, destruction of philippine economy is due to the neoliberal policies, ie; privatization, deregulation and trade liberalization.

I think mas importante ang more value sa money na nakabibili ng mas maraming halaga kesa sa more cash in hand. Sa Weimar Germany, magdadala ka sangkaterba pera pambili ng panggatong e pwede mo nang gamiting ang pera panggatong sa dami.

Regarding Marcos and Garcia, parekoy. Are you referring to Macapagal and not Marcos? Kasi both Garcia and Marcos were nationalists while Macapagal is for Free trade(neoliberal) at si Macapagal ang tumalo kay Garcia, hindi si Makoy. Maraming nationalist programs si Makoy(land reform with agriculture self-sufficiency, import substitution, nationalization of key industries like National Steel and nationalized the energy sector through Napocor and the acquisition of Meralco, energy programs to end imported oil dependence, BNPP) http://www.larouchepub.com/other/200...lipp_coup.html . Unfortunately for Marcos, some of his men in the NEDA and Bangko Sentral were neoliberalists/pro-free trade (which is a given in every Philippine presidency and though not succumbing the pressures to implement neoliberal policies, in the end his presidency succumbed to the pressures of the economic hitmen/jackals sent by the Globalists(Financial cartel) leading to the Edsa revolution...
Shultz and the 'Hit Men' Destroyed the Philippines
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/200...lipp_coup.html

This level of development—especially the capacity to free the nation from dependence on the international oil and raw materials cartels—was not to be tolerated by the international financial institutions. The contrived oil shortages of the 1970s left the Philippines, like all non-oil-producing nations, with huge debts. This was followed by the 20%-plus interest rates imposed by U.S. Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker in 1979, which doubled and tripled the debts of most Third World nations within a few years.

In 1981, Marcos lifted martial law. Also in that year, he attended the North-South Summit in Cancun, Mexico, organized by Mexican President José López Portillo (see accompanying article) where he spoke out for a "new world economic order," and denounced the destructive "conditionalities" imposed by the IMF in exchange for financial assistance in a crisis. Then, in September 1981, Marcos pushed through the Philippine Congress nearly $4 billion worth of priority infrastructure projects, including irrigation, drainage and flood control programs, highways, telecommunications, and airports.

This was answered in 1982 (the year George Shultz became Secretary of State) by an IMF report which attacked Marcos's projects, demanding debt payment instead: "In the Philippines situation, restraint on public investment could be an effective instrument for securing an improvement in the current account deficit." IMF Director Jacques Delarosière lectured that the country had set "unrealistic growth targets," while the World Bank denounced the Marcos government for supporting national industries.

These "softening up" raids were not adequate to control the Marcos government. Shultz visited Manila in the Summer of 1983, overseeing another 20% devaluation of the Philippine peso, thus further increasing the costs of financing the already-illegitimate foreign debt.
[snip]
By October 1984, the Philippines was forced to submit to an IMF refinancing package that included an end to price controls on rice and other staples, a float of the peso, unrestricted foreign exchange speculation, import reductions, domestic austerity, and yet another devaluation—making a total of a 63.3% devaluation in one year, nearly doubling the cost of financing the foreign debt. Ironically, the opposition, fully supported and sponsored by the IMF-related institutions, rallied support among the population by denouncing Marcos for "acceding to the oppressive conditions of the IMF."

On Mahathir' currency controls, it is precisely to counter the attempts done by speculators to devalue the Malaysian ringgit as what the speculators had done successfully on the Philippines and Thailand...
http://www.mir.com.my/lb/econ_plan/c...se/capital.htm
But the currency traders, in their quest for big profits, borrowed the ringgit and sold it down repeatedly, thus devaluing it greatly.

This meant our wealth was halved in terms of purchasing imported goods. Inflation set in, and people found difficulty in making ends meet.

To make matters worse, the foreign investors in the stock market began to dump their shares and to short-sell.
[snip]
Between the depreciation of the ringgit and the severe fall in share prices, the companies and the banks rapidly deteriorated and were bankrupted or became nearly so.

The Government, too, faced revenue shortfalls as businesses were unable to make any profit and could pay no tax.

Clearly the country's economy would have collapsed completely if the currency had continued to depreciate and the share prices remained very low.

To prevent this it was imperative for the Government to regain control of the exchange rate of the ringgit and to stop CLOB from destroying the Malaysian share market any further.

To devalue the ringgit the traders had to borrow and sell it. Singapore offered high interest rates so as to lure the ringgit to Singapore where it was lent to the currency traders.

The Malaysian banks found themselves without money to lend.

To stop this outflow of the currency, the Government decreed that if within one month the offshore ringgit in whatever form was not repatriated to Malaysia it would not be allowed to be brought back at all.

Effectively this rendered offshore ringgit worthless after one month.

This forced all offshore ringgits to be repatriated within one month, leaving nothing for the traders to borrow and manipulate.


Dr. Mahathir named and denounced both the speculators and the IMF for their subversive actions against the Asian economies, naming in particular the infamous hedge fund operative George Soros.
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/200...sia_v_imf.html

[Aizrith]

credit goes to noynoy

Noynoy: the best president ever





yellow ranger mode

[pieno]

Rodaksala Voting System. Mangyayari mga officials natin sa bansa from President to Baranggay Captains mga pinaka-experts natin, mga pinakamatatalino, magagaling, makabayan, lahat na...

Dapat may karapatan tayong iboto ang ayaw natin manalo... este... iboto ng -1 ang taong ayaw nating manalo.

[paenggoy]

Depreciation aside, about manufacturing driven economy;
Manufacturing at agricultural sectors will serve as the bigger market or the main driver for the sustainability and the growth of support service sector. In short middle class will grow. Parang sinasabi mo na pagiging inhinyero, factory worker at farmer businessman ay mababang sahod. Di mo ba alam mas nauubos ang middle class ngayon sa sitwasyon ngayon dahil sa pagbaba ng purchasing power at pagtaas ng buwis para lang makabayad sa utang.

Wala na po tayo sa 19th century na factory workers lang ang karamihan ng trabaho. At di rin tayo sa komunista, na iisa lang ang lifestyle.

But if the service sector grows together with a middle class, then the manufacturing and agricultural sectors shrink, and we're back to the same problems. And if the middle class today is weakening because of a global debt crisis, then that won't lead to increasing exports for manufacturing and agriculture.

The result, then, will be exactly that: a nineteenth-century setting where countries will try to meet their needs by minimizing imports and trying to export to pay for importing essentials. If any, this will lead to less diverse lifestyle.

And this will take place not because of choice.

[paenggoy]

"higher cost of living" - I agree with that but inflation would not be due to depreciated currency but more of workers' increase income due to industrialization

Income can increase due to more earned from exports, but that's negated by more expensive imports.

"lower earnings" - ??? where did you get that? That did not happen to China, South Korea and Japan

When imports become more expensive, then what you can buy with additional income is the same, or lower with a trade deficit. The three countries likely did not experience the same because of trade surpluses, which in turn implies that they saved more and spent less.

"lower returns in finance" - yes, because we will go to a more "real" economy than "financial" economy

...which the middle class and the elite will likely not support as they earn more from the latter, if not the service sector. The same goes for government that essentially works with or for both.

"destruction of middle class lifestyle" - off-tangent analysis. The increase in middle class income would not lead to this.

Completely the opposite, i.e., on-tangent, as it is very difficult to receive a middle class income from export-oriented agricultural and manufacturing work, which is why more eventually move to the service sector.

Your economic principle is neoliberal. I don't care much on the inflation if there's an increase in workers' income. It's a neoliberal thinking that low inflation, low interest regime increase investments. THIS DID NOT HAPPEN. Never it did happen. It's a naive theoretical logic. China has been in a high inflation regime for a long time but her growth is unstoppable due to continuous investments and exports. The same thing that happened in S Korea. But S Korea is too greedy relying to investments and exports for growth. Her inflation was too hot to handle which China knows that's why the latter increased her interest rates recently but still controlling yuan to a competitive level.

My arguments are not based on neoliberalism but on common sense. For example, "an increase in workers' income" is negated by inflation. The same increase also makes it more difficult for manufacturing and agriculture to compete externally; hence, outsourcing, and the move to the service sector. Low inflation and low interest doesn't help, either, as more will want to earn more money, which ultimately leads to a debt crisis.

One can even see the same dilemma in China.

Better read your history. Peso was maintained by the Americans to be almost equal to dollar to make their products cheap here. That's why for decades, we relied too much on imports to the stagnation, if not destruction of our manufacturing. The devaluation of peso was Marcos' issue against Garcia before. And Marcos' won the seat due to Filipinos' preference to "stateside" products.

From what I know, PH implemented control measures during those decades, and started decontrol in '62 onward. It was during that time that manufacturing, which was starting during the '50s, began to weaken. Marcos tried protectionist measures once more during the '70s, but that was negated by two oil shocks, growing corruption, etc.

Also, the preference for "stateside" products remains. Can that be removed, such that citizens will vote for politicians who will call for the removal of such, among others?

Our manufacturing grew when peso devaluated further. But during Ramos' time, when peso gradually "strengthen" again against the dollar, while he was bragging his unsustainable growth, we became import dependent again, and by the time the financial crisis happened, he was defenseless to fight it. Listening to neoliberal US, he increased interest rates to destruction further of the economy since we were dependent on domestic spending due to previous of years low interest regime. Then who saved the economy later on? the OFWs.

I'm not sure, but I think manufacturing grew while control measures were in place, especially during the 1950s:

"Industrial Culture and Industrialization"

http://www.freewebs.com/upcertificat...ustrialization

Importation grew as seen in chronic trade deficits from 1974 onward, even as the value of the peso also remained steady.

During GMA's neoliberal policy regime, Levi's, Eveready battery, Johnson & Johnson, and shampoo manufacturers left Philippines to a more competitive Indonesia, Malaysia, China and Thailand. Read the label of Pantene, where it is made of.

But these are multinational companies, right? Likely, Filipinos gained through what they received through low wages while the bulk of profits went to multinational investors.

These destroyed the middle class in the past two decades. And now, most of them are out of the country.

But these companies remained only when wages were kept low. How do low wages lead to the growth of a middle class?

The middle class did grow, but only when more Filipinos moved to overseas work and interest rates were cut, fueling borrowing, spending, and more jobs in the service sector, which is what was needed to prop up a middle class.

In short, if you want a middle class to flourish through manufacturing and agriculture, then that won't happen. These sectors will remain dominant only if wages are kept low. Otherwise, like the multinational companies you mentioned, more will move to the service sector or to overseas work.