PEx Alert: Welcome to the new PinoyExchange. For access issues, bug reports and technical concerns, please email us at [email protected] Thank you!

Prayers, Drug Mules and the OFWs

You know what's sad? A lot of us think the OFW culture is something to be proud of but it's a manifestation of our country's inability to provide decent jobs. Prayers don't work, but we can minimize these tragedies.

100% ownership of foreign businesses can bring more jobs, so we don't have to send people abroad.

DISCUSS.*okay*
«1

Comments

  • F-A SoldierF-A Soldier Your Personal Jesus PExer
    What? Nationalizing foreign companies? LOL are you kidding.

    The fastest way to destroy foreign investment flow and confidence in the country is to threaten and take over foreign firms.

    And what? Man it with Philippine ownership who's known for corruption? Do you understand why exactly Philippines rely on FDI and not homegrown firms to create jobs? Because homegrown firms have lots of problems, now you're wanting to take well managed firms to the hands of corrupt Philippine ownership?

    And including the fact that it'll face repercussion from WTO, IMF and others. :glee:

    And you know what nationalization tends to do to companies? Not that I'm against some form of government subsidizing and government $$$, but nationalizing companies tend to destroy its productive capabilities.

    Once again think of the goose and golden eggs, yes you may make some jobs when take over those companies but after you kill the goose, those jobs will go away and no more jobs will be made. :glee:

    OFW culture is actually something to be proud of. It shows 1. Filipinos' universality and adaptability 2. the fact that they support a good percentages of economy through remittances 3. allows metropolitanism in the Philippines---from the experiences (both professional and personal) experienced by Filipinos living overseas. Hopefully what they see in other countries, the good and the bad, they can bring back to incorporate to Philippines' advantage.
  • F-A SoldierF-A Soldier Your Personal Jesus PExer
    PS this was a 'solution' said in one of the Philippine news reel that I agree with (also a solution to curb human trafficking of Filipinos): upping the standards of Pinoys being sent overseas.

    Check for real diplomas, making sure they have skills necessary for the jobs, extensive background checks, prosecution of companies and people that involve in trafficking, education about countries they'll be staying: general rules, what and what not to expect, pre-travel check lists etc.
  • JUST_JTJUST_JT Banned by Admin PExer
    Ibig yata sabihin ni TS, dapat tanggalin na ang requirement na kailangang may local ownership ang negosyo. Sang-ayon ako rito; dapat payagan na maski 100% foreign-owned ang negosyo para mas maraming pumasok na investment sa Inang Bayan. *okay*

    -Just_JT
    At.magkaroon.ng.competition.ang.mga.oligarch. :glee:
  • nikkilovenikkilove Member ✭✭✭
    ^ I definitely agree daddy Just. Like in my other posts, allowing foreign owners take full control of their investments will definitely attract companies thus increasing employment in the country, if the leaders are afraid to sell lands to foreigners then just put a clause of lease or rent na lang, but there should be no more Pinoy middle men or stock holders na nakikisabit lang at humahati pa sa dapat mataas na pasahod na sa mga empleyado.

    Pero malamang, those politician- businessmen families will shoot the bird even before it flies. di sila papayag na may competition. malas na lang ng mga pinoy talaga.
  • clawed_outclawed_out Banned by Admin PExer
    For the drug mules, it was their choice to do that. They were conscious on accepting that job. And they should know the repercussions that entails. It was very sad that it's our fellow country people that got caught trafficking.

    We can't demand for 100% ownership even if it's our land. That's not the way the world revolves. It is a good business plan but I don't think it is feasible. Having them take interest in our country is already good knowing the fact that corruption still looms our country and the neighboring countries are progressing faster than us.
  • la_flashla_flash Banned by Admin PExer
    National patrimony. This requires constitutional change.
  • F-A SoldierF-A Soldier Your Personal Jesus PExer
    ^There's no articles for amendments?
  • tontondagatontondaga Member PExer
    That's why we need a Constitutional Change. Why send OFWs abroad where they are defenseless when they can work here? 100% ownership will bring more jobs.
  • Bigot3AtBalbasBigot3AtBalbas Kiss me and I'll be PExer
    honga pauwiin nyo na kami nina jed he he
  • tontondagatontondaga Member PExer
    @F-A Soldier Yeah how many billions pesos get to us and how many billions and lives do we pay for that chance? Tulo-laway jobs here; people go abroad to feed their kids; families apart; when OFW get in trouble, government pays to get OFW out of trouble and the whole nation makes ruckus.
  • F-A SoldierF-A Soldier Your Personal Jesus PExer
    They can work here? LOL. My brother there's not even enough jobs in the Philippines WITHOUT them. In 2005 unemployment in the PI was around 12%, years previous to that, it was hovering around 10, only these last few years after 2005 had it be around a decent 7.5%. And the jobs that exist in the PI? Imagine how many of those employed earners are working as domestic helpers/katulong. They make balibag **** compare to the money they make overseas for the same job.

    And say yeah you make jobs by allowing foreign companies more control...1. that would destroy Philippine native businesses edge---either wiping out jobs created by them or potential with them 2. say the make 'more' jobs with it...the jobs that would be made by it would come with a cost---salaries and benefits may go down. How? Because these companies aren't in the mercy of laws anymore.

    You know why these companies come to the PI and India? Because of lower wages. They pay a penny for a dollar for a US worker. They're profit making machines...and the moment they can expand they'll do so at the expense of benefits and salary. :glee: Capitalism 101 both Marx and Smith themselves.

    It's mighty noble to say "let's bring them home". Mighty noble and mighty hearty. Who doesn't want to bring poor mom domestic helper home to her children? Yeah? I sure do.

    But it's more complicated than that. Bring her home and what? Where'd she work? She was a DH in Hongkong making much more than what some people make in a year. What bring her to the Philippines and be a katulong? :shrug2: Sino magpaparal sa anak?

    Akala mo naman with a whip of 'constitutional' change you'll make enough jobs to save all our OFW's...and as if these jobs are going to be what they'll be wanting to do.
  • tontondagatontondaga Member PExer
    @F-A Soldier. Read Article-> http://bit.ly/ijEnxG :rotflmao:

    Hence the CoRRECT / Constitutional Change, 100% Foreign ownership like Singapore instead of 60/40 like Pinas. More foreign investments, better job generation, less OFWs who need to go abroad. *okay*

    Why would it destroy businesses here , when businesses here destroy themselves or become monsters because there's barely any competition? Recently, Manny P acquired bought chunks of Sun, o saan pa yung competition? Dati PLDT had monopoly over the services - palakasan at bad service ang naganap.
  • nikkilovenikkilove Member ✭✭✭
    ^ I agree, like in my previous posts in similar topics, granting foreign companies full ownership of their satellites and investments here would lessen their costs in using pinoy middlemen, and would also help the employers provide competitive salaries and benefits for their employees.

    If the statesmen (as they claim they are), are afraid of losing properties or land to foreigners, just put a clause on their contracts that lands are only for lease and rent while they operate in the country.

    like in my previous ex, 2 local networks are planning to sue a reorganized 3rd network cos they believe foreigners mostly share the stocks of this 3rd network, imagine if they pursue and win the case, what will happen to those employed by the 3rd network. An entire nation, only views programs from 2 networks? Surely there should be more. More companies means more jobs.
  • Bigot3AtBalbasBigot3AtBalbas Kiss me and I'll be PExer
    bakit gumagamit pa ng bit.ly? huwag nyo i-click yan, virus yan :glee:
  • -jps--jps- Untouchable PExer
    Mas maganda talaga kung gawing 100% ang Foreign ownership ng mga companies dito sa atin. Ang gawin ng gobyerno ay bigyan ng incentives ang mga Pinoy Companies lalo na yung maliliit pa lang para naman makasabay sila kahit papaano. Mas magiging maganda ang competition at mas panalo ang mga Pinoy Consumers.

    Kung corrupt man ang Pinas, mas corrupt ang China pero madaming nag-iinvest sa kanina dahil maganda ang business climate nila :)
  • F-A SoldierF-A Soldier Your Personal Jesus PExer
    I might agree with "widening" the property limit by 30% or less, but 100%?

    First, how many jobs would this make? OFW's make around 10% of total Philippine citizenry. You sure you're going to make close to 11 million jobs to bring all or most of them here? And that these jobs created are 1. will generate the same or better income 2. at what cost?

    Secondly, 100% ownership derides Philippine control over it's natural resources. Remember you likened it to Singapore? Well Singapore DOESN'T have the same business nature as the Philippines. Singapore is largely into financial/commercial businesses. It has not had a major manufacturing sector as it did during it's growing phase. Philippines is a service/manufacturing/agriculture country.

    What does that entail? Large amount of 'plausible' jobs that could be made from these sectors are going to be low paying unskilled or semi skilled jobs. (See Guangdong Nike factory). Would those jobs really make enough money for one returning abroad? And expansion of these 'ownership' would that make Philippine generated jobs lucrative? Meaning would it make jobs that as competitive and better paying as before, since now the competitive edge of Philippine firms had been reduced to equal?

    On top of that, what people didn't know about the 'national patrimony' amendment that was proposed: less restriction on the Philippine natural resources. What does that mean? 1. They can dictate the amount and scale of mining etc 2. whether or not that affects the environment and how it affects other market in the Philippines.

    Remember the Rapu-rapu Island Mining? When the Australian mining firm bought the rights to excavate and exploit ore in that island. How much investment? Around 50 million (infrastructure) not including possibly more and the jobs created by peripheral (ie infrastructure, maintainance, transport) and the actual mining jobs.

    At what costs? 1. large pollution that affects fishing and agriculture 2. resettlement of population 3. change to the ecosystem 4. MAJORITY of the economic 'gains' did NOT trickled down to the Filipinos.

    And look at the competitor: China. You know how many Chinese companies would love to exploit your natural resources as they are in Africa. What's the difference with China? There's nothing wrong with China as a business partner EXCEPT the fact that Chinese firms usually like in Africa are only wanting natural resources. They exploit BUT do not aside from 'supposed' investment in infrastructure use it as platform for manufacturing. In fact the impact of their trade is surplus for China (although imports went down thank to Chinese competition, these Chinese market access only solidify their presence) and some of the manufacturing sectors of Subsaharan Africa are hit or overrun. :glee:

    You can't play 'fair' given that China 1. are mostly state-owned firms (the trade imbalance with the US is the due to the fact that the Chinese state manipulates how much of their US bond reserves are kept---that allows their currency to dip and the dollar to rise, that makes their goods more competitive---the humongous economic growth isn't a mystery it's brought by a. China's cheap goods and the propensity to keep it cheap) b. China have protective measures in their OWN backyard---try a Philippine firm competing in their soil. :glee:

    You can't expect to trade fairly when they won't. And if you expose the Philippines' weaker economy, I'm telling you it's not going to be reciprocal.

    As for Philippine business competition, monopolies AREN'T a function merely of how much foreigners compete against PI firms. It's the propensity of PI firms to compete against each other as well. And how do some of these monopolies come to exist? It's not merely business but A LOT of times it's corruption: why do and how do these companies gain their edge and favoritism in projects? Because of KOTONG and influence. How do you break that? 1. fair business policies ie anti-trust/trust busting 2. anti-corruption.

    If you asked me if you wanted to see competitive business in the PI, it's to have PI businesses compete with each other much more than having weak PI businesses against giant multinational firms. Not that I'm against their business, but it's NOT reciprocal therefore you cannot expect the outcome to be reciprocal. In most MNC dominated countries, they may be some capital earned...but the majority of it are NOT spread out to the people, instead the MNC's become richer and more powerful to the point that they look like more than business, but more political entities. In some countries MNC's violate states' sovereignty and exploit their people and natural resources...which exactly what you're giving (control and edge) to them if you do that.

    In short, there's little proof that though maybe that reform of the constitution would make more jobs, that those jobs 1. will generate enough economic benefits 2. and at what cost.

    And 2 more things that IT doesn't guarantee Philippines, which would make it more competitive GLOBALLY in the long run: technology and market access.

    Although I'm for bringing them home, what's to say their return is going to be that great and what kind of jobs will they get?

    And you're harping at their 'vulnerability'.

    The reason why OFWs are vulnerable IS NOT only because the weakness of Philippine diplomacy but because A LOT of OFW's that do get exploited or affected overseas are ILLEGAL.

    How many Pinays were in that raid in Africa found duped to be prostitutes? Illegal recruiting agencies. How many Pinoys die in travel to Italy? Many illegals that cross through Africa. How many stay in countries like Japan and get exploited? TnT's and human trafficked. In Korea? Human trafficked (mail order brides).

    Yes I'm sure there are exploitation overseas, ie DH workers both in ME and SEAsia and Hongkong...but majority of those that are caught and prosecuted DID criminal acts (ie killed fellow pinoy workers) or are caught being illegal.

    Like I said my second post, in order to protect OFW's export better OFW's and crack down those that traffic illegally (Philippines is one of the highest human trafficked states in the world).
  • -jps--jps- Untouchable PExer
    pede naman magtakda ng 40% or less Foreign Ownership sa mga piling industriya for example sa mining industry at yung 100% ay sa ibang industriya at negosyo gaya ng retailing, banking at manufacturing industry.
  • Bigot3AtBalbasBigot3AtBalbas Kiss me and I'll be PExer
    40% lang talaga ang max foreign ownership.
  • F-A SoldierF-A Soldier Your Personal Jesus PExer
    Okay but charter change implied NOTHING about what percentages are going to able to exploit nr's and whether or not that 'percentage' matter. All it does it is abolishes the necessity to be partly PI owned and exclusivity of mining rights altogether.

    Furthermore how does that change the argument with monopoly? He said earlier that PI firms had monopolized and 'ruined' themselves. How does foreign business equality with PI firms make that not possible for the foreign companies instead of PI firms? Same thing (monopoly), different 'monster' (foreign vs. PI firm).
  • glamorous03glamorous03 Member PExer
    so yung intel pala na company (whatever american company) na nasa pinas eh 40% lang ang pagmamay ari ng american CEO doon? tapos the rest sa gobyerno na? or baka naman yung stocks lang may kahati ang mga pinoy or gobyerno? kung ganun man , eh natural naman sa business yan diba? lalo't malaki ang company at bongga ito, syempre may mga bibili ng stocks.. that's how business / entrepreneurship works..

    i dont understand this
«1

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file