Sunday, October 29, 2017
Where Do You Stand ?
Norman Madrid
Two Bright (?) Filipinas Fighting: Two Blind Mice? The Two Ladies Miss a 99.3% Solution: They and Duterte Are Each at 0.7%. Where Do You Stand?
I hope that the sharp words of a pro Duterte World Bank official criticizing an anti-Duterte critic, a Filipina columnist, has been posted here in Facebook by Jules Espina, as I requested him to do. I think that the pro-Duterte lady is right and, in bigger letters, 99.3% more WRONG than right.
The problem with this lady and her target, a Filipina critique of Duterte, is that they are both talking of trivia, namely Duterte in relation to Philippine issues. Each does not know the larger context within which to evaluate Duterte--that context being the world economy. The Philippines is only 0.7% of the world economy is size. That is, the opportunities of the Philipines to make progress lie 99.3% abroad and only 0.7% inside the country So, since Duterte has been dealing with only Philippine issues such as drugs, de Lima, Trillianes, Marawi, Build Build Build (mostly local in outlook), but has been neglecting to attract foreign investors with whom Filipinos can conquer the world and earn vast dollars there, therefor it can be concluded: Duterte has FAILED to help Filipinos to realize their 99.3% maximum opportunity; he has been a trivial leader engaged in the mud fields of tiny 0.7% Philippines.
All great leaders of the world at nation-building--those in Japan, Germany, China, Singapore, Ireland, Macau, Malta... and 15 more economies....-- all made their countries boom in the only way possible, and that was to make their countries win in the vast world economy a world economy five to 5,000 times as big as their econmies. The lady columnist who is a critic of Duterte should have stressed this point. Too bad both she and the President are badly educated at the economics of nation-building. The World Bank lady who is a pro-Duterte advocate should have then concurred with her to urge Duterte to stop doing trivia inside the country. But, I think she has not seen the light on 99.3% versus 0.7% despite her World Bank vantage point.
That light of 99.3% versus 0.7% is bright. Let us Filipinos open our eyes. Let us get Duterte and the pro Duterte camp plus the Anti-Duterte crusaders moving in step together to attract foreign investors into the country so that we may work with them as allies with whom our country will conquer world markets.
As for a specific legislative action to take, let us get Duterte to help us get Congress to erase Article 12 of the Constitution today--or in one week.--for it obstructs foreign investment inflows. That step is the 99.3% solution, or far better than the 0.7% that Duterte is doing now. Let us just get that Article erased; it is simpler than amending it. Am I being repetitive? Should I repeat this again for the second time in duplicate redundancy?
Summary: Let us Filipinos unite to eliminate a big barrier to foreign investment inflows to the Philippines, namely Article 12 of the Constitution. Let us urge Congress to simply erase it. It is a faster act to do, erasing rather than amending it. Ha I am bad, guilty of double redundancy again for the second time.
Okay, read what follows and get into the Dispute -- (as Reported here by Jules Espina who has submitted a report by it seems Sherry Zimmer) --between Ms. Charity Quiros of the World Bank and I think Raissa Robles of Rappler:
Today, Ms. Charity Quiroz of the World Bank in Washington D.C. politely defended Pres. Duterte against Raissa Robles' lies being spread around the US. A fascinating read - to say the least.
"Today, Raissa Robles, a journalist, author and staunch critic of President Duterte, spoke before the Filipino Association of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. She predicated her talk about her book on Marcos Martial Law and spewed speculations (yes, that's her own term) that Duterte is following Marcos's steps because the former wants to impose martial law, authoritarianism and be the new "strong man" of the Philippines.
Just like her previous talks in UCLA, UC-Berkeley, and New York, her ideas are all about the atrocities of Marcos martial law for which I give her credit for accounting these with clear supporting documentations. However, the punches she threw against Duterte are just that, speculations, which she tried to fit into the narrative of the Marcos martial law regime for which she has failed miserably.
There have been a lot of inconsistencies on her speculations. When I asked her questions below, Robles cannot give a categorical, factual and logical answer.
a) she notes no checks and balances but truth is there are currently in place in institutions (supreme court, congress, etc.) and on the vast majority of the populace (see item d) below); she mentioned De Lima being in jail shows this checks and balance system is gone. Really?
b) the disconnect from her alleged Duterte's aim for authoritarian and strong-man rule vs. her own claim that Duterte just delegates freely - an authoritarian that delegates? What can be more contradictory to that?
c) the contradiction for Duterte's aim for unitary power vs. Duterte's push for federalism - federalism removes unitary and central powers and instead decentralizes this to subnational government or states; she noted that Duterte aims for unicameral system where the senate will be abolished. So I asked, the members of the parliament can easily vote for a Prime Minister which usually make a President as symbolic. How will that favor Duterte?...silence...
d) the disconnect between the context of Marcos regime versus Duterte's current context on freedom of information, advanced technology that empowers knowledge sharing, fact-checking and thus, ushering an invisible force of accountability for Duterte or any leader enjoying the perks of popularity. She did not even bother to answer... next question please! lol!
Robles also mentioned about Duterte's tax reform that while will alleviate the middle class, will hurt the poor due to excise tax on petrolium products. She said Duterte, being a dictator that he is, is pushing without consultation (?) for the modernization of public utility vehicles that use electric source of power -- eh haler, how can the poor be negatively affected by excise tax on petroleum when they'll have access to more efficient public transport system that use non-petroleum energy? Ano ba ate, make up your mind!
Robles keeps mentioning about Duterte's war on drugs negatively affecting the Philippine economy. She might have forgotten that she's at the World Bank that monitors the country's progress and that continues to see a positive outlook on Philippine's economy. Boyito showed her the monthly report. Again, duhhh!
The discussion was cordial, but then Robles failed to satisfy the tests of logic and factual basis that may lead one into conclusion that she is stuck with her jurassic notion of the Philippines being a "third world country" (term she used in her book, which has long been debunked by World Bank itself in 2009 to erase such demeaning label against developing or low-income countries). And that she's bent on demonizing Duterte. A propaganda she might be oblivious that not just necessarily hit Duterte alone but maligns the entire Philippines and her kapwa Filipinos who are being demonized as well in foreign lands.
More than angered, I feel sorry for the so-called investigative and writing talents of Robles being used to vilify the Philippines. Sad and disappointing!"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment