The Art of Protest. Tucson immigration march, April 10, 2006

long-haired anti-immigrant to bald migrant protester:
"just grow your hair a little pleeeease"

Dance of protest

Can someone please give me an answer

Pictures of hate. Tucson immigration march, April 10, 2006

Hate-mongers or just anti-immigrant?

Why so few? Apparently hating is not widespread in humans.

What is illegal when many are impoverished and so few own so much?

Profile of anti-immigrants. Let's pray for them.

Tucson immigration march, April 10, 2006

Marchers coming in from Ajo and 12th St.

Festive atmosphere at Armory Park

Humanitarian aid is never a crime

Thousands of marchers.

Green Map Metro Manila, Philippines now on-line

Dear friends and colleagues,

Please check out the BETA version of Green Map Philippines at:

http://www.one-environment.ph/portal2/greenmap/greenabout.htm

Finally, after many attempts at putting everything together using our lunch money (baon), we decided to put out this version, which provides an overview of the urban environment of Metro Manila and an on-line map of the "green areas" in Metro Manila. The map contains only a small number of the over 500 sites we consider "green" and culturally and educationally significant. In the coming months we will be establishing our own URL (www.philippinegreenmap.org) putting in an online-registry for comment and verification of the identified green sites, updating the map, starting the planning for a hard copy version, adding pictures of green sites, etc. Green Map Manila is part of the environmental portal set up by various organizations and hosted by the Development Bank of the Philippines at:

http://www.one-environment.ph/

Check out the flash intro-really cool.

We'll appreciate your comments and if you have any IT, mapping, GIS, or graphic design skills, please volunteer and help in making this a better Metro Manila Green Map.

Maraming salamat kay Wendy Brawer and Bob Zuber of Green Map NY (that's many thanks Wendy/Bob), Yvette Fernandez for giving me her NY Green Map in 2001, and the GMS team of Jobo, Alex, Michelle, Nokman, Rex, Bunny, Ninoy, Leo, Tams...

Mabuhay!


Hecky Villanueva

**************************************************************

"In God We Trust, all others bring data" - W. Edwards Deming

Out of my mind: Open Letter To Our Leaders

Out of my mind: Open Letter To Our Leaders

WANT HYPERWAGES? DEMAND A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME

What’s wrong with a free lunch?

Nothing’s wrong according to Belgian economics professor Philippe Van Parijs in his 2001 book with the same title. Van Parijs or VP is one of the leading proponents of the Universal Basic Income (UBI) or Basic Income Guarantee (BIG). Never heard of it? Don’t be ashamed; I haven’t till recently. The UBI is an income a government pays, at a uniform amount and in regular intervals, to each adult permanent resident, regardless of his/her economic status and whether s/he is willing to work or not (Van Parijs 2001:5). It is guaranteed because the government is required to pay each permanent resident this amount. It is basic because the amount is “something on which a person can safely count, a material foundation on which a life can firmly rest” (Van Parijs 2001:5-6). As defined, it can either fall short or exceed the amount needed to fulfill the “basic needs”. Why is a UBI desirable? VP lists the following main points below.

It is just. Social justice is equivalent to real freedom for all. Freedom is normally equated with enforceable property rights and personal liberties. What should be added to this is the means or resources to use these personal liberties. VP calls this the distribution of opportunity, which should be designed in such a way that those with the least opportunities be given real opportunities. Providing a UBI is one way.

It promotes real jobs and sustainable economic growth. VP notes that Europe and America’s economic difficulties are different in that in the former there is limited poverty and high unemployment, while in the latter, it has low unemployment and widespread poverty. Technology advances have been eliminating jobs. It would take massive economic growth to stabilize employment levels. However, this would severely impact the environment and labor benefits. What to do? The UBI, according to VP, subsidizes the employee. It allows the employee to accept a job at lower pay or not to work at all. It also allows him/her to bargain harder with the employer, take a break, re-train, become an entrepreneur or self-employed, or do social work. On the employer’s side they have the option to offer a lower wage for non-critical positions and to offer more to their important employees. It is a win-win solution.

It is gender sensitive. Women have taken a disproportionate amount of the household “caring” functions. They have also been discriminated in the workplace in terms of pay and career advancement. A UBI gives them more financial independence to take care of the household and family, or from an abusive husband and more bargaining power from a discriminatory company.

It is environment-friendly. Environmentalists, according to VP, face an obstinate foe in “productivism, the obsessive pursuit of economic growth” (Van Parijs 2001:20-21), which generates pollution, consumerism, and uses up scarce natural resources. Accelerated economic growth is justified on the grounds of reducing unemployment. VP notes that working class organizations have bought into this argument. The UBI addresses unemployment without promoting “productivism” and undermines this broad argument. It forces business and industry to rethink their business programs. For environmentalists, the UBI provides them with the volunteer manpower who can now afford to work on environmental programs.

What are the objections?

It costs too much. Not really if a wide range of existing welfare benefits are abolished, tax collection becomes more efficient, tax exemptions minimized, economic rents are collected (from natural resource exploitation and use of government land), and the government cuts back on pork barrel expenses. Note that the UBI does not necessarily need to meet the individual’s “basic needs”. That is the goal, but it isn’t required.

It distorts labor supply. This is a non-issue according to VP. The goal should be sustainable economic growth not an “overworked, hyperactive society” (Van Parijs 2001:23). A productive adult does not necessarily have to be earning a living. They could be taking care of their children, elderly relatives, or volunteering. All these improve human capital and reduce costs on peace and order, prisons (better socialized youth), hospitalization (healthier families and elderly relatives), and other social service expenses that could be handled by less-stressed families.

It is unethical and immoral to get something without working for it. This is the reciprocity issue and is the basis for Clinton’s workfare welfare reform. VP likens this to the Malibu surfer who would spend his/her time on the beach and not work. Again, the response would be so what? The other response is that the reciprocity issue takes a dim view of human nature and discounts the human drive to be a productive and useful member of society. Really, how long and how often can you surf in Malibu without getting bored, injured, or even sun-burned? The third is, the UBI is not really enough for one to live a life of luxury. It is only a basic income.

Lewis et.al (2005:2) also noted that “tough love” policies, e.g. workfare, while supposedly providing more incentive to work, have, in the neo-liberal era, encouraged employers to pay less than living wages. Further, they advise value-neutral economists to note that many Americans have made the value judgment that workers should earn living wages and employers not paying living wages are morally reprehensible. Hence, value-neutral economists should take this value judgment into account in their assessments and policy recommendations, e.g. how to achieve living wages. This view has been supported by recent philosophical literature, while psychological research and evolutionary game theory lend support to altruistic motives and action, as well as cooperative behavior, and refutes the fear that individuals will free ride (not work) with a UBI (Lewis et.al 2005:2-3).

Lastly, the reciprocity issue is fallacious because everyone who became successful did so because of a combination of one or the other of the following: family line, ties, and resources, government support (tax breaks, public education, incentives, etc.), help from friends or relatives, pure luck, utilization of natural resources or public land/resources. No one really is self-made. Hence, the UBI ensures that everyone gets a fair chance.

The idea and concept of the UBI is not new or radical. In the United States it has been proposed in one form or another as early as 1796 when Thomas Paine proposed his version in Agrarian Justice (Lewis et.al 2005). Personalities from the left and right have supported a UBI like John Kenneth Galbraith, Milton Friedman, Richard Nixon (the watered down “Family Assistance Plan”), George McGovern (the “demogrant” proposal), Martin Luther King, Huey Long, and Bertrand Russell, among others. James Tobin wrote the first academic article in 1967. Nobel winner Frederick Hayek mentioned it in 1944. They all saw it as a scientific and simplified solution to poverty, a logical alternative to the welfare state, and a key tool for promoting human liberty.

In 1982, Alaska and the United States for that matter, was the first to institute a UBI in the form the Alaska Permanent Fund (APF). Throughout the years, the APF has provided each resident of Alaska annual dividends ranging from a low of $331 in 1984 to a high of $1964 in 2000. By an amendment of the constitution of Alaska, “At least 25 percent of all mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty sales proceeds, federal mineral revenue-sharing payments and bonuses received by the state be placed in a permanent fund, the principal of which may only be used for income-producing investments." Thus, the APF market value currently stands at around $34Billion invested in stocks, bonds, real estate, and CDs. Alaska residents favor the APF dividend and it has worked to reduce poverty in the state. See http://www.apfc.org/index.cfm.

Brazil passed the “Citizens Basic Income” legislation in 2004 paving the way for gradual implementation of the UBI (IPA 2005). Senator Eduardo Matarrazo Suplicy, a key ally of Brazilian president Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, has pushed for a UBI since 1991 when he authored legislation for the negative income tax wherein each citizen would receive an income supplement of between 30-50% of the difference between his/her wage and $150. Brazil also experimented with the UBI in the education and health sectors, Bolsa-Escola and Bolsa-Alimentacao programs respectively (Suplicy 2001:249). With the new legislation, Suplicy estimates that 11.4 million families or 46 million citizens, representing one-fourth of Brazil’s population of 182 million will be enrolled in the UBI program in 2006.

Portugal has a 1997 law ensuring UBI or BIG. It is being implemented for the poorest of the poor with a “social contract provision”, e.g. work eventually to become finanically independent. Initial reports show conditional success; since the implementation is only partial (da Costa 2002).

The UBI is feasible in the G8 countries and there are many versions of this. Belgium, UK, and the Netherlands have tax codes that closely reflect BIG. Libertarians, capitalists, and leftists support UBI. Neo-liberals and many leftists do oppose UBI, basically on the reciprocity issue and incentive not to work fear.

What can be more radical than the UBI? Why haven’t the progressives in the Philippines pushed for this? Is it feasible in the Philippines? Why aren’t our politicians exploring UBI? With UBI, the hyperwage theory has another roadmap to implementation. Isn't it time for a Philippine chapter to promote UBI/BIG?

References:

Clark, Charles M.A.

2002 The Basic Income Guarantee: Ensuring Progress and Prosperity in the 21^st Century. The Lifey Press, Dublin, Ireland.

Groot, L.F.M.

2004 Basic Income, Unemployment, and Compensatory Justice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

Van Parijs, Philippe

2001 t’s Wrong with a Free Lunch? Beacon Press, Boston.

Widerquist, Karl; Michael Anthony Lewis, and Steven Pressman

2005 The Ethics and Economics of the Basic Income Guarantee. Ashgate Publishing Ltd., England.

Useful links:

Basic Income Earth Network: http://www.etes.ucl.ac.be/BIEN/Index.html

The U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network: http://www.usbig.net/

Global Income: http://www.globalincome.org/LinksEnglish.html

Livable Income for Everyone: http://www.livableincome.org/links.htm

Ireland BIG: http://www.cori.ie/justice/basic_income/index.htm

Brazil experience: http://www.brazilink.org/politicspapers/Suplicy_Columbia_2005.pdf

Portugal BIG: http://www.etes.ucl.ac.be/bien/Files/Papers/2002BrutodaCosta.pdf

The Third View (Plot in Manila)

The Third View

While many of us lament what happened last week during the EDSA 1 anniversary celebrations, the antics of various individuals and parties revealed again their priorities and hidden agendas. In the end, there were no saints last week. All were tainted. The personalities and institutions we expected to provide maturity, wisdom, and guidance on the nation’s political economy have once more shown how short-sighted and impotent they are. On the brighter side of things, this catharsis will be good for us as a nation. The past week only urges us to immediately get on with remaking our political and social institutions if we are to be independent of the clowns in government, the legislature, opposition, civil society, church, and media. As I have been writing recently, we need to focus on creating individual wealth in order to develop our respective communities, because it will be individuals active in the Community that, in the end, will be both the defender and promoter of our liberties. By community, I mean us ordinary citizens, working hard and helping one another to sustain our families, our neighborhood, our town, our province, and nation; what scholars have referred to as real people doing real things.

Let me get a few things clear. I am no fan of GMA. I think she is just our employee, appointed by us, the citizens, to get the Philippine development program started. Because we took a big risk in getting Estrada ousted, GMA is indebted to us. After EDSA DOS, we demanded genuine reform from GMA, as expected of a leadership gained by extraordinary means. That is the social contract GMA entered with us. So far, she has done a poor job vis-à-vis the enormous social capital she had when she became president in 2001. The poor perception on her family members and relatives, her ‘cronies’, the incompetence of her appointees, among others, reflect on her own competence, integrity, and leadership. The economic gains we are currently experiencing are only partly attributable to her administration and are most probably due to OFW remittances and good corporate earnings. I think that she knows she is under severe scrutiny vis-à-vis her performance. We demand performance because we "hired" her, are not scared of her, or are in awe of her.

The fact that the citizenry is not scared or in awe of her is an important distinction. Opposition parties, biased columnists, idealistic rightwing military officers, and the malleable media think that Proclamation 1017 is a harbinger of military repression. There will be military repression, but it will be these personalities that will be directly affected. Not us, because we can take care of ourseleves. They have lost credibility with most Filipinos because of two critical aspects, namely, their hidden agendas and interests, and their Machiavellian attempts at usurping political power. Let me reiterate what is already common knowledge.

Cory Aquino and the Cojuangco clan are under threat of their 6,000 hectare Hacienda Luisita being land reformed. Soldiers protecting the hacienda from striking workers shot and killed several of them last year. Cory and her supporters have teamed up with Estrada supporters and Marcos loyalists to force GMA to resign. Is GMA’s administration so bad that we must strike unholy alliances with the Estrada group that nearly (allegedly) turned the country into a narco-state, or with the Marcoses that (allegedly) led the country into bankruptcy, devastated our environment, and committed countless human rights violations? Is this the price we need to pay to kick out GMA? Have Cory, that group named after a hotel, and the civil society folks reflected on the immorality of this alliance and the distaste that it generates on us who risked much in EDSA 1 and 2?

The other point is that newspaper columnists, once very influential, are steadily losing their credibility and high moral ground. As columnists, they naturally write about their view of a situation. Nevertheless, they need to do a little basic research and fact-checking. They have brought the term “arm-chair” writers to a new level with their biased and hysterical writing. Was there really a coup attempt or not? Who were the plotters? Why has the Tribune still been able to publish despite the clampdown? Do you think it is solely because of the courage of Cacho-Olivarez? Why was there no People Power IV? A friend, a political economist, raised the gender issue in the unceasing attacks on GMA and Cory during her own presidency. Has anyone explored this angle? Many questions have been raised but institutions tasked to provide timely and nuanced information have not done so now or in the recent past.

The fact is the media and newspaper columnists are both generally biased and malleable. To get a clearer picture of an event, one needs to read the reporter’s probably biased account, the pro-administration columnist’s viewpoint, and the oppositiion columnist’s version. By triangulating these three versions, one hopes to get a clearer picture of what is happening. This is too much effort and is unfair to the paying reader. In this aspect, media has failed its most important constituent, the reader. Thus, there is little sympathy when an opposition newspaper is invaded by the police or a columnist is arrested during a rally.

Some anti-GMA columnists write about the indifference of the citizenry to what is happening. I think this is insulting to us citizens. The perceived indifference of the citizenry should be interpreted to mean this: non-participation at last week’s events or even the past year is an indictment of the opposition, the biased media, and the power grabbers. Our issue with the opposition is their unconstitutional power-grab attempts. Our issue with media is their bias and incompetence. Our issue with rightwing military officers and the communists is their long history of human rights violations and perceived lack of management skills. How could you expect the citizenry to rise up? Rise up in defense of them? Defend what, institutions that these parties have coopted to further their hidden agendas?

Our issue with GMA is her governance, which should be dealt with on a daily basis. Filipinos are not stupid. They are watching from the sidelines as these detested personalities fight it out. Filipinos will act to protect their liberties when the time and need arise. EDSA 1 and 2 proved this. They will not, however, be used by parties with hidden agendas. I disagree that the reservoir of People Power has dried up. I think it is transforming. The Gawad Kalinga, RockEd.org, and OFW movements are examples. The burgeoning debate on basic income or even hypwerages is another. A third way is on the way. It is neither right nor left. It is about Community.

Further comments on the Hyperwage Theory

I’ve been trying to catch up with the comments on the StreetStrategist’s Hyperwage Theory (the theory was published Businessworld and at http://streetstrategist.weblogs.us). I just wanted to reiterate that hyperwages are actually being implemented in the Philippines at present. The Left and many of us say that there is a small elite class in the country that need to share their wealth. I would like to think, however, and as someone once wrote, that there are First World communities even in Third World countries. This is clearly seen when an Inquirer columnist recently wrote about some CEO-Taipans who pay themselves from a low of P3 million up to P25 million a year on company profits of from P1 billion to as much as P7 billion. I would also be curious to find out how much their other managers earn and how and where they reinvest and spend their income. As I wrote months ago, Ayala Land managers buy Ayala Land stocks and properties. Do Metrobank officers buy Metrobank investment instruments? In this scenario, hyperwage is a ‘real physical process’ and needs to be expanded.

How to expand and where? Metro Manila and not East Timor is the best place to do this. Afterall, the Hyperwage theorist is from Metro Manila and has developed a cult of believers, most of whom are professionals and entrepreneurs. This could be the starting point to achieve the critical mass needed. Second, Metro Manila is the ideal setting to implement the theory. It has a large population (12million) and is the country’s financial, commercial, industrial, educational, political, economic, and social center. It is highly urbanized and diverse. It’s residents have the intellectual and economic status to implement something this radical, yet simple. It is also strategically located to national, regional, and international markets.

Lastly, the biggest domestic market is Metro Manila. With its population, the Keynes multiplier effect could easily occur, be observed, and measured.

What I take away from the many postings and from what I have been reading elsewhere is this: the world is in flux and many areas of the world are in systemic crisis. Being currently based in the U.S., I see the present Bush Administration overseeing a radical overhauling of the economy based on minimizing welfare (social services spending), lowering corporate and personal income taxes (for the top 3%), and unregulated free trade. Wal-Mart, with 2005 sales of only $314 Billion, has initiated a “race to the bottom” in terms of consumer prices and living wages. The Wal-Mart business model seems to be depressing wages, de-industrializing the U.S. (the emphasis on cost efficiency has forced many U.S. firms to relocate to China) and gutting jobs, and eventually lowering the living standards of middle class America. As a petrochemical industry briefing noted, their top three clients are: (1) China, (2) Wal-Mart, and (3) the rest of the world.

The flipside of this is the rise of what is called base-of-pyramid (BOP) initiatives. Because of dim employment prospects, the poor are being encouraged and assisted to enter into entrepreneurial activities. Tens of thousands (no exaggeration) of community organizations, NGOs, and fair-trade activists have organized commercial firms trading (fairly) everything from shade-grown coffee to solar cookers. These are social movements addressing the ill effects of brutal free trade by defining and operationalizing fair trade, e.g. market economy with a heart.

The other trend I’ve been reading about is the growth of the underground economy and of illegal activities. Eric Schlosser’s second book, Reefer Madness: Sex, Drugs, and Cheap Labor in the American Black Market (Houghton Mifflin 2003) writes that the confluence of a moralistic-legalistic government, technological advances, and the huge profits that can be made in the burgeoning black market, have made illegal activities rival the mainstream economy in terms of size. Neo-classical economics has not accounted for this.

Thus, while one critic correctly writes about the conspiratorial activities of the U.S.-EU-World Bank-IMF-global financial capitalists; individuals, communities, and states still have agency. They can still act, react, mobilize, and strive to counter the effects of economic injustice (the “structure”). Schlosser uses the term “brittle” to describe the unsustainability of the law enforcement framework based on a moralistic and self-serving agenda. When a society is brittle it is vulnerable. Notice how the top officials in the Bush administration are being indicted one by one or are under a cloud of suspicion. Brittle.

How do all these relate to Hyperwages in the Philippines? If the Bush Administration is successful it will continue facilitating the “race to the bottom” China/Wal-Mart strategy with its adverse effects on the middle class. That will affect the 2.5 million Fil-Ams. The outsourcing of U.S. industrial jobs mostly went to China. This was a missed opportunity on our part. Last year, I attended this talk on the effect of NAFTA on the Mexican economy. The speaker observed that NAFTA has resulted in a net loss of Mexican jobs (despite the 4,000 maquiladores or foreign-funded factories on the U.S.-Mexico border region reportedly paying an average $5/day) and the de-industrialization of Mexico. It has also increased the Mexican diaspora to the U.S.

(Homes in a colonia in Nogales, Sonora, Mexico, Dec. 2005. Many residents are employed but wages are not enough to afford adequate housing.)

The elite in the Philippines may favor this race to the bottom, but as noted, Philippine society will become brittle. Metro Manila has about 40% of its residents living in squatter settlements. The U.S. embassy alone processes about 500,000 visa applications yearly. Just think, one in eight Filipinos now live abroad. I am not calling for a forced redistribution of wealth, but for Filipinos to have more opportunities to generate wealth for themselves. If not, the economic diaspora will continue and the ones left behind will be the angry poor, the vulnerable, the politicians, and their lackeys.

My last point is this. OFW remittances are reportedly $10 Billion for 2005. Where is this money being invested in? It is usually in real estate, consumer items, and pseudo investment schemes, usually pyramid schemes. This is another disservice to our OFWs. They need to have more investment options. Filipino entrepreneurs need to be more creative and bold and offer something more to OFWs. As one noted, if we had basic industries, then maybe OFW remittances could be a cheaper source of capital.

Living wages are under attack worldwide. This is one of the great intellectual and moral debates at present. How do we, as a society, want to proceed: a race to the bottom ala China/Wal-Mart or through a genuine partnership among different sectors of society to uplift the living standards of ALL Filipinos?

I wouldn’t pin my hopes on the government initiating Hyperwage. I would rather follow the Gawad Kalinga strategy of establishing a track record of private sector initial successes, partnership building, transparency, and accountability so that when the time comes to deal with the government, we deal from a position of equal footing.

We need to be more creative and bold in leveraging our freedom (while we still have it), skills, experience, and network in this pursuit.

Happy 2006.

Comments on Jesuit guidelines on Philippine political crisis

Comments on the the Jesuit guidelines on the Philippine political controversy:

1. Bringing out the truth cuts both ways. It is a given that we all should work at finding out the truth. In the meantime, GMA is presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty. GMA critics charge her with election fraud based on a wiretap. Wiretapping is illegal in the Philippines. So, there are two possible illegal acts here, the alleged election fraud and wiretapping. We need to know the facts regarding this illegal wiretapping because this has serious implications on our civil liberties and the Machiavellian way of assuming political power. If it could happen to the President then it could happen to any citizen, and even worse, the vulnerable and weak in society. This is a serious implication, which the "progressives" in civil society, academia, media, church, etc. are silent on. This is a terrible omission on their part.

2. Justice is multidimensional. Seeking out the truth is only one aspect. Another important aspect is procedural justice, which is the process of arriving at the truth, reaching a decision, and acting on the decision reached. The election fraud charge could have been resolved by: a) GMA resigning, b) another People Power or coup det'at, and c) impeachment by Congress. Options a and b were rejected by GMA, which is her prerogative, by majority of the Filipinos (no People Power), and the Armed Forces respectively. Impeachment was the logical, next, and most feasible alternative. However, as a friend observed, the opposition Congressmen who led the impeachment/prosecution panel were also the ones in charge of the defense of ERAP during his impeachment proceedings. On both occasions, they bungled the job (despite their educational credentials and their dominance in Congress during ERAP's presidency). Let's face it, impeachment is both a legal and political process. If the opposition and their allies had a weak case, they should not have hurriedly filed the impeachment complaint and should have prepared better. The Filipino people are not stupid and will not confuse legal and political ineptness on the part of the opposition with the administration's political machinations.

There should be a way of proving GMA cheated AND finding out who authorized, organized, funded, and conducted an illegal wiretap without sacrificing the economy. All these, not only GMA's ouster, should constitute the fixed pie of justice in this case.

3. Headless opposition. As FVR noted, GMA may not be our ideal president, but there are currently no alternatives in the opposition. The opposition is headless, disorganized, inept, and lazy. They are also vulnerable. Cory, aside from being retired, has her Hacienda Luisita agrarian reform and massacre debacles (including the killing of union leaders). Bro. Eddie has his Zoe TV station legal woes. Drilon and Dinky Soliman are being attacked for their insincerity. The Senate is so unproductive that I am amazed that they are not ashamed of it. Drilon and the UP Law Center charged GMA of graft and corruption on the Northrail project, a critical transportation project for Central Luzon, but they misidentified the Chinese proponent-corporation. Nestle, which Ex-DTI Sec. Santos headed previously, is tainted by the killings of Nestle union leaders. Ping Lacson is in trouble because of the alleged kidnapping, murder, and drugs accusations, and possibly espionage in the U.S. because of his protege, Michael Ray Aquino. Makati Mayor Binay is hindering business activity in his own city by co-organizing allegedly paid-for rallies. The Makati Business Club calls for GMA's resignation without consulting its members, while its Executive Director is allegedly a Canadian citizen. Congressmen are concerned more with their pork barrel and political dynasties. The Left, well, what can I say?

Do you think that persons and groups of contradictory political persuasions, who are now united in their attempts to oust GMA, will be able to solve our political and economic problems? They are their own worst enemies. The Philippines has been spared from catastrophes this year, but not the biggest catastrophe of all- inept and lazy professional politicians and amateur politician wannabes.

4. Debate now. The Constitutional debate is not being rushed. Discussions started almost immediately after the implementation of the 1987 constitution when various sectors of society began noticing the negative impacts of some aspects of the constitution. During FVR's presidency, the debate heated up. Many think it was bad timing because it would've favored FVR, but hindsight now provides us with the regret of an alternative future. The point is that on every occasion the possibility of amending the constitution was raised, select groups immediately opposed it. Why are those who profess to work for democracy so adamant against discussing and debating constitutional amendments? Shall we let this opportunity for constitutional amendment (and possibly shortening GMA's rule) pass? A parliamentary form of government is not a panacea to the nation's ills, but it addresses an important structural aspect of a country's developmental strategy- the political and legislative sector. Again, as FVR noted, a parliamentary form of government also provides for the development of leaders from all sectors of society; since it is cheaper to gain political power. Vested interests are not the monopoly of GMA and her allies, it seems.

The future is uncertain with globalization, "war on terror" (??), and "natural" disasters (actually natural phenomena affecting human settlements). Self-defeating politics are only an added misery. Too many people in the Philippines and in the world live in poverty. In the U.S., living wages are declining so working here will become increasingly difficult. The same may be true in Europe. If the Middle East autocrats don't shape up and their oil runs out, their economies may not be resilient enough to hire more migrant laborers. While economic migration is now the norm for a number of us middle class, middle-aged Filipinos, it is developing the Philippine economy that will enable us to live meaningful lives at home. We need to tackle poverty everyday and not let the politicians waste our time entertaining us with their clownish behavior. The poor are desperate and poverty is one antecedent to political upheavals and violence. While we have been weathering the external shocks of the 1997 Asian financial crisis, ERAP and GMA?, oil price increases, etc., a catastrophe such as a massive earthquake, another Pinatubo, a tsunami, drought, or a pandemic hitting a populated area could easily send the country in to chaos. All it takes is one massive "external" shock. Are we prepared?

I suggest reading the Hyperwage Theory of Thads Bentulan/Streetstrategist at the Businessworld on how to tackle poverty (I have parts 1-26 on e-file).

Office of the Provincial

PHILIPPINE PROVINCE SOCIETY OF JESUS

TO THE WHOLE PROVINCE

Re: Endorsement of GUIDELINES IN A TIME OF CRISIS

To Jesuits and Jesuit Institutions of the Philippine Province

With this letter, I endorse to all Jesuits, Jesuit communities and Jesuit apostolic institutions of the Philippine Province, the attached Guidelines in a Time of Confusion and Crisis, produced by our Province Commission on the Social Apostolate. These Guidelines, produced after much discussion and consultation, are an attempt to provide Christian moral reflection on our present national situation of political crisis and confusion.I ask that these Guidelines be read, reflected, and prayed upon, and made the subject of serious discernment, towards action, by individuals,communities, and institutions. They may be shared with others who are seeking direction and guidance in our troubled times.I know that not many will agree with what is presented here: some will judge that the Guidelines go "too far;" others will doubtless think that they do not go "far enough." For my part, I personally believe that these Guidelines offer sound directions to help us "read" our present situation and to orient us in our common search for authentic solutions to the grave problems of our country today. Nonetheless, these Guidelines are not presented as positions that all are compelled to accept and adhere to. If some, in conscience, differ with the positions taken here, let that dissent be presented with civility and intelligence, as input for the continuing task of communal discernment towards what will serve the true good of our country.Let us be united in prayer and deep concern for our country and our people. May the Lord show us the way toward the truth, freedom and justice that our people yearn for. May God bless us with courage and hope.

Fraternally in our Lord,

DANIEL PATRICK L. HUANG, S.J. (sgd.)

Provincial

SOME GUIDELINES IN A TIME OF CONFUSION AND CRISIS for Jesuits and Jesuit Institutions of the Philippine Province

1. The struggle to bring out the truth must go on. The freedom to advocate this struggle must be upheld. The President has not sufficiently rendered an account to the people where serious charges have been raised against her, and efforts to hide the facts only confirm the suspicions of many. Todismiss the concern for truth in the name of stability is to condone the culture of impunity, by which those in power have long been able to commit crimes unpunished, and our people have become cynical - accepting corruption and deceit as normal in our public life.

2. Those who claim that the "rule of law" was triumphant in the recent impeachment proceedings confuse proceduralism with law. While it is true that the procedures of law were fulfilled, the spirit of the law was subverted. Evidence was not allowed to emerge.

3. Peaceful and legal means that protect and strengthen our democratic institutions must be used in the continued search to bring out the truth. In this same spirit, the legislature, especially the Senate, must not be remiss in its oversight functions, to ensure the system of checks and balances setin place by the Constitution. Likewise, care should be taken that concrete actions do not support or strengthen groups with covert anti-democratic, adventurist, or power-grabbing agenda.

4. We respect the decision of those, who, in conscience, have reached a judgment that the President should not remain in office. Part of this process is the moral obligation to seriously consider alternatives that will be truly for the good of the country, and not abet the struggle for power among elite and corrupt politicians.

5. The search for the truth must include a search into the deeper truth of Philippine political life, the factors which make the present crisis just one of a series of political crises that hinder the country's development. It is necessary to listen to, reflect seriously on, and address the concerns of a large majority of people who seem apathetic or whose dissatisfaction does not seem to translate into political action. Some, for example, have lost trust in all politicians, of whatever camp. Others, especially those in the provinces, feel excluded by and resentful of what they perceive to be Manila deciding for the country again. Efforts must be made to address this disillusionment and sense of exclusion, so that our people might be motivated to participate more vigorously in our country's political life.

6. If many of our people seem to be uninvolved or uninterested, it is primarily because of an overriding concern for economic survival during very hard times. The real and urgent concerns of the poor should be given highest priority amidst all efforts to search for truth. Indeed, the search for the truth is integrally linked to the fate of the poor. Corruption and dishonesty have made the lot of the poor worse.

7. Programs and initiatives from both government and the private sector to address the urgent needs of the poor, in fields such as education, health, housing, livelihood, and the like, should continue to be supported,and indeed intensified. This is especially urgent in view of the looming international oil crisis.

8. While there may be reasons to consider amending the constitution for the sake of greater responsiveness to the needs and aspirations of our people, charter change as a diversionary tactic in times of political conflict, or as a means of perpetuating elite democracy, should be rejected. Thus, the rush to change the Constitution, especially through a Constituent Assembly, should be resisted. Furthermore, while major constitutional changes such as parliamentarism and federalism may seem to have merit, their concrete realization and implications should be carefullystudied and discussed, rather than prematurely decided upon.

9. There may be no clear solutions or exit strategies to our present state. But our past history, especially during the Martial Law years, reminds us that we can continue being vigilant and work for truth and justice even when the alternatives are not clear.

Thus, the following courses of action should be pursued:

a. Our educational institutions, parishes and other institutions should become centers for conscientization. Discernment groups must be organized, to combat apathy, to heighten awareness and involvement, and to prepare for future action. We echo the call of the CBCP in their statement of 10 July 2005, to "urge our people in our parish and religious communities, our religious organizations and movements, our Basic Ecclesial Communities to come and pray together, reason, decide and act together always to the endthe will of God prevail in the political order."

b. Conscientization that leads to organizing and reorganizing base groups and forming community or sectoral organizations should be given priority. Such groups can also be invited to deal with local problems, to engage local government, and to do network-building with other sympatheticgroups.

c. These and other groups should be mobilized towards vigilance, monitoring:

· first, the continued effectiveness of government programs for the poor;

· secondly, appointment to public offices made by the President;

· third, acts of apparent retribution against those who are critical of the government and the President;

· fourth, the actual use of pork barrel by legislators and their possible abuse of it for themselves;

· fifth, the preparations for forthcoming electoral exercises, through advocacy for automation, and the continuing task of voters' education;

· sixth, the use of funds that will be made available in the event of a Peace Agreement in Mindanao.

d. Deeper study and reflection on institutional alternatives (such as parliamentarism, federalism, etc.) should be conducted at various levels, from university think-tanks to grass-roots groups.

SOCIETY OF JESUS, PHILIPPINE PROVINCECOMMISSION ON THE SOCIAL APOTOLATE

Albert E. Alejo, S.J.

Miguel B. Lambino, S.J.

Jose Cecilio J. Magadia, S.J.

Antonio F. Moreno, S.J.

Karel S. San Juan, S.J.

Primitivo E. Viray, S.J.

Peter W. Walpole, S.J.

Roberto C. Yap, S.J.

comments on hyperwage theory

I don’t have the technical answers to questions raised about Hyperwage Theory, but below are some perspectives.

1. The strength of an economy is a function of, among other things, the level of industrialization and purchasing power of the citizens. That’s how the G7 countries and tiger economies, i.e. S. Korea, Taiwan, etc. made it. They industrialized and protected their infant industries until they were able to compete. At the same time, wages were living wages, so the employed citizenry were able to buy needed goods and pay for services. They also bought local. Culture trumps all. We all know this but it is good to keep it in mind.

2. Economists have foisted upon us the myth that their economic data are accurate and importantly, up-to-date. Unfortunately, this has not always been the case as data gathering is very difficult, costly, and time-consuming. Economists also rely on data that they did not themselves gather, so the data are questionable. All of the social sciences struggle with the twin problem of data gathering methodology and data validity.

What this means is that it is difficult to get some mathematical formulation that will fully support the Hypwerwage Theory. Besides, the other popular economic theories and schools of thought were implemented with even far less mathematical justifications, i.e. classical econ, macro econ, neoliberalism, state socialism, etc.

3. What businessmen, such as many of you, have done is that you have relied more on buying behavior, the market, pop psychology, and trends. That is why books like the Tipping Point, Butterfly Economics, and now Freakenomics (I’ve read the first 2) are widely popular and counter-intuitive. It is how people spend their money (marginal subjective utility) in a manner they personally feel is best utilized. Successful businessmen and entrepreneurs are those who discern this market/ subjective utility. The Hyperwage theory posits that it is prices that determine market behavior. But the “pricing behavior” is basically individual wants and needs which influence others’ behavior. This is then eventually scaled up to the societal or market level.

4. One way of looking whether Hyperwage will work has been written about already, the example of Ford raising his employees’ wages so they can buy the Ford T. Don’t think that this has not been done in the Philippines. One reason why Ayala Land is successful, aside from its good management, is that employees buy Ayala Land properties. They sell in-house and sell a lot. It and many other companies have what is called the employee-discount plan (all the U.S. car companies are doing it). Where do you think SM employees shop? Where do insurance and educational plan agents buy their plans? So, good wages and employee discount will generate in-house sales especially if you are selling GOOD QUALITY consumer items with good service (best management practices still count!).

5. The other point is the emergence of a major market segment that nervous local businessmen do not realize that they actually have been selling to. This is the OFW market. One out eight Pinoys are out of the country presumably earning, presumably remitting ($6-8 billion/year), presumably spending back home (a lot of assumptions here). Hey, we Pinoys spend $50 million yearly alone on U.S. visa applications. What does this imply?

5. 1 OFWs are becoming the middle class because of their higher wages.
5.2 They are re-investing and spending somehow in the country.
5.3 There is some multiplier effect on the local economy.

Who is earning from OFW spending? Astute businesses benefiting from hyperwages. Now, the truly creative part is getting the rest of the population to start buying (and selling!!!) more.

6. In the long-term, the government needs to give enough opportunities to Pinoys to be the best they can be. Given the right breaks and better governance, I believe Pinoys will choose to industrialize (in an environmentally-friendly manner) and provide even better wages. While the G8 countries are an inspiration, we will have to develop in our own unique way. Free trade has been bad for us, because we should’ve negotiated for FAIR trade. The OFWs are giving us another chance, but we all need to pitch in whatever way we can. We all need to support Pinoy businesses- and labor.

7. My thesis though is that it is futile to put our national economic salvation in our politicians and bureaucrats. I posit that due to their vested interests, they will never be able to reform by themselves. They must be forced to. Marx said it himself when he noted that bureaucrats have turned themselves into a class unto themselves in direct competition with the other social classes.

So, if we pin our hopes on reforming the bureaucracy/politics; then it will necessitate a bloodbath. Are we willing to do this? There are about 1.5 M government employees exclusive of the politicians. Where do we start the eradication? My brother-in-law, an American, says we go top-down. Ok, I said, why don’t we start with GMA’s kamag-anaks, relatives, classmates, then move on to the Congressmen, Senators, and their families and friends? Where does it end, I asked him. Do you think these powerful people will take it sitting down? It will be a bloodbath.

8. A few months ago, these same questions were raised by former Ramos NSC advisor, Gen. Jose Almonte (he correctly predicted in 1998 that if ERAP won the presidency there would be a coup d’etat or some sort of uprising in 2 years) and UP/PhilStar’s Alex Magno. Their conclusion? The market is the only feasible way of instituting reform. They said a bloodbath would be too costly for the nation and that “millenarian groups” (ideological bent can not be determined but might be of an ultra-fundamental religious leaning) would have a good chance of taking power. The country would then enter into a cycle of violence and become a failed state. I think Hypwerwage provides one pillar of support for their market-as-solution proposition.

9. The Philippines has been recognized in the academic literature, in the international social movement, and in the global human rights community for its contributions to democracy, people power, etc. Some writers are beginning to note that the effects of globalization and how to address some of its ill effects have come from Philippine civil society initiatives. Philippine environmental and community-based projects have been winning accolades. They also predict that the Philippines will also be able to come up with a way of solving its economic problems in a democratic manner. I think this could be done through generating wealth or as Almonte and Magno write, through the market and through Hyperwage.

Need people-to-people assistance in LA/MISS

Many of us think that since the U.S. has had many tragic experiences with hurricanes and storms and that it is a first world country, the crisis in Louisiana and Mississippi in the wake of Katrina is being adequately handled by U.S. government agencies. In another era (or presidency?), this would have been a correct assumption, but not today. Government funding has been used for you- know-where. Environmental programs, as well as disaster prevention and mitigation programs have been drastically cut because of you-know-what. U.S. military forces and importantly, equipment, that could be used in relief and rescue efforts, are overstretched and are in you-know -where. Thus, what you have now are the horrific scenes of floating bodies, the dead in hallways, rape, and people wasting away from the heat, hunger, and thirst.

The American people need help and the resources of the U.S. government are inadequate at the moment. Disaster relief efforts have been amateurish at best, borne out of the same reasons you are thinking of. Nevertheless, if you find it in your hearts to give/help in whatever way, please do so and insist that it go to the very young and old, the sick, and the poorest. The victims are the most vulnerable in society, i.e. of color, minorities, and without resources to leave the disaster area (even prior to the hurricane). Prayers do help too, as well as innovative actions. Spread the word at the very least.

The Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology (BARA), U. of Arizona, where I am a research assistant, has had long presence in Louisiana and is trying to get a more on-the-ground assessment and how to get the best bang for the buck/time/effort. If you want to help in anyway even if you are half-way across the world, contact me offline. I've attached an article summarizing how things went wrong and an email from my boss Dr. Diane Austin (daustin@u.arizona.edu)

Thanks and regards.





Published on Friday, September 2, 2005 by The Progressive
Katrina Compounded
by Matthew Rothschild

Even in the first seventy-two hours after Katrina came ashore near New Orleans, it became obvious that government had failed, at every level.

If ever there was an occasion for government intervention, this was it. People were drowning. People were stranded. People were cooped up in the Superdome in disgusting conditions. People were on the highway in the baking sun with no food or water or facilities or medicine. And none in sight--for themselves, or their elderly parents, or their infants.

The state and local authorities were woefully unprepared, and the Bush Administration responded with a lethal tardiness.

While Katrina was without question an extraordinarily vicious storm, the vast majority of people who died did so not because of Katrina but because of a laissez-faire federal government with skewed priorities. “A rightwing government that strangles public expenditures for public works is largely responsible for what happened in New Orleans,” says Paul Soglin, former mayor of Madison, Wisconsin, and past chair of the committee on urban economics for the National Conference of Mayors.

It’s not like there wasn’t any warning. The New Orleans project manager for the Army Corps of Engineers, Alfred Naomi, had warned for years of the need to shore up the levees, but the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress kept cutting back on the funding.

The most recent cutback was a $71.2 million reduction for the New Orleans district in fiscal year 2006. “I’ve never seen this level of reduction,” Naomi told the New Orleans CityBusiness paper on June 6. His district had “identified $35 million in projects to build and improve levees, floodwalls, and pumping stations,” the paper said. But with the cuts, “Naomi said it’s enough to pay salaries but little else.”

Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu blamed the Bush Administration for not making the funding a priority. “It’s extremely shortsighted,” she told the paper. “These projects are literally life-and-death projects to the people of south Louisiana and they are (of) vital economic interest to the entire nation.”

After Katrina hit, The New York Times interviewed Naomi. “A breach under these conditions was ultimately not surprising,” said Naomi, who had drawn up plans for protecting New Orleans from a Category 5 storm. “It would take $2.5 billion to build a Category 5 protection system, and [now] we’re talking about tens of billions in losses, all that lost productivity, and so many lost lives and injuries and personal trauma you’ll never get over.”

Naomi wasn’t the only one who warned of this disaster. In 2001, prior to the terrorist attacks, the Federal Emergency Management Agency “ranked the potential damage to New Orleans as among the three likeliest, most catastrophic disasters facing the country,” wrote Eric Berger in a prescient article in the Houston Chronicle on December 1, 2001, entitled “Keeping Its Head Above Water: New Orleans Faces Doomsday Scenario.” In that piece, Berger warned: “The city’s less-than-adequate evacuation routes would strand 250,000 people or more, and probably kill one of ten left behind as the city drowned under twenty feet of water. Thousands of refugees could land in Houston.”

In June 2003, Civil Engineering Magazine ran a long story by Greg Brouwer entitled “The Creeping Storm.” It noted that the levees “were designed to withstand only forces associated with a fast-moving” Category 3 hurricane. “If a lingering Category 3 storm—or a stronger storm, say, Category 4 or 5—were to hit the city, much of New Orleans could find itself under more than twenty feet of water.” One oceanographer at Louisiana State University, Joseph Suhayda, modeled such storms and shared his findings with “emergency preparedness officials throughout Louisiana,” the article noted. “The American Red Cross estimates that between 25,000 and 100,000 people would die” if the hurricane floods breached the levees and overwhelmed the city’s power plants and took out its drainage system.

On October 11, 2004, The Philadelphia Inquirer ran a story by Paul Nussbaum entitled “Direct Hurricane Hit Could Drown City of New Orleans, Experts Say.” It too said that “more than 25,000 people could die, emergency officials predict. That would make it the deadliest disaster in U.S. history.” The story quoted Terry C. Tuller, city director of emergency preparedness: “It’s only a matter of time. The thing that keeps me awake at night is the 100,000 people who couldn’t leave.”
But Republicans in Congress and the Bush Administration could not be bothered. They were more concerned with diverting money to cover Bush’s Iraq War. “It appears that the money has been moved in the President’s budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq,” Walter Maestri, director of emergency management for Jefferson Parish, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune on June 8. “I suppose that’s the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can’t be finished.”

Money was not the only valuable resource diverted to Iraq. So was much of the Louisiana National Guard. One reason that thousands of people were stranded without food or water in New Orleans for days is that 35 percent of the Louisiana National Guard was 7,000 miles away.
“Some 6,000 National Guard personnel in Louisiana and Mississippi who would be available to help deal with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina are in Iraq,” Pete Yost of AP reported on August 29. “The war has forced the Guard into becoming an operational force, far from its historic role as a strategic reserve primarily available to governors for disasters and other duties in their home states.”

It’s not just having the uniformed personnel in place but the equipment, as well.“Earlier [in August] the Louisiana National Guard publicly complained that too much of its equipment was in Iraq,” reported Democracy Now! “The local ABC news affiliate reported dozens of high water vehicles, Humvees, refuelers, and generators are now abroad.”

Once again, George Bush fell to the occasion. He waited out the storm in Crawford, held his breath for a day, and then jetted off to San Diego to seize a propaganda moment for his war. His speechwriter did patch in two paragraphs on Katrina, and then made a clumsy transition to Iraq: “As we deliver relief to our citizens to the south [south of San Diego?], our troops are defending all our citizens from threats abroad. . . .”

When he finally, the following day, cut short his precious vacation and flew over the devastation on his return to Washington, he gave one of the most lackluster speeches of his colorless career. He bragged about all the supplies the federal government had delivered, but it was clear from the media that those supplies had not reached many of the people who needed them the most. He appointed the Homeland Security chief to head a cabinet-level task force, but why wasn’t such a task force in place when there was ample warning that a monster hurricane was going to strike?
Beaming with local pride that was painfully out of place, he went out of his way to “thank the state of Texas” for providing relief for some of the refugees.
He urged people to donate to the Red Cross—nothing wrong with that. But at a time like this, the government, which is supposed to represent us as a national community, should be providing the emergency relief. Bush lauded “the armies of compassion”—the Red Cross, the Salvation Army, the Catholic Charities. They are to be praised—but relief should not be privatized at a time like this. With a disaster of this magnitude, only the federal government has the resources to provide the crucial relief expeditiously.

Bush acknowledged, belatedly, that “repairing the infrastructure, of course, is going to be a key priority.” It would have been a whole lot easier to repair it beforehand.

And then he took the occasion to push through a long-awaited wish of the oil industry by granting a “nationwide waiver for fuel blends” on gasoline. He didn’t say one word on the price gouging that the oil companies and retailers were engaging in.

“To announce this repeal as the major initiative to control prices is nonsensical,” says Tyson Slocum of Public Citizen’s Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. “It does not address the fundamentals. The fundamentals are you have speculators on Wall Street who are driving up the price of crude. For American cities that are suffering from very poor air quality from asthma and other respiratory diseases, this is going to make things worse.”

Then there’s Bush’s head-in-the-melting-iceberg approach to global warming, which may have contributed to the force of Katrina and may make similar hurricanes more likely.

“The hurricane that struck Louisiana . . . was nicknamed Katrina,” wrote Ross Gelbspan in The Boston Globe. “Its real name is global warming.”Gelbspan, one of the leading environmental journalists in the country, is the author of two books on global warming, The Heat Is On and Boiling Point. His assertion that global warming was the cause for the intensity of Katrina raised some hackles in the scientific community, with some scholars saying that any particular event cannot be pinpointed to changes in the Earth’s temperature.

But study after study on global warming has warned that as the water temperature of the world’s oceans goes up, the likelihood of more vicious hurricanes also increases. The most recent MIT study, released in the June 25 issue of New Scientist, showed that hurricanes were increasing in duration and intensity by 50 percent over the past thirty years as water temperatures increased.

Bush, for his part, won’t even admit that there is such a thing as global warming. He pulled the United States out of the Kyoto Accords, blocked efforts of other countries to move aggressively to curb greenhouse gasses, consistently downplayed scientific studies of the phenomenon, and had his political appointees even edit out some of the conclusions of the government’s own scientists.

Some disasters can’t be avoided. But they can be contained. Katrina was not. It was not contained because of a laissez-faire government that failed to bother to take warnings seriously, because of a Republican Congress and Administration that is stingy when it comes to spending on public goods but lavish on armaments and war, because Bush diverted much of the National Guard to Iraq rather than to keep them here to do the jobs they are meant to do, and because of an Administration that is pathologically hostile to science.

Katrina was a natural disaster. But it was compounded by a scandalous political disaster that took an even greater toll.
© 2005 The Progressive

________

Greetings.As most of you know, Tom McGuire and I have been working in south Louisiana for nearly a decade. We - along with Joanna Stone - were supposed to fly to New Orleans this morning as part of our ongoing work. Numerous students have worked in the communities impacted by the hurricane and some have started contacting me for information. I have been in touch with people in several communities over the past couple of days and wanted to give you a bit of an update of what is happening.

As Steve Shirley, the editor of Morgan City's local paper, said this afternoon, unlike most hurricanes and even Andrew (1992) where the hurricane passed and tremendous damage was done but people were able to get in there right away and start cleaning up and rebuilding, in this one things simply continue to get worse. Not only is New Orleans devastated (reports I received today include people passing up floating corpses to continue to search for survivors and people sitting on porches with rifles to guard their property from looters because our National Guard is you-know-where), but all the surrounding communities are continuing to be impacted. The full story of this one will take a long time to sort out. Here are some examples from Louisiana and ideas of where resources are needed.

1. Lower Plaquemines Parish has been nearly wiped out; some communities are gone, others are completely flooded. The United Houma Nation, a state-recognized tribe with communities in Plaquemines Parish, is organizing an effort to help its members there and can accept donations. Fortunately, Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes are in relatively good shape - trees down, roofs off, etc. but nothing out of the ordinary as far as hurricanes go.

2. A major concern is that communities throughout the area that received evacuees are facing shortages of food, fuel, etc. Unlike in other hurricanes where evacuees come in for a few days and leave, in this case they are being told they may not be able to go home for 1, 2, or even 3 months. The surrounding communities - many of them small towns without many resources themselves - are trying to cope with people who stopped in their towns and have now run out of money, food, etc. and have nowhere to go. To make matters worse, in the wake of Andrew federal policies were established that no official disaster relief shelters could be set up south of I-10 because all of these communities are at risk in future hurricanes (the season is not over...). Thus, the communities are unable to receive any federal assistance to help the evacuees already there and are being told to send the people on to Houston, Alexandria, etc. where FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Act) shelters have been set up. These communities are setting up groups to raise funds and help provide gas and food vouchers for people to move on to the areas with shelters.

3. Electricity is still out in many places; the city of Houma, which is the largest in the region outside of New Orleans, has been told it will be without power for two weeks. In addition, New Orleans is the hub for regional infrastructure so communication and transportation networks are disrupted and will continue to fail as cell phone batteries, small generators, and other devices stop working. People are having trouble communicating via phone even across town. Organizations and institutions for which New Orleans houses the web server, for example, are no longer able to maintain web pages. There will be need for assistance in establishing and maintaining communication.The list goes on and on... I have asked a couple of friends to send me specific information about how people can help - unfortunately banks are running out of money so it is not even as simple as sending checks - and expect to receive that in the next day or so. As I told Steve, the least they can get out of us after nearly a decade of researching them is access to some of our networks. It would be great if we can organize something here. If you are interested in being part of that effort, please get in touch with me.

Diane

Change the Plot

Marx said that philosophers should not only interpret the world, but change it. His mother though was said to lament, “If only Karl made Capital instead of just writing about it…” We Filipinos need to carefully think our state of affairs through. As one economist wrote, the crux of the matter is not only in changing the world but in first interpreting it CORRECTLY.

The past few weeks have been politically and economically brutal for the nation. After a good economic first quarter, dirty politics, graft and corruption, and roadblocks to economic reform are threatening the modest economic gains of the economy. Indeed, in the Philippines, the economy is intertwined with politics. Or is it?

Everyone in the country loves discussing politics. A look at the newspapers, writings of columnists, TV talk shows, and even discussions at family gatherings ultimately focus on politics. The alleged shenanigans of the Macapagal administration and the Arroyo men make for good fodder. Why so? In discussing what ails the country and the search for solutions, do the people agree on the root causes and the course of action needed?

From listening to these discussions and reading what columnists and “experts” write, the problems identified are generally; a corrupt government and legislature, peace and order issues, poor infrastructure, rampant poverty, and overpopulation, among others. Recommended solutions range from a hardline, authoritarian leader, to a parliamentary form of government, to a communist revolution. We ask, why is it that the identified problems are mainly economic in nature, but the solutions prescribed political? One could easily answer that this is the reality of political economy; but what if we try something else, something based on reality? Why should the national savior be a politician?

Two EDSA People Power, numerous coup de’tats, national worker strikes, a communist insurgency, Muslim secessionist movement, church activism, etc. have not done much to improve governance by our politicians and bureaucrats. Politicians and bureaucrats are clearly a problem and a significant part of the solution, but reforming them is not the only solution unless we are willing to literally KILL them all off.

Many of our countrymen have done the next best thing. They have voted with their feet. They have not given up on their country, only their politicians and bureaucrats. The Leftists’ calls for various boycotts have been taken up by our overseas foreign workers (OFWs), who want nothing to do with government. They have gone abroad to become the best that they could be in their fields, specialization, and careers. For many the costs are high, but their individual actions collectively state their priorities. These seven million plus OFWs prioritize personal and professional achievement, family economic security, and a better future for them and their families. For the country, the OFWs have been an economic lifesaver. They deserve more than just as a new national commodity.

For those who have remained behind, the successful are those who have done it through legal and honorable means or through criminal and rent-seeking activities. Looking only at the former, these small and medium-sized entrepreneurs, big businessmen, and professionals diligently conduct their affairs and seek to minimize their interaction with government. I know of successful businessmen who refuse to bid on government contracts and avoid contact with government. The successful Chinoy business community deals with government on an arms-length basis and through third party mediators. Their focus is on growing their businesses, not socializing with the political powers. The Ayala family, who have adopted the motto “Profit with Honor” have tapped the best and brightest their money can hire to help them professionalize and expand their businesses.

Business leaders like PLDT’s Manny Pangilinan, the Aboitizes, Lorenzos, and so on, have not only studied the Philippine business cycle well, but have developed a deep understanding of what products and services the country needs. These they provide to the immense profit of their respective companies.

What do these individuals and organizations have in common? The focus is excellence, be it personal or business. Diligence. Skill. Individual and corporate achievement. Providing for the family and the future. Personal integrity and responsibility. Continuing education. Highly competitive spirit. Work ethic. Team effort. Profit with honor. Corporate responsibility. Innovation. Studied risk taking. Growth and diversification.

What about government? Government is seen by them as a hindrance, a burden, something to be overcome. For the OFWs, government is irrelevant. For the companies, they must ensure that they comply with all laws and regulations. Do they seek to influence government or resist some corrupt politician or bureaucrats’ attempts to extract money from them? Sure they do, but they do it at arms length. No way will they invite these corrupt politicians and bureaucrats to dinner in their homes. Have you noticed how geographically far away our resilient farmers and fishermen are from bureaucrats?

Democracy is not only exercised at the polling booth. Politicians, their lackeys, arm-chair intellectuals, and the media have drummed it into us that votes, which are easily bought, are the best and only manifestation of a vibrant democracy. Another way though of exercising democracy and good governance is through each individual’s wallet.

We each need to take back control of our individual destinies. Do not wait for the government to reform itself and get the economy to grow. Politicians and bureaucrats are enriching themselves through rent-seeking activities because we allow them to. Where do we start in preventing this?

To the youth, do not abandon your education. Make sure you get a degree regardless if you are a Leftist or party animal. Sooner or later you will need that degree for credibility when you are in power or applying for work. Unless you want to be an inept individual and a liability to the organization you will join, you will need basic skills of reading comprehension, writing, public speaking, math, abstract thinking, and adaptability, among others. Get these skills in school asap. Plus, it will be harder for the politician/bureaucrat to fool or intimidate you.

To the entrepreneur, seek business opportunities that minimize interaction with government officials at all levels. Seek a low profile so you are not targeted by them. Study the lifestyle of the Chinoy entrepreneur, who saves and re-invests profits, diversifies both in business and geographical terms, and seeks to constantly improve his/her situation. If you do have to interact with a government official, do so professionally and do not seek to befriend them. It will be cheaper for you and less stressful in the long run.

To the professional, it is okay to seek employment abroad if that will ensure the economic future of your family. Take your expertise to the one who will either pay you or who appreciates your skill and professionalism the most. You deserve it. Love of country is not based on where you live, but what is in your heart and the help you will eventually extend to your friends, relatives, and community. When abroad, insist that OFW associations do not host or invite politicians who visit to speak or seek financial support. The point is to ignore the corrupt officials.

To civil society, focus your energies on specific, attainable goals. Do prioritize local sites and situations. In fighting for good governance, focus on the erring official and his/her family, while demanding command responsibility. Corruption is personally enriching, hence the consequence must be intimately personal. Information is a powerful tool. Get and clearly document instances of graft and corruption and immediately share it with the public through the internet, text, TV, radio, etc. Set up blogsites/websites that accept tips on graft, corruption, and criminal activities of government officials. The corrupt must be publicly ostracized. Let the management of these sites be flat and free-wheeling so that it will be hard to shut down. Increase the penetration of the Internet and other mass information technology to the countryside and to poorer communities, so that they can participate in a grassroots movement of governance. Your success will inspire compassionate individuals, and there are many, to support your cause.

Politics has been used to corner scarce resources for interest groups. Individual wealth and community self-help can insulate us from the pervasive influence of corrupt officials. Focus on generating your own wealth, while at the same time insisting on good governance. With a bigger middle class, more pressure can be laid to bear on government officials to do what is right.

Approximately 7.5 million Americans and 67,000 Hong Kong residents have assets of at least $1 million exclusive of primary residence. The Asia-Pacific region has at least 2.3 million millionaires mainly concentrated in India, Hong Kong, Australia, and Singapore. Economic growth and market capitalization are the main drivers. In these countries, even with a monkey as the leader, the economy and market continue to operate.

The bottom line is it will be wealth, individual wealth in many hands that will determine whether our country will grow or become a failed state. It is individual wealth that will enable us to demand good governance, hale the corrupt to court, sue the incompetent government official, jail the criminal, pay for better infrastructure and social services, and financially support civil society. It is not government who will do it but ultimately each one of us.

Do not believe what is being written that we need a political savior, a benevolent hardliner, or a communist takeover for the economy to grow. The first two are contradictions in terms, while the communists, though idealists, are inept in management and governance. Further, as seen in the Erap leftist officials, they are easily co-opted by sudden riches.

The most sustainable reform movements are those that are broad based, cognizant of merit, wealth-generating, focused on self-help and enlightened self-interest but with a sense of community, compassionate, and integrity-driven. These movements try their best NOT to depend on politicians. Once successful they leverage this success to help others and seek reforms. That is why projects such as Gawad Kalinga, the OFW initiatives, the community-based environmental programs, voluntary professional associations like Rotary, European Chamber of Commerce in the Philippines, MABINI, etc.; organizations such as the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, Businessworld, WWF, etc.; businesses like Jollibee, Globe, San Miguel, PLDT, Ayala, Red Ribbon, and the Chinoy business community are so efficient, effective, and successful. These are real people doing real things.

Political reform to effect economic growth is only one way. Political reform can be done either violently or with fundamental societal change that may have either positive or unintended consequences. Another way is through individual wealth generation that enables citizens and civil society to pressure government officials to do what is right.

How do we go about generating wealth? That is your task. Read the StreetStrategist's Hyperwage Theory at the Businessworld.