There are historical patterns that if we care to seriously reflect on would inform us of certain repeated forces known to have driven great events, among which is this: That history is often made by people and institutions in power and by how their power is employed by them to produce goods and services for society through the development and use of science and technology or otherwise dominate other peoples and grow more power.
Great historical events are also made when people and institutions in power, perceived to have failed society, have been overthrown, thereby allowing new institutions and ideas to be developed and instituted by the succeeding power.
Powers of ordinary men, like you and me, (not to speak of the shirtless, shoeless and toothless) are often circumscribed. For example, we in FV would like to believe that we have purposeful ideas and intentions for the Philippines, but we can only carry our purposes as far as our relative position in the hierarchy of powers can take us, unless of course we succeed in creating movements to match the strength of the powers that be.
So, in the Philippines, there are men and women, being in command of powerful institutions of modern society, whose decisions and non-decisions have immense consequences to our society. We do know that these special people own the financial establishments, control major corporations and organizations and for the most part “capture” the machinery of the state or, at the very least, have the ready ear of those who occupy positions of direct power.
There are thus dreadful consequences if our economic elites, the taipans or the old oligarchs for example, are risk averse, content as they seem with operating public utilities with captured markets, or mega malls and real estate ventures sustained by OWF remittances. Their lack of vigorous entrepreneurship translates into our economic engines not being propelled to create greater wealth and employment opportunities to provide decent incomes for a growing population of ordinary or less than ordinary people.
Today, as one of such consequences, we are witnessing that even well-meaning Filipinos – academicians, economists and scientists – are all sold to the proposition that much of our human resources are or will be “damaged goods,” or liabilities rather than assets, so that if the ones who made it to the light of day are not yet recruited by insurrectionary forces or not lucky enough to opt out as OWFs, they are offhandedly deemed as dregs of our society whose liberties are taken for granted by subjecting them, for instance, to “reproductive health” measures we won’t dare to prescribe via government fiat for those we hold in high esteem.
The National Academy of Science and Technology endorsing the Reproductive Health Bill states: “A large population with large resources is a state of affairs we probably aspire for but which so far has eluded us.” Shouldn’t scientists (as well as academicians and economists) be as passionate initiating or supporting measures which address the problems brought by a large population as those which confront the problems of want of resources because of failure to act on the part of those whose decisions have great societal consequences?
Popularity: 1% [?]
just keep on posting enlightening ideas here in FV.. youll never know who or what are the capabilities of those who find your blog worthwhile ;)
A small population with large resources means more for everyone. A large population with small resources means less for everyone. One can almost hear ‘It’s simple, really’ with matching emoticon. One of the problems in the Philippines is that a small percentage of the population holds, controls, and enjoys most of the resources.
By the way, “A small population with large resources means more for everyone. A large population with small resources means less for everyone.” is from the NAST statement.
LOL Jeg! hehe
consider the traumas this country has undergone, however, and then consider whether being risk-averse and essentially unimaginative can be viewed as so bad. it makes for lost opportunities in good times but ironically makes for a kind of coping mechanism being possible in bad times -hence the perpetual hailing of our “resiliency” made by people from all walks of life, concerning the country as a whole.
and that lack of ambition if you want to call it that, seems ingrained again across socio economic lines, valuing subordination and employment to entrepreneurship and risk; the same reason we are on the whole capable and accomplished mid-level managers and the continuing appeal of job security in the civil service as well as the middle class aspiration not to be ceos but comfortable, eventually pensioned, managers.
Abe, the issue of managing a country’s population needs to be viewed from both absolute and relative numbers:
In absolute terms, this is measured via the hitting the limits of Carrying Capacity of the environment, with which absolute numbers matter as well and which increasing per capita economic prosperity will actually worsen. The argument that says we should concentrate on economic development initiatives (in lieu of population control) does not address the issue of limited carrying capacity of the environment.
In relative terms, what is relevant is the dependency ratio, i.e. the ratio of productive individuals (15 to 64 years old) to their dependents. As i blogged before, we need the demographic dividend to be in our favor and this would require a decreasing birth rate. Goodness knows we need every bit of advantage that we can get to stack the decks in our favor.
My comment is given without prejudice to your emphasis on treating human beings as assets (not liabilities) which i wholeheartedly agree with.
Hongkong of almost 4 million people , squeze in government housing has no natural resources except one of the finest water ports in the world. The backbone of Hongkong’s productivity and creativity is due to a hardworking and well-educated workforce combine with entrepreneurial spirit. Can we Pinoy do this? of course-we have so much to offer to the world. Tourism, agriculture, english speaking workforce and many more. Overpopulation is not an excuse. Our government should at least find her NICHE to the world, to focus on our strengths instead of our weaknesses. Easy said than done. Information is really just around the corner.
Jeg,
You illegally used a registered trademark. You will be sanctioned by the Intellectual Property Office. LOL ;)
mlq3,
So, this “staying safe” thing, is it actually good?
Or is resilience becoming an excuse for underachievement? I hope not. :(
jon, probably a little of both, and dependent on your goals in life and the risk taking you want to undertake.
If our Society had Safety Nets, then people will be encouraged to take more risks, which is a good thing. (The analogy would be to car brakes without which we would be driving very slowly, if at all.)
mlq3,
I guess the virtue of the day is “calculated risk”. People who know how to take calculated risks will end up most successful as opposed to people who do not take risks or who gamble like hell.
That’s actually a common fate of the chronically unimaginative.
A society that is abundant in natural resources but utterly clueless as to how to exploit them profitably and sustainably is destined to a future of forever importing finished goods made from the resources they export raw.
Same deal with rich and poor individuals. The rich buy produce cheap from poor peasants and sell back to them finished goods worth 10 times the raw material and labour input.
reading the threads above reminds me of my friend in college who said whenever we have some discussions about economy and politics that our ideas would be more meaningful if we are in Congress or in the Cabinet of the President.
to a large measure the punditry here mirror our younger day dream of being able to be of service to the country. the government and the private sectors that control our resources must be able to expand their search for CEOS not only among those that are within their circle but among the well-meaning bloggers here.
abe/cvj can take the NEDA post, MLQ3 for CHED, benigno for San Miguel, leytenian for Social Services, Jon Limjap for Copyrights and Patent Office, Jeg for POPCOM..
i have not read much about jen so i do not have not a dream post for him yet.
honestly, our well-meaning bloggers here will do much in addressing the crisis in our country today.
“The argument that says we should concentrate on economic development initiatives (in lieu of population control) does not address the issue of limited carrying capacity of the environment.” – cvj
First, thanks for your posts.
As you will note, I’m proceeding from the argument that “scientists (as well as academicians and economists) (should) be as passionate initiating or supporting measures which address the problems brought by a large population as those which confront the problems of want of resources because of failure to act on the part of those whose decisions have great societal consequences.”
The proposition appears to be in line with Bloom and Canning’s hypothesis: “. . . the benefits of demographic change can be greatly magnified by a favourable policy environment.” We should therefore be passionate, I am suggesting, about having a good grip of both dimensions of the same problem. i.e., attaining a “large population (of productive individuals) with large resources.”
On policy environment, I have toyed with the idea about selective or targeted approach as advocated for the Philippines by Ateneo’s Cristina Morales and “debt moratorium.”
Philippines has many old problems and huge opportunities , a strong policy making is crucial, and so is a strong policy community.
We already have all the solutions- Policy Making. I would focus on combining it with Policy Making Competency. A Policy can only be implemented by a competent team. Competency is service delivery. It is a professional skill-public service. Maybe we should really look deeper on “who is who” that’s running our country. I am convinced that majority are not competent in skills. the world is too advance. We need new community leaders who are managers, knowledge broker , relationship builders, analyst, evaluators and thinkers. An international background and experience is also a must to compete with the global world. The problems we have is not really that simple.
( benigno) :)
Actually it is simple. Really.
Specially when one brings it down to this simple question:
Which one of the two is easier to implement and execute:
(a) An initiative to control population.
(b) An initiative to increase our collective productivity.
I’m tempted to add:
(c) An initiative to just simply sit on our arses (i.e. bahala na).
… but then we all know which one will win in this straw vote hands down if I add the third. ;)
Most will probably think options A and B would be toss up. But then one could easily propose summarise the solution design for Option A with three words:
:D condoms
:D free-range information
:D secularism
Whereas in the case of Option B we can end up with a list easily 10 times as long as the above and a complex of interdependent factors that would boggle an already intellectually-bankrupt collective mind.
Not to bore everyone with the obvious; but,
It’s simple, really™
;)
Benigno,
can you please add Ethics Reform for our Judicial System. Initiative from the RULE of Law department.
then Competency Survey for all political team from bottom to top. Competency can easily be managed by providing Awards of Good Local governance such as in the area of employment and local livelihood. Let’s make it as a contest -like ” tawag nang tanghalan” :) It’s the only way that our people can get involve on how well public officials are managing the people’s affair. There could also be a penalty for corruption such as… walang tubig, walang pagkain, walang kubeta sa paaralan at marami pa. The current survey we have is targetted at national level. Why can’t they expand the survey to regional, city and provincial? This information can motivate our public officials to become a positive thinker for the people and by the people.
Hopefully next year, I can create a database of governance questions that is not intimidating for the corrupts. :) can you help me? :)
Abe, from what i understand, we have similar positions in terms of addressing inequality and pursuing industrialization. What i don’t agree with (and perhaps this is not the point you have been making), are arguments that put forward the above (and any other suggestions to improve education, economic and social welfare) as substitutes for population control. Any such policies should not be treated as mutually exclusive alternatives but as complements. In particular, a population control strategy that decreases the number of dependents relative to the number of productive individuals (as measured by the dependency ratio) reinforces policies that support education and social welfare.
Manolo, it’s INTELLECTUAL REPRESSION :( from Spanish times… that’s where this seeming lack of ambition comes from. And our leaders (business, political,intellectual) are only out there to exploit our weaknesses.
However good your ideas are it’s still the politicians and business group who will say in the end: what is it for us? I am of the opinion that even though pols may sometimes mean well, their intellects can only understand those ideas which provide them with financial or political advantage over the rest of us.
They all play a game with limited dimensions made up of rules far less complex than rules in chess.