The Inquirer editorial yesterday (Queendom for a horse) took a critical look at AFP chief’s term extended.The editorial says the possibility that Esperon will serve longer than an additional three months should be considered. The editorial cites the following laws and decrees: Presidential Decree 1638 as amended by Presidential Decree 1650, and Republic Act 8186 as amended by Republic Act 9188, as well as the provisions of the Constitution (since Esperon term extension possible only in case of war – Palace). It also makes reference to GMA’s speech during the AFP Change of Command Ceremony, November 28, 2002.
Today, the news is Esperon: 4 months ahead may be bloody: General expects stiff NPA resistance. Whether this is posturing or Esperon’s real intention, remains to be seen. But if he really does believe the AFP is capable of liquidating the NPA in the hills, what would be his basis for this?
Randy David gives us a clue. In The tragedy of the rural poor, says something unprecedented is going on. We’re used to the sight of people moving to the city from the province, attracted by the glitter and opportunity of life in the big city. David says what’s going on today, though, is that people are moving to the city not because they are attracted by opportunity, but because they are fleeing the collapse of rural life in the provinces. There is a difference, he says, and it is troubling -an unintended consequence, he says, of defective land reform. This reminds me of an assertion by the economist Mike Alba who pointed out no one is quite sure, because the government mechanisms for monitoring it have broken down, of how much formerly productive agricultural land has been converted to real estate and other purposes. He also points out, and if he knows it the military knows it, too, that efforts to organize the peasantry are at their lowest ebb since the 40’s and 50’s.
On a related note, see Solita Monsod’s Two challenges, where she says the ranks of the truly poor have shrunk while most Filipinos have become slightly poorer across all classes.
Politically, the weekend had news that Arroyo douses plot vs Speaker via phone call — Ermita and that as Congress resumes session, GMA tells Rainbow Coalition to stand by JdV. The scuttlebutt, however, is that the changes in the executive and legislative departments are scheduled for later this year. Among the targets are Lakas stalwarts. Supposedly Executive Secretary Ermita will finally be eased out around May, to be replaced by the current DILG Secretary, Puno. Speaker de Venecia, on the other hand, will be removed from the speakership near the end of the year. Meanwhile, attempts to amend the Constitution will gather pace in the middle of the year.
Now this is what interests me about the other big weekend news, Melo named Comelec chair. His appointment, to my mind, can’t be evaluated properly until the other presidential appointments to the Comelec are announced. And even then, it all depends on whether the administration will then send signals it wants stability until 2010 or will pursue constitutional amendments aggressively. If it pursues amendments then the first task of the new Comelec Chairman and the new commissioners will be to preside over a plebiscite that will be manned by the same mid and lower level Comelec people tasked with the 2004 and 2007 elections. Which means individuals like Christian Monsod, groups like the PPCRV, and even the Cardinal Archbishop of Manila (who strongly backs the candidacy of Howie Calleja, for example, for a Comelec commissioner slot) might find themselves quite disappointed with their nominees, after Appointment of Melo as COMELEC head welcomed. But if constitutional amendments don’t take off, there is room for moderate optimism for 2010.
My column for today is Individualistic yet part of the whole. One of the books I mentioned, Profiles Encourage, is reviewed by Rodel Rodis. See also two commentaries in the papers: Filipino Diaspora as a Form of Revolt and Going beyond ‘Same same’. You may also want to participate in Janette Toral’s Important Issues on Philippines 2010 Election.
Speaking of elections, overseas, Obama’s big win keeps his hopes alive. Interesting reading in Slate’s The Super Tuesday Strategy Guide.
Concerning the prospects of an American recession affecting our part of the world, see Asia Won’t Get Away Clean in The Asia Sentinel, as well as Live it Up, Asia! (which doesn’t apply to us).
And for future discussion: Parag Khanna’s Waving Goodbye to Hegemony:
At best, America’s unipolar moment lasted through the 1990s, but that was also a decade adrift. The post-cold-war “peace dividend” was never converted into a global liberal order under American leadership. So now, rather than bestriding the globe, we are competing – and losing – in a geopolitical marketplace alongside the world’s other superpowers: the European Union and China. This is geopolitics in the 21st century: the new Big Three. Not Russia, an increasingly depopulated expanse run by Gazprom.gov; not an incoherent Islam embroiled in internal wars; and not India, lagging decades behind China in both development and strategic appetite. The Big Three make the rules – their own rules – without any one of them dominating. And the others are left to choose their suitors in this post-American world.
The more we appreciate the differences among the American, European and Chinese worldviews, the more we will see the planetary stakes of the new global game. Previous eras of balance of power have been among European powers sharing a common culture. The cold war, too, was not truly an “East-West” struggle; it remained essentially a contest over Europe. What we have today, for the first time in history, is a global, multicivilizational, multipolar battle.
In Europe’s capital, Brussels, technocrats, strategists and legislators increasingly see their role as being the global balancer between America and China. Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, a German member of the European Parliament, calls it “European patriotism.” The Europeans play both sides, and if they do it well, they profit handsomely. It’s a trend that will outlast both President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, the self-described “friend of America,” and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, regardless of her visiting the Crawford ranch. It may comfort American conservatives to point out that Europe still lacks a common army; the only problem is that it doesn’t really need one. Europeans use intelligence and the police to apprehend radical Islamists, social policy to try to integrate restive Muslim populations and economic strength to incorporate the former Soviet Union and gradually subdue Russia. Each year European investment in Turkey grows as well, binding it closer to the E.U. even if it never becomes a member. And each year a new pipeline route opens transporting oil and gas from Libya, Algeria or Azerbaijan to Europe. What other superpower grows by an average of one country per year, with others waiting in line and begging to join?
With the new Big Three, the author then says the task is to identify the “Second World”:
To really understand how quickly American power is in decline around the world, I’ve spent the past two years traveling in some 40 countries in the five most strategic regions of the planet – the countries of the second world. They are not in the first-world core of the global economy, nor in its third-world periphery. Lying alongside and between the Big Three, second-world countries are the swing states that will determine which of the superpowers has the upper hand for the next generation of geopolitics. From Venezuela to Vietnam and Morocco to Malaysia, the new reality of global affairs is that there is not one way to win allies and influence countries but three: America’s coalition (as in “coalition of the willing”), Europe’s consensus and China’s consultative styles. The geopolitical marketplace will decide which will lead the 21st century…
Second-world countries are distinguished from the third world by their potential: the likelihood that they will capitalize on a valuable commodity, a charismatic leader or a generous patron. Each and every second-world country matters in its own right, for its economic, strategic or diplomatic weight, and its decision to tilt toward the United States, the E.U. or China has a strong influence on what others in its region decide to do. Will an American nuclear deal with India push Pakistan even deeper into military dependence on China? Will the next set of Arab monarchs lean East or West? The second world will shape the world’s balance of power as much as the superpowers themselves will.
As for our part of the world,
America may seek Muslim allies for its image and the “war on terror,” but these same countries seem also to be part of what Samuel Huntington called the “Confucian-Islamic connection.” What is more, China is pulling off the most difficult of superpower feats: simultaneously maintaining positive ties with the world’s crucial pairs of regional rivals: Venezuela and Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Iran, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, India and Pakistan. At this stage, Western diplomats have only mustered the wherewithal to quietly denounce Chinese aid policies and value-neutral alliances, but they are far from being able to do much of anything about them.
This applies most profoundly in China’s own backyard, Southeast Asia. Some of the most dynamic countries in the region Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam are playing the superpower suitor game with admirable savvy. Chinese migrants have long pulled the strings in the region’s economies even while governments sealed defense agreements with the U.S. Today, Malaysia and Thailand still perform joint military exercises with America but also buy weapons from, and have defense treaties with, China, including the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation by which Asian nations have pledged nonaggression against one another. (Indonesia, a crucial American ally during the cold war, has also been forming defense ties with China.) As one senior Malaysian diplomat put it to me, without a hint of jest, “Creating a community is easy among the yellow and the brown but not the white.” Tellingly, it is Vietnam, because of its violent histories with the U.S. and China, which is most eager to accept American defense contracts (and a new Intel microchip plant) to maintain its strategic balance. Vietnam, like most of the second world, doesn’t want to fall into any one superpower’s sphere of influence.
It’s a lengthy article but well worth a read.
Technorati Tags: CBCP, Charter Change, constitution, economy, elections, House of Representatives, ideas, law, media, military, philippines, politics, society
To me, INFLATION is the better explanation for why FIES shows that the food expenses of the bottom 30 percent increased from almost 50 percent of their total incomes to almost 60 percent ( as opposed to that the poor’s income has decreased). As Monsod said, food expenses are income-inelastic. It is also why the expenditure for an addiction — tobacco increased by 50% for the bottom 30%.
The Obama-Nation Baby!!! Yeah!!!!
We are a people with short memories.Yes, our country’s political system sucks. But our culture sucks as well. And one of the ways it sucks the most is in its failure to teach people reasoning, cause-and-effect… and history.
Equalizer: I was wondering about that myself — this “failure to teach”. From your understanding of things, is this a failure of parents to teach their children, failure by the elementary or high school teachers, or failure by college/university professors?
In Venezuela, the same rural to urban migration, for largely the same reasons, eventually resulted in 90 percent of their population living in cities.
BTW, with Khanna’s new meaning given to ‘Second World’, GMA can say that she was correct when she said sometime last year that the Philippines should aim for ‘Second World’ status. (Her clairvoyance is uncanny. Maybe that tells us that, with her, we’re dealing with unearthly powers.)
Hi MLQ3. Thank you for the mention. Look forward to your insights. That project was basically inspired by your iBlog3 talk last year challenging bloggers to participate in the political discussion, sharing insights.
“And one of the ways it sucks the most is in its failure to teach people reasoning, cause-and-effect… and history.”
Wow, Equalizer. reverse racism at work here.
My opinion and I have tried putting it forward several times in this forum is that Filipinos are too peace-loving. Given pathologically irrational leaders and a dominant religion which dignifies them with forgiveness, which would’ve driven other cultures into murderous frenzy, Filipinos opt to turn a perpetual blind eye and deaf ears. To claim that we need to be taught cause and effect is like saying we are stone age primitives.
Manolo,
as for your mention of Toral and elections 2010, isn’t it prudent to volunteer your site as a forum for presidential and senatorial debates. The politicians themselves need not participate. We always complain about how people don’t know who to vote and how easily they are swayed by money and guns. Shouldn’t we do the charitable thing and begin debates (education) via cyber space? It’s best to keep discussion general and easy to understand (let’s think of the entire population here). Small words, big ideas should do the trick.
I challenge people to volunteer bigger issues than population control, increasing education budget, and electoral reforms that will help end political dynasties
melo’s appointment tells me that the problems caused by garci will be swept under the rug.
oh… there will be a few COMELEC officials that will be publicly sacked, not because they were involved in a Garcillano-like operations–but because they were involved in the MEGA Pacific deal thingy.
In her column, Monsod says:
One possible explanation is that GDP per capita has been overstated because smuggling has greatly increased and are not accounted for so they cannot be deducted from GDP.
Melo replaces Abalos. If Abalos didn’t resign, he could have weathered the storm, and had the possibility of extension just like Esperon. You know, let Abalos be extended as he’s the only one who can bring clean elections. I rue that lost chance!
Woe to people of short memory…that’s why are leaders are getting away with duping the public!
Is it any wonder why we tolerate our leaders’ lies and double standards? …
Woe to people of short memory…that’s why OUR leaders are getting away with duping the public!
Is it any wonder why we tolerate our leaders’ lies and double standards? …
Randy David’s urban migration as an unintended consequence of the failure of land reform is I believe also the unintended but necessary and foreseeable consequence of the country’s economic program that puts emphasis on competitive advantage (manpower, call centers/IT, tourism) in accordance with globalisation demands instead of the build up of opportunities for growth.
On Monsod’s the number of the truly poor shrinking, my eyes must be deceiving me and the higher number of people living on sidewalks in karitons compared to the past may be just for show. Or may be because life in posh subdivisions just does not allow some the opportunity to have a glimpse at those poor wretched souls.
“Melo replaces Abalos. If Abalos didn’t resign, he could have weathered the storm, and had the possibility of extension just like Esperon. You know, let Abalos be extended as he’s the only one who can bring clean elections. I rue that lost chance!” – Jon Mariano
A controversy of that scale could bring a man down, Jon. Abalos did the right thing of giving himself space through resignation, or he would have been fried by now. I really don’t approve of Melo, since he barely got anything truthful out, but even the constitution states that the President has the final say, even in the supreme court, so we have to deal with the President’s decision. (Correct me, if I got my memory on Politics and Governance with the New Constitution, upside down)
I honestly don’t think he would bring clean elections, since he got to that Mega Pacific thing already.
“I honestly don’t think he would bring clean elections, since he got to that Mega Pacific thing already.”- PDubSpEditor
Unless Melo files the appropriate charges against erring Comelec officials, we cannot expect clean elections in 2010. No charges, no changes.
And why should it be deducted from GDP?
I have no faith on the Comelec. Anybody who leads it can only know and do so much with the deeply ingrained corruption. Outside operators can still influence people inside who have been there forever who are like that French guy who was able to defraud his bank because he knew his bank’s system like the back of his hand.
Proof: even the most “credible” among the commissioners was not competent enough and was not able to make a difference in the last elections. But as they say, something has to be done. Melo might be a good start, but as I have said, I’m not putting my hopes high.
Wow, Randy David is so late to realize this phenomenon of migration of people from rural to urban.
This has been going on ever since the Nice People Around made the lives of the poor people miserable by collecting taxes for their protection.
This has been going on ever since the electrification program of FVR brought TVs and radios even to the remotest barrios. They must have seen what they have been missing if they stay in their God-forsaken places.
This has been going on ever since the OFW phenomenon and that was since MArcos time courtesy of Blas Ople. When one kababaryo makes it big as OFW, many are inspired by the success stories. Since it is impossible to apply while in the barrio, they stay in the cities with their relatives.
The problem with writers, columnists and bloggers is that they see only what’s within a few meters of their residences and offices.
They should be getting out more often to meet real people.
Because smuggled goods, just like legitimate imports, are not produced domestically.
“Yes, our country’s political system sucks. But our culture sucks as well. And one of the ways it sucks the most is in its failure to teach people reasoning, cause-and-effect… and history.” – equalizer bunny
Just out of curiosity, does this apply to you too?
You did not check the formula. The imports refer to the cost of the raw materials that go into production or manufacturing.
You are assuming that all the imports are intermediate products when majority of smuggled goods are finished products, not unless you consider rice, vegetables and cheap canned foods are raw materials for processing.
Do you think the exporters will use chepa smuggled goods for their components when they have to meet certain standards?
Actually, i share your belief that majority of smuggled goods are finished products to be consumed locally. They are therefore reflected in personal consumption expenditure when sold. This sale shows up as an addition to GDP belonging to the aforementioned category.
However, since there is no record that they were not produced locally (aka imported) owing precisely to the fact that they were smuggled in, then there is no corresponding deduction. By contrast, if the finished goods were instead legitimately imported, then these would have been reflected in the Imports portion of the GDP and deducted accordingly.
The erroneous measurement of GDP by undercounting Imports could account for the discrepancy between the reduction in average incomes and the supposed higher per capita GDP.
The formula for GDP that i’m referring to is:
gdp = pce + gc + cf + x – m
where:
pce -> Personal Consumption Expenditure
gc -> Government Consumption
cf -> Fixed capital formation
x -> Exports
m -> Imports
Example:
If i imported 100 pesos worth of rice and sell it, then it will be reflected in both personal consumption expenditure (pce) and Imports (m). So the net effect of is zero.
However, if i smuggled 100 pesos worth of rice and sell it, then it will be reflected only in personal consumption expenditure (pce) with a net effect of adding 100 pesos to GDP. So in the latter case, GDP is overstated by 100 pesos.
cat but if you’ve noticed other trends noted in this blog (changes in land ownership in q. prov., younger people prefering ofw work to farming, drop in private school enrollment both due to more competitive public schools or disinclination of parents to spend, cylical decrease in 2nd sem enrollments, closing of factories in cebu, etc.) the trends are being noticed and there is a difference between the trends that are more gradual and of longer duration that you pointed out, and the possibility you have to consider that other trends are emerging or older ones are accelerating. for example even if kids are joining the drinking age, where are they getting the money, since the jobs aren’t being created in the provinces, etc.?
Monsod did identify POPULATION GROWTH as explanation:
That real average family incomes decreased even as real total incomes increased, i.e., that even as the national “bibingka†[pie] became larger, the share of each partaker became smaller, can only be due to one thing: ……. No matter how one tries, one cannot get around the population “challenge†that stares us in the face.
UPn, population is also already factored in the measurement of per capita GDP as well. Per capita GDP is computed by dividing the total GDP by the population. So the puzzle is, why did per capita GDP increase while per family income as measured by FIES decrease?
And the Randy David article eventually ends by pointing to agri-reform failure and (a wistful???) look to leftist-organizing of farmers:
( … deviously crafted and half-heartedly implemented …agrarian reform program …that was supposed to emancipate the rural poor, has become a mass weapon to decimate them. …
There is hardly any sustained peasant organizing left in the countryside that could match the energy and presence of the peasant movements of the 1930s and 1950s.
cvj: Underground economy??? Or OFW-remittances getting counted in GDP (as PCE) but not in INCOME.
UPn, in fact its the opposite. Remittances are already counted in family income of the FIES, but excluded from GDP. (This is because remittances are not part of domestic production.)
As far as i’m aware, GDP also does not reflect the underground economy.
Interesting issue, especially when Monsod, who has expressed the dilemma, also has the line-item details that go into both ratios.
UPn, i don’t think Monsod has enough info in the line-item details to resolve the dilemma she expressed. Other possible reasons for the discrepancy could be:
1. Use of different population figures as a divisor but this is unlikely since the figures come from the NSO.
2. Consistent under-declaration of income by the survey respondents of the FIES. However, assuming a true random sample, this effect should already have been cancelled out across time periods compared (i.e. 2006 and 2003).
What is also striking are the conclusions that from 2003 to 2006:
(1) income inequality has NOT gotten worse: [the share of the top 10 percent of Filipino families in total income has dropped although still very high at about 36 percent; (2) while (when aggregated) the TOTAL income of Filipino families increased, both in nominal and in real terms. [I guess, by ‘real’, she means after-inflation.], Monsod pointed out that the number of those partaking of the bibingka increased at a faster rate than the rate at which the bibingka increased. so that average family incomes decreased in real terms — that is, the average family in 2006 could buy fewer goods with its income than it could in 2003.
And the balance sheet of Filipinos in top 5% like the Arroyo couple and Ping Lacson who own real estate in California has gone worse now because of the burst real estate bubble. [Now they don’t pay taxes to the Philippines when their real estate assets go up, so I doubt anyone will start a rosary-prayer-chain for these folks.]
Manolo,
i wrote “joining the drinking spree of the adult relatives”.if you’ve been to the barrios, you will see how these people become drunk without buying their own bottles.
The drinking marathon starts with two, probably the father and a friend, then joined in by more relatives, including those children who are already old enough to take a swig until the whole barrio are in attendance.
this is also true in depressed areas in the cities. Heard of kanto boys who test one’s manhood thru St. Michael the Archangel?
Father and son also share in the pack of cigarettes, father buying most of the time. so budget for his vices also increases. who’s going to stop these young children to smoke when their old grandparents smoke, their parents smoke and their friends smoke?
another sad fact is that these young people believe that they are going to eat three square meals a day as long as they stay with the family so the few pesos that they earn go to non-basic such as cigarettes.
cat, yes, i’ve seen that. but it leaves some things i’m still curious about. besides the way people start drinking pretty early in rural areas, i wonder though whether family-oriented drinking like this is as prevalent as it used to be. if the father’s abroad, for example, then maybe the grandfather is the source but what if the siblings are the only ones left in charge…
GDP = Esperon
“GMA’s domestic poodle”
Nyahahaha.
Down doggie, hersh yer prizesh fer veing a good lapdog…four more montsh of malacanang goodiesh…
The “push” to move to rural areas is not solely due to conversion of agricultural lands. My experience is that even families of tenant farmers on a crop-sharing scheme with their landlords are increasingly nuclear as well because their constant share of the harvest are unable to support their rapidly growing family. Do you know that it is still common to have 6 or more children in these areas?
One evil is to ignore the need for access of women to education and reproductive health in rural areas.
‘The bottom line here is that if the FIES tells us that poverty must have increased from 2003 to 2006, what with average incomes of the bottom 30 percent decreasing, why is it that our National Income Accounts estimates for the same period tell us that real per capita gross domestic product has increased? How are these conflicting statements to be reconciled? Another challenge.’
There is probably an error in the computation somewhere or data must have been ‘doctored’. Garbage in, garbage out.
“The “push†to move to rural areas is not solely due to conversion of agricultural lands. My experience is that even families of tenant farmers on a crop-sharing scheme with their landlords are increasingly nuclear as well because their constant share of the harvest are unable to support their rapidly growing family. Do you know that it is still common to have 6 or more children in these areas?
One evil is to ignore the need for access of women to education and reproductive health in rural areas.”
I am from a most rural area of the country, a fact none of you guys can boast about. So I know something you don’t, inspite of your expertises. From where I came from, the choice to have 6 or more children (the more the better to them) is a prevailing logic by rural parents for economic reason. After weathering the grinding poverty raising 9 or 10 offspring (for example), payback time is when the chldren reach their prime, some starting from age 15 years, go to Manila to earn a couple of thou, send home half of it, some even got more lucky, and the parents survived for the long haul. That’s one migration type and reason even Solita and Randy might not know about. Now, if you are them, and you neither have that glib of tongue, nor the wit of Cicero, but only the wit of brawn, would you not do the same?
CAT and Manolo,
Maybe you guys mean Starbucks. Ginebra gin is so 80s.
Then it is worse because they can do whatever they please with the money they receive from the father. And since a member of the family is abroad, the members of the extended family would like also to share with the bounty.
A request for isang lapad naman diyan o kaya kuwatro kantos never ends.
Teh return of the OFW is often celebrated with expensive wines bought from the tourist duty free. Then more local wines are consumed as more relatives come to visit the newly-arrived relatives.
Would you believe that even women in the province drink too?
“filipino diaspora as a form of revolt” is one of the most amusing, disingenuous thesis i’ve heard since the proposition that ofw’s stop remitting dollars to their families to undermine the arroyo government. it’s another telling exposition of the ‘vacuousness’ of the filipino mind.
studying, working and living “abroad” (especially u.s. and europe) are among the natural aspirations of most pinoys, from cradle to grave. in spanish colonial days, only the wealthy few (e.g. rizal, the luna brothers, jaena, del pilar, etc.) and, of course the poor laborers and crewmen of the galleon trade) could get to leave their homeland, not so much to rebel but to study and/or work. during the american occupation, many pinoys wanted to live and work in the u.s. but, except for relatively few agricultural workers (apple pickers, canners, tobacco farmers, etc.) and limited number of wealthy students, were unsuccessful because of exclusionary immigration policies and discriminatory treatment of “colored” peoples (including filipinos) at the time. only after 1952 when u.s immigration was liberalized to allow non-europeans (including filipinos) to immigrate under a strict quota system. the opening-up of immigration rules for filipinos ushered in the heavy influx of immigration to the u.s. those who could not opted for other places that would admit them such as canada, australia, europe, and later, the middle east, africa, hongkong, singapore, taipeh, etc.
the filipino’s desire to immigrate has always been there under every administration from quezon to macapagal-arroyo. i think the primary motivation is economics rather than political (except those who fled from marcos’ dictatorship). it seems, most everybody wants to live in “the land of milk and honey”, where “money grows on trees”, and where the poorest can eat the same cut of beef as the sole heir of the rockefeller fortune.
Sorry for the delay in the response. I have to call a phone card company and threatened them that I will report them to the Better Business Bureau if they are not going to attend to my complaint. I used a phone card to call my sister in the Philippines. After three rings, I hang up do the machine would not get my call. I dialed again only to be told the remaining balance of the phone card has been reduced by 1.65 and the number of minutes to half. I was not even connected. Second time, I called, I was not connected and the same amount was deducted from my balance. Highway robbery. In times,like this I contact a live person in the customer service. AND TELL THEM I AM GOING TO REPORT THEM. arghh
So going to our issue.
Personal Consumption Expenditure refers to household expenses such as food, rent, medical expenses and other final goods.
In our case, it is food.
Consumption of food does not change with the change in price. Simply stated, you will not gorge yourself with vegetables or rice because the prices have gone down.
Same is true with the smuggled rice that we are talking about.
Let’s use your example.
You buy smuggled rice worth 100 pesos in exchange of locally produced rice which could be 200.00 in the market.
What goes to the PCE?
The 100 pesos worth of rice. Something wrong. Yeah definitely. Because that is not locally produced goods but is counted as one.
Second, the value is lower than if the rice purchased was the locally produced rice. In my case it is half.
What’s the effect? GDP is understated not as what you claimed that it is overstated because the smuggled goods can not be deducted as imports.
The locally produced goods were not consumed at all and therefore are not included in the PCE. As I have said , you donot double your consumption of staples even if the price is reduced. That’s inelasticity.
What happens to the locally produced 200 worth of rice? It is still in inventory waiting to be purchased and reported as expenditure in the next quarter or year.
If they are not stored in the warehosue which suddenly catch fire accidentally or are sunk in the ocean while in transport to the other regions.
What you give as sample is only applicable for intermediate goods or if you are accounting for GNP.
Bencard,
Maybe Filipinos are true lovers of democracy. The reason why they want to be in America.
It is not just Filipinos, but practically every nation has a lot of its people wanting to immigrate. One of every 10 Russians want to live in the US. And for every 100, more French than Russians, will live in the US if given the chance. So by extension, a whole lot more than 1-in-10 if they had the chance will live elsewhere (Australia, Israel, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia (but does Saudi Arabia accept immigrants??)).
Canadians, too — 17% (or a little under one in 5) will live in the US if given the chance. And for every hundred of its citizens, more Indonesians (also Koreans and Brazilians) want to live in the US than Canadians wanting to live in the US.
Willingness to live in another country seems the norm than the exception. [Side-note: My perception given the choice — move to France or the US, more Filipinos will choose USA. (I’ll say this is true — US preferred over France — also for Australians or Indonesians or Chinese. But this is just a guess — no surveys to affirm or dispute the statement.]
Source: BBC Survey
Question: If you had the chance, would you like to live in America?
Indonesia-Yes 23% Jordan–Yes 15%
Brazilâ€â€Yes 25% Canada–Yes 17%
Franceâ€â€Yes 12% UKâ€â€Yes 24%
Australia–Yes 25% Russia–Yes 10%
Israelâ€â€-25% Koreaâ€â€Yes 24%
The BBC Survey illustrates that “diaspora to USA” is driven less by politics and more by economics — “a better life” primarily salary and freedom of speech.
Question : Based on what you know, do you yourself agree or disagree with American policy on terrorism?
The score below is percent-agree less percent-disagree.
(a) more French said agree than disagree : net plus 10%;
(b) more Indonesians said disagree : net minus 15%;
(c) more Brazilians said disagree : net minus 41%;
——–
In contrast, twice as many Indonesians(25%) than French(12%)will live in the USA if given the chance.