Sharing my ideas to Mar Roxas, Ed Angara and some other minor left/center-left politicians

Published by myself in the Mar Roxas website.

"

Clearly, being in power while some year is a chance for the country. Now it is up to you, Noynoy and other major politic leaders to impulse the reform, and at a pace faster than 2010.
The first revolution will be to be in total opposition to Nationalistas (to allow foreign investment to be increased by a major reform that they won't like) and Lakas Kampi (to reform the constitution and separate definitively any party and any administration from any outside donator... here vatican).
1) The first reform must to be administrative : We must to reorganize more efficiently the country with a new constitution (more democratic, secular, more liberal, and economically more efficient). Some models exists abroad. In switzerland, for example, they talk 3 different languages and are a democratic united confederation without any problem.
In our country, the administrative division is often blocking new projects. We must to divise the country into 5 big autonomous regions with their own official language : Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilokano, Hiligaynon, Muslim Autonomous Region (Tausug language ? up to them). All of them united under the Philippines confederation with as unity language the english (to be fair).
The confederation would have with their constitution to garranty civil liberties and democracy. Only acceptable limits would be charia rules who makes consensus (for muslim region).The role of the confederation would be the stability of institutions, defense, infrastructures investment (constitution must to force investments to come where there is a lack of infrastructures to maintain unity), custom control, foreign affairs, health, and administration.
Then, barangays and provinces must to be removed from the division. All urbanized areas and their closed provinces must to become new unified cities, whatever the size. Citizen must also to be protected from investment by constitution : investment in something must to come first where there is a 'lack'. For example, Mandaue city, Lapulapu city and Cebu city must to be only one city (sugbo city ?). And the cebu province must to be divised between this sugbo city, and others cities such as moalboal, liloan, samboan, etc.
And to finish, the last point of the constitutional reform must to be to improve the Justice and the Police institutions. These institutions must to be more independants and transparents.
Also, these institution must to have the correct fund to work correctly. They are obviously too slow, and about it, we should follow our Japanese brothers who are in top. Safety non-defense budget in the Philippines is from 1 to 1.1% of the gdp. Let's equalize Japan with 1.4% of our GDP ! Prisonners are humans, they have right also. I condamn the functionment of the cebu provicial prison who is obviously against human rights. Miss Garcia don't have any respect. Also, a numerus-clausus must to be set-up. Prisonners have right to sleep in their own room with shower.

2) The second big reform concerns the economic freedom in The Philippines.
Except some sectors who need a special regulation (let's talk about that later), Philippines is suffering of its old dying nationalist economy. History showed that in globalisation, the only winner countries are those who have infrastructures, knowledge and who open their market to foreigners.
First thing, we must to stop this administrative economy. Anyone who want to make its business should be able to do it without any autorisation process (who leads often to corruption). Let's adopt a system such as Singapore : some clics on internet, and you are registered, your business can begin !
Second thing concerns foreign investors. A foreign investor should be able to own 100% of its property in our country, or else, they would prefer to invest in another country. And we would deserve to lose them. Foreign companies, then, must to be able to own their properties and lot. Some regulation could be acceptable to prevent companies to invest in real estate leasings but that is all. Here also, we could have inspiration from Singapore (city with a lot of people from The Philippines).
Nationalists and populists pretends that foreign companies don't help the Philippines but their countries : that is or a LIE, or STUPIDITY. Most part of the turnover, whatever the nationality, is to pay employees and re-investment. So foreign investment makes growth, and exponentially. Nationalists and populists are liars.
Third thing would be about individual property right of foreigners. I consider acceptable to limit property right to someone who doesn't live here. However not totally. Moreover, I consider that any foreigner resident could own 100% of its house and lot. Those who doesn't live here should be limited to only one house (and it would make more offer in the leasing market, making housing less expensive in the country). We must to protect the property right as well as the Finland legal system does. According to the economic freedom annual report.
Fourth, the labour market regulation : In our country, there is too much labour market regulation, with as result not a lot of employees protection. It makes our companies less competitive, and our employees, still with bad working conditions. We must to liberalize it to make it more competitive. In this instance, the best example is Bahrain, according to the same report.
However, there is employees protections to set-up if we want to be fair with our citizen :
- 8 day off per month. If not given, the hourly wage of these days must to be the triple.
- 2 weeks of paid-vacations per year. If not given, the hourly wage of these days must to be doubled.
- From 3 month pregnant to 1 year old baby, our mothers have right to a paid vacation. The companies must to be reimbursed by the government as a compensation.
- From 1 year baby to 3 years old child, a parent (mother or father) can have a paid vacation if no one is in jobless (who would mean at home). The companies must to be reimbursed as a compensation for that also.
- A public free nursery system must to be invested to put children from 3 to 4 years old and allow parents to work.
- Some other regulations such as young, senior, women, and disabled tax incitation to recruit could be acceptable.
For the rest, the labour market regulation must to be as little as possible (even if what I proposed looks big, at least, it's flexible).
Then comes the credit market regulation. Here, the global financial crisis prooved us that we must to be careful.However, we must to notice that it is regulation who made the crisis, and not the contrary : US government pushed its two almost-public banks to loan to poors subprime credits, and later, the F.E.D. increased their interest rate. These two public regulations made the crisis, but since a long time USA plays with fire. In this instance, we must to adopt a model who associate credit market freedom and debt limitation. Finland and even Mongolia in Asia associates well these two caracteristics.
However, it would be smart and prudent to cap/ceil this market. To avoid problems but to make it flexible :
- No loans over 20 years
- No monthly reimbursment over 50% of fixed income
As simply as that, and same for individuals and companies.
Next is the money reform. To explain it well, it is very dangerous when governments creates more pesos than what the market did. Globally, in money creation, you have two way to print money :
- Credits from market makes the Bank of Philippines print new pesos.
- Government (or Bank of Philippines) intervention makes new pesos printed.
But every pesos printed is a new inflation. Inflation = money printed. Then, when politics prints money because they are afraid to tax more or to reduce their expenses, they create inflation that everyone support, as a hidden tax. The problem of this hidden tax is that it makes the country less competitive and it creates a speculative bubble. It is a dangerous game who makes the Philippines's economy less credible. Moreover, false money makes also inflation, and God only know how much false printed money are running in our country.
In this instance, we must to make a money reform. First, to make forbidden any politic intervention in the money printing. We must to have as a model countries such as Japan, Taiwan or Switzerland. Moreover, and it would be the Philippines exception, I am favorable to the Gold Standard system. Insuring people that for X money that they have, they can exchange it against gold. It makes the money more stable, and this stability decreases the underemployment in general. In this reform, Bank of The Philippines would be totally independant with those limited roles. And to mark this changing, a new money is to create for a new start. A modern money the most hard to copy. The Philippines Dollar.
Next is the freedom to trade internationally. Why Philippines would do protectionnism as some other countries such as Australia ? It is bad for their economy. It protects those who product in the "protected" sectors, but it penalizes the most part of pinoys who must to pay more expensively for a product. Nobody wins with protectionnism. Those who are not enough competitive must to fail to not brake the best sectors of the economy. We must to accept this market rule. Then, to make Philippines less expensive and more competitive in the long term, we must to make as maximum as possible the freedom to trade internationally true in the country. Hong Kong and Singapore are examples in this way. Chile also in a more little proportion (but bigger country).
The last non-financial/non-budget reform is about the size of the government. Here, this is crazy. You can find 36000 different kind of "bureau" or "department". All of this must to be really simplified to focus on the main mission of a government.
All these constitutional and economic freedom reforms could be made directly in the begining of the first electoral mandate, and would be a real positive revolution here. All you need is courage.
PS : I forgot also another detail in the constitutional reform that I talk about. Every pinoy should be able to vote and run for any election. Not only pinoy born here... There is no two categories of citizen. A real democratic liberal country is a country who treat all its citizen by the same way. Also, foreigner residents should be able to vote in local elections to imply them in the integration.

3) Next part of the reform that I advise you is more about expense programs... It can not be made directly. To reach this program you need two or even three electoral mandate, the road is long then (or else if the movement is too fast, the unstability would create unemployment).
I developped my proposition on a OECD basis, this OECD basis allows me to see clearly what works, and what don't work.
- social expenses (not including social health expense, social education expenses) : +0.35% if efficient, 0% for the rest
- education expenses : +0.1% if efficient, 0% for unefficient expenses
- administrations and public services : +0.35% if social public services such as nurseries, 0% for the rest
- health expenses : 0%
- police, justice, and other safety expenses : +0.1%
- defense expenses : +0.1%
- infrastructures, housing and collective developments : +0.1%
- culture expenses : 0.1% if language school abroad for skilled immigration program, 0% for the rest
- environment expenses : 0%
- economic miscellaneous affairs : 0.1% if only minimum necessary such as energy and monopoly prevention, 0% for the rest
As you probably know, every expense makes a gain of growth, every tax the contrary, and every debt to reimburse is exponentially more expensive. The number that I proposed you is this multiplier that you commonly can find in many economists websites. 1% of GDP of superior expense makes X gain of growth.
In this instance, let me propose you this final goal (after some mandates), as what is expensed in the best OECD country in each category. Only my social expense is not into them because with my left-liberal ideology. I have my own conception of social system.
- Social expenses : 23.5% of the GDP
With this expense, no more poors.
Everyone can eat and ride public transportation because of an universal allowance equivalent of 15% of the local GDP per capita. Only condition : being 18.
Every family with children would have a family allowance of 15% of local GDP per capita. However, if a family have more than one children, they would not have more than this amount, as an incitation for family planing.
Everyone in jobless who don't refuse to study (TESDA programs or college/university) can live in a brick studio with aircon and internet because of a 40% of the local GDP per head additionnal social fund. Those who refuse would not have it, and students would have it.
Minimum wage must to be hourly, and calculated to make the minimum income of a full time worker up to 55% of local GDP per capita.
A work incitation allowance up to 10% of local GDP could be made gradually to push people to work.
Pills, condoms and abortion would be free and allowed.
This is what we can do with this amount, and I am absolutly sure that there is no poverty anymore with that plan. Please note that I don't mean that this plan must to be made by the government, but it means a total of national and local public expenses.
- education expenses : 6% of GDP.
This is the amount expensed by the best education system in the world : Finland.
Their educative system is free for everybody, from primary school, include to university.
Their educative system is totally public, but autonomous. Teachers with the least performances at middle term lose their jobs directly, and teachers just under the average must to follow a training to renew their skills. Management is evaluated also.
From 4 to 15 years old, according to PISA test, Finland system is from far the best of the world. Finland people are not superior humans, they just have a good system.
There, children are responsabilized very early. School have a main program to provide them mathematics, science, history, language and foreign language skills. This program is of 15h per week only. Then, students are pushed to take optionnal courses up to 10h a week : doing a sport, playing music, trying some vocational shed/studio to know if they would like, learning another language, etc etc. This system continue till their high school graduation (graduation there is year 12 and not year 11 unlike here... so their bachelor is a 3 year program).
Their universities are also the best of the world for three reasons :
- they graduate 80% of their youth, that is huge
- as a proportion of their inhabitants, they are not bad in the rankings
- they are free of fees
Their universities work on the same philosophy than their primary and secondary system. Also there, they recruit wisely their teachers, expect good performances from them, but pay them in a better proportion also.
Only their vocational training are to improve. Not because of its system but because their training doesn't provide exactly what their local labour market need.
- Administration and public services : 6% of GDP. In fact, a country provides a good administration at a low price : UK with 4.5% of their GDP. Why 6%? I counted approximatively a free nurseries system (this expense would push more people to work, so would create growth).
- Health expenses : 2.9% of GDP. I don't consider public expenses in health useful because the market can provide it. Which country spend 2.9% of their GDP ? Macau for example, and the life expectancy at birth there is one of the best in the world. Then, I see these expenses as incitations for the market to go in any places (to not make health desert), and incitations to health medical insurrances to not make too much profits (as a compensation).
BE CARREFUL, with economic freedom reform that I proposed upper, you would have such as 50 different companies who would proposed their offer. This competition would already make their price really more little. Just observe abroad if you want to have an idea.
- Police, justice, and other safety expenses : 1.4% of GDP. This amount is spent in Japan. Japan is the only one OECD country who have good results in crime fight. I observed that globally, all the other countries spend less, it explains their bad results.
- Defense : 1% of GDP. I observed that in superpower countries, germany spend less for its defense (1.1% of their GDP). So I supposed that for a country like here who doesn't need to be implied internationally, 1% would be a good proportion to stop the rebellion in a middle-term.
- Infrastructures, housing, and community developments : 1% of GDP. The most efficient OECD country, as well for infrastructures as housing price, is Germany, with 0.8% of GDP. But Philippines by its situation need a constant effort to catch up its situation while Germany just have to maintain it. That is why I suppose that an effort of 0.2% additionnaly is necessary. Two sectors for that. First, making airports, ports, and public transportation as a public autonomous monopoly. The term autonomous is really important in that. Second, making financial incitations to build brick houses, studios and appartments : Philippines is able to stop to see its most poor people to live in bamboo houses. All we need to do is to improve the offer of brick hourses.
Today, approximatively 50 brick houses per 1000 heads. Tomorrow, almost 550 brick houses per 1000 heads needed.
This decreased price will make the foreign and local investment more interesting also in the long term.
- culture expense : 0.1% of GDP. This expense is one of the most useless expenses that exists except making language schools in the embassies and consulates where we can get skilled needed workers (ex : countries as rich/poor as here, or countries more poor). Japan is the OECD country who spent the least in culture, with 0.14% of their GDP. However, Japaneses have their own culture, even without public expenses ! So to just focus on language training for skilled immigrates, I think that only 0.1% of GDP is needed.
- environment expenses : 0% of GDP (same than USA). As for the culture, this expense is useless. Earth always lived period more hotter and colder, that is cycles. In the 19th century, earth was more hot than today. Are we dead ? No. There is more important pollution fights such as PM10 who are dangerous for health. And incitative taxes are enough to fight it, making expenses is not necessary. These are the reason why I don't advise expenses in this sector.
- economic miscellaneous affairs : 1% of GDP. One of the best OECD country about that expense is France with only 1.2% of their GDP. I simply think that it is possible to spend less, France spend too much as shareholders of useless companies such as "Quick" (equivalent here of Jollibee), or in automobile. This procent is made to make a public energy company, and a public medecine production company, to sell their product at a discounted price.

For you to know, I counted how much is spent today in each sectors by the government (unfortunaly, local governments are not enough transparents to add their own expenses. But often their expenses are just "administration". Eventually "infrastructures" and "safety" if they are less bad than the average).
*****2010 expenses (% of GDP)*****
18.05% || Total government expenses
4.17% || Public debt annual reimbursment
0.22% || Useful economic expenses : energy, medication production
1.49% || Housing, Infrastructures, community services
1.21% || Social
0.44% || Health
2.76% || Education, vocational education, culture
0.86% || Defense
1.10% || Security, Justice
1.25% || Administration and Public services
4.55% || Useless expenses : subventions, environment, etc
I also forgot to say that in what I called economic affairs, I included all fiscal advantages to make agriculture more competitive or housing less expensive.

4) The last point of program advised is of course about revenues
You fighted against VAT. Probably because hard for poors. However, the amount of social expenses I proposed is designed for a VAT at 26% as a liberal consensus (I explained that in my blog, I invite you to visit it http://jeffincebu.blogspot.com). So the problem is not anymore a problem.
You must to notice, if it is not already the case, that VAT is a good tax who doesn't penalize a lot the economy.
Here are the multipliers :
- VAT, immovable property taxes, financial transaction taxes (if no more than 0.1% per transaction) : -0.1% of growth per % of GDP taxed.
- Social cotisations on salaries : -0.2%
- Income taxes on individuals and businesses : -0.3%
- Excise taxes, and other miscellaneous taxes of this type : -0.4%
- Taxes on wealth, on inheritance, gifts, and taxes on capital : -0.5%
Of course, the revenues who are not from taxes are the best. And it is advised to privatize all the useless public companies and sell the useless shares. Also advised if later the budget is an excedent to loan to other countries, as China is doing.
And for information, here are the revenues made by our governors (central, I still can't guess for the local) this year :
15.20% || Total revenue
2.65% || VAT
4.81% || Excise tax
5.73% || Income tax individuals and corporate
1.46% || Non-Tax revenue
0.55% || Estate and gift tax
Unfortunaly, impossible for me to separate the estate tax from the gift/inheritance tax, but we can have an idea.

Then, according to these informations, and wanting as goal to not make the wedge more than 60%, here is the revenue advised, designed for the expenses proposed before. Of course, I didn't count non-taxes revenues because they are unstable and not safe, but if there is possibility to have donations from abroad, or other kind of non-tax revenues, it is the priority.
- VAT at 26% but 0% in food, housing, electricity, public transportation, internet : 14.8% of GDP of revenues expected
- Proportional Income tax on individuals at 25% with fiscal deductions for the topics I said upper (real estate, etc.) : 9% of GDP expected
- Social cotisations on salaries at 35% : 10.4% of GDP expected
- Immovable property taxes at two times the ireland rates (I invite you to consult their website to know more exactly about it) : 1.3% of GDP expected
- Financial transactions tax at the same level than Australia (here also, too complicated to explain it in one sentence only) : 1.4% of GDP expected
- Proportionnal Income tax on businesses at 25.8% (less incitations) : 6.4% of GDP expected
I also invite you if you have time to visit my blog http://jeffincebu.blogspot.com
My email and msn is also here : gangrene23@live.fr"

This article can be found here : http://www.marroxas.com/forum/topic/ambition-for-economic-liberal-reform

From corruption to freedom

To explain the corruption to pinoy citizen, let's explain its origin by a little story.

That's the story of a foreign company who want to invest in the Philippines. First thing they will have to do is to ask a business permit to the local government.

However, local government mostly don't publish their detailed budgets. To have its autorisation, the company will have to schedule local government.
First, this government will ask fees to the company, nothing's wrong.
However, they will ask more than the official fees : first step of corruption, but we can call it robbery.

The company, unhappy of this lack of respect will close its eyes. But two weeks later, they will contact them for another appointment. Not to give their business permit, but to tell them that it is refused, and if they want it, they will have to give a X-mas gift to them. Second step of the corruption, but we can call it rackeetery.

The company paid it, hoping it's the last time they will have to do that, and later they get their business permit.
But the local government now tell them that they have to register themselves to national sector autorities.
National government publish their budgets, so the company is safe of extra-fees for this time.
But in the appointment, the responsible would ask them also a X-mas gift in cash to get autorisation : Third step of corruption, rackeetery also.

Moreover, the company planing to invest here will learn at its depends that they can not own their lot and their business more than 40% (in most part of cases). So they would have to give the property of their investment to pinoy partners : Fourth part of corruption, also called robbery.
About the land, they would have choice between pinoy partners, or a long-term leasing : Fifth step of corruption, choice between robbery or being unstable and uncompetitive.

The business can start, the investor is reassured. However, a year later, autorities will ask a new X-mas gift if the investor don't want to lose its right to make business here : Last step of corruption in business who is also rackeetery.

At the end of the story, the investor is ruined (if not multinational company), robbed, humiliated, and must to sell its 40% of capital and runing away from the country.

Eventually, he could tell it to Police. But Justice also here is reputated corrupted.
Then if this affair become popular, most part of politics here will have lyrics saying "foreigners makes corruption" (mostly nationalist lyrics). And this, even if they are responsible of all this chain !!! (from revolution to marcos dictatorship).

At the end, foreign people thinking to invest abroad, knowing that, would avoid Philippines. And they would be right to say the truth. And without these foreign direct investments, Filipino power purchase is reduced exponentially.

The conclusion of this story is simple : to remove corruption in the country, remove this administrative and nationalist system, and make free entrepreneurship, free investment, forbid discretionary grants, and discretionary fiscal advantages.

Fiscal Aquino reform for 2011 or 2012

I have read somewhere that President Aquino is thinking to reform its fiscal system in different ways :
- Reducing VAT from 12% to 6%
- Leaving custom taxes on wheal and cement
- Increasing excise taxes on cigarettes, liquor, etc
- Asking local governments to increase land taxes

So my comments in the right order :

1- For the VAT, this is a big mistake what liberals are trying to do. Probably pushed by Mar Roxas who fighted against VAT by the past.
First of all, Philippines is suffering of debt and deficit, the priority then is to stop to vote deficit budgets, not making it worst.
Secondly, VAT is the best tax. The one who impact the least negatively the economy. I can explain it simply : it taxes all products, imported or local, without braking investment. Philippines with this tax can partially base its system on imported products. And contrary to custom taxes, VAT don't make people forced to pay for a non-competitive product.
Lastly, reducing VAT won't decrease prices. We experienced it already by the past in France. By reducing VAT, companies will just increase non-VAT prices. Moreover, this reduction will also push importation. The only one country who will win of this policy is the country who export here  but import less (Singapore, Thailand, China, Taiwan).
Every pinoy (not me, I am not...) should express its opposition to this tax project.

2- Leaving custom taxes on wheal and cement is a good idea. Because in long term it will decrease the price of these products. However, other custom taxes must to be slowly removed too. It corrupts all the competitivity of pinoy production (even if first these taxes pretends to protect them), making all prices more expensive by reducing offer. In this instance, I can just incitate liberal to pursue this custom tax policy.

3- Excise taxes on cigarettes and alcool don't shock me. However, Aquino should stop to base its system on excise taxes because as well as custom taxes, it corrupts the competitivity of the country. Better for him to change of policy, and choose to increase VAT to decrease excise and custom taxes.

4- Asking local governments to increase their land taxes is a good idea because immovable property taxes and all taxes around are not too bad for the economy, as well as VAT. However it is all the immovable property taxes who should be a bit increased.

Opened letter to major Philippines newspapers

Here is what I sent to some of the biggest newspaper here :

"Dear redaction,

I am writing to you, expecting that you will have the courage to say something taboo here in the Philippines. Country shared between a minority nationalist (one third of population), and a vatican lobby. My article "needs" are about three topics.

- The cultural massacre organized by Manilla. 20 millions of citizen are native cebuano speakers, for this 21th century, it is more than time to recognize cebuano as official language, and to teach it as well as tagalog. Too many cebuano can not talk correctly their own native language because of this policy, and tagalog is clearly not their language.
In switzerland, for example, this confederation talk 3 different languages, no one is more important than the other, and their nation is united.
Let's stop to be a Republic of Tondo, and let's begin for the first time the Republic of the Philippines.

- My second major problem is the foreign investment. Mass medias must to put pression on their governor to incitate them to let foreigner residents own their land. Also, oversea foreigners could be able to invest and own 100% of their business for the most part of sectors (even if key sectors such as energy or real estate could be subject to regulation). Economic history showed that in globalisation, only countries who make infrastructures and open their economies becomes rich. Japan have been one of these examples.

- My last topic concerns religion freedom in the country. Obviously, the vatican lobby is powerful here. And the country is not as secular is it claims to be. For example, how many procedures would ask you a baptism certificate ? I claim my right to be neither Christian, nor Muslim. Personnaly I am agnostic, and I don't like to have problems here because of my religion. It is time to stop this religious influence, beliefs must to come from heart, not by force. Inquisition time is done.
To stop this influence, the first thing to do is to change the political parties financement. Obviously, Vatican "buy" parties such as lakas kampi.
To change this, political party financements must to be only a public subvention given to parties depending of their election results, proportionnally.
If you make forbidden donation from Vatican to parties, their attitude would change.
Also, it is an emergency to make laws to protect little religions and non-believers.

Thanks to the redaction. I hope to read from you"

Let's share !

Let's share !

Everyone who visit me here : thank you for your interest.
I hope you will read my articles, even if they are long. I think they are interesting for everybody who want to know how their country work.
I hope also that I will cross some people who would like to give me comments (it will make me more debates, I love it).

And my big wish when I make this blog is : you too, pinoy, pinay, make a blog and critic !
Critic all what you like, and all what you don't like. Add me as a friend here, let's make a network.

An obvious thing in the Philippines : People are passive. They don't have critical mind/sense. They just care about their own family and the masters of the game (politics) are free to do what they want...
This situation must to stop, and if you begin to open your mind to the politic, the economics, the philosophy, slowly, the situation in your country will become better.

Everyone is an actor, not a spectator. If you think you are spectator, you are only actor of your passivity.

NB : If you liked my Blog, make yours, add me, let's make a network of Bloggers, and make ads for me to your friends. Together, things can change.

Salamat.

Moody paper about some topics

Here is a moody little paper about some things that I don't like in this beautiful country (and if I critic, it's to try to make it change, nothing else... The only persons who have hate of others are the nationalists... Not me.)

- Today I was watching SUGBO TV. How a country who claim to be democratic can allow Ms Garcia (governor of the Cebu province) make a propaganda like this ? In most democratic countries, the media time of politics (example : this party have XX time of media per month) is regulated by an autonomous institution.
Here, because she is governor of the province, Ms Garcia own the channel and make a big propaganda as if her action is exceptionnal : her attitude is a scandal !
Now whatever, my only hope for her is to lose all her next elections. This kind of persons should not do politic elections...

- Second thing who bother me : sometimes, when I go to S.M. Cebu to buy my things, S.M. turn off all its noise for the prayer time. If all Christian believers (in majority) are happy of it, what about the others who must to support the devil eyes of people who see you are not praying ? How in a country who claim itselves as secular (but who is obviously not), this kind of practices can be allowed ?

- Third and last thing : The national anthem. To understand me, read first my article about internationalism. How a democratic country can force its citizen to stand up with the hand on the heart everytime they hear their anthem ? A country is the wish of a group of citizen to live together. Do you think forcing people is a wish ? A wish must to come from heart, and to come from heart, the country must to accept that there is Internationalists here who don't want of any country but only one flag : Earth flag !
Would someone here have the courage to claim it ? Stop to touch to our freedom to demonstrate our opinion !

Arroyo economic bilan from 2002 to 2008, and begning of Aquino

To make bilan, let's say that observing analysis and reports, economic freedom in the Philippines didn't get improved at all. Worst, monetary freedom got more politic manipulations, and corruption is still here.

In this instance, I will just focus my analysis on voted budgets (and it makes my analysis more realist).

2002 : one year after the begining of Arroyo
2008 : last year of Arroyo BEFORE THE ECONOMIC CRISIS
2010 : end of the first year of Aquino, but economic crisis is not yet done so only expenses can be analyzed.

*****2010 budget balance*****
-2.85% of GDP as deficit (can not be judged with the crisis)
*****2010 expenses (% of GDP)*****
18.05%           ||    Total government expenses
 4.17%            ||    Public debt annual reimbursment (+0.43%)
 0.22%            ||    Useful economic expenses : energy (-0.04%)
 1.49%            ||    Housing, Infrastructures, community services (-0.55%)
 1.21%            ||    Social (+0.28%) 
 0.44%            ||    Health (+0.20%)
 2.76%            ||    Education, vocational education, culture (+0.33%)
 0.86%            ||    Defense (+0.05%)
 1.10%            ||    Security, Justice (+0.06%)
 1.25%            ||    Administration and Public services (-0.06%)
 4.55%            ||    Useless expenses : subventions, environment, etc (+0.21%)
*****2010 revenues (% of GDP)*****
 15.20%          ||    Total revenue (can not be judged with the crisis)
 2.65%            ||    VAT (can not be judged with the crisis)
 4.81%            ||    Excise tax (can not be judged with the crisis)
 5.73%            ||    Income tax individuals and corporate (can not be judged with the crisis)
 1.46%            ||    Non-Tax revenue (can not be judged with the crisis)
 0.55%            ||    Estate and gift tax (can not be judged with the crisis)


*****2008 budget balance*****
-1.3% of GDP of deficit (+3.4%)
*****2008 expenses (% of GDP)*****
17.14%           ||    Total government expenses
 3.74%            ||    Public debt annual reimbursment (-0.66%)
 0.26%            ||    Useful economic expenses : energy (+0.25%)
 2.04%            ||    Housing, Infrastructures, community services (+0.65%)
 0.93%            ||    Social (+0.76%)
 0.24%            ||    Health (-0.03%)
 2.43%            ||    Education, vocational education, culture (-0.44%)
 0.81%            ||    Defense (0.13% closer than "my" ideal rate in my articles before)
 1.04%            ||    Security, Justice (+0.75%)
 1.31%            ||    Administration and Public services (-0.67%)
 4.34%            ||    Useless expenses : subventions, environment, etc (-0.42%)
*****2008 revenues (% of GDP)*****
15.68%           ||    Total revenue
 2.36%            ||    VAT (+0.30%)
 4.34%            ||    Excise tax (+0.59%)
 6.29%            ||    Income tax individuals and corporate (+1.09%)
 0.69%            ||    Estate and gift tax (+0.03%)
 2.00%            ||    Non-tax revenue (+0.40%)


*****2002 budget balance*****
-4.7% of GDP of deficit
*****2002 expenses (% of GDP)*****
17.66%           ||    Total government expenses
 4.40%            ||    Public debt annual reimbursment
 0.01%            ||    Useful economic expenses : energy
 1.39%            ||    Housing, Infrastructures, community services
 0.17%            ||    Social
 0.27%            ||    Health
 2.87%            ||    Education, vocational education, culture
 1.52%            ||    Defense
 0.29%            ||    Security, Justice
 1.98%            ||    Administration and Public services
 4.76%            ||    Useless expenses : subvention, environment, etc
*****2002 revenues (% of GDP)*****
13.27%            ||    Total revenue (% of GDP)
 2.06%            ||    VAT
 3.75%            ||    Excise tax
 5.20%            ||    Income tax individual and corporate
 0.66%            ||    Estate and gift tax
 1.60%            ||    Non-tax revenue

My opinion about Arroyo : She have been positive to stabilize the situation in the Philippines, and her impact have been globally positive, but just a bit. The situation almost didn't change. Arroyo makes me think of Jacques Chirac in France : specialist of inaction/inactivity. In general, I don't like her party who is obviously not enough liberal, too much into religious values compare to freedom values (abortion for example).
If my opinion of Arroyo tend a bit more to positive than negative, it's because she made a good fight to reduce the public debt and the deficit. She didn't really do negative things, but her only real positive things are : making the country stable politically (in its safety, it was hard after a putsh), and reducing debt and deficit.

My opinion about the first year of Aquino : It looks in the good direction. Noynoy is not enough ambitious in his reform in my opinion, but he is maybe the most ambitious leader in the country. I am convinced that at the end of his mandate, Philippines will be in a better situation, even if I don't like his little lack of ambition and his useless waste of money for subventions/environment/agriculture. The other thing I don't like in noynoy is when noynoy always talk about his life, not enough about his political project.
But globally I am optimist for The Philippines with Mister Aquino (even if I repeat it : he is not enough ambitious in his reform).

Pag-Asa !

The liberals system (from Left to Right) : How to make a consensus program ?

This article is totally (and not partially) subjective. But in my subjectivity, I will try to be as realist as possible...

1) To make a consensus, let's define what kind of liberals exists first
- Left Liberals as me : those who consider important to ensure equal opportunity at birth to achieve studies, to ensure right to live (food) and circulate locally with an universal allowance enough to allow it, and to ensure regulation if (and only if) it makes taxed people wealthier than poorer with this investment (example : contraception, free nursery system, cheap energy price...).
- Center Liberals (as Liberal party in the Philippines) : those who consider the same but don't accept the universal allowance because they consider hobos as responsible of their situations. They also considers that investment must to be limited to some sectors like energy to prevent private monopoly.
- Right Liberals : those who consider that administration must to not make intervention in economy, only if necessary (ex : energy). They also consider useless to make a social policy unless the person is not responsible of its situation (ex: disable). Their only social intervention is for these people and eventually a social limited scholarship. On the other side, they accept the free school and the Equal opportunity to study as principle.
- Extreme right Liberals : those who are the same than Right liberals but consider useless and unfair the Equal Opportunity (of studies) principle.

2) To make a consensus, Let's define in each system what politic is the most efficient
All liberals, from left to right have the same philosophy about laws... Then, we exclude this because there is already a natural consensus about it. Differences are economic or social. Then I will try to define the most efficient politic in each systems, taking as example in each sector the best country.

By expenses (base OEDC as % of GDP) :

- Health : 2.9% >> There is consensus on the philosophy (as explained before). And the most efficient government is Macao with this amount. Their system is globally based on private health system and private insurrances. The main problem in the Philippines is the lack of economic freedom. It makes less competitors for medical insurrances. And this lack of competition makes the prices bigger. The second problem is not a consensus, but social system is not enough to allow everyone to have health insurrance (in my own opinion of left-liberal). In 2010, Health expenses in the Philippines are 0.44% of GDP. This too little amount reveals the lack of infrastructures and the too big cost of health here.

- Culture : 0.1% >> This expense makes consensus also in the liberal world because we consider this kind of expenses unnecessary. Personnaly, I would put this little amount only as subvention to language schools (english, tagalog, cebuano, etc) in the country and in pinoy embassies. The country with this little amount is Japan. It is impossible today to know the amount in the philippines because Administration includes culture into the education budget. But we guess easily that this budget is closed to this proportion. Simply, the country should less finance festivals and other obscure financing, and focus on the language incitation.

- Environment : 0% >> As before, there is a consensus. Liberals are naturally against politic intervention when it's not justified. Here, making incitement by taxes to not create pollution is enough to reduce pollution (depending if incentive taxes are enough big or not). So why we would spend money of citizen in this ?
The country who doesn't spend for this is USA. The amount spent in the Philippines about it is negligible to be quote, but it's already too much.

- Security (police, justice, etc) : 1.4% >> Safety is the first freedom. OEDC is the only one institution who can evaluate the safety in each member and compare it. There is a country who shine in its safety : Japan. Then, Japan spend this amount. On the other hand, in 2010, the Philippines spent 1.1%. It is obviously not enough to fight all the crime in the country. Sometimes, Justice takes 15 years to judge someone who is in prison. It's a scandal !

- Defense (from terrorism, from war) : 1.1% >> In the same principles, a minimum amount must to be invested in the defense. The threat of NPA or Abu Sayaf is hanging over us... The only way to beat them is to maintain a good budget, and to make the country wealth. Why 1.1% ? Because that is the most little amount spent by one of the superpowers. This superpower is Germany, and they don't have war or terrorism problem. Then, I just considered that under is not enough, but more is useless (I told you this article is subjective). The amount spent by the Philippines in 2010 is only 0.86% of the GDP. In those conditions, don't be surprized if you still hear about NPA or Abu Sayyaf...


- Public services, Administration management : 4.5% >> Another easy consensus is the Administration management. Liberals considers that taxpayer money must to be wisely spent. The rich country with a working administration who spend the least in its administration is United Kingdom. Then, as for the defense, I consider that spending less is not enough, but spending more is useless.
The amount spent by the Philippines in 2010 to make a working Administration is only 1.25%. In those conditions, don't be surprized if Administration is never available, very slow, and not friendly.


- Collective developments (roads and infrastructures) : 0.5% >> Here is more problematic. In the OEDC accounts, this sector include real estate. But there is no consensus possible in real estate for some reasons. Including real estate, the most efficient country is Germany with 0.7%.  Then, separating real estate from the rest of infrastructures, we can estimate that Germany spend 0.5% of their GDP in their infrastructures (almost the best of the world for this little amount). On the other hand, real estate investments are almost away in the Philippines. 
In 2010, the total investment in this category in the Philippines is about 1.49% of the GDP. If the intention is good, it's a bit too ambitious because this big amount can be economized by less taxes for companies (for example).


- Education : Only extreme-right liberals are against the concept of free education. In this case, no one consensus can be made in education. 
The best free education system is from Finland : I invite you to analyse their data in the OEDC, World Bank and IMF websites to compare it. Finland spend 6% of their GDP to provide this system.
In same time, we can evaluate that to leave the wantonness in the Finland system, the necessary amount to spend as incitations would be around only 3.8% of the GDP.
About Philippines, the truth is that in 2010, the government invest only 2.76% of their GDP into education... It is more than in the budget of Arroyo, but no comment......


- Social : As explained in my other articles and before, no one liberal can agree another in this topic.
To make an universal allowance, with an additionnal help for people who study, a left liberal would need around 23.5% of the GDP.
To just make the help for studying people, a center liberal would need around 12% of the GDP.
To make helps only for people who didn't make a choice to be in a bad situation, the right liberals would need only 0.5% of the GDP.
In this instance, all depend of the intentions of the person... Personnally I am in the first category for the reasons explained before.


- Other economic affairs : No consensus possible also, as already explained.
With the philosophy explained before, a left liberal would spend around 3% of the GDP for these reasons. While the right side of the liberals would spend only 1% maximum. Center liberals are between that... So you can count 2% of the GDP, depending of the project. 




Consensus by public revenues (by kind of taxes) :
In economics, depending your analysis, economists can determinate which kind of taxes are good or not for the economy. If you count well what we said before, we can determinate with 0.4% of safety excedent that :
- left liberal administration need a budget as big as 43.4% of the GDP for their project
- center liberal administration need a budget as big as 30.9% of the GDP for their project
- right liberal administration need a budget as big as 18.4% of the GDP for their project
- extreme right liberal administration need a budget as big as 16.2% of the GDP for their project 


Here is the order of taxes. First is the one who have the least negative impact on economy, last is the worst.
1- VAT : recognized as the best tax by economists. In this instance, liberals of all kind can focus first on this tax. Some countries have a maximum VAT of 25%. I think it can be pushed till 26% (but 0% VAT for food, real estate, transport, education, health and energy)... This would give around 14.8% of GDP in the budget.
In 2010, the VAT revenues of Philippines is only about 2.65% of GDP... No coment.
2- Tax on financial transactions : this tax doesn't make consensus but is an incitation to not make speculation. It worked well in Australia who didn't suffer of the crisis. I just propose to copy Australia about it. This tax gives them 1.4% of GDP as revenue.
In 2010, this tax doesn't exist in the Philippines... No coment.


Here, extreme right liberals don't need any other taxes for their program.


3- Immovable property : this tax makes consensus also into economists to less impact economy. Extreme right don't need other taxes, but right, center and left do. A realist project would be to copy the Irish system, with a rate two times bigger. This tax would give 1.3% of GDP to right/center/left liberals.
In 2010, the revenue of this tax in the Philippines is only about 0.55% of GDP.... No coment.
4- Social cotisations on salaries : This is the next in the ranking... But at this moment, this is the end of the fiscal consensus.
- Right liberals just need 0.9% of GDP for their budget... So 3% of salaries need to be taxed for them.
- Center liberals need 13.4% of GDP for their budget... So 45% of salaries need to be taxed for them.
- Left liberals need more than that, so they can not base all on that. In my mind they would tax 35% of salaries and have 10.4% of GDP for their budget, and make another additionnal tax with that.
In 2010, this tax doesn't exist in the Philippines... No coment.


Here, right and center liberals don't need any other taxes for their program.


5- Income taxes on individuals : With already 35% of salaries taxed before, this tax can not excess. We can only put it into its acceptable maximum. In this instance, a 25% Income tax on everybody (associated with the social system, this is not problematic) is to provide (it would make a fiscal pressure on wage of 60% and 25% on capital). This would make around 9% of GDP in the budget.
6- Income taxes on business : To reach their budget, left liberals still need 6.4% of GDP. A rate of 25.8% should be enough to make this revenue.


In 2010, impossible to know the revenue separately of these taxes in the Philippines. Only both of them together is available, but it's only about 5.73% of the GDP.


Here, left liberals don't need other taxes also... But for information...


7- Excise and miscellaneous taxes : Because they destroy the natural competition in the market, they are the worst taxes. Especially import/export taxes. Of course, no one tax like this is needed by liberals.
In 2010, the Philippines government tax 4.81% of their GDP in this kind of taxes. This is a scandal.


If you did read me till here, you understood my meaning. And I can just thank you for your curiosity !


To sum up, the perfect politic liberal consensus would be in revenues to tax financial transactions and to make a VAT of 26% (with 0% rate for food etc).
About expenses : defense, security, administration, infrastructures, health, culture and environment systems can make consensus also.

Other base of my philosophy : Internationalism (and anti-nationalism)

Competition between nations kills General Interest. This is how to sum up the base of this part of my philosophy.
Let's give the best recent example :

- 2010 Copenhaguen process failure : United States refuses to forego some growth to cut pollution if China don't do it also, because they want to keep their world influence. China says that they are still considered as a poor country (GDP per capita), and don't want to do it. The process to save earth is a failure.

Who can say that somebody have been wrong ? That's the competition between nations who created this failure.
The only way to stop the competition between nations is to make a Federal government with as fonction to ensure World Defense against Wars, Terrorism, Mafias and Drug Trafic. And to ensure General human and animal and environment interest. Nothing else.


The probematic of this utopy is to respect the local cultures. To ensure it, I think that this utopic federation should be enough decentralized in 3 stages/floors :
- The federal internationalist floor (I wrote the role just before)
- The society floor : I consider that our values are similar according to our beliefs. In this perspective, societal laws could be the same in all christian provinces in the world (respect a maximum freedom), in all muslim provinces in the world (making their Charia, but not other laws who would reduce freedom), in all non-believer provinces in the world, etc. It makes 4 or 5 societal systems in the total (depending if Jewish consider themselves differents than christians). This floor shall have a constition guardian of freedom (as much as possible, without reducing their belief influence who is a priority).
- The local floor : I consider that native language influences also (less than beliefs) human culture. Every zone with comon language in each society floor (so common beliefs also) could have their own local administration.
This elected administration can decide administration language(s). Their responsability is to install (or refuse to install) their social system, and to invest in zones with a lack of public infrastructures (priority to these zones).
Local floor would have to respect the consitution of "society floor".


Can you tell me in this condition, who would be against this utopic system ?


When I consider that Internationalism is super-hard but not impossible. When I consider that Nations are against General Interest. I think that the only reasons why people are Nationalists/Patriots are their ignorance or their racism. Both of them are to fight (by dialogue).

Base of my philosophy : Why being a Left-Liberal ?

The liberal philosophy (as from left to right politic color) is considering that humans have "natural rights", and that nobody, even governement, can deprive someone of its natural rights.
There is a consensus between all kinds of liberals (left and right) on a list of these natural rights. It concerns :
- right to live
- right for freedom
- right of safety (that government must to provide)
- right of travel/circulate
- right of property

The most hard to understand is the last (property natural right). However, I have an easy example to understand it.
Imagine that you are in a desert island, and all the human society is to build. The first form of property right, is the property of your body. To survive, you will have to use of this property, and your neighbors will do the same. You will become surgeon and get wood while some others will get fish, and other will build houses, other will make business...
How would you feel if a superior authority will dictate you the price that you will sell your wood at a price who won't be the best for you (too expensive reducing customers, or not enough, making you earn less for a lot of work) ? Probably you will consider that you must to change of work.
This is a form of property right : the right to enjoy of the fruits of its efforts/work. Another right is to do what you want of the fruits of this work : if you want to give a part to your family, a friend, a poor, or to invest it in something else, nobody have to block you.

Administration, then, must to protect people for these rights, not reduce them as nowadays.
Moreover, it implies that administration must to be really secular. No one law can reduce freedom of others. Christianism traditions could not reduce muslims/non-believer freedom. Muslim could not as well. Non-believers could not as well. It is as simple as that (example : the administrative baptism certificate reduce freedom of non-believers).

However here is the cleavage between left liberals and right liberals :
- Left liberals like me consider that equal opportunities at birth to study any diploma is necessary to make a fair and stable society. Taxing to ensure free studies and social living helps for serious students (universities as well as vocational) is required. The Finland system is for us, an example.
- Left liberals like me consider that to ensure the natural right to live and to circulate, taxing a bit to provide an universal allowance to eat and ride public transports is required, and without conditions (contrary than the additionnal social help for students who would require the presence in class of the student).

Advantages ?

Individually :
- A fair society where no one kid is penalized by its family origin.
- A society where nobody can force you of anything, even not the administration. The only reduced freedom are taxes to allow the administration to protect your natural rights.
- A society where someone who work is sure that its money is well used (only for the protection of natural rights).

Economically :
- Free trade will allow companies to make more profits in short term (then bigger salaries and/or less unemployment)
- In a middle and long term, free trade will increase the power purchase of citizen (by reducing prices)
- Concentrating regulation only sectors where it makes consensus that it will help everybody (no one tax in agriculture, housing, energy, transport, export), but nothing else.
- The non-regulation in everything else will push Philippines companies to make profits (and then, bigger salaries, less unemployment)
- The non-regulation in labour law will allow companies to hire and fire as they need, to allow them to make more profits. The only regulation that I consider would be some work standards to increase life expectancy in good health (and then, having more wealth creators). And eventually require 2 rest days per week, and 3 weeks of paid vacation per year.
Also, but I don't call this "regulation", the company must to count the salary PER HOUR, and must to provide the average hourly local salary for the job in question (if available) : to allow the employees to negociate well their income.
- The best argument is that would make easily a wealth Philippines. Why ? It would push investors from anywhere in the world to invest their money in The Philippines. The "Ireland miracle" prooved it in Europe.
Today ? Investors can not own totally companies in the country (or because of the business laws, or because they can not own a land/lot). So of course they prefer to invest in another country, even more expensive.
Tomorrow ? Investors could own their company and land/lot/house, and enjoy of economic freedom to make the system simple.

Socially :
- With the universal allowance, no one could die of lack of money.
- No one kid would growth up in the street.
- Condoms, pills and other contraception would be free. Because it's less expensive to make it free than to provide more family allowance, and because it makes incomes growth up faster to have less demography.
- Everyone could expect to study anywhere in the country without any money problem as long as they study seriously with the additionnal social help for these persons and with studies free of tuition fees.

Societally :
- Everyone shall be responsible of its acts
- The Liberal reform need a new constitution : this one would respect more the local freedom of people.
There is too many people unable to talk correctly English or Tagalog. This is not their native language. And because of this forced system, they can not even learn their own language (especially Cebuano). In a liberal decentralized constitution, people will choose locally which language to teach to their children, and to leave this unfair tagalog domination, English would be the only one unity/togetherness language : the language of administration, and the only language education required by federation.
- People could create referendums locally (under condition of petition). It implies that if local people in Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao REALLY want to be independant or join another country like Brunei or Malaysia, they could with this referendum. Useless to create deaths in civils and soldiers just to force people to live together.

Left Liberal parties ? No one in Philippines. Only Akbayan, a little party is near than this Philosophy. The liberal party of Noynoy is more a center-right party than a left party.
Abroad ? Left parties from Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, UK, Australia, Ireland.