PHL Competitiveness Index Increased? Competitive Against Who?

The good news is PHL competitiveness increased to #65 and switched spots with Vietnam at #75.

Last year 2011-2012, Vietnam was ranked #65 while the Philippines was ranked #75.

The Philippines was less competitive than Vietnam from 2006 to 2012 – and has been able to switch position with Vietnam in 2012-2013.

The #65 will be a psychological boost to the Aquino regime because it beats Arroyo’s previous high point of #71 from 2007 to 2009. However, the increase in competitiveness is just a recovery after plunging to #87 when Aquino assumed the presidency in 2009 -2010.

For short the Philippines is just recovering lost ground, but is still way far behind the ASEAN 5 economies by at least 15 points from the #4 Indonesia despite a decrease in competitiveness by the latter.

Other than that bone which the Philippine mainstream media will be chewing on – the Philippines, at #65, REMAINS – and IS STILL THE LEAST COMPETITIVE among the ASEAN 5 economies – Singapore (#2), Malaysia (#25), Thailand (#38), and Indonesia (#50).

The graph shows that the Philippines needs to do more than what it is currently doing to even come close to being ranked #4 among the ASEAN-5.

That the Philippines has the competitiveness of a traditionally socialist country like Vietnam poses interesting questions too. The Philippines may appear to have democratic institutions but are the policies and programs implemented in these institutions socialist in nature? The buffet of free lunch – health, education, food, corporate subsidies, and public services very reminiscent of the Soviet Union. Add to that – the special privileges granted to the party elite which is eeringly mirrored in the behavior of Philippine public officials – who believe they are better than the rest of the Filipinos and therefore should dictate what goes into and out of the Philippine economy in the interest of the “greater good” at the expense of individual consumers and taxpayers.

On another note, will Philippine competitiveness be improved by an handling out more “free lunch” like contraceptives, CCT subsidy or, Noynoy’s Pork Barrel of last count has reached PhP315 BILLION? That’s one helluva campaign kitty in time for the 2013 local elections.

If the Philippines wants to be really competitive – it must go beyond comparing its year-on-year performance -the Philippines should benchmark against the market leader. Take for instance – welfare programs like CCT and RH, what has the market leader got to say about it? Here’s what the Economist had to say about the Stingy Nanny:

FOND of having the last word, Singapore’s government can nevertheless be flexible. Who would have thought it would be building casinos? But one policy that shows no sign of reversing is Singapore’s antipathy towards public welfare. The state’s attitude can be simply put: being poor here is your own fault. Citizens are obliged to save for the future, rely on their families and not expect any handouts from the government unless they hit rock bottom. The emphasis on family extends into old age: retired parents can sue children who fail to support them. In government circles “welfare” remains a dirty word, cousin to sloth and waste. Singapore may be a nanny state, but it is by no means an indulgent nanny.

The aftershock of a deep recession, which pushed unemployment among citizens up to 4.1% in September—high for Singapore—has not altered the popular belief that the dole is bad for society. The casinos, which open on February 14th, have already helped reduce unemployment, which by December had fallen back to 3%, seasonally adjusted.

The government does run a handful of schemes directed at some of the needy, from low-income students to the unassisted elderly. But these benefits are rigorously means-tested and granted only sparingly. The most destitute citizens’ families may apply for public assistance; only 3,000 currently qualify. Laid-off workers receive no automatic benefits. Instead they are sorted into “workfare” and training schemes.

Applicants complain that the process of seeking help is made tiresome and humiliating. Indeed that could be the point, supposing it deters free-riders. Officials take a dim view of European-style welfare systems, which are said to beget laziness.

Contrast that to the Philippines where the process is like a fiesta. Obviously – public spending on social programs is a way of co-opting citizens so these voters lose the moral ascendancy to question the thievery of their leaders – and become assimilated into the hive mind of the proud pinoy palamunin.

The fiesta atmosphere keeps citizens distracted from the widespread looting of tax coffers by the cronies and enablers of the Aquino regime – throw the masses a “free” condom, lots of tourism festivals while the MBC/PSE members corner the deals and supply contracts for health, education, power, telecom, transportation, retail, and finance – while keeping foreign competition at bay – on the tab of consumers and taxpayers.

Surely, Aquino can lull the mostly ignorant Filipinos into focusing on the parochial increase in competitiveness – while hiding the fact that the Philippines remains – and continues to be the LEAST COMPETITIVE ASEAN 5 ECONOMY – and has the same competitiveness as a traditional socialist country which is just emerging from state central economic planning and into market economics.

Speaking of central economic planning – I am reminded the DA’s plans of rice self-sufficiency – instead of enhanced access to global rice markets – but that’s a post for another day.

About the Author

BongV has written 425 stories on this site.