DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
7/16/2012
Ten million Filipinos labor overseas, often in horrendous conditions, to earn a few dollars. Even more Filipinos, almost 20 million families, labor each day in various conditions of difficulties to eke out a living to pay for food, water, electricity and other basics. Over and above all that, they also pay for one thing that they never even completely understand — financial interest on everything. They are paying interest for the P 5.1-trillion national debt that continues growing in interest payments, and the P2-trillion national budget includes P800 billion automatically appropriated for debt payment, half of which is interest payments. They are paying for the interest on securitized projects of the PPP (public-private partnership projects) or the MRT, the power companies such as Meralco and the water companies such as Manila Water and Maynilad. The basic facts of Filipino life today are death, taxes, and interest rates on debt.
On June 27, the international finance media reported that Barclays Bank had been find by £290 million or $451 million for manipulating Libor (London Interbank Offered Rate) between 2005 and 2009. It had been lying and falsifying its submissions (misreporting, some describe) to the Libor setting mechanism on such critical matters as cost of borrowing from other banks. It did this to boost its appearances as a solid financial institution and maintain high rating and lower interest cost to itself. Libor is calculated by the BBA (British Bankers' Association) and published by Thomson Reuters financial information group daily after 11:00 a.m. (London time), fixing rates for three currencies: the US dollar, British pound sterling and the Japanese yen. Evidence of the rate fixing included e-mails of Barclays executives, as The Globe and Mail reports: "The scandal — complete with e-mails showing bankers boasting of manipulating interest rates and congratulating each other with offers of champagne — has triggered fierce criticism about the financial industry in general and Barclays in particular."
Barclays has dragged in other major banks into what seems to be industry practice, lying and falsification to manipulate their interest costs. Barclays is being investigated for its manipulation from 2005 on, and this couldn't have gone on so long without knowledge of financial authorities. The British paper Financial Spectator suggests this is so, "In the statement, the bank confirms that it had close contact with the Bank of England and other authorities regarding the liquidity crisis in October 2008 … Paul Tucker, the deputy governor of the Bank of England (BoE) …. advised that a number of senior figures within Whitehall were concerned (about) Barclays' Libor submissions... Mr Diamond (Barclays' head) explained this by advising Mr Tucker that he believed other banks were 'posting rates at levels that were not representative of where they would have to undertake business'", i.e. other banks were also falsifying to window dress their submissions. Now, the BoE and other major banks are dragged into the scandal.
The Guardian reports the Barclays' scandal is just the tip of the iceberg. One Website reflecting my sentiment aptly called "Hang the Bankers," reports other global banks being investigated and sued on Libor fixing: HSBC, Lloyds and Royal Bank of Scotland, JP Morgan, Citibank, et al. Interest rate "rigging" comes in many forms, while these commercial banks do it and can be found criminal in the act, governments like the US of A. can rig it and it is accepted as law, as the almost zero percent interest rate in the US for its bankers is today. For Filipinos who labor to pay interest on everything with interest rates from the lowest of just over four percent that the BSP (Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas) is paying for example to keep local banks' moneys from OFWs and other inflows parked with it, to the $36-billion bonds costing as much, to commercial rates of up to 10 percent or consumer finance that is much, much higher, the news of such bank manipulations of interest rates such as Barclays should cause an epiphany, and call for independence from Western banking enslavement.
The Philippines is no longer short of capital to fund its development, as a Filipino banker confirmed to me in a recent discussion. The banker, who was also a major OFW contractor, explained that the over $ 20-billion earnings of the nation annually is more than sufficient and only an OFW bank is needed to consolidate this for investment which will earn the OFWs handsomely on interest. But our national ruling elite in finance and politics refuse to acknowledge the fact that the Philippines is already financially self-sufficient and the traditional bankers with their foreign partners would lose their interest earnings from our country and politicians like Sonny Belmonte who wants Cha-cha to allow in foreign financial predators.
Our politicians are operators for these global and local shylocks. Our nations' labors should not be stolen of its fruits by the lying boors of Libor, Eurobor (Euro Interbank Offered Rates), the US Federal Reserve or other foreign manipulated rate setting bodies.
The Philippines currency and interest rate sovereignty will only be restored with policies we had during the "Filipino First" era: currency and capital controls.
(Watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., this week "New Sin Tax: Sin against Filipinos"; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)
Monday, July 16, 2012
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Fixed wages will solve the problem
BACKBENCHER
Rod P. Kapunan
7/14-15/2012
The paralyzing traffic jam we experience daily could be resolved by compelling bus, and possibly taxi and jeepney, operators to pay wage instead of commission to their drivers and conductors. Fixing their daily wage is well grounded as it is for the safety of the passengers and commuters. It will also ease the traffic snarl that occurs in our major thoroughfares.
Notably, those drivers whose day's earnings depend on the number of passengers they could take, viz. to reach the so-called "boundary" or rent they would remit to the operator to entitle them to a commission, has indeed been pinpointed as the source of most vehicular accidents and cause of unnecessary traffic, and sometimes tempt deceitful conductors to cheat passengers by not returning their change. The proponents argue that it is on that rat-race system to meet the rental mislabeled as "boundary," which on the average is fixed at 9 to 10 percent for the drivers and 7 to 8 percent for the conductors of the bus earnings that turns them into some kind of hell drivers resulting in complete road pandemonium.
Paying drivers their fixed wage could be a possible solution to the irritating problem of buses and passenger vehicles converging at certain intersections all wanting to pick up as many passengers they could. They would not budge an inch to let other vehicles pass, neither would they leave until after all seats have been taken, nor would care if one exasperated passenger is cursing them for being late. In fact, we are the only country in the world that allows commuter vehicles to converge in such strategic choking points and use them as their terminal to pick up passengers. It is on this chaotic situation where corrupt policemen and traffic enforcers take advantage by ignoring the problem all for the "kotong" they receive either from the individual drivers or from the bus operators for the assurance of not being driven away.
Likewise, commuters take the risk to get a ride and agonizingly wait for their bus or jeepney to finally move. For their lack of safety concern in wanting to take their ride, they too contribute to the gridlock and make possible the unwanted vice of tong collection to proliferate. During rush hours, when all are in a hurry to arrive on time, many of them are rather suicidal chasing moving vehicles just to be able to get inside ahead of the rest. Because drivers too are eager to get their quota, they too would not bother to pull their vehicle to the side to avoid blocking the road. It is typical of a dog-eat-dog society.
Besides, the operators of passenger vehicles and their drivers failed to realize vehicles that keep on moving after loading or unloading their passengers conserve more fuel than those that stop and wait to pick up passengers. Those "on the go" are able to save gas up to one third of the consumption compared to vehicles that stop and wait to pick up passengers. Even if those vehicles carry less passengers than those that wait, in the long run they are able to carry more passengers if divided by the number of loops they are able to complete. For instance, if normally they would be able to make an average of seven to eight loops for a 12-hour run, they could only manage an average of five to six loops for the same number of hours with much less passengers, if divided by the loop, and more fuel spent because of their habit to stop and wait to pick up passengers.
Finally, if those bus drivers and conductors are thinking they would earn less if the Department of Labor would insist they be paid on a fixed wage, I say they are dead wrong. This does not mean this column now takes back its original advocacy in wanting to deregulate wage. Rather, in their eagerness to maintain their day's commission ranging from P700 to P800 for the drivers and from P600 to P700 for the conductors, respectively, they overlooked that they drive for an average of 10 to 12 hours. If their commission is divided by the number of hours plus a 25 percent premium for overtime pay for those hours worked beyond the required eight hours work, that would definitely fall below the current minimum of P412 daily.
Most important, drivers and conductors take a rest or are not able to work the next day to complete the six-day a week work. They are only able to work for an average of 4 days a week. If the actual number of days they drive in a week is divided by six their income would dip steeply below the minimum wage. This explains why most bus operators would not care less about the traffic jam and accidents that happen. At the back of their mind, profit is what counts.
The fear that fixing the wage for drivers and conductors would result in them failing to pay the "boundary" with the excess mislabeled as "commission" is capricious and arbitrary. Bus operators must realize that their fixed rental is based on what is profitable, notwithstanding that public utility vehicles is a form of public service vested with public interest. Nonetheless, through time and motion study, the problem could be resolved not to mention that giving our drivers their fixed income would finally relieve us of the serious problem of traffic jam and vehicular accidents caused by crazy drivers racing to meet their commission quota.
(rgkapunan_office@yahoo.com)
Notably, those drivers whose day's earnings depend on the number of passengers they could take, viz. to reach the so-called "boundary" or rent they would remit to the operator to entitle them to a commission, has indeed been pinpointed as the source of most vehicular accidents and cause of unnecessary traffic, and sometimes tempt deceitful conductors to cheat passengers by not returning their change. The proponents argue that it is on that rat-race system to meet the rental mislabeled as "boundary," which on the average is fixed at 9 to 10 percent for the drivers and 7 to 8 percent for the conductors of the bus earnings that turns them into some kind of hell drivers resulting in complete road pandemonium.
Paying drivers their fixed wage could be a possible solution to the irritating problem of buses and passenger vehicles converging at certain intersections all wanting to pick up as many passengers they could. They would not budge an inch to let other vehicles pass, neither would they leave until after all seats have been taken, nor would care if one exasperated passenger is cursing them for being late. In fact, we are the only country in the world that allows commuter vehicles to converge in such strategic choking points and use them as their terminal to pick up passengers. It is on this chaotic situation where corrupt policemen and traffic enforcers take advantage by ignoring the problem all for the "kotong" they receive either from the individual drivers or from the bus operators for the assurance of not being driven away.
Likewise, commuters take the risk to get a ride and agonizingly wait for their bus or jeepney to finally move. For their lack of safety concern in wanting to take their ride, they too contribute to the gridlock and make possible the unwanted vice of tong collection to proliferate. During rush hours, when all are in a hurry to arrive on time, many of them are rather suicidal chasing moving vehicles just to be able to get inside ahead of the rest. Because drivers too are eager to get their quota, they too would not bother to pull their vehicle to the side to avoid blocking the road. It is typical of a dog-eat-dog society.
Besides, the operators of passenger vehicles and their drivers failed to realize vehicles that keep on moving after loading or unloading their passengers conserve more fuel than those that stop and wait to pick up passengers. Those "on the go" are able to save gas up to one third of the consumption compared to vehicles that stop and wait to pick up passengers. Even if those vehicles carry less passengers than those that wait, in the long run they are able to carry more passengers if divided by the number of loops they are able to complete. For instance, if normally they would be able to make an average of seven to eight loops for a 12-hour run, they could only manage an average of five to six loops for the same number of hours with much less passengers, if divided by the loop, and more fuel spent because of their habit to stop and wait to pick up passengers.
Finally, if those bus drivers and conductors are thinking they would earn less if the Department of Labor would insist they be paid on a fixed wage, I say they are dead wrong. This does not mean this column now takes back its original advocacy in wanting to deregulate wage. Rather, in their eagerness to maintain their day's commission ranging from P700 to P800 for the drivers and from P600 to P700 for the conductors, respectively, they overlooked that they drive for an average of 10 to 12 hours. If their commission is divided by the number of hours plus a 25 percent premium for overtime pay for those hours worked beyond the required eight hours work, that would definitely fall below the current minimum of P412 daily.
Most important, drivers and conductors take a rest or are not able to work the next day to complete the six-day a week work. They are only able to work for an average of 4 days a week. If the actual number of days they drive in a week is divided by six their income would dip steeply below the minimum wage. This explains why most bus operators would not care less about the traffic jam and accidents that happen. At the back of their mind, profit is what counts.
The fear that fixing the wage for drivers and conductors would result in them failing to pay the "boundary" with the excess mislabeled as "commission" is capricious and arbitrary. Bus operators must realize that their fixed rental is based on what is profitable, notwithstanding that public utility vehicles is a form of public service vested with public interest. Nonetheless, through time and motion study, the problem could be resolved not to mention that giving our drivers their fixed income would finally relieve us of the serious problem of traffic jam and vehicular accidents caused by crazy drivers racing to meet their commission quota.
(rgkapunan_office@yahoo.com)
Friday, July 13, 2012
Time for serious realism
DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
6/13/2012
Just as the nation felt the relief of lowered gas prices for a week or two, conditions in the Middle East just as quickly started raising crude oil prices anew, with the Philippines bracing for new oil price hikes this week. These fluctuations came at a time when Philippine "King of Comedy" Dolphy's long drawn-out health battles and subsequent demise dominated the airwaves. Despite the entertainment icon's much-deserved accolades, I still wonder why a lot of coverage is being devoted to this when an entire national economy is dying because of unresolved problems in energy supply and price stabilization.
With mainstream media placing so much importance on the life and times of the screen and TV legend, I wonder: Are the hard times best assuaged by comedy instead of serious realism and problem-solving?
Indeed, comedy may lighten the burdens. Comedy may even provide the needed distraction. But the truth is, comedy can never solve our problems. And as reality persists, every moment of distraction only eats away at the opportunities to solve these problems.
I watched my share of John en Marsha as a kid; but as I had often preferred to play and do other things, our yayas were the ones left to watch it. I did wonder over the years how he had one woman after another. I later learned that as the masa spend a lot of money on comedic distractions, which Dolphy was a master of, such artists become so fabulously rich that their innate charisma is magnified to the hilt. Thus, in Dolphy's case, with his string of romances, he also sired quite a number of children, some of whom, unfortunately, turned to murder and arson for self-expression.
When I became oriented to economics as I am today, and contemplated on what such kind of comedy has really contributed to Philippine society, I found that the benefit accrues mainly to the elite. It's not that they follow Dolphy's work; but it's rather due to the distraction of the masses from potential thoughts of dissatisfaction and rebellion.
When egged on for political candidacy Dolphy once joked, "No way. I might win, then what do I do?" So why is the country taking him so seriously when he has never taken himself half as seriously?
Some types of comedy require a lot brains, like stand-ups. Charlie Chaplin once said, "All I need to make a comedy is a park, a policeman and a pretty girl." Although Chaplin had serious social and political commentary in his later features, with some saying the same for Dolphy's John en Marsha or Home Along da Riles, it seemed to me that the latter dwelt more on self-deprecation and a come-what-may acceptance of the depressing lot faced by lower classed Filipinos, instead of making them think about its causes.
So how seriously should audiences take comedians? Saturday Night Live's Dennis Miller said, "I'm a comedian, for God's sake. Viewers shouldn't trust me. And you know what? They're hip enough to know they shouldn't trust me." Sadly, comedy and entertainment are extolled to the extreme in profit-seeking societies because they are a business; and as Steve Martin says, "Comedy may be big business but it isn't pretty."
Exploitation in the entertainment industry is as bad as it is in the regular capitalist economy, though there are efforts by industry Samaritans like Erap to establish welfare projects such as the Movie Workers Welfare Fund (Mowelfund); still, it cannot be doubted that a greater number of support actors and cast retire into poverty while only a few live in the opulence of movie potentates.
Let me pick a quote again from another renowned entertainment icon, Sholem Aleichem, writer of Fiddler on the Roof: "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." And life will always be this way if comedy and entertainment become the focus of Philippine society instead of, as I would prefer, watching the tragedy. As Aldous Huxley once said, "We participate in a tragedy; at a comedy we only look."
It's time to get serious and demand such headlines as "Government approves six months oil buffer stock" so that the country could tide over periods of manipulated high oil prices with stocks of low-priced oil; or "ERC (Energy Regulatory Commission) total revamp… Consumer protectionists appointed;" followed by "New ERC investigates sweetheart deals," uncovering 900 percent overpricing in the tens of thousands of power transformers and substations a power company has been buying from its sister company all the past decades; or better yet, "ERC cuts Meralco (Manila Electric Co.) rates by 50 percent." Now, wouldn't all these elicit euphoria and a genuine comedy in the sense of a "happy ending?"
None of these can ever happen if the nation is glued to comedy day in and day out, which, in a sense, even the shows of Willie Revillame are. Only when the nation gets serious about its crisis and tragedy can it be galvanized into action.
If the progressive countries of today such as China, Singapore, Venezuela, et al. had spent their days indulging in comedy instead of revolution, they would certainly have ended up like the Philippines today.
Laughter is not the best medicine when you have cancer; it is radical intervention with all the means at one's command. And in a country such as ours which is in the midst of a socio-political and economic cancer, even a healthy dose of comedy wouldn't amount to much.
(Watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., this week on "Consumer Updates: Water and Power Scams;" visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)
Herman Tiu Laurel
6/13/2012
Just as the nation felt the relief of lowered gas prices for a week or two, conditions in the Middle East just as quickly started raising crude oil prices anew, with the Philippines bracing for new oil price hikes this week. These fluctuations came at a time when Philippine "King of Comedy" Dolphy's long drawn-out health battles and subsequent demise dominated the airwaves. Despite the entertainment icon's much-deserved accolades, I still wonder why a lot of coverage is being devoted to this when an entire national economy is dying because of unresolved problems in energy supply and price stabilization.
With mainstream media placing so much importance on the life and times of the screen and TV legend, I wonder: Are the hard times best assuaged by comedy instead of serious realism and problem-solving?
Indeed, comedy may lighten the burdens. Comedy may even provide the needed distraction. But the truth is, comedy can never solve our problems. And as reality persists, every moment of distraction only eats away at the opportunities to solve these problems.
I watched my share of John en Marsha as a kid; but as I had often preferred to play and do other things, our yayas were the ones left to watch it. I did wonder over the years how he had one woman after another. I later learned that as the masa spend a lot of money on comedic distractions, which Dolphy was a master of, such artists become so fabulously rich that their innate charisma is magnified to the hilt. Thus, in Dolphy's case, with his string of romances, he also sired quite a number of children, some of whom, unfortunately, turned to murder and arson for self-expression.
When I became oriented to economics as I am today, and contemplated on what such kind of comedy has really contributed to Philippine society, I found that the benefit accrues mainly to the elite. It's not that they follow Dolphy's work; but it's rather due to the distraction of the masses from potential thoughts of dissatisfaction and rebellion.
When egged on for political candidacy Dolphy once joked, "No way. I might win, then what do I do?" So why is the country taking him so seriously when he has never taken himself half as seriously?
Some types of comedy require a lot brains, like stand-ups. Charlie Chaplin once said, "All I need to make a comedy is a park, a policeman and a pretty girl." Although Chaplin had serious social and political commentary in his later features, with some saying the same for Dolphy's John en Marsha or Home Along da Riles, it seemed to me that the latter dwelt more on self-deprecation and a come-what-may acceptance of the depressing lot faced by lower classed Filipinos, instead of making them think about its causes.
So how seriously should audiences take comedians? Saturday Night Live's Dennis Miller said, "I'm a comedian, for God's sake. Viewers shouldn't trust me. And you know what? They're hip enough to know they shouldn't trust me." Sadly, comedy and entertainment are extolled to the extreme in profit-seeking societies because they are a business; and as Steve Martin says, "Comedy may be big business but it isn't pretty."
Exploitation in the entertainment industry is as bad as it is in the regular capitalist economy, though there are efforts by industry Samaritans like Erap to establish welfare projects such as the Movie Workers Welfare Fund (Mowelfund); still, it cannot be doubted that a greater number of support actors and cast retire into poverty while only a few live in the opulence of movie potentates.
Let me pick a quote again from another renowned entertainment icon, Sholem Aleichem, writer of Fiddler on the Roof: "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." And life will always be this way if comedy and entertainment become the focus of Philippine society instead of, as I would prefer, watching the tragedy. As Aldous Huxley once said, "We participate in a tragedy; at a comedy we only look."
It's time to get serious and demand such headlines as "Government approves six months oil buffer stock" so that the country could tide over periods of manipulated high oil prices with stocks of low-priced oil; or "ERC (Energy Regulatory Commission) total revamp… Consumer protectionists appointed;" followed by "New ERC investigates sweetheart deals," uncovering 900 percent overpricing in the tens of thousands of power transformers and substations a power company has been buying from its sister company all the past decades; or better yet, "ERC cuts Meralco (Manila Electric Co.) rates by 50 percent." Now, wouldn't all these elicit euphoria and a genuine comedy in the sense of a "happy ending?"
None of these can ever happen if the nation is glued to comedy day in and day out, which, in a sense, even the shows of Willie Revillame are. Only when the nation gets serious about its crisis and tragedy can it be galvanized into action.
If the progressive countries of today such as China, Singapore, Venezuela, et al. had spent their days indulging in comedy instead of revolution, they would certainly have ended up like the Philippines today.
Laughter is not the best medicine when you have cancer; it is radical intervention with all the means at one's command. And in a country such as ours which is in the midst of a socio-political and economic cancer, even a healthy dose of comedy wouldn't amount to much.
(Watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., this week on "Consumer Updates: Water and Power Scams;" visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
