Are we mad and is it Time for MAS; Mindanao Times 1 September

Through the Eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

Are we MAD and is it time for MAS

Most readers will recall the doctrine of mutually assured destruction, so aptly abbreviated with the acronym MAD.

The central theory of deterrence during the Cold War, MAD postulated that the use of weapons of mass destruction did not result in victory but the total annihilation of opposing sides.

As neither the U.S. nor the USSR could survive a full scale nuclear war there would be no point in starting one. MAD was predicated on inaction. The threat of obliteration had to be credible and this was achieved by building stockpiles of nuclear warheads so large that no doubt was left about the result if things got started.

We all understood the gravity of the situation, the message was clear, the threat was self-evident.  You would have to be mad to start a conflict.  The doctrine worked, even though the peace it brought was uneasy.

Do you sense the same level of threat from climate change?   I suspect not.

For a majority of the world’s population it is a subject the beats softly in the background.  The talk of dire consequences and pending disasters fail to resonate or build a palpable sense of apprehension.

The grind of daily life and more immediate problems are numerous and serious enough to push threats to our climate to the back of a long queue.  Moreover, for every dire claim made about the climate there is a counterview and a counterclaim, and proposed action comes at a cost that we hesitate or refuse to pay.

No wonder most people simply turn off.  I suspect people’s apathy is as much as a case of overload, as it is lack of relevance. If you disagree on the apathy claim, there is a simple personal test: ask yourself if you have taken the time to study or even consider the scientific arguments?

                                                                                *******

Are there correlations between climate change and the doctrine of MAD?  Does MAD provide lessons which can benefit our understanding of this important global conundrum?

Maybe?

We would need to acknowledge that human annihilation, mass extinction or something near to that was more than possible, it was probable.  A credible stockpile of evidence would need to be built to support the threat. But unlike MAD, a plan of action would also be needed to show that sacrifices were justified: that, inaction in this case could be catastrophic.

On the first parallel we must ask is mass extinction possible?  Well there is no proof as far as the human species concerned.  There are compelling arguments that many species will become extinct.  It is suggested that 50% of current species won’t be here by the end of this century, consigned to history as a result of human activity.

Should the connection between plant and animal life break down and the food chain fail we can only guess what might happen.  The inverse relationship between the loss of land and unsustainable population growth on the one hand and food security on the other is clear enough. The empirical evidence is that pressures of this type increase the risk of conflict as nations fight to protect their national interest.

As for a stockpile of evidence to support assumptions and predictions, our scientists are endeavouring to understand the signals, readings, climate history and the sciences involved so as to extrapolate the impact of climate change.  

But they are dealing with inadequate data, and uncertain science.  For every chilling conclusion reached there is debate, conjecture and outright disagreement. There is plenty to read on the subject but it will not provide a conclusive answer.  It will, however, highlight the difficulties we face in attempting to predict what is coming.

So, is the supporting evidence sufficient to support the annihilation scenario?   To over simplify the evidence we seem to have reached a stage that says:

Human pollution is causing the planet to heat faster than would otherwise be the case.  We are starting to see the impact of these changes. We have strong evidence to suggest it will get worse unless we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our present scientific understanding of climate change is incomplete, but sufficient to take action. We don’t know what will happen to our species, but it is conceivable our very existence will come under threat.

Is that a credible threat?  Well it is certainly not overwhelming, and it does not equate with the threat from massive nuclear stockpiles accumulated during the cold war.  And that goes someway to explaining why a debate is raging.

So if the threat of annihilation can’t be made and our stockpile of information is incomplete what do we do? 

Well, we argue, disagree, complicate, obfuscate, rationalise and take tentative steps to reduce the risk defined by most of the world’s leading scientists. Our action plan seems to be a slow move away from a carbon intense world, and a dawning realization that our rapacious tendencies can’t continue indefinitely.

Does MAD have a resonance we can learn from? As I said earlier maybe.

We are capable of being mad.  That is, acting in a way which guarantees mutual assured destruction. Whether we can act in a way that guarantees mutually assured survival (MAS) is open to question.

 A theory of MAS would say that unless we find a way to cooperate at all levels of civilization to do something and soon, to protect life on this planet; all that will be left for us to do is pray.

Perhaps you think that will be enough.

PS.  This is my last article as I return to Australia in a few days.  The discipline of putting thoughts to paper has been valuable in organising my view of the Philippines and has been motivated by a desire to see the quality of life for Filipinos improve.  That hope remains strong and I will continue to watch developments from afar with your best interests at heart.

(Comment or contact Andrew at andrewengel.blogspot.com)

Everyone Loses

Through the eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

Everyone Loses

There are significant variations in the role and accountability of politicians here in the Philippines and those in most democracies which are worth considering in the light of local economic condition generally.

Take, for example, the situation revealed last Friday with the revelation by Vice Mayor Duterte over the use of groundwater for the proposed coal fired power plant in Binaguao.

The fact that the Vice Mayor has expressed surprise at the advice from Abolitiz Power that 1500 cubic meters of groundwater will be required daily for the operations of the plant, at what amounts to the 11^th hour of the process, would bring a storm of critical comment in most democratic political environments.

The Press would be quick to react with a series of questions, starting with the most obvious one; why wasn’t this known before approval was given?  Political opponents would be swift to use this information as an example and proof of the council’s inefficiency and possibly worse, corruption.  Interests groups would ask what else wasn’t known and what was yet to be revealed.  And in the process, political support for the incumbent councillors would be damaged, possibly fatally.

The fact that Abolitiz has refused to comment on the decision to defer the land reclassification proposal to the press would be seen as a possible cover up, that by failing to be transparent and give its explanation, it had something to hide.  To suggest that it was a matter which needed to be explained to the Vice Mayor first promotes the view some sort of a deal is in the works and makes the political fallout that much worse.

Now, none of the criticisms need be true, but in politics perceptions are reality.

Except, I don’t sense any of the above dynamics, or at least very little of this, in what I see taking place here.  The press has reported the Vice Mayor’s decision to defer the approval of the reclassification and one sensational headline shouted the Vice Mayor “blinks” over the coal fire power plant.  But the press does not have opposing political opponents to quote and further fuel the critical comment and provide the oxygen to keep the issue alive.  Investigative journalism is not something that features in most broadsheets either so I don’t expect to see much from this perspective.  And I have questions about just how broad the readership of the dailies is and to what extent the public of Davao is aware of the latest controversy.

Having read blogs on the subject there does seem to be a general disinterest in the proposal and for all those who are critical of the decision there are just as many who take the view that it’s time to get on with the plant’s construction.  Most of the opinion appeared to be based on a superficial appreciation of the facts.

It follows that the political fallout for the councillors is not likely to be harmful.  That in turns means that the councillors can skate past the obstacle when in fact the apparent ham-fisted nature of the process should be causing red faces and heavy political criticism for all of them.

I sympathise when politicians have to handle controversial policy issues on which they have little or no expertise.  And let’s be honest, few if any of the councillors have thermodynamics on their resumes so it is perfectly understandable that they are no better equipped that most of the public to assess the technical nature of a proposal to build a coal fired power plant. 

And, that it is exactly why politicians need to get expert advice, to have due diligence done so that they can make informed decisions.  It is no more than a risk assessment, both to inform the politician but also to provide political protection against both reasonable and unfounded criticisms.  If they don’t then criticism is not only appropriate but essential.

That is unless the process is free of close and detailed scrutiny.  If there are no checks and balances in the process, if the councillors are free to make mistakes or fail to carry out due diligence without any political penalty, than sloppy administration of the process is permitted to flourish.  I just don’t see where this type of accountability can come from under the system in place in Davao and I can’t identify where check and balances exist particular if the public by and large do not care.

And here is the irony.  Everyone loses including Abolitiz Power as the process has failed to show the rigour needed to potentially gain the support for the power plant or to demonstrate that the cost benefits are too high to proceed. In the end no one knows with any certainty what the best policy is at this point in time.

The coal fired power plant will in all probability be built.  The suggestion that the process was flawed or corrupt will, however, linger and yet again the thought that the process is one which favours the powerful will be present, whether it is true or not. 

And that is a belief system that is wholly more damaging to the integrity of the political process with all its consequences than any decision to build the plant will ever be.  It is a view that an open and fully independent assessment process of a coal fired power plant would have avoided.

The admission that information is just now being revealed creates the impression that the process is an illusion of good governance, not the real deal.  For some reason most people seem willing to accept that this is way things are done here.

(Comment or contact Andrew at andrewengel.blogspot.com)

Can the Philippines grab the Opportunity? August 25

Through the eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

Can the Philippines grab the Opportunity?

Living in the Philippines could, from one perspective, be described as living in the worst house on the best street.  The other houses have been updated or are undergoing renovation, but the Philippine house remains largely untouched and dilapidated.

As a metaphor for the emerging Asian economies, the picture of houses on a street goes some way towards describing today’s realities and where the Philippines sits in relation to its neighbors and the economic growth they are experiencing.

I say some way, because not all the Asian economies are booming and because there are good things happening here.  But too many impediments remain problematic, too many indicators are below where they should be, too many lag behind many other Asian countries, whose people are no smarter or hard working than Filipinos.

And while many of these indicators can be depressing, it is also true that sooner or later, investors are going to realize the opportunity the Philippines offers because of what has happened with the economic value of all the other houses.

It may come in the form of investors who can sense the opportunity for profitability; it may come from the owners themselves who realize that the status quo can be changed, or it may be a combination of both.  And it will come if impediments are cleared.

It would be a mistake to think it is not possible. Investors with literally billions of dollars are watching the Philippines waiting for signs of change and a move to address the obstacles that keep too many away and wary of putting capital into the Philippines in the quantities needed to kick start Asian style economic growth.

                                                            ********

The Philippines is at the center of the greatest shift in the global economic structure seen in recent history.  The days of European and US dominance and the lions share the world’s wealth they have traditionally taken are coming to an end.  No longer are the poor neighbor’s price takers.  Increasingly, Asia is a partner and beneficiary of global wealth production.  Moreover, Asian economies are capable of driving the world economy even when the rich countries of the developed world falter.

There is no longer any doubt that the economies of greater Asia are playing an increasingly important role in global economic prosperity.  Statistical indicators all point to growing prosperity of what are now being described as emerging economies.  From exports to the need for raw material, innovation and an increased domestic demand, it is now clear the quality of life in most Asian countries is improving.   And it has only just started with abundant capacity for further expansion.

It is no longer the case that Asian economies just offer cheap labor. As prosperity grows in these populous countries their domestic markets become opportunities in and of themselves and the first cousin of this growth is innovation.

The sheer size of these domestic markets, with over half the world’s population, and the amount of catch up available to get a slice of what the rich nations have long enjoyed, sets the pattern for years to come.

No longer can it be said that when the US catches a cold, the rest of the world gets pneumonia.   We can see that today with the problems in the US and Europe can cause for global growth being offset to some extent by China, India and other Asian countries.  While the structure is not yet completed and it is a period of transition, meaning many of the norms still operate, the building process is well underway.  A new global structure (what economist describe as structural, not cyclical change) is emerging, and it is one which will benefit Asia greatly.

When you think about it, the untapped potential of the world’s poor countries has been there for decades, waiting for the right set of conditions, the spark to get things started along the road to increased prosperity.  Small individual actions helped to pre-position these economies for the lift-off that has now seen not just China emerge as a global economic power house, but Asian economies generally prosper.

Sooner or later, it will happen here in the Philippines.

                                                            ********

The existing impediments in the Philippines are well known and extensively documented, not only by those who watch or govern the Philippines, but its citizens.  Ask any Filipino what these problems are and they list the same things.  Poverty, corruption, and lack of employment will always feature at the top of the list.  Foreign investors will talk of political stability, institutional concerns, inadequate infrastructure investment, red tape and corruption, as well as other subjects less spoken of that I will also leave aside.

Clearly, there is a culture of corruption in the Philippines which while oiling the process of redistribution is a key impediment to growth and shared prosperity.  Some would say it is the single greatest impediment.

For many it is both necessary to make ends meet and a simple reflection of what many of those in authority do or are forced by the system to do.  As it riddles the system from top to bottom it can be justified as unavoidable.  It can be used as an excuse that says everyone does it.  It provides a pretext for saying it can’t be changed. 

Few are comfortable with this system, and most would like to see it changed. A majority of people seem to despair feeling it can’t be altered and that it has become too ingrained.

Indeed it would be foolhardy to think corruption can be eliminated.  It occurs everywhere in the world.  But can the pervasiveness of corruption in the Philippines be changed? 

Absolutely! 

It starts with great leadership; it grows in small increments as demonstrable victories are obtained; it comes from systemic changes that make dishonesty too costly; it needs to happen at all levels of the social structure.  People need a reason to buy into the idea that it might be possible.  It comes with determination to write a brand new chapter based on what is possible.

It is not easy to change a belief system, but when the benefits are made obvious by the neighbors in the street, the gravitation pull ultimately becomes irresistible.

At least that is my hope.

The house may be seen to be full of termites by those who despair, but I prefer to see the inherent benefits in taking a positive view. That is a vision to be seen by just looking at the neighbors.  If they can do it, so can we.

That is a vision of change which gives a reason to believe.  Do you believe it is possible?

(See Andrew’s blog at andewengel.blogspot.com)

Ever tried to Catch a spinning Wheel with your Teeth: Aug 18

Through the Eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

Ever tried to hold on to a Spinning Wheel, with your Teeth?

Can you imagine what you might do if one morning you woke to find you were the President of the Philippines.

Would you have an agenda to work on?  Would you have a vision for the future of the country?  Where would you start and what would be your priorities?  Who would be the first person you would call?

It’s a mental exercise you might consider doing.  Step back from the role of citizen, observer or commentator and put yourself in the hot seat.

I’m sure for many their first instinct would be to doubt their ability, their qualifications to do the job.  Immediately, the magnitude of the role would start to dawn, the subjective and narrow concerns each of us holds would be swamped by the concerns of the whole body politic…….. and 100 million Filipinos.

Does the burden seem a bit heavier now you are in office?

So you are concerned about education.  What are you going to do?  How about health, defence, foreign relations, economic growth, corruption, financial systems, the global economy, the constitution, separatism, framing a budget, selecting the heads of departments, regional issues, making speeches, answering questions on all subjects, picking a cabinet, the environment, power and energy, urban planning, infrastructure, population growth, agriculture, industry development, foreign investment, taxation, poverty alleviation, social welfare, culture, the arts and sport, dealing with vested interest, political strategy, tactics, vision, the law and the list goes on….and on.

How do you feel now?

Are you ready to go back to bed yet?

No, well let’s get on to personal qualities and traits

                                                                                                *********

Whatever your character, your personal failings, human weaknesses, you can expect that the people will have high expectations for you.

Were the position to be filled as a result of a job application we can surmise in thinking about people’s expectations that it would contain the following human qualities: honesty and unshakable integrity, selflessness, gallantry, intelligence, loyalty, vision, kindness, concern for others, knowledge, patience, strength, supreme communication skills, credibility, decency, a humanitarian, historian and citizen of the world.”

The Job ad could be headed, “Required: an extraordinary human being”. 

You will need to have the fortitude to remain confident in the face of criticism, but be open to better ideas, while keeping a firm eye on the political consequences of appearances. The job ahead will require a personality with the strength to act, the ability to organise, the certainty to know what is right and the arrogance to believe you are correct, all while harbouring doubts, not knowing anything for certain and showing humility. 

Hmmm, this is getting harder all the time.

There are serious messages underlying the question, in particular that the job is one that can only be done with the help of the majority.  It should remind us to be a little less certain in our criticisms, or at the very least more understanding.  Yes, criticism is valid, indeed essential, but it is not too much to ask for a touch of humility in the process, particularly when the job is being done with honest intent.

It is worth reflecting on not only the magnitude of the job but also the complexity it entails when we jump in and offer our arm chair expertise. 

To cherry pick that which concerns us, and let the rest pass by, is a luxury only the uninvolved get to enjoy.

The point I intend is that the job of running a country is beyond difficult, it is near impossible and no single human has the capacity to do it perfectly. 

                                                                                *********

In playing this question game with friends and family, another human trait has been most evident, and that is humour.  I have been left in fits of laughter as people confront the question.  Usually, they have nothing to say at first, struck dumb by the implications, a nervous laugh preceding a puckering of the brow. 

One friend spent the first few minutes just shaking his head in dismay as he tried to put it together in his mind, before finally saying the first thing he would do is have breakfast!  Typically Filipino wouldn’t you say, let’s eat first.  Here is a sample of some other responses:

I’d resign. I’d find out how much I was being paid, than I’d resign. I’d take a sick day. I’d call my mother.

Yep, as much as we might want to have the power of the Presidency, most of us would not take it even if it was handed to us on a golden platter. 

It would be a bit like the proverbial dog chasing a car wheel, catching it and then thinking, what the hell do I do now?  To complete the imagery, picture the dog spinning through 360 degrees at speed being belted each time it hit the ground.

The next time you comment, reflect for a moment what you would do if you woke up one morning and found………………..The more I think about it, the more I think I’ll just go back to bed.

(You can find Andrew’s article and comment on andrewengel.blogspot.com)

Nothing Like a Good Chat to Start a Day: 16 August

Through the Eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

Nothing like a good chat to start the day.

I had coffee several weeks ago in Bislig with a very nice Filipino gentleman.

It was early morning but daily life was already in full swing.  The pulse of the waking dawn beat steadily in my consciousness and I was again reminded how much I love this time of the day.

We met at a small sari-sari store adjacent to the hotel where I was staying, arriving around 6 am, both in search of caffeine to get things moving and wash away the cobwebs.  A ritual I must admit is one of my many faults.

There was a small seating area out front, enclosed behind a high security fence that was completely out of proportion with the building, but in keeping with the environment, a rather narrow street with an assortment of ramshackle buildings that were equally fortified.

The congenial owner supplied us with several 3-1 satchels and hot water, an unhealthy start for our bodies made worse by the cigarettes we consumed.  We both agreed it was another habit we both needed to overcome. 

We settled, as easily as two barkadas sharing bar stools, into a discussion and the gentleman, perhaps 20 years younger, talked about life in general and Bislig in particular.  He was a wellspring of information, and knowledgeable about a wide range of subject matter. 

I felt totally at home, yet again being schooled on life in a way only available when you seek companionship and open yourself to insights. 

Regardless of the security measures everywhere I looked, I felt no sense of alarm.   The advice I received constantly from many friends and family about being careful and the risk foreigners run in Mindanao didn’t enter my mind.

Why would it, my companion and the shop owner were friendly and I never find Filipinos to be anything other than courteous and giving.  That is not to say the robbery doesn’t take place or people shouldn’t take precautions. 

But, life is full of dangers, and believe me, when I say I feel safer here than I do on a street in Los Angeles or Port Moresby.  In any case, I would not give up the chance to talk to people and live in some guarded compound, or seek to mediate in private like a Buddhist monk……….for all the tea in China.

I need to be with other people.  Singular self-reflection is something I am forced to do only when I can’t be with people, of before I sleep.  And even then I talk to myself.

What I hear from others in conversation is always sufficient to cause me to reflect, both in agreement and disagreement. It gives meaning to my own thoughts.  It stimulates my thinking.  It is the catalysis of my cognitive awakening which otherwise seems to be on some sort of permanent vacation.

My companion and I talked of the town and its history.  How its current circumstances were damaged by the closing of its paper mill and the cascading impact of the unemployment that followed.  I said I had noticed how the town seemed to me to have had better times and the closure of this important plant went some way to explaining what I had seen.

At the same time I said that the town was situated in a beautiful area, that I could see the money that had been spent on beatification of the foreshore, and how tourism was one industry that held the prospect of economic growth.

I explained how I had visited The Enchanted River and the Tinuyan Falls.  Both were breath-taking and I would recommend a visit to anyone.  These two natural gifts alone, it seemed to me, should be enough to form the basis on which a tourism industry could flourish. I assume locals are aware of the potential without me pointing it out, but I don’t have any specific details and my companion likewise, while agreeing, didn’t know either.

 I was fascinated by his insights more generally, and the degree to which he understood the dynamics at work in the town, how peopled coped, the work that was available, the good and the bad.

His own life choices were revealing.  He had worked overseas, but ultimately had come home, “even if I am poor and have to struggle”, to look after his children.  He just couldn’t subjugate his paternal feelings, or justify not being with his children.

As I sat there talking I realised that we were neither a Filipino nor Foreigner, just two people talking about life’s vagaries.  It didn’t matter that we had lived two very different lives, or the cultural disparities and diverse paths of our combined history.  I could have come from Mars for all that mattered.

We were talking the same language, we harboured the same aspirations, and we worried about the same type of things.  But more than that, we appeared to hold similar views on what was lacking and what was needed to make things better.  And, as is usually the case when the conversation turns philosophic, we ended up agreeing we had no idea how to go about making things better.

I left my companion after an hour or so, not feeling defeated by our failure to solve the world’s problems.

No, I left happy to have met him, to have shared a coffee and a few experiences.  I hope he felt the same way.  When I returned to the hotel I found my friends frantically searching for me, relieved I had not been ”grabbed”….I just smiled and explained I was just fine.

Is there a moral to all this?  Maybe something like: “coffee and cigarettes are bad for your health, but a conversation will always make you feel better.”

(Comment or write to Andrew at engelmint@hotmail.com)

Catching Smoke: Aug 11

Through the eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

Catching Smoke

Earlier last week I had roughed out the draft of an article on how the US debt crisis may effect average Filipinos.

I had a structure in mind and I hoped some useful insights, including the impact of an appreciating Peso on remittances from OFWs and those likely to gain or lose from improved terms of trade.  The working title was winners and losers.

I had even managed to turn some economic gobbledygook into plain English, without the need for clichés or the use of vehicle part analogies.

In the process, I was also playing around with the idea of saying something on how incomprehensible economics is for most people. That an economist might as well be speaking in Swahili as far as Joe or Pedro public were concerned:  firstly, because economic jargon is a foreign language and secondly, because economics is a convoluted and complex discipline.

I had written the follow sentence as part of the point about economics being little understood by laypersons; “as for the so-called ‘dismal science’, there are multiple determinants to consider, rarely do these work in harmony, there are pressures exerted in opposing directions, indeed in all directions and future events are mostly if not entirely unpredictable”.

That was on Monday, when the US debt crisis was the only game in town.  Moving forward, the US debt crisis was avoided with a last minute deal, the world sighed with relief and the dramatic and breathless minute by minute media coverage of an approaching Armageddon ended, to my delight.  Phew, lucky they fixed that right? 

Wrong!  Before the working week was over, the stock markets crashed around the world, pundits predicted a double dip recession for the US, while basically saying the biggest economy in the world is tanking.  And, of course, bearing in mind that the US economy had been given a D (for dud) by every economic commentator or expert around the world, the US dollar appreciated!  Go figure.

My draft went in the bin as well.  All I was left with was the Swahili idea.

                                                                                ********

Of course, any economist can tell you why the US dollar can appreciate on the back of the US economy being publicly declared a basket case.  Here’s where you need to put common sense on hold, particularly if you think it should have been the other way around.  When stock markets crash, people get nervous and scared (a loss of confidence in eco speak) so they race out and buy US dollars because it’s the reserve currency of the global financial system.  It represents safety!  See, easy, clear as mud isn’t it.

 The Economist ran an article on 8 August “Guessing in the Dark” which provided further clarification.  The gist of the piece was that markets fall if you have more sellers than buyers, and that it will be a week or two before we find out that there was a forced seller behind the collapse. It was “a non-economic reason” (sic), part of the market’s dynamics, according to The Economist.

Whoa, wait a minute, it’s not economics based?

Even if that’s right it is a damn convenient argument for economics. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that is saying stock markets don’t operate with economic good sense doesn’t it? That market “dynamics” are in some way not economically rational.   So, rather than apply economic logic to the strength or otherwise of national economies, sellers and buyers will be guided by irrational thinking.  So it’s not real economics at work.  Mmmm, so remind me again, what’s the point of teaching economics?

In this context irrational thinking is being used as a get out of jail free card.  Even though it is what economists refer to as “animal spirits”.  The phycology of people as they swing from optimism to pessimism when considering, among other matters, their investments and the risks they face. The pejorative reasoning is that the human mindset veers from confidence to fear and that we are driven like cattle and spooked by the reaction of a few in the herd.

As usual, I’m oversimplifying, but here I was thinking economics and markets were all part of the same game. That it’s all part of economic thought and reasoning and that human behaviour was a chunk of the explanation for market collapses, indeed it is very often the reason that the neat and tidy economic model breaks down.  If there can ever be a totally effective economic model.

My mistake and clearly I’ve confused the matter and am not about to question a peer economics publication.  But it does help me make my point about how confusing it all gets.

I have to come clean and admit I consider that economic predictions are a bit like trying to grab smoke.  It doesn’t stop us, however, and there are thousands out there running around with their arms flaying trying to do just that, and making a tidy living out of it.  When you ponder the futility, some of the time, of the process it can seem a bit silly (Ok, before you have a heart attack, I have left out all the valuable work done and the contributions to humanity of every scholar since Adam Smith).

So where do we go now?  Well let me try and catch some smoke.

                                                                                *********

In the grand scale of things, the impact on a majority of Filipinos of these latest events is likely to be minimal.  

With 41% of the Filipino population being described as “vulnerable” (a quaint use of the word that only an economist could come up with) and 26% said to live in poverty (both ADB estimates), there are at least 40 million Filipinos who probably couldn’t care less about a debt crisis in the US or Europe, or a stock market “correction”.

 Add to that the number of “employed” who barely make enough in wages to survive and the figure jumps to…who knows what, perhaps 60 or 70 million. (And bear in mind that the official unemployment rate is 7.3% - which doesn’t seem too bad until you understand how it is calculated.)

So we have more than half the population, arguably much more than half who struggle just to get by every day.  Their lives will not change dramatically, whatever the consequences of the US or global economic headaches.

While I hesitate to say this, the one good thing about being poor, is that you don’t stand to lose much if the world economy tanks, or big players lose their shirts. 

One thing I am certain you can predict is that we are going to hear a lot more about economic prospects over coming weeks, and most of it will be scary as hell.

I hope you can make sense of it and what it means for you personally, if it bothers you at all.

(Comment or write to Andrew at engelmint@hotmail.com)

A Letter to Kristelle: August 01

Through the eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

A Letter to Kristelle

If you want an example of excellence in writing, check out Kristelle Omar’s piece, “Realizations”, in the Mindanao Times Opinion section on Saturday July 30.  You can get it in the archives section of the web site if you missed it or don’t have a copy of the paper.

When we talk about a writer needing to find their voice, we mean simply that a writer must find their style.  It’s the tone they wish to set, the mood they seek to create in the reader’s mind.  It’s also about being true to oneself, honest and unique. The best writers do this with such ease that one can do no more than stand back and marvel.

Kristelle’s voice rings loud and clear in her article.  You are immediately transported into her world, her fears are real, the experience resonates, we empathise, her honesty is palpable and the words drip with feeling.

Depending on your perspective or your age the article will send different signals and for me one was amusement over her self-doubts in the face of such a powerful specimen of writing.

If this is an example of her skills, she has nothing to be concerned about.

I found myself shedding my years in a time machine back to my own youth. Recalling the stumbling attempts at speech making, embarrassed by recollections of faux pas and idiotic statements, over used clichés and generally no ideas about how the world really worked.

I also recall that I was so stupid I actually thought I knew most things and it took several more years before I started to realise that I was a suitcase short of anything approaching knowledge, let alone wisdom.

Fortunately, here I am washed up on the shore of old age, but still capable of being taken back by a young writer to feel what youth was like, however embarrassing some of the recollections are.  That’s the definition of good writing.

And writing doesn’t need to be lofty and high-brow to be good.  Indeed, writing from the heart in a simple but effective style often makes for much better reading.  Look at the way self-assessment is handled in the following sentence from Kristelle’s article.  It conveys the sense of a young woman who not only sees faults in herself but is confident enough to write about them:

“Take, for instance, the fact that I can’t play an instrument, or ride a bike, even snap my fingers”.

It’s the choice here that works, not everyone can play an instrument, or ride a bike, but everyone can snap their fingers, can’t they?  Actually, no they can’t when you think about it and it’s the counterpoint between the examples that works in this sentence.  It’s what makes it so good.

I’m aware that Filipinos are sometimes a bit hesitant when it comes to communication in English.  My advice is don’t be and don’t get overwhelmed by what seems better, more wordy, a wider vocabulary, better grammar.  These things can help, but nothing trumps good honest writing.

I am sure that there are plenty of Kristelle’s out there, aspiring writers or journalists and I don’t mean to blow her trumpet too loud, if you will excuse the clumsy metaphor. It’s more that I see the real value in promoting youth and recognising the contribution they can make to our society. 

I am reminded that a person from the baby boomer generation can just as easily be educated by a Y generation as the other way around.  Something we “oldies” too easily forget and that gives lie to the attitude that youth is wasted on the young.

As for speech making, I will recount for Kristelle a survey conducted in the US several years ago about people’s greatest fears.  The question posed to over 10,000 people was to list their greatest fear in descending order from 10 to 1.  Number 2 on the list, the second greatest fear, was death. Top of the list at number 1, was the fear of public speaking!

So be brave and know that for most of us the anticipation of having to address a crowd strikes fear into our hearts.  Most of us we would rather stick a fork in our eye than speak in public.

Fowler, the English grammarian once wrote that: “what you don’t precisely know you can’t precisely write and what you can’t precisely write you don’t precisely know”.

I’ve always found that to be good advice and it also works if you are confronting a public speaking engagement.  I hope that helps you as much as your article taught me.

(Comment or write to Andrew at engelmint@hotmail.com)

State of the Nation speech over a cup of Coffee 28 July

Through the Eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

State of the Nation Speech over a Cup of Coffee

Over a cup of coffee, a friend asked me on Tuesday if I thought that President Aquino was a good President.

I replied that I thought he was a good man, but his leadership will be judged by history. 

Change takes time, and often attempts to shift the paradigm are fiercely opposed: by those who see their vested interest challenged, or the simple conservative nature of people.  There is a natural aversion to change aided by the fear it can create.

It is rare, therefore, that a leader forms a legacy while in power.  The struggle is too intense while change is being pursued and it is only in hindsight that the benefits can be seen, the fears having evaporated like the morning mist.

Many political leaders think and talk about the legacy they want to leave behind. It is the political narrative of their goals while in power, the story of what they want to achieve, their vision of the future.  And all leaders need a political narrative.

As a great deal of what President Aquino says is in Tagalog, I am at a disadvantage when assessing his narrative.  I have read a translation of his state of the nation address but it is always better to watch and listen.  So much is conveyed non-verbally, so much is less accurate in a translated tongue.  But, from an outsiders perspective this is the narrative I see.

The Philippines has a relatively young leader who is passionate about his people, seized with the need to improve their lives and focussed on ridding the country of its endemic corruption.  He is not the first President to make such claims, but one senses the sincerity behind the rhetoric.

The central story line is corruption and the hero of the story is the Filipino people. The villains are those who take and rob food out of common people’s mouths. The first chapter sees the battle enjoined, perhaps too successfully.  Five chapters to go, but not a lot on what these may contain, and the characterisations are still a bit thin.

The problem is that this is not a new story.  Until action matches words there will be scepticism.

This is not a speech based in reality.  It is one based on hope; one that seeks a common commitment, one which demonstrates the size and complexity of the job, but ultimately hesitates to confront the big questions head on.

He has chosen to be optimistic in tone, preferring to see the glass as being half full, not half empty.  You would have to be politically naïve to think he is unaware that the job remains largely incomplete, but his vision and hope for improvement beats steadily throughout the speech.

He appears to be that rare thing; an honest politician - in so far as any of us are truly honest.  As a result it is difficult not to like him or believe he means to do his very best for his people.  Trust is a commodity in short supply, and it is priceless.  Once lost, it can never fully be regained. For whatever criticisms made against PNoy, I sense that he has the trust of his people.  When he says and repeats he wants to change things, it is believable.

He is a man who appears to understand that arrogance and greed are human characteristics too common in Philippine society. His own humility is tangible.  He sees the job as not his alone, he calls the people his Boss, and he lauds the work of those who are responding to his call to arms over honest government.

                                                                                *******

Great leaders are a rare commodity. To infrequently in history has the right man or woman come along at the precise moment they are needed.  And their traits vary widely.  Mandela teaches us to forgive ones enemies, Churchill to, “…never, never, never, surrender” and Ghandi believed that we don’t need to spill rivers of blood.

President Aquino has an opportunity to be one of the Philippines great heroes.  He has walked onto the stage at a time when the gap between the Asian tigers and the Philippines has grown so wide that they are almost out of sight. From the lofty heights of Asia’s second best economy in the 1970’s, the Philippines has fallen to the bottom of the pack and all at a time when the “shift” to Asia and the sub-continent gathers pace.

He can set a place at that table that will benefit Filipinos for generations, reversing the slide of the last 30 years.

That is a new story line (if not original). That is a big target I would have liked to see the President put in his sights. To become part of this exciting age of Asia is a narrative full of exhilarating possibilities, and it lifts the heads of Filipinos to the horizon, beyond the mundane.  

And within that vision lay the solutions to most of the internal problems confronting the people of the Philippines including corruption. Achieving the former solves the latter. 

(Let me hasten to say that politics is a tough game.  It is a really tough game in the Philippines and armchair experts are a dime a dozen.) 

The Philippines must be part of the era of Asian prosperity.  It cannot afford to miss this opportunity.  Two particular areas are critical policy considerations if the Philippines is to claim a greater share of the largess available:  action on unsustainable population growth and foreign investment.

Foreign investment is needed to release the potential of the human resource in the Philippines.  Like many countries, the Philippines lack the savings to do this job alone. Australia with its small population depends on foreign investment, and some fear that the country is being sold.  It is a misplaced fear, as it benefits Australia greatly, and never threatens the sovereignty of the nation. Action which promotes greater foreign investment in the Philippines, under rules set by the state, but which give certainty to investors will unleash a powerful wave of change. 

It’s time to get the job done on population growth.  The precise moment has arrived. It should not be allowed to continue unchecked and it needs management. The harm being done to millions is clear for all to see and people support action.  A majority of the Filipinos get it, even if they remain silent in the face of a vocal minority.

The RH bill provides the solution and reducing the birth rate has been a 20 year old policy debate that needs to end.  It is time for the President and all political leaders to step up and make it happen. It is time for the state to assert its power.

This is a legacy act for the President, and no matter how strident and entrenched the opposition, or rather because of it, this single act will ensure his presidency will make its mark in Philippine history, for its benefits, will be profound and wholly positive.

A Puncj that Stunned the Nation, literally: July 12

A Punch that stunned the Nation, Literally

By Andrew Engel

Like a modern day Joan of Arc, Mayor Sarah Durterte, strode into a fracas in Agdao and wrote herself into the history of social media with 4 well directed right crosses.

But she did much more than that.

She catapulted herself into national prominence, into a political spotlight that has created a base from which anything is possible.

She rose above the law to remind us all that it can be blind to justice.

She established herself as a champion of the defenceless and dispossessed in a country where they are the vast majority.

She captured the hearts and minds of a majority of Dabawenyos with a siren call: a warning that a system of governance that is seen as the servant of the rich and powerful and the bedfellow of influence has its limits. 

So, despite the notoriety she has received from certain quarters outside Davao, she has achieved something more fundamental and lasting.  She has initiated a discussion that will increasingly move from the dramatics of the incident itself to the underlying message and the symbolic value of the punch.

That message is that the people have a voice.  That the law must be dispensed equally or there is no real justice and its institutions are hollow. That it is government which is the servant of the people and not the other way around.

And “the voice” is not new, as a modest, self-effacing housewife found in Manila over two decades ago, albeit in very different circumstances.

People want to believe that there is someone who will stand up for their rights and challenge the status quo.  They tire of empty promises and the constant rhetoric they hear falls on deaf ears. They long for a hero, or heroine.

That is why the punch struck home, why it symbolised the frustration felt by so many at the failure of the system to improve the basic lot of the Filipino.

Whether it is true or not that institutional weakness is causing a failure in the delivery of justice, that appears to be what people believe, and perceptions not only count in politics, they count in life!

Will anything change as a result?  Well that is the question.  It is a question the Mayor and her advisors will need to ponder as she finds herself at the head of agenda she would never have imagined possible as she let fly with those right crosses.  It is a question all politicians or those inclined towards a political career need to ask.

Does it overstate the political case to say she has captured the hearts and minds of the people?  I think not.

Is the task of reform too difficult for any politician in the Philippines? Well, so far, history records it has been.

It is easy to surmise that no lessons will be learned and that the matter will fade into the background quickly. That depends on what happens now and into the future, what this clever and capable young Mayor does with the opportunity she has inadvertently created.

Irrespective of what the Mayor achieves in the future, I doubt she will ever be able to top this.  It is almost certain to be the signature moment of her political career. You can’t buy this type of attention and for that reason it is a political opportunity not to be squandered.

My guess is the claims of abuse of power will soon be lost, the arguments over its rights and wrongs consigned to fading memory.  The so-called imperialists in Luzon will have their moment and those who mistakenly think the system has been wronged will continue to miss the point completely, until something else takes their interest.

What will be remembered is that a young female politician stood up for the common people.  She didn’t think twice about the damage she might do herself politically or legally, she acted to defend what she believed in, her people!

Isn’t that what people want of their politicians?

She doesn’t need to be censored or counselled and she certainly doesn’t need to be defended.  She is more than capable of looking after herself, and the people of Davao have made it clear that they will defend her without hesitation.  There are literally thousands out there who now hold out hope that Mayor Sarah Durterte, “Inday Sarah” as she is fondly called, offers something different.

She already had a heavy weight on her shoulders and the impact of the recent flood is but one in a long list of challenges.  Nonetheless, her responsibilities are even greater now as she moves forward in the aftermath of the Agdao incident.

This relatively young woman deserves the support of all Dabawenyos for the task ahead.  And I have no doubt she will get it.

(Comment or write to Andrew at engelmint@hotmail.com)

The Horns of A Dilemma: July 07

Through the Eyes of a Foreigner

By Andrew Engel

The Horns of a Dilemma

A modern day skirmish, with roots in century old decisions, is taking place to the south of Davao. 

It is a clash to win the hearts and minds of people, between the forces propelling modernisation and those who see its perils, or those who feel its footprint.

The decision by of the City Council to approve a coal fired power plant in Toril is the battleline for this confrontation.

Caught in the middle are the residents of Binugao and Hinatulan.

At its core, it is a confrontation born in mutually exclusive positions, in views which are contrary and in the complexity of human need and human behaviour. 

And here is one fact.  There are no simple answers.  No argument can win the day outright.

Why do we build coal plants if they cause so much harm to the environment and human health?  Why not use “clean” energy sources like solar, wind, tide, geothermal and the like?

It seems like a no-brainer.

Well, in answer to the first question, we didn’t know any better when it all kicked off.

We needed abundant energy to power the industrialization of our civilization.  We had burnt coal for a 1000 years, but late in the18^th century we turbo-charged it’s production to run our revolution.  We didn’t understand the harm we were causing the planet or our health by releasing carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere and by spewing toxic waste and heavy metals into our pristine environment.

Or we didn’t want to know. 

(And if you want a health description for the gases above, let’s replace carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and sulphur dioxide with the words, global warming, lung cancer and acid rain.)

In was a period heralded as the dawn of a new age of prosperity for the human race.  And with it came an unprecedented advance in human knowledge enriching humankind.  The human race was on a roll, prospects looked good.

There was sting in the tail we only realised in hindsight. By the time we worked out that fossil fuels had some nasty side effects, and some of the knowledge is quite recent, the horse had bolted.  Too late to shut the gate or to go back and try another way.

And that partly answers the second question. Whole economies now depend on fossil fuels, our modern world is powered by its energy and millions of jobs have been created to run these industries, light our cities and fuel our cars.  

That is not, however, the whole story. 

Economics play a role, and profits. It is a fact that renewables being new technologies cost more to develop and this creates a price gap between the renewables and fossil fuels. You need technology that works, and to get it you need research, investment and time.   

In simple terms if you want renewables, you have to pay more. The investment of the private sector is higher and these costs would be passed on to consumers.

So, the coal is available and mining continues partly because the renewables are either not yet available or are still too expensive to compete.

 (I should mention that even without climate change we need to find alternative forms of energy as fossil fuels are non-renewable and are running out.  We are extracting these resources faster than they can be regenerated.)

This all adds up to a consensus view that we need to make a transition over time from the old non-renewable fossil fuels paradigm, to a new era, or risk throwing the world economy into turmoil, with millions of jobs lost and the calamitous consequences this would entail.

Let me return to the coal question.   The defenders of the fossil fuel era are trying to find a way to compete with the emerging renewables option.  For the coal industry that comes recently in the form of Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS).

That is the reengineering of our original decision to dig up the carbon.  The planet has been storing carbon dioxide for millions of years and the idea for coal combustion now is to put it back into the earth where it came from, to store it. 

The problem is that it took millions of years for the planet, beginning with decomposing plants and animals, to capture the carbon dioxide. We are now trying to find a way, unsuccessfully so far, to put it back but in a fraction of the time the planet took to form coal.

That is not, however, what is being proposed for the Binugao plant for the obvious reason that the technology is not available.

When its owners talk of clean coal, they use a term that was commonly used to describe any technology that reduced the emissions of sulphur dioxide or others oxides, or the concentrations of ash, sulphur and heavy metal by-products of coal combustion.  The term is now generally accepted to refer to CCS.

So the coal industry promotes advances in production technologies that dilute pollutants or recycle some elements. It is not the elimination of the pollutants and no reasonable argument can be made to say coal is “clean”.

If you wonder what burnt coal residue contains, here are a few of the nasties: mercury, arsenic, chromium, cobalt, lead, magnesium and zinc.  We have to put the residue somewhere and storage in landfills or ponds is the answer.  The concern is whether the nasties stay there.

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist or be educated in thermodynamics to understand that opening the jail door to this “slug” is best avoided.  It’s simple common sense. Nonetheless, we build coal plants around the world. China builds a new coal fired power plant every two weeks.  Almost 90% of the world’s energy needs come from fossil fuels.  That’s 90%!

So here we are, faced with the need, perhaps the uncontrollable desire, to improve the quality of life humans seek and the knowledge of the price we are paying for our “toys”.  The emerging question is not what amount are we willing to pay for our development?  We already know the answer that question.

The question is how much longer will we be willing to pay a price that could be higher than anything we can possibly imagine?

Well stick around,” you ain’t seen nothing yet”!

This is the predicament of two mutually exclusive positions. What someone once described as being caught between a rock and a hard place.

One thing is true. We are caught on the horns of a dilemma of our own making.

(you can contact Andrew or comment at engelmint@hotmail.com)