pogi points for whom?

But remember it is government itself that says, “If it’s too good to be true, it must be a scam.”

A scam it is.

It looks good…initially. But it cannot be sustained, the traders will lose out in the end resulting to closure of mills and ending in bigger unemployment.

Why? Because at P17, which will reach up to P35 once it hits the markets, majority of the consumers will still be buying the cheaper NFA variety at P18.50 (which gov’t now imports at P40)leaving the traders, distributors and vendors with lots of stocks with no buyers. They will have to dispose of their inventories at a loss, that’s for sure.

The government is simply spending billions to make good-loking figures – but only for 2008.

Should it choose to continue the same for 2009, the treasury will sink further in debt. Ditto for infrastructure spending that will be used for “food security” – the next milking cow opportunity similar to what we saw prior to 2004.

Household income figures, of course, will mean lots of pogi points come 2010 elections.

mang Piring is a good example. let’s assume the worst calculation because of competition. Mang Piring will lose most of his net profit but will keep his employment and family from being hungry. He will be in a break-even position which will motivate him and encourage him to think how to compete, be resourceful and make even more.

It takes opportunity and challenge for an individual to be successful. A continuing education and seminars must be provided to the farmers to become updated of supply and demand, new innovation

A new opportunity for an entrepreneur to create a proposal to our current administration. A license provider of seminars and continuing education not only to the farmers but to all government sectors. An entrepreneur can charge a fee to attendees and the government will impose a policy that at least 24 hours of CEU’s must be required every two years or 8 hours every year.

The report says Mang Piring “…sets aside 15 cavans for home consumption and emergency needs. Mang Piring sold the remaining 71 cavans at P800 each–the previous buying price was P500–and he had a gross income of P56,800.

Still, he had to consider his expenses: e.g. For land preparation, P3,500; pulling, bundling and distribution of seedlings, P2,500… etcetera.

Mang Piring’s total expenses reached P21,370, leaving him with a net income of P35,430.”

Actually, Mang Piring’s net income should be increased by the 15 cavans he has set aside, or by P12K, which puts his net income to P57K. With 2 plantings a year, his net income is P114K. Making “singit” a 3rd planting raises his income to over P140K a year.

“I can only speculate that the traders are jumpstarting the price surge and keeping their stocks long enough until the market prices zoom past the 60% rate increase in input costs.”

you are right on your speculation,please read my comment on “April 30th, 2008 at 11:06 pm ” smuggling.

On a positive note, our stirring up the whole rice-producing community of nations could also be viewed as encouraging rice exporting countries to ensure availability for the whole world and those non-exporters to secure their own supplies while we, the shrewd Pinoys, are converting our ricelands to biofuel crops without need to worry about producing all our grain requirements. In the same stroke, we are also limiting the expansion of our future biofuel competitors’ plantations.

Although the risks are great, I’m sure this is a valid explanation why our government acts this way. Of course, importing billions of dollars worth of the grain opens more opportunities for bigger tong-pats, too.

50% to 60% : increase in price paid for palay.”

was an entry in my Comments Section in reply to Angela Stuart-Santiago.

The buying prices are accurate, and I confirmed these from Inquirer’s report here.

As I also stated in the same Comments Section, the farmers are making 45%-65% income. Again, this is substantiated by the same Inquirer article which detailed a farmer’s total expense per hectare @ P21,370 versus a gross sale @ P56,800!

What I cannot reconcile though is what millers/traders claim that of the P34 – P36 per kg price of well-milled rice in the market, only about P1.00 goes to their net income. It doesn’t make sense. Why increase your cost by 60% (P800 per sack of palay, from P500) only to make the same profit?

I can only speculate that the traders are jumpstarting the price surge and keeping their stocks long enough until the market prices zoom past the 60% rate increase in input costs.

I may also venture a guess that farmers choose the high-end variety over the NFA one to make the 45-65% profit this particular farmer in Inquirer’s article is making thus, we are in a glut of the high-end staple while short of NFA stocks.

Note however, that we are importing only 10% of our total requirement of the grain which could explain why gov’t is pursuing traders who are stockpiling (not necessarily hoarding) while it is importing @ P40/kg ($1000/ton).

If this is the case, gov’t is dumping more of the overly-expensive variety despite its inferior quality (higher breakage percentage) with these importations. Absolutely no contest against the locally-produced stuff.

Bottom line, traders will not be forced to sell their stocks at a cheaper price, government will be forced to subsidize the poor (by buying at P35-P40 and selling at P18.50) to avoid food riots while depleting the additional income from recent tax/RVAT hikes, and again, the middle class will bear the brunt of the huge spikes (or choose to join the poor in 6-hour queues), and the Philippines agitates the global rice market, even encouraging smuggling, according to John Berthelsen.

All these while a few farmers make 45-65% net.

that would be good for benigno. he doesn’t have no emotional IQ. he cannot separate his brain from his emotion. it’s really just his own battle not even mine nor yours.