…even if they don’t pay taxes – UPn Student

Thanks to the highly regressive taxation system (VAT etc.) in the Philippines, almost everyone, even the poor gets to pay taxes. Nevertheless, i know the underlying attitude behind your remark.

Urban living is not exactly great for one’s health — think metro-Manila air pollution and crime-statistics. The better is for government programs made more available in the rural areas and for economic activity to follow.

Rurals-to-urban migration and population-growth have similarities where the numbers are so high as to overwhelm the current capabilities. The right incentive programs (and laws if needed) can moderate the flow… for the greater good of all the citizens of Pinas (even if they don’t pay taxes).

http://www.cvjugo.blogspot.com/2007/03/land-reform-inequality-and-economic.html

The above means that if we want our economic growth to accelerate, we should focus on land redistribution to make land ownership less unequal which is consistent with Habito’s recommendations for Asset Reform.

I have no disagreement with your proposals on primary education and public health btw.

no. the ‘creamiest of the cream’ won’t stay urban poor for long, as they have a shot at becoming lower-middle class at the least. the first thing they would do, if their means permit it, is get out of the squatter area and buy a low-cost housing unit

cvj: You’ve looked to China for many ideas so check out and critique (pluses and minuses) Mainland China’s experience with people-flow-control of its own citizens to control migration into urban areas. The State requires documentation and “other stuff” before allowing a farmer from Sichuan or Shandong province to migrate into Beijing or Hongkong. Pinas should obviously do better where we can like providing more intense attention to elementary- and secondary-education (in rural as well as urban areas); also public health delivery. The mechanism for people-flow control can be similar in principle to you being vetted and submitting paperwork and other “stuff” before you were allowed into Singapore, a requirement which (I jump to the conclusion that) you agree with.

In a modern capitalist society, the decision by businessmen on where where to commit capital is decided by the projects’ internal rates of return and payback period, not on on the say so of the State. – PSImeon

That may be the case in capitalist societies that have already reached an advanced level of development. However, for those societies that have yet to industrialize, government has a role in deciding where to commit capital, as well as set internal rates of return and payback period. These are part of what Alice Amsden describes as reciprocal control mechanisms.

http://www.cvjugo.blogspot.com/2007/04/amsdens-reciprocal-control-mechanism.html

If the State forces re-chanelling of capital through eminent domain(?), the capitalist may just decide to be risk-averse and park his money in government securities, which most banks do. – PSImeon

Re-channeling of capital was the effect achieved via the land reforms in South Korea and Taiwan. It’s a poor kind of ‘capitalist’ who parks his money in government securities. I’m not even sure he/she deserves to be called that name.

hmmm, steady jobs and income? who would be tending those corporate plantations, the executives? – grd

Corporate plantations? Most likely a few people with tractors (and other farm equipment), maybe a bit more temporary labor during harvest time. The executives will busy deciding where they allocate their capital, as well as computing internal rates of return and payback period.

BTW, is there currently a labor shortage in the provinces?

don’t you think UPn’s solution is the better alternative rather than watching those usual stressful scenes in tv where demolitions almost happen so often in metro manila and other big cities? – grd

Put yourself in the shoes of the squatter whose shanty is being demolished and ask that question again.

Plus… there is a mistake in your history-lesson presentation. The peoples that PolPot “gently” asked out of the cities were primarily the middle- and upper-class. PolPot called them “the elite”, too, I think, because they were Chinese or had property or knew more than 7 English or French words. – UPn Student

Pol Pot ordered a complete evacuation. The cities in Cambodia did not just consist of people who belonged to the middle and upper class.

If you want to order a partial evacuation consisting of only the urban poor, then that would make you an elitist version of Pol Pot.

—————–
Plus… you missed a detail in your PolPot history-lesson presentation. The peoples that PolPot “gently” asked out of the cities were the middle- and upper-class (and any bottom-30% who PolPot called “the elite”. PolPot’s “elite” were the Chinese or those who owned property or knew more than 7 English or French words.)

As for people-flow control, I can prove to you that not from me but from you came the words “emptying the cities”. Metro-Manila urbans who had fled from Bicol- or Negros-farms have not broken any laws — rule-of-lawsays they get grandfathered in. I did point to Mainland China where people-flow-control (of its own citizens) is implemented. It takes documentation and “other stuff” before a farmer from Sichuan or Shandong province gets allowed to migrate into Beijing or Hongkong. The people-flow control will be similar in principle to you being vetted and submitting paperwork and other “stuff” before you were allowed into Singapore, or Pinas requiring documentation and “stuff” before a Taiwanese-, Bolivian- or Afghani-citizen gets accepted into Pinas.

—————–
Plus… there is a mistake in your history-lesson presentation. The peoples that PolPot “gently” asked out of the cities were primarily the middle- and upper-class. PolPot called them “the elite”, too, I think, because they were Chinese or had property or knew more than 7 English or French words.

As for people-flow control, I can prove to you that not from me but from you came the words “emptying the cities”. Metro-Manila urbans who had fled from Bicol- or Negros-farms have not broken any laws — rule-of-lawsays they get grandfathered in. I did point to Mainland China where people-flow-control (of its own citizens) is implemented. It takes documentation and “other stuff” before a farmer from Sichuan or Shandong province gets allowed to migrate into Beijing or Hongkong. The people-flow control will be similar in principle to you being vetted and submitting paperwork and other “stuff” before you were allowed into Singapore, or Pinas requiring documentation and “stuff” before a Taiwanese-, Bolivian- or Afghani-citizen gets accepted into Pinas.