Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more

DSC00106.JPGDSC00107.JPG
Friday, along Ayala. Some people preferred to be at the sidelines.
DSC00108.JPGDSC00109.JPG
Office types stood and watched. Marchers congregate.
DSC00110.JPGDSC00112.JPG
Office types and families stood at the sidelines. Another view.
DSC00113.JPGDSC00114.JPG
Another view. Red Cross volunteers at a first aid station
.DSC00116.JPGDSC00117.JPG
Saturday: as preparations took place, LSGH held its Junior Prom at the gym.
DSC00118.JPGDSC00119.JPG
Jun Lozada prepares for the grueling “Harapan” interview (see in on YouTube).
DSC00120.JPGDSC00125.JPG
Lozada hooked up for sound; begins his 3-hour confrontation.
DSC00128.JPGDSC00129.JPG
Sunday, 7 a.m. Nuns arrive; ushers double-checking plans
DSC00130.JPGDSC00131.JPG
Ushers prepare to go to their stations; Nuns survey the gym
DSC00132.JPGDSC00134.JPG
Early birds at the gym; venue begins to fill up
DSC00135.JPGDSC00136.JPG
mainstream and new media: Mike Enriquez and Dean Jorge Bocobo (see his slideshow of the event!)
DSC00137.JPGDSC00140.JPG
Bleachers fill up; participants, old and young
DSC00141.JPGDSC00142.JPG
Thomasians in school colors; gym fills up
DSC00143.JPGDSC00144.JPG
Scenes from a gym
DSC00145.JPGDSC00150.JPG
Mass begins
DSC00151.JPGDSC00152.JPG
views of the gym
DSC00153.JPGDSC00154.JPG
views of the gym
DSC00155.JPGDSC00156.JPG
views of the gym
DSC00157.JPGDSC00158.JPG
views of the gym
DSC00159.JPGDSC00160.JPG
Fr. Francisco’s homily; with gym and canteen full, people spill over to football field
DSC00161.JPGDSC00162.JPG
Field spillover
DSC00163.JPGDSC00164.JPG
canteen spillover; singing “Bayan Ko”
DSC00165.JPGDSC00167.JPG
Young and old singing “Bayan Ko”
DSC00168.JPGDSC00169.JPG
Bleachers singing “Bayan Ko”
DSC00170.JPGDSC00171.JPG
Clergy (including Dominicans) and laity singing “Bayan Ko”
DSC00172.JPGDSC00173.JPG
As people emerge…
DSC00174.JPGDSC00175.JPG
Crowd in the field salutes those who were in the gym and canteen.

The Senate hearings continue, today. See Inquirer.net’s running account of the hearings.

Besides the the best that the administration being able to manage to do, was to crowd a restaurant with officials (and issue panicky warnings), the most interesting thing to me about Friday’s rally and Sunday Mass, was what took place in the sidelines. Friday’s rally was a morale booster for the Left and the UNO, but it also involved workers from Makati offices who dashed down to watch and clap during their breaks and families from what formerly used to be the President’s constituencies, who simply showed up to make the point that henceforth, they intend to be interested and engaged in what’s going on.

These small clusters of people on the sidelines -I am not alone in observing this interesting phenomenon last Friday, see a published e-mail from Fr. Eliseo Mercado– and its flowering on Sunday cared less about what was being said during the rally, and more about simply making a stand in a small way. Some hadn’t shown up at any rallies since 1986; others, since Edsa Dos. Mon Casiple calls it The epiphany of the Middle Class. In the entry, he zeroes in on the significance of this reawakening:

The dramatic street play may or may not come to pass but all political actors are now constrained by the middle class’ political stand.

What does Casiple mean? Observe how some of the Middle Class who went to Makati ended up disillussioned, as Jessica Zafra recounts (see also Patricia Evangelista’s column, Liars); no such worries or fallout from the Sunday Mass, which means this will become the antidote to street-type rallies, since they are more hakot-proof (what is the definition of hakot? Bringing people who neither understand nor care what an issue is about, to a gathering, simply to give the impression of popular participation; this is different from a committed group mobilizing its supporters who share the common cause).

With regards to this, a conversation I had with a professor from UP illustrates what the constraint on the various political groups will be. He came up to me and told me he hadn’t been in any political gathering since Edsa Dos. But he’d gone to the Mass because “it’s just too much, already.” But he said his own preference was for a real, genuine, impeachment in October, in which he saw little rational prospects for the President to be acquitted. And thereafter? “I think it’s clear that Noli could not possibly be worse than what we have now.” But if so? “People will be much more determined not to cut him or anyone that follows any slack.”

Another interesting thing is that sectors formerly deeply divided are gingerly coming closer to healing those divides. The President is a master of fostering divisions but seems weakened in maintaining them.

For example, while UST, which has great sentimental ties to the Macapagals has been largely silent since 2005, on Sunday groups of Thomasians showed up in their school colors and Dominican priests concelebrated the Mass; and while the Assumption Convent continues to express solid support for the President, the people at the Mass let out a gasp when a delegation of Assumption nuns participated in the Mass (not to mention the students, like Assumptionista i am obsess, who defied her school’s ban on student participation in rallies!). A student from La Salle Bacolod (a city where 2,000 had gathered for a mass last Friday) texted me this, a short while ago:

Hi po. Magandang hapon. We the polsci students believe in Lozada.

Last Saturday, the Inquirer editorial summed the attitude of such people: “Bring it on”! And on Sunday, the Inquirer editorial (which cites the President’s Friday speech and a Financial Times story) pointed out why the President speaks with a Forked tongue.

Meanwhile, Ricky Carandang says we live in a “Bizarro World.” Indeed, I believe, as my column for today puts it, that This too shall pass. There is the question of the Catholic hierarchy and even clergy’s involvement in the whole issue. See Randy David’s Saturday column, Should bishops lead political actions? Though I must say Fr. Francisco’s homily served as a reminder of the powerful and beneficial role an engaged clergy can play in clarifying things for society, politically.

At the end of my column, I tried to underline a point raised by Mahar Mangahas in his column, Social volcanology. This is the point Mangahas made:

I disagree with those who think that Filipinos have turned numb and no longer feel much social outrage. I sense that much outrage is underground, and can pack as much energy as a volcano…

Both EDSA I and II were brought closer to the surface by mass protest rallies, in 1984-86 and in 2000-01, but they were ultimately triggered by unexpected, highly publicized, events: the Fidel Ramos-Juan Ponce Enrile breakaway in February 1986, and the non-opening of the “second envelope” of evidence in the Joseph Estrada impeachment trial in January 2001. The former was brought to public attention by radio, while the latter was seen live on television by four out of every five Metro Manilans. (In the final stage of the trial, most Filipinos, including those who considered Estrada guilty, said they would respect a Senate decision not to remove him from office. Thus the overkill of the “second envelope” led to Estrada’s downfall.)Of course, the timing of triggering events is unpredictable.

The ability of these events to stimulate mass action is partly due to the public certainty that they were not stage-managed. People Power and volcanic eruptions are equally unpredictable.

The title of today’s entry is taken from Shakespeare, from Henry V (watch the scene in YouTube; had to link as embedding video kept screwing up the layout of this page; or you can read about it in Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more).

Another apt title could be lifted from The simmering pot, in Mon Casiple’s blog. He says a new factor has entered the equation:

The difference today from similar occurrences in 2005 (Garci tapes) and 2006 (state of emergency) is the emerging broad consensus to end the GMA term sooner than 2010. Previous differences among the broad opposition are dissolving in recognition of the widespread unpopularity of the Arroyos and the activism of the middle class. The engine of disenchantment is fueled by middle class discontent (such as over the massive corruption, the rapid weakening of dollar vis-a-vis peso, scarcity in the local job market, GMA Marcosian tactics, and the specter of 2010 elections cancellation and continuing Arroyo rule). Two recent events — the JDV ouster and the Lozada abduction — are being seen by the middle class as indicative of the ruthlessness of the president’s team in their drive to maintain the power. It has led to their defending Lozada and to their manning the frontlines of the movement against GMA.

The great unknown, he says, is not if, but when, the pot boils over:

Is it the tipping point? I don’t think so — yet. However, this particular pot simmers, and if it continues to simmer, will ultimately boil over. The rallies, the masses, the statements, and open positions — all these are but prelude to a great political act by the middle class.
All the ingredients for people power are already in place and there is the momentum. Having said this, they are not yet ripe and are still undergoing the process of maturation. How long this process lasts depends on more events that logically should happen.

My browsers have been groaning under the weight of bookmarks and so I thought I’d present a sampling of different bloggers’ views on what’s going on. Marvelous, indeed, is Scriptorium, who compares 1986 to 2008, and the lessons learned (or ignored) since then:

What is it with the Comelec (komisyon on elections) and its leaders, we ask? We should have learned from 1986, I think, that the structural checks to Presidential power like Congressional impeachment and Comelec supervision don’t work unless they’re backed by institutional tradition as with the Senate and the Supreme Court, or by ideological focus in the case of the Church and the Communist Party. Without a tradition or ideology of independence, officials’ conduct lapses into a pure pragmatism founded on financial interest, which makes the Comelec and the Congress pliable to Executive manipulation.
…This makes us ask: Where are the heroes today who will oppose law with justice, might with right? They are still here, I believe, with different faces and names, the women and men who will defy a dictatorship in the name of truth. Ed Panlilio, beleaguered by cash-armed opponents using the oh-so-honest Comelec to get their hands on Pampanga’s cookie jar; the Hyatt 10, the Kapatiran leaders, and numerous others who left their government posts (in Atty. Harry Roque’s case, an ultra-plum PCSO directorship) to protest the fraud perpetrated the Arroyo Autocracy. Some, like De Venecia and Jun Lozada, are johnnies-come-lately who defected through force of circumstance; but, as the lives of Boethius and St. Alphonsus Liguori demonstrate, even those with initially imperfect motives may become heroes at the time of testing.

A general roundup can be found in Global Voices Online. A big deal? A Simple Life thinks not: and wishes it would all go away.

On a vaguely related note, see the amusing take on the scandal-as-drama courtesy of paolomendoza.

On a precisely related note, with all the large numbers being mentioned, DAKILA breaks them down. Read the relevant numbers and weep.

It’s interesting how people have been following the Senate hearings. See My Life and Inspirations (Feb. 8), Take it Easy, Smile (Feb. 11) who feels overhwelmed, and Sabistski Point (Feb. 12),while [slap happy] .an OFW (Feb 10) says the whole thing is fascinating and urges people to follow the hearings and make up their own minds. AKOMISMO Vol. II is using the whole thing as a teaching aid. the in’s and out’s of the twisted mind of the nomadic asian polar bear says it may sow the seeds for change (Spendor of Creation on Feb. 7, called it the need for “positive politics”). Law and ICT reflects on government projects in general. As does Lofty Quest.

There is, first of all, the question of Jun Lozada (who originally irritated My Croak). You can’t beat the extended Star Wars-based analysis (see Sylvia Mayuga, too) by big mango:

What was Yoda to do if he won his contest against Palpatine? Palpatine and his Sith Order had adapted. Yoda knew at that moment that Palpatine’s Sith Order had turned war into a weapon and that the Jedi still fought the Sith Order as if they were an army to be destroyed. It was why the Jedi failed. People didn’t want the Jedi. They wanted the Sith Order to rule. They wanted “peace, order, security.”

Yoda could have “won” that contest against Palpatine and in the processes would have become the very thing he fought against. He would have had to become Emperor himself and the turn the Republic into a Jedi Empire. How would that theocracy be better than a Sith one? Theocracy, Yoda knew was not the way.

People who wanted change had to fight for what they believed in and the Jedi should not be above them— but along side of them. In many ways those who want change and I count myself amongst that rank, we need to reinvent the way we strive for change. Reinvent how to fight war, just as the Jedi did. The romantic notion of street protests alone as a path to change is no longer enough. What must accompany it is a groundswell of effort.

A lot of people are asking why Congressmen who side with Arroyo still hold their jobs. The short answer is because good men and women don’t rise up to challenge them.

In Star Wars lore, the Sith people went extinct. not just because of constant war, but because the Dark Lords had interbred with the Sith. As our country is constantly led by people who value treachery, greed and lust for power, so too will most people adapt to those concepts as being the norm.

Also, people have taken to discussing Lozada in terms of his writing. There was his piece on Neri’s attitudes, (incidentally, Atty-at-Work quotes a comment appended to the piece, concerning one effect of the OFW phenomenon: detaching people from engagement in the political system) nd there is another piece, which people have taken to titling Mindsets of Inaction (I first saw the piece in village idiot savant; the piece has been endorsed by Lozada’s own nephew, so I take it as an endorsement of its being genuine), as discussed by former priest Ed dela Torre in his blog entry, A Peek into Jun Lozada’s Mind. A previous entry by dela Torre, Reinterpreting Rizal’s Ideas in 2008 is equally interesting, in which he probes Lozada’s keen interest in Rizal.

A radical offering up a glimpse into another’s radical thoughts, is, I think, something that requires reflection. The radical is dismissive of the limits imposed by the status quo, viewing those limits with neither affection nor veneration. This explains why a radical can be deeply embedded in the system, claiming to hold on to idealistic notions while being part of the system’s sins of omission and commission. This is why Lozada can preach love of country today, yet been found to be implicated in the wrongdoings of officials.

Lefthandledlayup (Feb. 11) says Lozada has no real friends. Tingog.com doesn’t think Lozada is hero, but he has the chance for redemption. Viloria.com suggests this, too.

Lester Cavestany identifies three crucial questions:

1) How come there are people who are not disturbed by Lozada’s testimony in the ongoing Senate hearing about the ZTE-NBN scandal?2) Why were there so many high-profile people who tried to stop Lozada from testifying in the Senate?3) Where do we go from here?
Strangely enough, I found my answers in studies made on battered women.

Those who express support for him (and the reasons why) ranges from a government worker, Irish’s Site (Feb. 8) to coffeeLover::::brattygurL (Feb. 11) to i like taho for breakfast (Feb. 12) to a slice of wine.. and a shot of cake.. to a Thomasian, Planet Earl ; for a post-mortem on Lozada’s Saturday evening grilling, see smoke (royally pissed off), live.laugh.sparkle (who felt the opposite way) to Leslie’s Crazy World!!! who heard about it from her mother, and (apropos to those who think Lozada has a point, but bring it to court, like Ang Pagbabagong Buhay) see Uniffors:

To Golez, who said let the courts decide, Lozada said we have a legal system but we have no justice system.

While those who continue to harbor doubts, ranges from Iniibig ko ang Pilipinas! (Feb. 8) to smoke (Feb. 13; yes two citings in this entry: she’s been on a roll); (among columnists those swinging from caution, to initial support, then swinging back to hostility because their close friends are affected includes Solita Monsod; on the other hand, columnists like John Nery say: be conscious of the nuances).

And there are those who express outright skepticism or hostility, from Beauty in the Breakdown to and Phoenix Eyrie, Reloaded (February 9).
A foreigner’s point of view: Torn & Frayed (Feb. 10):

I can’t see all this going anywhere. The Senate can expose the administration’s failings as much as it likes but an impeachment motion has to begin in the House and last Monday’s ousting of the Speaker by the pro-Malacañang block indicates that the president’s control over that body is stronger than ever. Lozada’s explosive testimony reminds me of Perfecto Yasay’s during the BW scandal all those years ago: explosive, but too far from the real center of power to prove fatal. Only when Gloria meets her Chavit — when someone in the inner circle finally turns the screw — will we see a “For rent” sign outside the palace.

There, too, is the decline and fall of Joker Arroyo: (though there are exceptions: Brown Monkey Theory said Joker made sense, too) particularly his fall in reputation as expressed by young people like memento and miss_choi, and lawyer marichu lambino, also, achacs den while faculty like USLS CAS Faculty Issues and Advocacies pointed out,

Joker Arroyo unwittingly hit on the truth when he asked Jun Lozada to explain why he didn’t go to London, as indicated in his travel request form, when he was already in Hong Kong. When Jun Lozada tried to explain that he never really intended to go to London (he didn’t even have a visa) and that his bosses knew about this Joker almost shouted and said “What your telling us that all these government officials are in conspiracy with you!” Hello Senator Arroyo, are you there sir?” Senator Arroyo, who used to be my idol, is certainly losing it. He must have been the only one in that room who didn’t know that yes, all of them from Litong Lito and Defensor, to Atty. Bautista (barred from teaching in UP and Ateneo for some kind of a misdemeanour involving a female student kuno), to Razon and Defensor, all of them were in a conspiracy to keep the truth about the NBN-ZTE deal from the Filipino people.

Snippets contrasts Lozada, on the other hand, with Miriam Defensor Santiago (see also Insert Foot in Mouth!). A contrasting view from Mad Musings of a Matabang Mama from Muntinlupa. Then again, Thirtysomething v.4.3 was unimpressed by Mad Miriam. 3sa doesn’t like the senators, period.

As for the question of Friday’s rally (lots of nifty pictures, by the way: see i will be a hot dancer, and Shooting for God’s Glory, Reggie… or NOT!, Nina’s Life Chronicled, as well as Wish You Were Here, and Oh Mickey you’re so fine you’re so fine…,) in Philippines Without Borders he was surprised to hear, on Thursday, that middle class office types intended to go.There’s this account by The Warrior’s World, who participated, having last taken part in a rally in the 1980s:

Today, I decided to make a stand and be counted. Even for a short while, I joined the crowd at the corner of Ayala and Paseo. Though i miss the fervor, the hysteria and the intensity of rallies in the 80s, i am glad i was there. kakaiba naman kasi talaga noon…

The wind of change is blowing… i was surprised to see that the crowd earlier where not your usual rallyista. there were expats, yuppies, makati executives. They were there, mingling with the masa.

The numbers may not be that huge, but at least i saw for myself there was something different.

There are those who expressed support, and were fairly pleased with the results. See and Half-swing (who likes the fact the politicians took the hint and didn’t make themselves the center of attention). Only God Can Judge Me comes out swinging at the rally’s critics.
And those who express opposition to the idea of rallies: see some are students, see wonderstricken: waking up creativity and A million girls would kill for my waistline.

As well as outright indifference: see LittleMisssPerplexed and paperchimes.net. Or who believe there are valid points raised by rallies but who, like Musings of a Media Strategist turned Retirement Strategist, who simply feels unworthy to be there. Steadiness… hates rallies because he thinks you should simply shoot all the crooks. Celebrating Life’s Journeys didn’t like the rally but offered up a prayer for Lozada.

Concerning Sunday’s mass,prior to it, Philippine Commentary has a bitch fight with Manoling Morato; leading up to it while ...strawberry-filled donuts… (Lozada’s nephew) was depressed, then cheered up; there are eyewitness accounts from SamutSari and Torn & Frayed (who also takes stock of the President’s situation), as well as Blood Sky, who said it best:

Day after day after day of hearing nothing but bad news, of hearing nothing but lies and cover-ups, of divisions, of graft and corruption, of killings and robberies, in this one morning, I saw and felt, unity. Under the roof of that gym, I saw and felt people of various walks of life from various sectors of society, just throw away the lines that clearly divide each of them, and come together to support a good man, a man who had the courage to just stand up to all of the farce, to all the deception and the coercion and just speak out the truth.

That kind of intense feeling burns deep in you when you experience it first hand. Even more when you see that everybody around you responds to it, accepts it and allows it to make them free. That’s how I felt the entire time, and even more so, near the tail end of the celebration, when they played “Bayan Ko”, and I saw the entire gym, myself included, raise our right fists up the air, as we sang that song, all the while feeling a chill down my spine as I heard every single one in the gym (well maybe not the younger generation who did not reach or have the opportunity to appreciate the song) sing with their hearts, sing with all passion.

I have seen many calls for change in this country. I too have taken let that call flow out of my mind, heart and mouth before. I wrote before that it does require a revolution to start change in this country. But it is not the revolution that a lot may mistake it to be. The Philippine society, not just the government and our leaders, but all of us, from the bottom all the way up, need to do a major examination of ourselves, and undertake the painful task of removing/changing all the deeply entrenched nuances and behaviors that we possess that cause our nation to deteriorate. These problems go way beyond the issue of corrupt officials. We can remove each and every one of these named perpetrators, remove every one in the current bureaucracy, even change the platform and type of our government. But if the behaviors, the nuances and the dysfunctional and distorted beliefs and ideals remain the same, then all those changes won’t mean anything. It’s just the same cycle all over again, with a new face plastered over the old one. SAME SHIT, DIFFERENT COLOR.

Change has to start somewhere. And if it isn’t apparent to the higher-ups, who somehow still continue to delude themselves into thinking that everything is peachy-keen, that everything is just fine and dandy, well let another concerned Filipino citizen add to that call. WAKE THE FUCK UP, IDIOTS!! Your shit has hit the fan and we all know its you guys. Everything’s over but the shouting. We’re all tired of the charade that all of you continue to put before us. We just want to go on with our lives, working hard to earn our keep, paying our dues without having to worry so much about our lives getting fucked over.

A very interesting observation, about the way people raised their fists during the singing of “Bayan Ko” during the Mass, from stuart-santiago:

…the singing of bayan ko, brought goose pimples. what a rare sight. the church-going middle-class with fists raised, many with great gusto, some self-consciously, and a few who just wouldn’t, or couldn’t, yet. oh, and one who flashed the L (laban) sign instead. never mind, they’ll get around to it, once they’re mad enough, and engaged enough, in the struggle for nation.

so is this a triumph for the communist left, that the raised fist has become the signal, too, of middle-class resistance? i think not. i think it’s mostly just the appeal of that palaban posture – it feels right (never mind that it’s left) and feels appropriate to the situation, as in dramatic and fraught with tension. ideologically, however, the middle-class is more rejectionist (RJ) than reaffirmative (RA) of joma sison, which is a great divide.

so how do we tell them apart, the true leftists from the bourgeois middle-class? i’m not sure about RJs, but certainly RAs raise left fists, burgis churchgoers raise the right.

A reflection, too, from filling in the blanks. And opposition to it from +livin’ lovin’ mania+ who says Lozada’s playing God, and Idiosyncratic Philosophy Leading to Infinity ; while are indifferent.

 

 

Then on the question of the President (who inspired a poem written by Chances in the Starlight) of whom The Write Stuff says the problem is her husband and kids. For all summers disease it’s a case of first things first: first the President, then the rest. But Spring Roll thinks all the right stuff are missing, thoughts echoed by Bong Austero who says this:

Let me get this clear: This administration is hopelessly corrupt beyond redemption and the sooner we get rid of these people, the better. But it’s not just these people. And removing this administration, and mainly by embarrassing and ridiculing it — which, also harms business and ourselves — should not be the only goal. A major reason why this administration is still in power is because most think that the people who are itching to replace this administration are doing so mainly for personal political gain. That may not be entirely true, but that’s the message people are getting. A taxi driver I talked to said it well: Better the thief that has been unmasked and has seemingly no pretensions of being moral than the people who claim to be imbued with stronger moral fiber.

But I have to ask: is he casting the net so wide, that it guarantees even the whales wriggle right on through? This extract from Brown SEO says it all:

This friend of mine which we shall name Tin and I had a heated debate on the capacity of the current government to govern its people that we began comparing the misgivings of one government to the other starting with the one deposed by the current regime.

Tin said: “Erap was tactless and other than being corrupt he was arrogantly corrupt. He was so arrogant that he even wags his corruption in front of his underlings. He wags his misdemeanors in front of his Military Generals… Imagine, he was supposed to attend a military parade to inspect the troops and he comes in a few hours because he was dead drunk the night before and he was complaining of a hang-over… they lost respect for Erap bringing him his own downfall. GMA inspite of her corruption she was well meaning to hide them under the table to keep them from the publics scrutinizing eyes… She was well bred enough to keep her slimy hands inside her pockets while Erap was not.”

To which I replied: “And so because GMA is able-bodied to keep her dead in her closet and she’s really good at that you would still permit her to stay in power? Don’t you think we should be more careful of her because of that? We never know perhaps one day it’s your family’s carcass inside that closet as well as our country’s well being.”

I understand her point well. As if saying that being able to hide ones own evil is a skill or a taste of genius, or to vehemently proclaim justice and yet get away with ones own farce is considered gifted in the realm of politics.

And this reflection, by bitchology 101, who is a nursing student:

it just made me wonder how the people in our government can tolerate hundreds or million dollar corruption when the people they are supposed to be serving couldn’t even manage to have a life decent enough. it made me contemplate again, having such kind of public officials, will there still be hope for this country? coz I’m starting to fear for my own future too.

my friends and i have been talking about that for some time now. Normal for soon to be graduates, i guess. we’re just thinking of the P70,ooo+ our parents spent solely for this sem, and the P15,000 they still have to provide for us when we review in summer. we were disillusioned by the belief that we can start working by the end of this year already(that is if we passed the board) and then we can start earning back all the money spent for our uber expensive education. but we were greatly disappointed upon learning that our monthly allowance today is even higher that the salary that we will be having as nurses. Add the fact that it’s so hard to look for a job these days, that is according to some our co-tams from the higher batches. so i guess it will really take time before i can be able to give back to my fam, and even much more time before i can finally work abroad. i still have a decade or at least half a decade to spend and to suffer here in Pinas. sigh.

it’s too bad that we’re still 2 years away from the 2010 elections. just like what’s been said in the news in chan7, there seems to be a “people power fatigue” coz more Pinoys are now apathetic of what’s happening. cant blame them. nakakasawa naman talaga. paulit-ulit lang, wala naman ding nangyayari. parang red bull si GMA eh, ang bumangga giba. punyeta. bleh.
oh well, what else can we do but go on with our lives right? and i guess pray, pray hard for a miracle. ganyan talaga ang buhay Pinoy. miserable but still nice in a lot of weird ways. 😉

Finally, here are today’s readings.

First, the Sunday homily of Fr. Manoling Francisco, S.J. He differentiates legal truth from the truth necessary to reach conclusions about an administration’s fitness to govern:

RECLAIMING OUR HUMANITY
MASS FOR JUN LOZADA
LA SALLE GYMNASIUM, GREENHILLS
17 FEBRUARY 2008
Fr. Manoling Francisco, S.J.

On this Second Sunday of Lent, during which we are asked to reflect on the Transfiguration of Jesus Christ, I wish to touch on three themes that have to do with our moral transformation as a people: first, Ascertaining Credibility; second, Rediscovering our Humanity; and third, Witnessing to the Truth. In so doing, I hope to invite all of you to reflect more deeply on how we, as a nation, might respond to the present political crisis in which our identity and ethos, our convictions and integrity, in fact, who we are as a people, are at stake.

I. ASCERTAINING CREDIBILITY

Jun, as Sen. Miriam Santiago has grilled you to ascertain your credibility (or was it to undermine your credibility?), allow me to raise some important questions to consider in the very process of discerning your credibility. Allow me to do so by drawing on my own counseling experience.

Very often, a young rape victim initially suppresses his or her awful and painful story, indeed wills to forget it, in the hope that by forgetting, he or she can pretend it never happened. But very often, too, there comes a point when concealing the truth becomes unbearable, and the desperate attempts to supposedly preserve life and sanity become increasingly untenable.

At this point the victim of abuse decides to seek help. But even after having taken this step, the victim, devastated and confused, will tell his or her story with much hesitation and trepidation. It should be easy to imagine why. In telling the truth, one risks casting shame on himself or herself, subjecting oneself to intense scrutiny and skepticism, and jeopardizing one’s safety and those of his or her loved ones, especially when one dares to go up against an older or more powerful person.

Similarly, it is easy to imagine why Jun would initially refuse to challenge the might of Malacanang. Who in his or her right mind would accuse Malacanang of crimes against our people and implicate the First Family in a sordid tale of greed and corruption, knowing that by doing so, one endangers one’s life and the lives of his or her loved ones? We are, after all, living in dangerous times, where the government has not hesitated to use everything in its power to keep itself in power, where it has yet to explain and solve the numerous cases of extra-judicial killings.

But Jun is in his right mind. His story rings true especially in the face of the perils that he has had to face. And by his courage, Jun has also shown that it is not only that he is in his right mind; his heart is also in the right place.

Hence, my personal verdict: Jun, I believe that you are a credible witness. And if hundreds have gathered here this morning, it is probably because they also believe in you. Mga kapatid, naniniwala ba kayo kay Jun Lozada? Naniniwala ba kayo sa kanyang testimonya? Kung gayon, palakpakan po natin ang Probinsyanong Intsik, si Mr. Jun Lozada.

Jun, we hope that by our presence here, you may find some consolation. Pope Benedict XVI writes that “con-solatio” or consolation means “being with the other in his or her solitude, so that it ceases to be solitude.” Jun, be assured that your solitude is no longer isolation as we profess our solidarity with you. Hindi ka nag-iisa. We are committed to stay the course and to do our best to protect you and your family and the truth you have proclaimed.

II. REDISCOVERING OUR HUMANITY

What makes Jun a credible witness to us?

I think Jun is credible not simply by virtue of his being an eyewitness to the unmitigated greed of some of our public officials. Perhaps more importantly, Jun is credible because he has witnessed to us what it means to be truly human.

Which leads me to my second theme: What does it mean to be human? How might we rediscover our humanity?

Allow me to quote Pope Benedict XVI, who in his latest encyclical, Spe Salvi, has written: “the capacity to accept suffering for the sake of goodness, truth and justice is an essential criterion of humanity, because if my own well-being and safety are ultimately more important than truth and justice, then the power of the stronger prevails, then violence and untruth reign supreme. Truth and justice must stand above my comfort and physical well-being, or else my life becomes a lie. . . For this … we need witnesses — martyrs …. We need them if we are to prefer goodness to comfort, even in the little choices we face each day.”

Our Holy Father concludes, “the capacity to suffer for the sake of the truth is the measure of humanity.”

Isn’t this the reason we emulate our martyrs: Jose Rizal, Gomburza, Evelio Javier, Macli-ing Dulag, Cesar Climaco and Ninoy Aquino? They have borne witness for us what it means to be truly human — to be able to suffer for the sake of others and for the sake of the truth.

I remember Cory recalling a conversation she had with Ninoy while they were in exile in Boston. Cory asked Ninoy what he thought might happen to him once he set foot in Manila. Ninoy said there were three possibilities: one, that he would be rearrested and detained once more in Fort Bonifacio; two, that he would be held under house arrest; and three, that he would be assassinated.

“Then why go home?” Cory asked.

To which Ninoy answered: “Because I cannot allow myself to die a senseless death, such as being run over by a taxi cab in New York. I have to go home and convince Ferdinand Marcos to set our people free.”

Witnessing to one’s deepest convictions, notwithstanding the consequences, is the measure of our humanity. Proclaiming the truth to others, whatever the cost, is the mark of authentic humanity.

Jun, we know you have feared for your life and continue to do so. But in transcending your fears for yourself and your family, you have reclaimed your humanity. And your courage and humility, despite harassment and calumniation by government forces, embolden us to retrieve and reclaim our humanity tarnished by our cowardice and complicity with sin in the world. You have inspired us to be true to ourselves and to submit to and serve the truth that transcends all of us.

III. WITNESSING TO THE TRUTH

This leads us to our third and last theme: witnessing to the truth. In his encyclical, Pacem in Terris, Pope John XXIII exhorts that it is the fundamental duty of the government to uphold the truth: “A political society is to be considered well-ordered, beneficial and in keeping with human dignity if it grounded on truth.” Moreover, the encyclical explains that unless a society is anchored on the truth, there can be no authentic justice, charity and freedom.

Every government is therefore obliged to serve the truth if it is to truly serve the people. Its moral credibility and authority over a people is based on the extent of its defense of and submission to the truth. Insofar as a government is remiss in upholding the truth, insofar as a government actively suppresses the truth, it loses its authority vested upon it by the people.

At this juncture, allow me to raise a delicate question: At what point does an administration lose its moral authority over its constituents?

First, a clear tipping point is the surfacing of hard evidence signifying undeniable complicity of certain government officials in corruption and injustice, evidence that can be substantiated in court.

Hence, during the Marcos Regime, the manipulation of Snap Election results as attested to by the tabulators who walked out of the PICC was clear evidence of the administration’s disregard for and manipulation of the collective will of the people in order to remain in power..

During the Erap Administration, the testimony of Clarissa Ocampo, claiming that Pres. Erap had falsified Equitable Bank documents by signing as Jose Velarde, was the smoking gun that triggered the rage of our people.

Allow me to respond to the same question by pursue an alternative track of argument: an administration loses it moral authority over its people when it fails in its fundamental duty to uphold the truth, when it is constituted by an ethos of falsehood. When a pattern of negligence in investigating the truth, suppressing the truth and harassing those who proclaim the truth is reasonably established, then a government, in principle, loses its right to rule over and represent the people.

Regarding negligence: Do the unresolved cases, such as the the failed automation of the national elections, the fertilizer scam, the extra-judicial killings, and the “Hello, Garci” scandal, constitute negligence on the part of the GMA Administartion to probe and ferret out the truth?

Regarding covering-up the truth: Does the abduction of Jun Lozada and the twisting and manipulation of his narrative by Malacanang’s minions constitute concealment of the truth? Was the padlocking of the office of Asst. Gov’t Counsel Gonzales who testified before the Senate regarding the North Rail project anomaly an instance of covering-up the truth?

Regarding the suppression of the truth: Does the issuance and implementation of E.O. 464, which prevents government officals from testifying in Senate hearings without Malacanang’s permission, constitute suppression of the truth? Was the prevention of AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Senga and six other officers from testifying before the Senate with regard the “Hello, Garci” scandal tantamount to a suppression of the truth? Was disallowing Brig. Gen. Quevedo, Lt. Col Capuyan and Lt. Col. Sumayo from appearing before the Lower House an instance of hindering the truth from surfacing?

And regarding harassment of those who proclaim the truth: Are the abduction of Jun Lozada and the decision to court-marshall Gen. Gudani and Col. Balutan for disregarding Malacanang’s order not to testify before the Senate examples of punishing those who come forth to tell the truth?

By conflating one’s responses to all these questions does one arrive not at hard evidence showing culpapility on the part of some government officials, but a ghestalt, an image which nonetheless demands our assessment and judgment. I invite all of you then to consider these two methods of evaluating and judging the moral credibility of any government, the moral credibility of our present government.

Allow me to end with a few words about an Ignatian virtue, familiaritas cum Deo. To become familiar with God involves the illumination of the intellect, coming to know who God is and what God wills. But it also involves the conversion of the affect, the reconfiguration of the heart. Becoming familiar with God entails trasforming and conforming my thinking, my feeling and my doing in accordance to the Lord’s, which can only be the work of grace.

Familiarity with God thus entail rejoicing in what God delights — the truth; abhoring what God detests — falsehood; being pained by what breaks the heart of God — the persecution of truth-seekers. Familiary with God means sharing the passion of God for the truth and the pathos of God whenever the truth and the bearers of truth are overcome by the forces of the lie.

On this Second Sunday of Lent, as we contemplate the transfiguration of Jesus Christ on Mount Horeb, we pray that our hearts and minds be so transfigured and so conformed to the mind, heart and will of the Jesus, our way, our life, and our truth.

May the Lord bless and protect you, Jun, and your family. May the Lord bless and guide us all into the way of truth. Amen.

Second, the statement issued by former members of the cabinet, etc. for other officials to come forward (for background, see Calls for Arroyo, Cabinet members to resign mount and Ex-Cabinet men ask Arroyo officials in telecoms deal to resign):

TIME TO GO: A CALL TO OUR COLLEAGUES IN GOVERNMENT

We are former government officials who have held high positions in the current and previous administrations. Having participated in the highest level of governance up close and personal, we now feel compelled to speak up for our demoralized public servants and arrest the decline of our institutions of governance. In the past, many of us kept quiet, going on about our daily chores, attending to business as usual.

However, over the last few days, we, together with the rest of the country, have seen one man — Jun Lozada — finally decide that he can no longer be part of the massive graft and corruption that permeates this government. His testimony exposed that the corruption in the project he dealt with — the NBN ZTE project — is standard in what he called “dysfunctional government procurement processes.”

Clearly, what Jun Lozada knew so terrified the powers-that-be that they unwittingly exposed what Jun called “the dark side of the state” — state-sponsored terrorism that had been rearing its ugly head in the various disappearances and extra-judicial killings in the past six years — and which almost took him as a victim in a botched kidnapping that the administration has been trying, with little success, to cover up.

In a sense, all Jun Lozada did was to confirm what we already know: Our country is sliding into moral decadence. He also confirmed the systematic destruction of our democratic institutions and the systemic nature of our problems. We have seen this in the wanton disregard of checks-and-balances; abuse of the powers of the President; the cooptation through patronage and outright bribery of the other branches of government; politically sponsored corruption, facilitated, not thwarted, by bureaucratic procedures; the naked use of power and authority through the PNP, PSG, NAIA, among others, to strangle the truth; and the deployment of cabinet, sub-cabinet officials, and the military to obstruct justice and cover up illegal orders and acts.

In the past, for too many times that we were confronted with threats to our democracy and to our moral values, our response was: “What can we do about it? What is our choice? Who will lead us?”

These questions persist but, today, we can no longer stay silent. We can no longer ignore the reality of a government gone wild, wreaking havoc on our rights and institutions in a climate of impunity. We can no longer console ourselves in the strength of the peso, narrowing deficits, and an expanding economy. Even these ephemeral gains have not translated into a better life for the majority of our people, especially the poor.

The future of our country is at stake. Our democratic institutions are under attack. What we stand to lose is the moral fabric of our society.

We call on all government officials — Cabinet Secretaries, Undersecretaries, Heads of Agencies — who know about these anomalous transactions to join the heroic stand of Jun Lozada to come forward and speak out. We call on all those who know about the extrajudicial killings and disappearances to go public and tell the truth. We call on all those who can no longer endure this wrongful governance, with its structures of evil and unmoderated greed: IT IS TIME TO CUT CLEAN! IT IS TIME TO GO! .

Tama na! Sobra na! Panahon na!

Signed by:
1. Florencio Abad (Former Secretary of Education)
2. Tomas Africa, (Former Administrator, National Statistics Office)
3. Rafael Alunan III (Former Secretary of Tourism)
4. Tomas Apacible (Former Commissioner of Customs)
5. Senen Bacani (Former Secretary of Agriculture)
6. Angelito Banayo (Former Secretary of Political Affairs)
7. Romeo Bernardo (Former Undersecretary of Finance)
8. Gerardo Bulatao (Former Undersecretary of Agrarian Reform)
9. Clifford Burkley (Former Undersecretary of Social Welfare and Development)
10. Ramon Cardenas (Former Head of the Presidential Management Staff)
11. Jose Cuisia (Former Governor of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas)
12. Sostenes Campillo (Former Undersecretary of Tourism)
13. Karina Constantino-David (Former Chairman of the Civil Service Commission)
14. Elfren Cruz (Former Head of the Presidential Management Staff)
15. Isagani Cruz (Former Undersecretary of Education)
16. Teresita Quintos Deles (Former Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process)
17. Benjamin Diokno (Former Secretary of Budget and Management)
18. Quintin Doromal Sr. (Former Commissioner, Presidential Commission on Good Governance)
19. Franklin Drilon (Former Executive Secretary)
20. Narcisa Escaler (Former Ambassador to the United Nations)
21. Jesus Estanislao (Former Secretary of Finance)
22. Fulgencio Factoran Jr. (Former Secretary of the Environment and Natural Resources)
23. Victoria Garchitorena (Former Head of the Presidential Management Staff)
24. Ernesto Garilao (Former Secretary of Agrarian Reform)
25. Peter Garrucho (Former Executive Secretary)
26. Jose Luis Gascon (Former Undersecretary of Education)
27. Marietta Goco (Former Chairman of the Presidential Commission to Fight Poverty)
28. Jose Antonio Gonzalez (Former Minister of Tourism)
29. Milwilda Guevarra (Former Undersecretary of Finance)
30. Cielito Habito (Former Secretary-General of the National Economic Development Authority)
31. Edilberto de Jesus Jr. (Former Secretary of Education)
32. Philip Ella Juico (Former Secretary of Agrarian Reform)
33. Antonio La Viña (Former Undersecretary of the Environment and Natural Resources)
34. Bienvenido Laguesma (Former Secretary of Labor and Employment)
35. Lina Laigo (Former Secretary of Social Welfare and Development)
36. Ernest Leung (Former Secretary of Finance)
37. Josefina Lichauco (Former Secretary of Transportation and Communications)
38. Narzalina Lim (Former Secretary of Tourism)
39. Juan Miguel Luz (Former Undersecretary of Education)
40. Felipe Medalla (Former Secretary-General of the National Economic Development Authority)
41. Jose Molano Jr. (Former Executive Director of the Commission on Filipinos Overseas)
42. Vitaliano Nañagas (Former Chairman of the Development Bank of the Philippines)
43. Imelda Nicolas (Former Lead Convenor of the National Anti-Poverty Commission)
44. Roberto de Ocampo (Former Secretary of Finance)
45. Oscar Orbos (Former Executive Secretary)
46. Ernesto Ordoñez (Former Secretary of Presidential Flagship Programs and Projects)
47. Victor Ordoñez (Former Undersecretary of Education)
48. Cayetano Paderanga (Former Secretary-General of the National Economic Development Authority)
49. Jose Pardo (Former Secretary of Trade and Industry)
50. Vicente Paterno (Former Minister of Trade and Industry)
51. Felicito Payumo (Former Chairman of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority)
52. Pete Prado (Former Secretary of Transportation and Communication)
53. Cesar Purisima (Former Secretary of Finance)
54. Victor Ramos (Former Secretary of the Environment and Natural Resources)
55. Amina Rasul (Former Chairman of the National Youth Commission)
56. Alberto Romualdez Jr. (Former Secretary of Health)
57. Albert del Rosario (Former Ambassador to the United States of America)
58. Francisco del Rosario (Former Chairman of the Development Bank of the Philippines)
59. Ramon del Rosario (Former Secretary of Finance)
60. Melito Salazar (Former Member of the Monetary Board, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas)
61. Leticia Ramos-Shahani (Former Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs)
62. Cesar Sarino (Former Secretary of the Interior and Local Government)
63. Juan Santos (Former Secretary of Trade and Industry)
64. Corazon Juliano-Soliman (Former Secretary of Social Welfare and Development)
65. Hector Soliman (Former Undersecretary of Agrarian Reform)
66. Mario Taguiwalo (Former Undersecretary of Health)
67. Jaime Galvez Tan (Former Secretary of Health)
68. Wigberto Tañada (Former Commissioner of Customs)
69. Rene Villa (Former Secretary of Agrarian Reform)
70. Veronica Villavicencio (Former Lead Convenor of the National Anti-Poverty Commission)
71. Deogracias Vistan (Former President of the Land Bank of the Philippines)

And finally, the statement of the Catholic Educators Association of the Philippines, calling on member schools to engage their students in efforts to understand what’s going on:

Speaking Truth, Seeking Justice
Setting Things Right
CEAP on the Events of our Time
February 14, 2008

“No lie can live forever,” said Carlyle. “Truth, crushed to earth, will rise again,” added William Cullen Bryant. And forty years ago, Martin Luther King cried:

On some positions,
Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?”
Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?”
Vanity asks the question, “Is it popular?”
But Conscience asks the question, “Is it right?”

There comes a time when one must take a position
that is neither safe nor politic nor popular;
but one must take it
because Conscience says, “It is right.”

Following his conscience, Rodolfo Lozada Jr. these days has revealed possible corruption in the handling of government contracts. His confession has stirred memories of other allegations by other people of graft and greed in government, and is shaking the souls of many to speak and act in response.

What of us, the Catholic Educational Association of the Philippines (CEAP), an association of 1,252 schools, colleges, and universities with at least 2 million students and around 120,000 school personnel and faculty?

We too must speak, we too must act. For, as the same Martin Luther King continued, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent on things that matter.”

Silent then we must not be or must no longer be, if once we were. May not our lives end but rather begin in a special way this Valentine’s Day. Beyond the love we are expected to declare for the persons of our hearts, is the love for the people of our country that we are invited to express in this time of crisis in our land. Mere bystanders we cannot just be but active participants in the continuous task of shaping our nation’s life. In the words of Vaclav Havel, “By perceiving ourselves as part of the river, we take responsibility for the river as a whole.”

For those of us who know the truth, we pray for the courage to speak it. For those who seek justice, we pray for humility in the pursuit, personal integrity in the quest, respect for others involved in the search. For those of us who must judge and act on what we see and hear, we pray for fairness and the will to make the good triumph over evil in a way that removes the bad, without the act leading to what is even worse.

In tandem with the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) we invite our member schools and their constituents, our alumni and friends individually and communally to pray for guidance on what to do in these times of tension and difficulty. We ask our administrators, faculty, and students to bring to the fore the issues of the day, discuss in humility and decide in fortitude and love what we must do together as a people in the different parts of the country where we are.

We must seek to discover the educative moment and the lesson for life in the investigation sessions and in the rallies and other mass actions we may join. To our country and the world we must show and say that we will not allow dishonesty, corruption, indifference or neglect to rule our lives. We must look into ourselves and ensure that what we decry in others we do not do ourselves.

We should pledge to continue to teach and live truth, honesty and integrity in our own schools so that when our graduates leave us they bring with them not just skills and knowledge but wisdom and love to inspire and change the world.

To this end, we link up with other groups sincerely searching for truth and justice. We encourage the establishment of truth centers in our schools so that our students, teachers, and staff are led to continuing awareness, reflection, and formation toward social-political engagement. We invite our members to support the sanctuary fund set up by the Association of Major Religious Superiors of the Philippines (AMRSP). We support the signature campaign demanding the implementation of the Supreme Court’s decision junking Executive Order 464 so that the search for truth is not hindered or compromised.

Jesus, the Way, the Truth, and the Life we shall continue to ask to lead us, accompany and comfort us in all we need to do. It is He, after all, who will truly set us free. The Holy Spirit we ask to enlighten us so that our external actions flow from inner harmony of heart. We remember the words of Will Durant: “A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.” So we ask our Heavenly Father for the grace that we never neglect but ever firm up the moral fiber of our souls.

Our anger at the wrong and sinful things in and around us may we not allow to make of ourselves men and women of violence. We take to heart the thought of Martin Luther King: “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence, you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.”

May our light dispel our darkness, may our love melt whatever hatred may lurk within. But in this Kairos moment, this time of grace, we, the Catholic Educational Association of the Philippines, with all men and women of good will, in our nation and in the world, in the name of the Lord, by the grace of His Spirit, in concert and in communion call on ourselves and one another to — speak the truth, seek justice and work to set things right.

CEAP National Board of Directors

Manuel L. Quezon III.

562 thoughts on “Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more

  1. Manolo, another correction in defense of James. In your link it says that Manila has 1.58 million residents which comes to around 2% of the Philippine population. So when James says “Imperial Manila” i think he really means Manila proper (and not Quezon City or Mandaluyong for example).

  2. irregular but not impossible. besides, ikaw lang ata ang nagi-insist na there must be a correlation between GDP and family income, basta may maibato lang kay gloria. GDP measures economic activity more than anything – Anthony Scalia

    Hindi lang ako ang ‘nagi-insist’. Pati na ang mga dating pinuno ng NEDA na si Cielito Habito, Felipe Medalla at Solita Monsod.

    http://www.cvjugo.blogspot.com/2008/01/tale-of-two-statistics-family-income.html

    ayaw mo nun, it will support the view that GDP doesn’t measure quality of life, which is what you really want to shout from the mountaintops (your way of telling gloria ‘take that!’) – Anthony Scalia

    Walang kinalaman ang ayaw o gusto ko. Pareho silang quantitative measures of income. Iba nga lang ang mga sangkap na bumubuo ng dalawang sukat na ito.

  3. okay. maybe i’m dumb to still believe in the inherent goodness of man…but here goes…

    I don’t see GMA staying beyond 2010. Every president thought about their legacy to the nation and that doesn’t include following in the footsteps of Marcos. And because of this, and also because she has to leave a good name to her politically-inclined sons, she will clean up, open up the administration and push the country forward economically.

    if an impeachment can be passed through the lower house – fine, I’m looking forward to it. gloria resign won’t work because it has to have some teeth to have the support of the majority, not to mention the military – without those two elements, she stays till 2010.

    the only way to redeem our country is through education of the electorate…not just the adults but the next generation.

  4. “we can prevent the same dogs replacing the old ones by holding a snap election now. that’s always been the logical remedy. wipe the slate clean. and we must learn the lessons of the 2 edsas.”

    Im, not open to snap election. Just liek peopel power this can set a bad precedt too. Mamaya konti scandal involving the president peopel will threaten go to streets again calling for snap election.

  5. Kung parliamentary na ang Pilipinas, hindi na kailangan ang snap election by the people — vote of “no confidence” by the honorable members of parliament na lang ang kailangan. A motion of no confidence is a parliamentary motion traditionally put before a parliament by the opposition in the hope of defeating or embarrassing a government.

    Ngayon, to prevent crises of the state by ensuring that whoever is head of government has enough support to govern, siguro kailangan kopyahin ng Pinas-parliamentary ay ang mother-country Spain which use “Construction Motion of No Confidence”. In Spain (also Israel and Germany), a vote of No Confidence requires that the opposition, on the same ballot, propose a candidate of their own whom they want to be appointed as successor by the respective head of state.

  6. bencard, ang akala ko dito, si Lozada ay testigo lamang o witness sa kaso, siya ay hindi nag-akusa. Hindi pa inakusa sina FG at si Abalos. Ang alam ko ang Senate hearing ay factfinding lamang para kuno in aid of legislation. ang ma-ari lang mag-akusa kina Abalos, FG at kay Lozada mismo dahil sila manga opisyales sa Gobeyerno ay ang Ombudsman nga kaklase ni FG. iyan ata ang patakaran sa Filipinas..baka ang sa iyo sa Amerika. Ulit is Lozada hindi nag akusa, siya pa ay testigo lamang, pareho rin ni Mr. Neri, si Mr. Abalos testigo rin sa Senate hearing kasi ang Senate Hearing hindi Trial Court ata. siguro iyon ata ang responsibiladad nang senado.

  7. UPN

    Based on the proposed Charter revisions; they actually did.

    One of the premises of that is that its easier to be united against someone you don’t want than to be united on someone you do want. Or words to that effect; can’t exactly remember the exact words but thats basically it.

    On it alone; it has its merits but the combination with the other recommedations would totally wipe away what they explained to be the benefits of a parliamentary government.

  8. “I don’t see GMA staying beyond 2010. Every president thought about their legacy to the nation and that doesn’t include following in the footsteps of Marcos. And because of this, and also because she has to leave a good name to her politically-inclined sons, she will clean up, open up the administration and push the country forward economically.” — Mita

    We have to go by objective indicators. GMA from her track record has not been known to “clean up”. She always plays the “populist card” but she is no democrat. Contrast with FVR, who was a military man, but was shown to be a true democrat during his presidency. GMA meanwhile has consistently shown that she is oblivious to the will of the people. She has lied, evaded, and obstructed the path of justice and truth. After Hello Garci or Joc-Joc Bolante, Jose Pidal, she and her family have only became more and more rapacious — indicators that they would exploit every situation just because they could. And she is a very pragmatic politician who uses power at all costs. With all the moves to amend the Constitution which will surely come up again — she could find a way not to stay in power per se but so as to evade being made accountable and allow her to forge deals with other politicians along the way.

    Re: her wanting to leave a “legacy”. In previous threads, I have argued that her so called “economic triumphs” are not her work — our economy has grown mainly due to OFW remittances resulting in a consumption-driven growth, and meanwhile our domestic economy remained stunted, except for the BPO sector. We have an economy which has grown inspite of, not because of her policies. Add to that she has opportunistically exploited the global job environment and allowed brain drain to continue unabated, which resulted in the worsening migratory pattern of the middle class – and to think she says we aim to become a first world country. Que barbaridad! How will that happen when the middle class have all but left and who would remain in the country but the rapacious elite and poverty stricken, powerless majority. I am sorry to say but as a leader she does not have a long-term vision of where we should go. We have given her 7 years, we have given her the benefit of the doubt and her time is up. She would have been really lucky if Lozada didn’t turn up.

    And yet, I also hope that she will really show something, you know that maybe would all convince us that she should be allowed to finish her term. It is always wise to give someone the benefit of the doubt.

  9. cvj,

    “Hindi lang ako ang ‘nagi-insist’. Pati na ang mga dating pinuno ng NEDA na si Cielito Habito, Felipe Medalla at Solita Monsod”

    so where do you attribute the decrease in the purchasing power of families? to Hello Garci? to gloria’s economic mismanagement? to the NBN-ZTE deal? Solita Monsod provides the explanation in the same column you cited –

    That real average family incomes decreased even as real total incomes increased, i.e., that even as the national “bibingka” [pie] became larger, the share of each partaker became smaller, can only be due to one thing: the number of those partaking of the bibingka increased at a faster rate than the rate at which the bibingka increased. Specifically, between 2003 (16,480 families) and 2006 (17,408), 923,000 more families were added. No matter how one tries, one cannot get around the population “challenge” that stares us in the face.

    “Walang kinalaman ang ayaw o gusto ko. Pareho silang quantitative measures of income. Iba nga lang ang mga sangkap na bumubuo ng dalawang sukat na ito”

    oo nga quantitative nga. don’t ever say that walang kinalaman ang ayaw o gusto mo. why are you citing them? ano ang gusto mo at you are citing them? di ba to discredit gloria, kahit na in the process you’re denying the output of hard-working Pinoys here

    uulitin ko, GDP measures economic activity, not spending power of the people. i don’t see a disconnect between a supposed increase in per capita GDP and the FIES results. as one blogger here said

    GDP is more than wages and salaries. Sand-and-gravel; rebars; gasoline, oil; made-in-RP automatic rifles plus trucks and truck-parts go into GDP.

    When the US military built those highways in Basilan, the expenditures got added into GDP. The construction cost for C5 and all the flyovers also go into GDP

    madali lang naman i-measure ang per capita GDP di ba? GDP divided by the population

    ill say it again, i refer to GDP as a measure of economic activity, not standard of living, and definitely not purchasing power of families

  10. I believe CVJ is again advocating confiscation because of the phrase below….

    “Sorry, the oligarchs can go but their capital cannot (or at least should not) above was meant for Tonio.”

    Let’s try to see if we can get CVJ’s wealth first///mahilig din naman siya sa confiscation…

  11. Anthony

    Wala ka nang magagawa…kapag natinta ng kulay ang glasses, kahit anong linis mo, yun kulay ng tinta pa rin ang nandiyan. Di talaga makuha na GDP is a measure of economic activity and not a measure of standard of living…to think all the while akala ko pa naman may PhD sa Economics at cite ng cite ng mga economic indicators, eh ganun kasimple lang na measurement, di naman pala naintindihan….

  12. Anthony, in that portion you quoted, Monsod was simply explaining how it could be that average family income decreased. Later in that article, she then expresses her puzzlement on why the per capita GDP indicates otherwise.

    The level of economic activity you refer to that is being measured by GDP is expressed as National Income. For example, in a hypothetical country whose economy consists of a single lechon-manok stall operated by only one person (who raises his own chickens, roasts and sells the chicken), you measure the level of economic activity by the amount of sales of that lechon-manok stall (i.e. sales = lechon-manok sold x price per lechon-manok). The GDP per capita in this case is total lechon-manok sales of that single person in that stall. Since he is a single person belonging to one family, per capita GDP will be equal to average family income. I hope the above example clarifies for you the similarities between per capita GDP and average family income.

    Of course, an economy consists of more than a single business. In UPn’s example of the highways in Basilan, C5 and flyovers, the expenditures are reflected in GDP by adding up the income of the contractors, engineers and laborers (assuming they are local residents) and revenue of those who sold the raw materials (e.g. cement, steel beams assuming its locally produced). If the firm that sells the cement is a corporation (or a partnership), then its profits (the retained earnings portion) are not reflected in family income – only as business income.

    Therefore, for the divergence in per Capita GDP and average family income to occur, it should imply that most of the per capita GDP growth over the decade is because of increases in business (i.e. corporate and partnerships) income large enough to compensate for the decrease in personal income. That’s a highly unlikely scenario.

  13. mabuhay parin Si Ate GLO!!!!

    Kahit ano pa gawin niyo siya parin ang pinakamatalinong presidente since Marcos.

  14. mang isko, testigo nga si lozada pero and kanyang testimonya ay nagpaparatang ng kriminalidad, paris ng kidnapping, bribery, perjury at iba pa laban sa ibat-ibang tao. dapat lang patotohanan niya and kanyang sinasabi lalo pa’t tila kumbinsido na ang nakararami dito at mga senadores, e aligasyon pa lamang yan ni lozada. ano ba naman kung magpasailalim siya sa LDT kung talagang nagsasabi siya ng tutoo? kung magkakaroon ng caso ito sa hukuman ay dahil sa kaniyang pagbibintang. tila ang tawag po diyan ay “complaining witness” na ang testimonya ang pagbabasehan ng casong isasampa ng ombudsman sa korte.

  15. cvj,

    in that portion you quoted, Monsod was simply explaining how it could be that average family income decreased. Later in that article, she then expresses her puzzlement on why the per capita GDP indicates otherwise.

    that’s not the whole picture my friend. she said that even though the economic bibingka pie got bigger, average family income decreased, because the number of individual slices of this pie increased. The rise in number of slices is faster than the increase in size of the pie.

    then from there she was puzzled why despite the decrease, there’s a rise in per capita GDP figures.

    irregular? could be, but not impossible

    The level of economic activity you refer to that is being measured by GDP is expressed as National Income. For example, in a hypothetical country whose economy consists of a single lechon-manok stall operated by only one person (who raises his own chickens, roasts and sells the chicken), you measure the level of economic activity by the amount of sales of that lechon-manok stall (i.e. sales = lechon-manok sold x price per lechon-manok). The GDP per capita in this case is total lechon-manok sales of that single person in that stall. Since he is a single person belonging to one family, per capita GDP will be equal to average family income. I hope the above example clarifies for you the similarities between per capita GDP and average family income

    sorry but it didn’t clarify one bit. sablay pa nga

    the sales is GDP. sales is the final output. per capita GDP is the sales divided by the number of members of his family, including the owner-operator. per capita GDP is the supposed economic output of each family member.

    income is not a component of GDP. what GDP measures is the final output that resulted from work paid by income.

    An employed IT consultant bills and collects US$500,000 for services rendered in a year. But he is paid only US$75,000 a year. The US$500T is the GDP

    “Of course, an economy consists of more than a single business. In UPn’s example of the highways in Basilan, C5 and flyovers, the expenditures are reflected in GDP by adding up the income of the contractors, engineers and laborers (assuming they are local residents) and revenue of those who sold the raw materials (e.g. cement, steel beams assuming its locally produced). If the firm that sells the cement is a corporation (or a partnership), then its profits (the retained earnings portion) are not reflected in family income – only as business income.

    Therefore, for the divergence in per Capita GDP and average family income to occur, it should imply that most of the per capita GDP growth over the decade is because of increases in business (i.e. corporate and partnerships) income large enough to compensate for the decrease in personal income. That’s a highly unlikely scenario.”

    iho, ang components of GDP ay public and private investments, consumer spending at exports. why are you insisting on income’s inclusion in GDP? already included in the final product is the compensation given to the producer/provider of the goods/services.

    saka iho, napapalayo na tayo sa talakayan natin. I started the discussion with the use of GDP as measurement of economic activity, without any mention of family spending or standard of living.

    uulitin ko again – never did i ever mention that GDP is a measure of quality of living or spending power

    my goodness, we’re just looking at a figure! That figure doesn’t even say how the economic activity is dispersed/scattered. Its possible to have a high GDP and all of it is produced in Metro Manila.

    China’s per capita GDP is around US$2,500, yet how come 900 million Chinese live in absolute poverty? But that ‘disconnect’ does not detract from China being an economic wonder

    again, for the nth time – GDP measures the final output. the income paid to produce that final output is already included in, and taken from, such final output. by itself, GDP is silent on spending power/standard of living

  16. Silent Waters,

    “Wala ka nang magagawa…kapag natinta ng kulay ang glasses, kahit anong linis mo, yun kulay ng tinta pa rin ang nandiyan. Di talaga makuha na GDP is a measure of economic activity and not a measure of standard of living…to think all the while akala ko pa naman may PhD sa Economics at cite ng cite ng mga economic indicators, eh ganun kasimple lang na measurement, di naman pala naintindihan….”

    oo nga eh. frustrating lang kasi.

    sa economic activity lang naman magkakaroon ng jobs.

  17. miq3 & jeg, i didn’t see “harapan” but if you were referring to lozada’s challenge to take the LDT with abalos, i find it ridiculously evasive and nonsensical excuse. lozada was the one who implicated abalos of bribery or corruption, why should the latter have to prove he’s innocent? lozada should be advised by his counsel that he just couldn’t go around gossiping about people without any basis in fact, and set a condition for substantiating what he had asserted. abalos has a constitutional right not to do anything about the accusation which could lead to self-incrimination. lozada doesn’t have the same right as the accuser.

    if lozada can prove he’s telling the truth, nothing abalos could say or do will make it untrue.

  18. the sales is GDP. sales is the final output. per capita GDP is the sales divided by the number of members of his family, including the owner-operator. per capita GDP is the supposed economic output of each family member. – Anthony Scalia

    I did mention that the example i used is that of “a hypothetical country whose economy consists of a single lechon-manok stall operated by only one person (who raises his own chickens, roasts and sells the chicken)“. In this manner Total GDP = per capita GDP because in that example, there is only one person (aka ‘capita’) operating that lechon-manok business.

    income is not a component of GDP. what GDP measures is the final output that resulted from work paid by income. – Anthony Scalia

    Income is a component of GDP, in fact one way of computing GDP is via the “Income Approach” (already mentioned by someone previously in this blog) as follows:

    GDP = compensation of employees + depreciation + indirect taxes – subsidies + net operating profits

    You can refer to the NSCB website to confirm:

    http://www.nscb.gov.ph/technotes/sna/sna_tech_gdp.asp

    An employed IT consultant bills and collects US$500,000 for services rendered in a year. But he is paid only US$75,000 a year. The US$500T is the GDP – Anthony Scalia

    For your example, let’s give hypothetical numbers to be clear:

    Total Fees = 500,000
    less:
    IT Consultant salary= 75,000 (included in both GDP & family income)
    Management salary = 100,000 (included in both GDP & family income)
    Other staff salary = 125,000 (included in both GDP & family income)
    Equals:
    Net Income (Profit)=200,000 (included only in GDP assuming the firm is a Corporation or Partnership)

    In the above example, GDP will be 500,000 while Total Family income will bet 300,000. If we project this example to what has been happening in our case where GDP per capita is increasing but average family income is decreasing, that means that it is only the ‘Profit’ portion that has been growing for the past decade. That would be highly irregular and unrealistic.

  19. Anthony

    You seem like a sensible guy. WOuld certainly like to have further discussions with you without these let’s have their head rolled crowd drowning the discussion. I wonder how I can set it up so that we don’t reveal our email addresses or cel numbers here.

  20. lozada should be advised by his counsel that he just couldn’t go around gossiping about people without any basis in fact, and set a condition for substantiating what he had asserted. abalos has a constitutional right not to do anything about the accusation which could lead to self-incrimination. lozada doesn’t have the same right as the accuser.

    Yes, except that he didnt ‘go around gossiping’. He testified under oath. I defer to your legal opinion that Abalos doesnt have to take the LDT. But on the strictly non-legal ‘image’ thing. Abalos looked like a borjer-eating wimp.

    (By the way, Bencard, the reference to borjer is also from Harapan. Abalos pronounces burger as borjer.)

  21. “components of GDP ay public and private investments, consumer spending at exports” – Anthony

    ——-
    Anthony,

    Tanong ko lang kung may figures ka ba breakdown ng GDP based on the components you cited? Alin ang pinakamalaki in terms of percentage? I was just thinking baka naman public investments lang ang nagpa-boom dyan considering na in billions of dollars ang inuutang natin from China alone to fund our projects here?

    I am not an economist pero from the term investment, dapat kumita yan. Kung private investment, medyo safe yan kasi gustong kumita ng private businesses, pero kung public investment and pinakamalaki dyan at alam natin kung gaano ka unsound at corrupted ang mga yan, parang ipipirito tayo sa sarili nating mantika when the time to pay these loans come.

    As I said di ako ekonomista pero gusto ko maintindihan ang issue na ito. I am so open to corrections and insights.

  22. If you read carefully, you’ll see that i was not blaming the edsa tres crowd. As i said before, it is the refusal of the EDSA Dos crowd to hold Gloria to the same standard as Erap that is to blame. It is people’s inaction that keeps Gloria in Malacanang. Of course, kasama ka na doon… Cvj

    at ikaw? living comfortably somewhere safe while ranting about people’s inaction? that’s the height of hypocfisy.

    no more excuses just admit the mistake of edsa dos. you have the nerve to own up the credit for installing Gloria, you should have the decency to admit your mistakes too in creating that “monster”. at huwag mo ng idamay ang sisi sa lahat ng tao dahil sa kapalpakang nagawa nyo. stop associating people’s action w/ people power. youre too presumptuous in saying the inaction of the middle and upper class now is due to the fear of edsa 3. if people would want to bring down Gloria, nothing can stop them certainly NOT DUE TO FEAR. they will not be deterred by anything even if threatened with tanks or a hail of bullets. it is very clear that majority of the people now are too wary of too much politicking on both sides and will not be hoodwinked easily in joining another people power uprising (instigated by people with vested interests) that will only bring more harm on this country. it’s not about the double standard, it’s about the lessons learned.

    you and your ilk just can’t accept the fact that Glroria has been continuously outsmarting all of you. after 3 years of failed attempts to oust her, majority of the people have come to the realization that the only chance to get rid of this Lucky Bitch is to wait for 2010 and that is when her term expires… but your big egos just can’t accept it.

  23. Mita, just to clarify, i am not calling for Arroyo to step down because of EDSA Dos. I am calling for her to step down because of Hello Garci and what came after it…

    oh really? what about below?

    …. We help put her there, it’s our responsibility to take her out… cvj

    wow. ibinoto mo pa pala. lakas ng messianic complex mo. kasama ka pala sa nagluklok kay Gloria sa trono. ang galing mo. ano ba tawag doon, kingmaker? with your claim above and strongly taking it by heart, you can actually end this all and help this nation move forward. how? instead of ranting here without accomplishing anything, why don’t you and your brother ramrod (who claimed also to be instrumental in ousting erap) just strap bombs on your bodies and blow-up that Lucky Bitch? with your guts I have no doubt you can do it. people would really love and appreciate your great sacrifice.

    pero ika nga ni gen lim, “dissent without action is consent”. so, blogging with your anti-gloria rants will not qualify you as patriots while others here with different views as paid hacks. pare-pareho lang tayo nagpapalitan ng kuro-kuro dito.

    sabi mo nga sa isang blogger:

    …mabuti naman at mukhang nahikayat ka na rin na sumali sa pataasan ng ihi… cvj September 7th, 2007 at 1:05 am

  24. Zel,

    thats all i can remember from my Econ 11 and Econ 101. as far as i know, wala nang iba pang component ang GDP.

    teka, bago magkalihis-lihis ang discussion natin, let me define some terms:

    GDP – measurement of all goods and services made within a country within a year. Key words – final output/product. By itself, it does not measure standard of living, purchasing power, income

    now, on with our mini-discussion:

    “Tanong ko lang kung may figures ka ba breakdown ng GDP based on the components you cited? Alin ang pinakamalaki in terms of percentage?”

    if you are asking about the specific breakdown of the official 2007 GDP, i dont have any.

    “I was just thinking baka naman public investments lang ang nagpa-boom dyan considering na in billions of dollars ang inuutang natin from China alone to fund our projects here?”

    thats possible

    “I am not an economist pero from the term investment, dapat kumita yan. Kung private investment, medyo safe yan kasi gustong kumita ng private businesses, pero kung public investment and pinakamalaki dyan at alam natin kung gaano ka unsound at corrupted ang mga yan, parang ipipirito tayo sa sarili nating mantika when the time to pay these loans come.”

    it depends on the ‘public investment’. infrastructure can be a public investment. i don’t know how to quantify the ‘revenues’ coming from constructed bridges, farm-to-market roads, flyovers, highways. Kapag seaports and airports (not on BOT), yan pwedeng i-quantify

    i am not familiar with the NBN system, if it pushes through, how it can make money

    ang hirap kasi sa ibang bloggers dito, ayaw nilang magpa-pogi si gloria sa 2007 GDP figure, kay ganun na lang ang pag-undermine nila dito.

    eh in all my posts wherein i mentioned GDP, i never used it to measure standard of living, purchasing power. GDP is all and purely about economic activity, output.

    it is also possible na direct investments are made here but do not result in job creation. kasama din sa GDP yan

  25. you and your ilk just can’t accept the fact that Glroria has been continuously outsmarting all of you. after 3 years of failed attempts to oust her, majority of the people have come to the realization that the only chance to get rid of this Lucky Bitch is to wait for 2010 and that is when her term expires… — grd

    grd,

    Opps grd, now that Lozada came around, the Achilles heel of Ate Glo is now all but showing. And her enemies are all throwing spears at it. We know that she is very smart, but let’s see, how smart she really is with this new storm. I agree, the opposition has been really stupid, mostly because it was concerned on only bringing her down. But I don’t subscribe to that view because we do not have to take her out per se but we have to show that we are serious about making our leaders accountable for their policies and wrongdoing, for us and the next generation of Filipinos. Of course, this goes with the primary consideration that the mistake of Edsa Dos will not be repeated.

    Just a fact and correction, as per surveys since 2005 up to now, majority of the people want her out. The only dissenting views are on how she would have to go. GMA has srewdly and correctly read the data that majority of the citizens do not have the mobilizing power to make her accountable — that is because the middle class, that sector that tips the game has been silent on what to do with her. This is no longer true after Lozada came out –not yet the whole of middle class, but the mobilization has begun, with students, professionals coming out with their statements on the crisis recently. These groups are the middle of the middle class (not the religious, business or NGOs) and we now clearly seeing a genuine movement. When the very middle moves, we are going to see a tipping of the balance of power.

  26. anthony,

    Thanks for the answers. I think its good to understand some technical terms, the ins and outs of basic economics.

    You said its possible that public investments are keeping the GDP numbers up, so its possible that the increase in GDP is in a way artificially boosted. I mean we do not have the facts so we couldn’t say for sure, but it is enough I guess to say that it is a possibility.

    You also said that revenues from public infrastructure would be difficult to quantify. I have a question on this, if let us say a project is approved, lets have the northrail and southrail phase 1 as an example, is the fund for this project reflected as part of GDP even if the project is not yet physically completed and is actually rusting away in Calamba?

    Also, is the alleged $130M commission that is incorporated in the price of the NBN-ZTE contract, had it not been cancelled, also be a part of the public investment of the GDP when in actuality that portion of the investment will never earn the country a single centavo in revenues?

    I am really trying to understand so I can put into context the press releases that are issued by Malacanang. I am nervous about the loans we get to “invest” on our local projects. If a large portion of the GDP is actually public investment then we are really going to be in deep shit for quite a long time.

  27. cvj,

    haay naku.

    this statement of mine

    the sales is GDP. sales is the final output. per capita GDP is the sales divided by the number of members of his family, including the owner-operator. per capita GDP is the supposed economic output of each family member

    is my direct comment to your favorite ‘lechon manok’ example of computing GDP

    I did mention that the example i used is that of “a hypothetical country whose economy consists of a single lechon-manok stall operated by only one person (who raises his own chickens, roasts and sells the chicken)“. In this manner Total GDP = per capita GDP because in that example, there is only one person (aka ‘capita’) operating that lechon-manok business.

    in your example – mali. its wrong to equate sales (GDP) to per capita GDP counting only the owner. any computation of per capita includes all people, including those who never actually participated in the final output. kaya nga in my example, included ang lahat ng family members ng owner operator in computing GDP per capita.

    you’re assuming that only the people who actually produced the goods or services should be computed for per capita GDP. wrong.

    Income is a component of GDP, in fact one way of computing GDP is via the “Income Approach” (already mentioned by someone previously in this blog) as follows:

    GDP = compensation of employees + depreciation + indirect taxes – subsidies + net operating profits

    are you cocksure on your reliance on that formula? does that formula ever say anything on purchasing power of family income? it does not!

    Total Fees = 500,000
    less:
    IT Consultant salary= 75,000 (included in both GDP & family income)
    Management salary = 100,000 (included in both GDP & family income)
    Other staff salary = 125,000 (included in both GDP & family income)
    Equals:
    Net Income (Profit)=200,000 (included only in GDP assuming the firm is a Corporation or Partnership)

    In the above example, GDP will be 500,000 while Total Family income will bet 300,000. If we project this example to what has been happening in our case where GDP per capita is increasing but average family income is decreasing, that means that it is only the ‘Profit’ portion that has been growing for the past decade. That would be highly irregular and unrealistic.

    first, you’re wrong in saying only the net profit of US$200,000 is included in GDP. remember, GDP measures the final output of goods or services. The services produced was worth US$500,000. Not US$200,000

    its gross domestic product not net domestic product

    aren’t you noticing? you are bringing in another measurement! GDP by itself does not measure family income! even using your highly touted formula! family income is never a component!

    in the formula you enthusiastically cited, theres no mention of family income! the income is still connected to the output of goods or services! so in the end, output pa rin ang measured!

    its never unrealistic nor irregular! as i was saying for the NTH time, GDP only measures economic activity, the output! never family income! if you will just hold in abeyance family income whenever GDP is discussed, you will be enlightened.

    look, if you want to harp on the continuing decrease of purchasing power of families as per the latest FIES, then focus on that! if you want to argue that purhasing power is the true test of ‘gumagandang ekonomiya’ you won’t hear a rebuttal from me

    Income approach nga, pero still the final result is the output of goods and services pa rin!

    ano ba talaga kuya?!?

  28. Zel,

    “You said its possible that public investments are keeping the GDP numbers up, so its possible that the increase in GDP is in a way artificially boosted. I mean we do not have the facts so we couldn’t say for sure, but it is enough I guess to say that it is a possibility.”

    yes. thats the result of ‘pump priming the economy’. not really artificially boosted, but there can be times that the intention is an artificial boost

    im not sure if investments in the stock market is included in GDP. because investing in the stock market can also be ‘pump priming’. The SSS and GSIS have really huge investible funds

    “You also said that revenues from public infrastructure would be difficult to quantify. I have a question on this, if let us say a project is approved, lets have the northrail and southrail phase 1 as an example, is the fund for this project reflected as part of GDP even if the project is not yet physically completed and is actually rusting away in Calamba?”

    that i don’t know.

    iho, the two rails are not yet operational, so no income can be derived from it yet, much less quantify it

    “Also, is the alleged $130M commission that is incorporated in the price of the NBN-ZTE contract, had it not been cancelled, also be a part of the public investment of the GDP when in actuality that portion of the investment will never earn the country a single centavo in revenues?”

    that i don’t know. since the kickbacks are given in one lump sum at the start, siguro. i don’t know.

    “I am really trying to understand so I can put into context the press releases that are issued by Malacanang. I am nervous about the loans we get to “invest” on our local projects. If a large portion of the GDP is actually public investment then we are really going to be in deep shit for quite a long time.”

    true. pero as far as i know, many foreign loans for public infrastructure are implemented by contractors chosen by the lenders. kaya sana, quality ang output, yung kickbacks na lang ang downside.

    ang mahirap kung substandard quality na ang infrastructure, malaki pa ang kickbacks!

  29. Madonna,

    Just a fact and correction, as per surveys since 2005 up to now, majority of the people want her out.

    specifically that means majority of 1,200 people want her out

  30. in your example – mali. its wrong to equate sales (GDP) to per capita GDP counting only the owner. any computation of per capita includes all people, including those who never actually participated in the final output. – Anthony Scalia

    In my example, i posited an economy with only one lechon-manok stall and one person who, if i may repeat again, who raises his own chickens, roasts and sells the chicken. That is to simplify so that Total GDP = per capita GDP. To emphasize the givens:

    one country = one lechon manok stall = one person

    therefore…
    Total GDP divided by one person = per capita GDP

    …as far as my particular example is concerned.

    first, you’re wrong in saying only the net profit of US$200,000 is included in GDP. remember, GDP measures the final output of goods or services. The services produced was worth US$500,000. Not US$200,000 – Anthony Scalia

    We have the same understanding. Please re-read the portion you blockquoted, particularly the part where i said, n the above example, GDP will be 500,000 while Total Family income will bet 300,000. The 200,000 USD, on the other hand, is the portion of the GDP that is not reflected in personal income so will not show up in average family income.

    specifically that means majority of 1,200 people want her out – Anthony Scalia

    Assuming the 1,200 is a nationwide random sample that is representative of the total population, then the findings reflect the sentiments of the 85 million Filipinos. That’s an established part of Statistics.

  31. Zel, if i may…

    if let us say a project is approved, lets have the northrail and southrail phase 1 as an example, is the fund for this project reflected as part of GDP even if the project is not yet physically completed and is actually rusting away in Calamba? – Zel

    It is not reflected in the GDP unless the amount is spent. Also, all components that are imported (e.g. trains) are not part of GDP.

    is the alleged $130M commission that is incorporated in the price of the NBN-ZTE contract, had it not been cancelled, also be a part of the public investment of the GDP when in actuality that portion of the investment will never earn the country a single centavo in revenues? – Zel

    If Abalos spent all of his commission within the Philippines, then it becomes part of GDP (under personal consumption expenditure) on the year it was spent. If he deposits the amount in a bank (or buries it), then it does not become part of GDP.

  32. Just a further clarification, anything Abalos spends on imported goods will have a zero effect on GDP. So that means that if he imports an SUV worth 200,000 USD, then it is both added to ‘personal consumption expenditure’ and then deducted as ‘imports’. Also, anything that Abalos spends on trips overseas will not be part of GDP.

  33. Kung may nuclear bomb lang ako, payag akong maging suicide bomber para burahin na sa mundo ang buong administrasyon at ang mga alipin at alipores nito…

  34. Anthony,

    “specifically that means majority of 1,200 people want her out”

    Which statistically means that majority (50 plus percent)of Filipinos want her out. This has been consistently the case since 2005 when Hello Garci came out — or don’t you find the data significant?

    I don’t want to debate about things which are a matter of perception or belief — and evidently at least from the above comment you don’t believe in surveys and I do — for me they are legitimate and efficient measurements of public opinion. And I consider myself more or less a democrat, that’s why I consider surveys important when it comes to politics. But suit yourself, we all have our own take on issues.

  35. cvj,

    In my example, i posited an economy with only one lechon-manok stall and one person who, if i may repeat again, who raises his own chickens, roasts and sells the chicken. That is to simplify so that Total GDP = per capita GDP. To emphasize the givens:

    one country = one lechon manok stall = one person

    therefore…
    Total GDP divided by one person = per capita GDP

    …as far as my particular example is concerned.

    wrong pa rin. sablay again.why are you insisting on one country = one lechon manok stall = one person? its obvious that you are putting into GDP metrics for FIES

    sabi mo

    “We have the same understanding. Please re-read the portion you blockquoted, particularly the part where i said, n the above example, GDP will be 500,000 while Total Family income will bet 300,000. The 200,000 USD, on the other hand, is the portion of the GDP that is not reflected in personal income so will not show up in average family income.”

    ito ang sinabi mo

    Net Income (Profit)=200,000 (included only in GDP assuming the firm is a Corporation or Partnership)

    as clear as the sun – you included only the net income of 200T in GDP

    for the nth time, why are you insisting that the 200T be included in family income? eh di nga component ang family income in the formula you cited!

    no sir we don’t have the same understanding. you keep on insisting that family income is a component of GDP. i don’t.

    Assuming the 1,200 is a nationwide random sample that is representative of the total population, then the findings reflect the sentiments of the 85 million Filipinos. That’s an established part of Statistics.

    Stress on the words “assuming”, “random”, “Statistics”

    Yes, as far as statistics is concerned, thats an established part. No arguments with that.

    But to say that its representative of 85M……..basta may maipukol lang kay gloria

  36. “basta may maipukol lang kay gloria”

    No, that’s not the case. Sorry.

    “But to say that its representative of 85M”

    It is representative of 85M! Hello?

  37. wrong pa rin. sablay again.why are you insisting on one country = one lechon manok stall = one person? its obvious that you are putting into GDP metrics for FIES – Anthony Scalia

    How can it be wrong if that hypothetical example conforms to all the requirements of what GDP is? That example is constructed to illustrate the areas in which per capita GDP and income per family are similar.

    as clear as the sun – you included only the net income of 200T in GDP – Anthony Scalia

    That sentence “included only in GDP assuming the firm is a Corporation or Partnership” means the opposite of how you understand it. It means that the 200K is included in GDP (which totals 500K) but excluded from family income (because it is business income). Please, read the above again.

    Stress on the words “assuming”, “random”, “Statistics” – Anthony Scalia

    There is such a scientific field called Statistics which uses random sampling find out the characteristics of a given population. That field is more than 100 years old and is taught in school with applications in economics, medicine, manufacturing, biology and other fields. You can look it up.

  38. Madonna,

    “Which statistically means that majority (50 plus percent)of Filipinos want her out. This has been consistently the case since 2005 when Hello Garci came out — or don’t you find the data significant?”

    stress on “statistically” milady. 50% of 1,200. yes, i don’t find the data significant. its a joke actually.

    besides, the entire 85M can want gloria out, but she’s still seated. that alone isn’t enough to unseat her, legally that is

    i dont have to remind you that popularity isnt a criteria for staying in Malacanang

    “I don’t want to debate about things which are a matter of perception or belief — and evidently at least from the above comment you don’t believe in surveys and I do — for me they are legitimate and efficient measurements of public opinion. And I consider myself more or less a democrat, that’s why I consider surveys important when it comes to politics. But suit yourself, we all have our own take on issues.”

    admit it – you dont want to debate about the reliability of surveys because deep inside you know that each political survey stands on razor-thin ice. surveys can also measure perception and belief

    look i have no problem that surveys legitimately measure public opinion. its just that the opinion measured are those of the respondents only.

    suit yourself also if you consider the surveys ‘representative’ of 85 M Pinoys.

    and i’ll bet – you don’t have any idea how the questions of these surveys are phrased

  39. Re: the statistics porblem…maybe the question is: how representative is the 1200 respondents. DId they ask these questions all over the whole archipelago or did they limit it to the Luzon area. SO it really depends on that. If it was the whole archipelago and the 1200 samples were actually proportionately distributed by either provinces and the subsectors within those provinces, then maniniwala ako sa survey….pero kung siyudad lang…medyo duda ako….unless sabihin niyong mga taga evil society na mang mang ang mga nasa rural area ….

  40. Anthony,

    “stress on “statistically” milady. 50% of 1,200. yes, i don’t find the data significant. its a joke actually.”

    Sir, it’s a joke if you don’t consider the will of the people generally speaking.

    “besides, the entire 85M can want gloria out, but she’s still seated. that alone isn’t enough to unseat her, legally that is”

    So, admit it then you’re a “legal” guy like Bencard. You don’t consider justice and accountability as the primary issues here.

    “i dont have to remind you that popularity isnt a criteria for staying in Malacanang”

    Oh of course it isn’t the only criteria. The surveys were not a measure of popularity per se, they were measure of how trust, legitimacy and performance.

    “admit it – you dont want to debate about the reliability of surveys because deep inside you know that each political survey stands on razor-thin ice. surveys can also measure perception and belief”

    Not razor-thin if the results show consistent results. That’s why I say the data is significant, meaning come hell or high water in the past three years, the people still view GMA the same.

    “look i have no problem that surveys legitimately measure public opinion. its just that the opinion measured are those of the respondents only.”

    Oh my pray next time, the statistical ball hits you. But of course, you may conclude that you are representative of the minority opinion in the surveys, which of course is still legitimate.

    “and i’ll bet – you don’t have any idea how the questions of these surveys are phrased”

    sorry anthony, you lose in your bet, because I have more than an idea of how these questions are done. Validy and realibity are what legitimate surveys are all about. And no, I am not being a poseur here.

  41. “Validy and realibity”

    Sorry, it’s been a long day. That should read validity and reliability.

  42. Ang Senate Hearing na ito, Trial ba ito o factfinding nang manga Senadores kong mayro-on talaga “kickback” sa kontrata?

    kong ito as inquiry lamang, at ang manga testigos ay magbigay nang kanilang ka-alaman, o impormasyon, kahit isang tingi lamang, pag-ipon iponin iyon nang manga Senadores para mabuo nila ang katotohanan. Kaya dapat, bawat tao na “supetsado” na may koneksyon sa kalokohan ire, yong nakakobra man o hindi, magbigay nang kanilang testimonya, bahala na sila kong papayag mag LDT o kaya magsumpa lang sa pangalan nang kanilang manga Ina.

    Bahala na rin kon paniwala-an ang kanilang testimonya o hindi, pero sa tingin nakalamang yata si Mang Lozada dito, kahit na nagisa lang siya, laban sa isang tambak na alipores nana Palasyo, kong hindi siya lamang, tinggan ninyo, pati yong 11 na ODA projects cancel na Naman..baka lumabas pa ang manga amoy tinakpan ka-AGAD, ang Tawag naman dyan PREEMPTION…ang galing manga abogados ni GMA.

  43. jeg, i don’t have to tell you that an “oath” doesn’t necessarily make a statement true. that’s why we have the crime of perjury. some people just don’t know, or don’t care, about the sanctity and value of an oath.

    mang kiko, wala sa paramihan ‘yan. kung nagsasabi ka ng tutuo, kahit isang libong anghel na magsabing iyo’y kasinungalingan ay hindi pa rin makapagbabago ng iyong katotohanan. ang sino mang naninira ng kapuwa ay dapa’t na magpasailalim sa masusing pagsusuri, kasam na and LDT.

  44. Madonna: On surveys in the Philippines. There are only 3 or 4 firms, right? And how many dialects do they use?

    The most important question for my interests — how much to conduct a survey of 1,000 respondents where I provide the population characteristics (e.g. (i) high-school and college-level only; (ii) 600 from NCR, then 100 each for Baguio, Davao, Cebu, Naga); (iii) cost of “piggyback” survey of 3 questions; (iv) cost for independent-survey of 12 question.

  45. “so admit it then you are a ‘legal’ guy like bencard. you don’t consider justice and accountability as the primary issue.” madonna.

    this is a big problem here. people like you have this mindset that legality, i.e. adherence to the rule of law, is not concerned with justice and accountability. i don’t know your education level but having been living in a democratic society, you must have a modicum of understanding of how the law and the legal system work. for a start, you should know that “justice” and “accountability can only be attained and enforced in this world through law. without law they are just empty words that have no value except, maybe, in the afterlife (if any). btw, an unjust, unreasonable law is void ab initio.

  46. “you should know that “justice” and “accountability can only be attained and enforced in this world through law.”

    Isn’t this really dumb and arrogant, coming from one who claims to be a person of the law? Does his claim mean that parents and teachers for instance can’t enforce justice and accountability? wow!!!!!

  47. tila yata lahat ng proyecto para sa ikauunlad ng bansa ay nakansela dahil sa malaking ingay ng mga taong ibat-iba ang motibo. haaay, naku! paano ba naman uusad ang ating bayan? bakit hindi ituloy ang mga proyekto sa halip na kanselahin, hulihin, isakdal at parusahan ang mga may sala at kunin ang lahat ng kinurakot. ang mga hakbang ng nbi, pulisya, fiskal, ombudsman, at mga korte sa mga kasong kurakot ay suriing mabuti at kung lumitaw na mayroon ngang katiwalian ay parusahan ang mga salarin, o hindi gumagampan ng kanilang tungkulin (hahit sino pa man), ng pinakamabigat na parusang ipinapataw ng batas.

  48. pta, whoever you are. rebut what i say instead of calling it “dumb and arrogant”. even parents and teachers can only impose on children within limits prescribed by law. parents and teachers have no absolute power over children who, themselves, have rights too. they can be prosecuted and penalized for child abuse. they can set up their rules but those rules must conform to the law.

    what if if, as a parent or teacher, a child disobeys you, i.e., ridicule your “justice and accountability”, can you put him to jail?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.