The politically colored term “Brain drain” can be seen as an example of what George Orwell labeled as “doublespeak” or language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words.
Here is the Inquirer,
The brain drain has become a bigger problem in the last 12 years, as the yearly exodus of people trained in science and technology (S&T) grew by about two and a half times from 1998 to 2009.
According to a Bureau of Labor and Employment Statistics (BLES) report, the number of S&T workers who opted for overseas jobs rose from 9,877 in 1998 to 24,502 in 2009.
The numbers refer only to new hires or those leaving the country for jobs for the first time.
The BLES cited data from a study titled “International Migration of Science and Technology Manpower-OFWs,” which the Department of Science and Technology’s Science Education Institute (SEI-DOST) published in 2011.
S&T deployment
Results showed that during the 12-year period, S&T deployment grew by an average of 11 percent yearly, peaking at a 59-percent increase in 2001 when 17,756 professionals left, compared with 11,186 the previous year.
Based on the SEI-DOST study, S&T manpower includes physicists, chemists, mathematicians, statisticians, computing professionals, engineers, life science professionals, health professionals (except nurses), and nurses and midwives.
The study found that nurses and midwives represented the biggest group with an average of 9,348 deployed yearly, or 60 percent of the total S&T average of 15,555.
Brain drain is essentially OFWs in different attires.
How can migration be a “problem” when they are representative of individual choices and responses to the current political economic environment?
Have OFWs not been acclaimed as modern day heroes based on mainstream politics?
Whether it is about greener pastures or about career advancement or many other reasons, the point is that OFWs VOTED with their feet. Thus, the actions of science, math and technology graduates, simply reveals of the lack of income, if not career opportunities in the Philippines. These people are simply looking out for their welfare.
Are they not in a better state than becoming unemployed tertiary or college graduates which not only adds to political dependency and the government's fiscal problems but also dehumanizes or demoralizes the individual and their families?
So it is ok to send graduates of different courses or undergraduates, but it isn’t ok to send (S&T) graduates? So the government discriminates or plays favorite with different segments of OFWs? How moral is this?
I have dealt with this bromide lengthily here
Ah but of course, it said that when all you have is a hammer, everything else is a nail. When the government sees a problem they have the typical solution: spend, spend, spend and spend more of other people’s money
From the same article,
When the national budget for 2012 was pending in Congress last year and Malacañang was pushing for a 10-percent increase in allocations for state universities and colleges (SUCS), Budget Secretary Florencio B. Abad said the Executive supports the development of SUCs toward five priority areas that are expected to drive economic growth and employment.
So there you have it.
“Brain drain” has not been a problem when it gives the political authorities free advertisement, as “modern day heroes”, to advance on their political goals.
But “Brain drain” becomes a problem when the government has been itching to spend money other people’s money.
Doublespeak it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment