Economic Freedom: Philippines Gains on Regulatory Improvements

At last some genuine good news for the Philippines.

According to the latest Heritage Foundation study on the state of world’s economic freedom 2012 Index of Economic Freedom, regulatory efficiency has significantly improved to nudge our ranking up from last year’s 115 to 107.

Here’s the Heritage,

The Philippines’ economic freedom score is 57.1, making its economy the 107th freest in the 2012 Index. Its score is 0.9 point higher than last year, with a significant improvement in business freedom. The Philippines ranks 19th out of 41 countries in the Asia–Pacific region, and its overall score is slightly below the world and regional averages.

Despite the challenging global economic environment, the Philippine economy has been on a steady path of economic expansion. The government has pursued a series of legislative reforms to enhance the entrepreneurial environment and develop a stronger private sector to generate broader-based job growth. Overall progress has been gradual, but regulatory efficiency has been notably enhanced. The economy has expanded at an average annual rate of close to 5 percent over the past five years.

There are lingering institutional challenges that will require deeper commitment to reform. Despite some progress, corruption continues to undermine prospects for long-term economic development. The inefficient judiciary, which remains susceptible to political interference, does not provide effective protection for property rights or strong and transparent enforcement of the law

While such improvements should be cheered at, we need broader advances not just in regulatory efficiency, but also in property rights, rule of law, open markets, the size and scale of governments founded on less interventionism.

But in watching mainstream media's penchant for government is the solution to our social problems, and political developments mainly focused on generating approval ratings via controversies, and by my recent experience, count me skeptical of such (statistical based) improvements.

Heritage Foundation Urges Military Action on Iran

The Heritage Foundation has an incredible philosophical dichotomy, where on the one hand they propose free trade, and on the other hand, they propose imperialist policies to defend against terrorism

From Mike Brownfield (bold highlights mine)

The Obama Administration, to date, has pursued the Obama Doctrine–a foreign policy that calls for the United States to engage with its enemies instead of confronting the threat of state-sponsored terrorism head on. It’s an attitude and a posture that has been pervasive in President Obama’s rhetoric–abjuring American exceptionalism, passing on the opportunity to speak loudly to promote the spread of democracy in the Middle East, failing to condemn Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless regime, offering weak support to Israel and failing to condemn those who threaten the country’s very existence, and presenting a face of international accommodation and ambivalence. Obama’s strategy invites aggression and leaves the American people less secure as a result.

The Administration must finally change direction. Heritage’s James Carafano writes that it should take strong measures to respond to Iran’s actions, including conducting a proportional military response against suitable, feasible, and acceptable targets (in many ways the situation is similar to military operations conducted against al Qaeda in Pakistan). It should impose and enforce the strongest sanctions, target public diplomacy to expose the regime’s human rights abuses, reduce Iran’s meddling in Iraq, and rescind and rewrite its counterterrorism strategy.

The fact is that war and free trade are simply incompatible. Not only does war appropriate resources required for productive economic activities, which likewise has been tied to inflationary policies, war encourages growth of government or statist ‘ratchet effect’ policies in the broader spectrum of the economy in the US and elsewhere. This would be inimical and contradictory to economic freedom and free trade.

Yet militant foreign policy responses would likely trigger retaliatory impulses among those affected by these policies, whose feedback mechanism encourages more ‘terrorism’ instead of quelling it.

Besides to militarily provoke other nations could mean that the law of unintended consequences will apply. It would be hubris to believe that applying violence on some entities labeled as ‘terrorist’ won’t prompt for any nasty feedback.

Encouraging people to trade instead of coercive imposition of Western brand of democracy would serve as better approach for peaceful settlements.

As the Murray N. Rothbard wrote (italics and strike through mine)

America was born in a revolution against Western imperialism, born as a haven of freedom against the tyrannies and despotism, the wars and intrigues of the old world. Yet we have allowed ourselves to sacrifice the American ideals of peace and freedom and anti-colonialism on the altar of a crusade to kill communists terrorist throughout the world; we have surrendered our libertarian birthright into the hands of those who yearn to restore the Golden Age of the Holy Inquisition. It is about time that we wake up and rise up to restore our heritage.

I am no American, but I believe that America’s libertarian legacy can set the right model for the world.