In this issue
The War on Drug’s 'Crowding Out' Syndrome Emerges on Government Budget! The Path toOchlocratic (Rule of Mob) Dictatorship and the Mechanics of Mass Surrenders
-Follow the Money Trail: Crowding Out Syndrome Emerges, President’s Pork Barrel Zooms to Php 7 Billion!
-The Path to Ochlocratic (Rule of Mob) Dictatorship
-A. Selective Application of the War on Drugs
-B. Buying the Support of the Military and Police, Undermining of Other Political Institutions Through Personal Attacks
-C. Romancing the NPA
-Conclusion
-War on Drugs: Valuable Excerpt on the Mechanics of Mass Drug Surrenders; Cracks on Bolivia’s War on Mining: Protests Against Socialism!
In fact Socialism is not in the least what it pretends to be. It is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created. It does not build; it destroys. For destruction is the essence of it. It produces nothing, it only consumes what the social order based on private ownership in the means of production has created. Since a socialist order of society cannot exist, unless it be as a fragment of Socialism within an economic order resting otherwise on private property, each step leading towards Socialism must exhaust itself in the destruction of what already exists.-Ludwig von Mises
Follow the Money Trail: Crowding Out Syndrome Emerges, President’s Pork Barrel Zooms to Php 7 Billion!
Even prior to the assumption of the new left leaning regime I warned that
The essence of which is that of the tendency for leftist governments to expand government size relative to the economy. In doing so, a bigger government would command a relatively greater amount of resources. The government’s larger use of resources would imply of the crowding out the private sector, increased financing requirements and higher operating costs for businesses. Since government activities signify as consumption, such would entail of less efficient use of resources, deadweight losses, corruption as well as, diminished productivity. Furthermore, the government will resort to financial repression to corral citizens’ resources especially during economic slowdowns. Part of financial repression will be manifested through increases in debt, taxes and or inflation or a combo. Moreover, a torrent of regulations would imply of restrictions or proscriptions on economic activities
While the “crowding out” syndrome has yet to become apparent in the private sector, symptoms of intense competition for resources and funds or the crowding effect has already emerged in the government.
From Philstar/Yahoo (August 26): President Duterte has cut funding for agriculture by P3.4 billion, from P54 billion this year to P50.6 billion in 2017. When queried by congressmen during a budget hearing yesterday, Agriculture Secretary Emmanuel Piñol could not explain why Duterte reduced funding for his department. The lawmakers said the reduction is contrary to the President’s pronouncements that he would like the agriculture sector to grow since farmers are among the poorest sectors of the population.
Let me use the refinement of the law of demand in analyzing the story above.
When the cost of an activity rises, people do less of that activity.
A short background: The Philippine agriculture political economy has signified as one of the most politically protected industries. In other words, prices, investments, fund or credit flows and trade, or economic activities in general have severely been restricted by a labyrinth of regulations, mandates and edicts. And this has been one of the key reasons why commodity market/s has not existed even when almost all major ASEAN neighbors has incorporated them as part of modern day market based ‘reform’
And given the great wall of restrictions, investments and financing have now become substantially reliant on the government.
And now the government declares a cutback!
The budget reduction on agricultural spending presently involves “various programs recommended by local government units.” (Woe to federalism! Under the current financial setup, this means that local governments will be starved out of funds to sustain the local agricultural economy in favor of the national government. So how will the grassroots embrace federalism when local governments will be painted financially shut?)
Next year’s budget cuts will include: “Socsargen (South Cotabato, Sarangani, General Santos) integrated food production program” and…the “implementation of Payapa at Masaganang Pamayanan (Pamana) program, whose beneficiaries are rebel returnees”, (pls hold THIS thought as the romance with the NPA has been rekindled), “Philippine rural development project” and “funding for farm-to-market roads”.
What’s the idea for all these subsidies and spending? Well the short answer is to REDUCE the underlying costs of the agricultural economy.
Let me cite for instance farm to market roads. The objective for this is to reduce transport cost. A reduction in transport cost should translate to lower overhead, more earnings and thereby increased output. Meanwhile, “integration program” have been intended to LESSEN operating costs via the economies of scale, while expanding potential market.
So by restricting spending on a protected industry heavily dependent on the government, guess what happens to output? Will this grow or shrink (materially)? Now what happens to agricultural prices, will they fall or rise (sharply)?
Because government spending comes out of the pocket of taxpayers and currency holders, diminished government spending IS a wonderful idea. But given the current setting, such has to be replaced with the increased participation of the private sector, who would take up the slack from the government. This entails liberalization, or market based reforms. Part of which SHOULD be the establishment of commodity market/s.
Unfortunately, this has NOT been the essence of why funds will be pared.
The real reason? The shift of funds has been meant to finance the rapidly expanding POLICE state!
From the Time Magazine (August 25): “Duterte has given huge funding boosts to the police and military by slashing the country’s health budget by 25%, and reducing expenditure on critical sectors like agriculture, labor, employment and foreign affairs. On the other hand, the budget for the presidential office has increased tenfold, and now includes a provision of $150 million for “representation and entertainment.” (bold mine)
Fans of the administration say that health budget was merely transferred to the ambit of government monopoly casino operator PAGCOR. However, media says that PAGCOR (Rappler August 23) will only finance parts of the health budget.
Regardless of the budget technicalities, vastly increased spending by the military and police will come from the cutting of spending elsewhere. Hence, the crowding out.
And the path of political spending will be predicated on present and expected future tax collections, borrowings and bank financed credit expansion. And this is why the government has been first transferring funds to what it perceives as areas of priority as against areas which has been deemed as lesser priorities.
And the area of priority now includes a massive increase in pork barrel for the Office of the President!!! To emphasize, from Philstar (August 21): “Duterte is substantially increasing the budget for his own office, from P2.9 billion to P20.030 billion. The increase includes P2.5 billion in intelligence funds and more than P7 billion for representation and entertainment expenses.”
“My GAD”!!!!!
Yet there is no such thing as a free lunch!
And it’s not just the military and police who will get a raise, the present government has approved the carrying over of the four tranche wage hike scheme (Interaksyon, August 23) for the government employees as part of the previous program by the administration.
And since manpower represents scarce resources, this entails that the expansion of political budget for government employees would draw more people from the labor pool that would come in competition with the private sector. As I wrote in “Welcome to the Philippine Police State!”: “This essentially “crowds out” the private sector. And for the private sector to compete with government, they would have to RAISE wages SUBSTANTIALLY. This serves as an indirect minimum wage hike!”
Compounding on this would be the government’s war on labor contractualization or “ENDO”. This implies for more reduction of the labor pool for the private sector. More importantly, higher labor costs assures the shriveling of the private sector economy. Meanwhile, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) has declared a one month moratorium on the war on ENDO (Philstar August 18)
From a budget perspective, the war on drugs has gotten out of control!
The Path to Ochlocratic (Rule of Mob) Dictatorship
Now I’ve never really believed that the war on drugs signifies as the ultimate aim for this regime. Rather, the war on drugs has been used as a means to justify an end. The end of which, as I have predicted, is to establish a revolutionary government/dictatorship
So to attain his "revolutionary government", Mr Duterte needs to groove his comrades into the system. His comrades must blend into the mainstream so they will get the sympathy of the military. When they get such their desired support that’s when they’ll move to launch the "revolutionary government". Changing the System is a Time Consuming Process; Duterte’s Backdoor Strategy (May 18, 2016)
A. Selective Application of the War on Drugs
One symptom: the divergent or selective application of the war on drugs.
The regime seems to have whitewashed drug activities within exclusive wealthy villages. From GMA (August 26): Why is the government's campaign against illegal drugs focused on susects in urban poor communities? Aside from saying that wealthy drug lords are running their illicit business from outside the country, President Rodrigo Duterte said there's no shabu trade in exclusive villages like Forbes Park in Makati City…."But cocaine and heroin are not as destructive as shabu because itong cocaine and heroin are manufactured out of the derivatives of a poppy, tanim iyan parang marijuana. So it is not as destructive to the mind as meth, which is just really a combination of a deadly mix of chemicals," Duterte said. Duterte said the poor mostly use shabu or methamphetamine hydrochloride, which is sold in not so well off communities.
So from campaign of “Rich or poor, I do not give a shit…"My order is to destroy" to “Rich use drugs…which are not as destructive”.
Given how fast the political leadership vacillates on an issue or how fluid the political environment has been, it’s really hard to give an immediate interpretation on this.
Example: Because of criticism of summary executions, the administration threatened to pull out of UN (CNN August 21). But after a hailstorm of brickbats from international opinion, this prompted for a backpedaling, for the leadership to say it was all a “jest” (Inquirer August 23). Then again, a turnaround to lambast the UN: “I’m the President!” (Inquirer August 26)
Nevertheless, if the regime insists on keeping the wealthy off the war on drugs, then it could imply the following:
one) the administration could be apprehensive of the risk of capital flight from his biggest taxpayers,
two) this could be part of the payment of political electoral debt from which necessitates keeping their residences beyond popular politics, and or
three) this has been part of the stratagem to setup the financial elites for the next phase of the war on oligarchy and
four) a combination of the above.
Let us apply the refined law of demand to the president’s exemption on wealthy villages.
When the cost of an activity DECREASES, people do MORE of that activity.
The president’s implied exemption represents a tacit subsidy for particular drugs (cocaine and heroin), and also on drug using income class (wealthy).
If the political sentiment by the administration is sustained, then drug usage will move out of “restricted” meth to “allowable” cocaine or heroin (and or other innovative forms) other than stated.
And if sustained, trading hubs for drugs will shift into wealthy exclusive villages.
And this is why I said that this could be part of the stratagem to setup the financial elites as fall guys for the war on oligarchy. Once the latter gravitates into a center for drug trafficking, then the local version of populist social justice warriors would fervidly demand for “equality”, and this will give the regime license to crackdown on them.
But of course, the administration can’t do this immediately because of the latter’s potential to move capital out of the country. So this will have to be timed. And only when doors to capital movements would have been shuttered will such option become palatable.
In short, such conditions will be ripe only when martial law and emergency power/s have been declared.
B. Buying the Support of the Military and Police, Undermining of Other Political Institutions Through Personal Attacks
AS one would observe war on drugs and vices, corruption, media, mining, oligarchy, endo, the latest war on the “enemies of the state” (GMA, August 25) and coming forms of political wars… needs unwavering support from the military and police, which are of course, the essence of all forms of government.
And the substantial pivot for the outpouring of funds and of privileges to such militant institutions not only means the buying of support but of their loyalty. The critical objective is to attain the fealty of the military and police to the administration’s coming courses of actions.
And yet the ultimate objective appears as the establishment of a dictatorship founded on ochlocracy (government of mob rule).
Symptom: any lodged criticism on the regime’s pet agenda will be met with strident ad hominem politics. Hence, legality and or morality becomes subject to the vehemence of trial by publicity or mob rule politics.
The halo effect from the superhero political dynamic allows the administration to essentially freehandedly undermine other branches of government through personal attacks. It doesn’t matter whether the accusations have been true, what matters is that of the populace’s perception of the leadership’s convictions. The leadership's utterances, of course, has been deemed as gospel truth!
And by destabilizing popular support for established institutions, such paves way for administration’s usurpation of power!
With the military and the police in his pocket, and with popular opinion solidly with the administration, what should stop the trampling of the present institutions for the administration to metastasize these into an Ochlocratic “revolutionary government”???
Well the short answer is economics or resources expressed through MONEY!
C. Romancing the NPA
This leads to the third symptom. Romancing the NPA.
It’s not just the military and police, but the NPA will also be showered with providence of material benefits and privileges!
From Philstar/Yahoo (August 26): President Duterte is ready to distribute public lands to members of the New People’s Army if peace negotiations in Oslo, Norway succeed. He said he is willing to “give more” to the Left, aside from providing money and public lands to communist combatants… “I am joining the Communist Party of the Philippines in its desire to seek peace for this nation. That is my plea to everybody – communists, soldiers, police – to understand that there is always a time for everything,” he said. “We cannot be at war at all times.” “I am not a President who would enjoy waging war against the citizens of this Republic,” he said. “It pains me deeply to see people dying for an ideology that we can talk over peacefully, just like now.
Since addicts and junkies have been portrayed as not humans (Inquirer August 28) they cannot be reformed and thus should be condemned for extinction. Of course, this comes with an exemption: that’s unless you are from the exclusive villages! Money buys one’s humanity!
Of course waging wars have not been limited to junkies but expands to miners, to smokers, drinkers, oligarchs and entrepreneurs who employ subcontracted labor. While one is addressed with direct violence, the rest are resolved with indirect violence: threat of confiscation, and or business closures.
However, “ideology” based criminality, which largely applies to the higher ups and not to the underlings, should be rewarded.
But how does the government intend to distribute lands? From the same report: In talking of land reform, Duterte said the lands to be distributed will not come from the landowners. “It is a genuine land reform,” he said. “But I will not confiscate lands (or) get it from people who own… there’s so much land in the Philippines… just tell me and I would give them everything.” Duterte said he is not willing to do land reform similar to what has been done in the past, where the government would buy land from landowners and distribute it to farmers or the landless who would eventually end up selling the property back to its original owner. “I will not do that, that would be an injustice,” he said.
With the exception of a few voluntary choirs, the essence of government is force. The same applies to government properties which are obtained, in essence, through force. Government revenues (taxes, tariffs and fees) are acquired through force. Unless you can use legal loopholes to avoid taxes, skirting taxes means penalties via fees, jail time or garnishment/confiscation of one’s properties. Force.
From revenues to expenditures it is all about force. Even when government buys land through eminent domain, it is channeled through confiscation or “compulsory purchase”.
And just which public lands will be given by the government as "trophies" to a renegade ideological but largely spent political force?
How much more will be required for the government to spend, not only for rehabilitation of rebels but to help secure their assimilation to the mainstream?
Yet what ensures the productivity of these rebels? And what if lands alone will not suffice for a return of peace? What if there has been lack of economic opportunities to sustain them? And because of this, what if rebel beneficiaries sell these and subsequently head back to the banditry profession? Or what if habit dictates a return to hills?
Yet going back to the reduction of the agriculture budget which includes “Payapa at Masaganang Pamayanan (Pamana) program, whose beneficiaries are rebel returnees”, so where and how will government get its funding to finance NPA’s welfare? From the Php 7 billion pork barrel of the office of the president?
And who will pay for the dole outs of land and other welfare for NPA beneficiaries? Again by how? Raising taxes, increase borrowing or inflationism?
Unless “manufactured” or through reclamation, supply of land is largely limited. Thereby as a matter of opportunity costs, land bequeathed to rebels would mean land that would be stripped off from other political uses (military installations, infrastructure, areas for squatter transfer, temporary shelters for disasters, public schools, and etc…). Alternatively why NPAs? Why not also MILF, MNLF or other rebel groups? Or why not non rebels or government employees? Squatters? Or why not as public housing among the many other interest groups for doleouts?
What’s so special with NPAs?
Yet will NPAs eventually be absorbed into the military and police? Would such stir up the hornet's nest?
Conclusion
Like markets, politics is a time consuming process. Yet amazingly, the speed and fluidity of current developments seem to chime with my expectations on the directions of the developing trend of Philippine politics.
Socialism Latin American version here we come!
Whether or not a revolutionary government or martial law will be established, what’s truly more interesting will be the economic impact from the incumbent government’s presumptuous and profligate ways and actions.
Yet differentiating substance from forms matters alot. On one hand, the government may have a penny pinching inauguration menu (Rappler June 27) as a populist signal of prudence, on the other hand, ironically the government can imperceptibly lavish with taxpayers resources for supposed implementation of a political moral agenda (with practically no accountability on “discretionary” public treasury expenditures!).
Moreover, such populist undertakings have all been hinged on the belief in free lunches or third party, or specifically, taxpayer largess for what has been portrayed or sold as a moral issue.
Yet the economic costs of the war on drugs have been mounting! The unforeseen adverse socio-economic cost will soon surface too.
War on Drugs: Valuable Excerpt on the Mechanics of Mass Drug Surrenders; Cracks on Bolivia’s War on Mining: Protests Against Socialism!
Two final post script observations
-Remember the regime’s war on mining? And the proposed cooperative takeover by the government to replace environmentally “destructive” miners?
Well Bolivia’s experience show us why this will fail.
Miners were in essence protesting socialism and demanding government bring back capitalists into the mining industry.
As I wrote before “Why the War on Mining Will Fail!” (June 26, 2016), cooperatives will not work. Why?
Because…
“Mining is a capital and technology intensive industry. Just where will cooperatives get funds and expertise?”
The background to this is that Evo Morales nationalised the mines (and all of the country’s mineral resources) soon after being elected in 2006. The cooperatives are able to gain a licence to mine such deposits. Great – but the government insists that such cooperatives cannot then team up with private sector companies. And that’s what the protest is about. Because the miners have realised the thing about mining – it’s a capital intensive business and cooperatives don’t really have any manner of raising large amounts of capital
Amen!
-Oh about those huge numbers of drug related people who reportedly has surrendered due to the regime’s war on drugs. Awesome insight from the Time Magazine (August 25) [bold mine]
Rightly fearing for their lives, Filipinos are surrendering in droves. More than half a million people have turned themselves in to the authorities for drug-related offenses, according to police data, since Duterte took office. Although, as Joseph Franco, an expert on the Philippines at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University, tells TIME via email, “Surrender is a very loaded term.”
The police draw up lists of suspected drug users and dealers, he explains. The lists are then sent to the barangay, where community leaders are pressured to endorse them and include additional names — something done with little verification or oversight, if any.
“So you can put on those lists neighbors with whom you have an ax to grind” without worrying about a detailed vetting process, Franco adds. In this way, the poor are turned on each other.
Once named, an alleged drug user has three options. To risk being murdered, to wait to be picked up in a potentially lethal police action, or to report to the authorities. If they choose the latter, they are made to sign a waiver saying they will swear off illegal substances — or face the consequences if they begin using drugs again.
During elections, the opposite of this would be called as “hakot” (bused in or ferried in crowds) of usually paid supporters.
In the contemporaneous war of drugs, mass “surrenders” comprises mostly compulsory enlistments through repression!
War on drugs? Or war on the poor?
