5,800 Filipinos born in every 24 hours!!!

**oldblue** · May 29th, 2005 04:06 PM

The Philippines has adequate resources. Look at the countries I mentioned earlier which has a population density of 6,000/Sq. kilometer. These are Japan, HK, and Singapore. Lahat iyan, small countries WITH NO NATURAL RESOURCES WHATEVER. Japan, with all their big cities and tall buildings, where did you think they got their wood, steel, cement, etc??

it's so convenient to compare the Philippines with this highly-developed countries. after all, they are our neighbors, so why the hell didnt we experience the same progress as them, as the years progressed.

who really knows, some say bec. of good governance, others say they have strong sense of culture and respect as a people, that's why they are united for common goal. Others may even conveniently point out that Japan, HK and Singapore had a big brother to look after them. Japan aided by the USA after the WW2, while HK and Singapore controlled by our majesty's govt for a considerable number of years after WW2. Contrary to popular belief that the US was our biggest brother/provider at a time of devastation, they instead immediately granted our independence, leaving us a country to rehabilitate and to fend for ourselves.

who really knows d'ba, but these countries you mentioned certainly had a good push than us. ikaw na din nagsabi, they dont have natural resources and yet they managed to become successful. d'ba nakakapagtaka yun?

As, analogy think of a public school who has limited libraries, computers, textbooks and other material resources but is rich in people resources. do you think they will ever become a credible/certifiable school? But look at what happens when this school gets a facelift by (for example) Ateneo or the La Sallian Brothers.

but then again the above countries you mentioned, is just a comparison. it may or may not be applicable to us.

**civic1990** · May 29th, 2005 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

bro
Paki verify yung 6k/km2 na population density ng japan

http://www.mlit.go.jp/river/english/land.html

hindi ata 6k/km2 ang density, its around 327/km2, grossly inflated ang figures.

the only figure nearing the 6k/km2 figure u gave is for tokyo.

http://www.jref.com/society/japan_pr...p_capita.shtml

Yung sa manila city naman nasa n 44k/km2 ang density. di man lang lumapit tokyo

http://www.demographia.com/db-dense-nhd.htm

yung philippines 255/km2 ang density.

http://www.census.gov.ph/data/pressr.../pr0130tx.html

Mojo, thanks for the reply.

1. I'll double-check on my figures on Japan. But granted that we use your figures, Japan is still more densely populated than the Philippines. And HongKong and Singapore is still more than 6,000 people per sq. km.

2. Yes, I mentioned that the Philippines has a population density of 255/sq. km. Didn't I?

3. Yes, Manila city (and maybe even Metro Manila to some degree) is congested. Because andun ang trabaho. As I mentioned earlier, it is because we didn't develop the countryside. Maluwag dun, i.e. wala masyadong tao, as the other tsikoteers forumers have observed. What we need is good governance.

P.S. I just checked the internet. I stand correct in Japan. Population density is around 336. Total population is 128 Million Japanese.

**civic1990** · May 29th, 2005 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by oldblue

who really knows d'ba, but these countries you mentioned certainly had a good push than us. ikaw na din nagsabi, they dont have natural resources and yet they managed to become successful. d'ba nakakapagtaka yun?

As, analogy think of a public school who has limited libraries, computers, textbooks and other material resources but is rich in people resources. do you think they will ever become a credible/certifiable school? But look at what happens when this school gets a facelift by (for example) Ateneo or the La Sallian Brothers.

Oldblue,

To answer your question: They don't have natural resources and yet they managed to become successful?

1. Good governance
2. People!

Japan is still one of the highly densely populated countries in the world.
Everybody knows the Japanese work-ethic that made the Toyotas and the Sonys a major export for Japan.

So actually, the size of their population was actually an asset, not a hindrance.

Let us take another example, China.

Before China opened up the iron curtain, China was lagging behind the western countries in economic development. It is therefore not really surprising that communist China opened its doors to the international community. They had to.

But with 1 BILLION people labor force, they were able to make productive use and make them the greatest economic threat to the West nowadays. Everything now seems to be MADE IN CHINA.

**civic1990** · May 29th, 2005 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by oldblue

As, analogy think of a public school who has limited libraries, computers, textbooks and other material resources but is rich in people resources. do you think they will ever become a credible/certifiable school? But look at what happens when this school gets a facelift by (for example) Ateneo or the La Sallian Brothers.

Bro,

What about U.P.?

**oldblue** · May 30th, 2005 02:30 AM

Originally Posted by civic1990

Oldblue,

To answer your question: They don't have natural resources and yet they managed to become successful?

1. Good governance
2. People!

Japan is still one of the highly densely populated countries in the world.
Everybody knows the Japanese work-ethic that made the Toyotas and the Sonys a major export for Japan.

So actually, the size of their population was actually an asset, not a hindrance.

Let us take another example, China.

Before China opened up the iron curtain, China was lagging behind the western countries in economic development. It is therefore not really surprising that communist China opened its doors to the international community. They had to.

But with 1 BILLION people labor force, they were able to make productive use and make them the greatest economic threat to the West nowadays. Everything now seems to be MADE IN CHINA.

like I said, what is true to them may not be true to us. Africa & India too have a larger work force (close to a billion people each), but they're not progressive. Living conditions there are a lot similar to ours -> hot climate, tribalism, very rich in natural resources.

anyway let's take a quick glance sa history:

The Great Japan you admire and know now is not exactly the Japan in the 50' until the early 80's. Ang mga japanese cars, TV sets noon pinagtatawanan lang ng west and even europe. try to watch old hollywood movies and you'll see, baka magulat ka. The Japanese back then were so good in copying/duplicating anything from electronics to spare parts to the point that they literally supplied the whole world with the cheapest mass-produced exports. And if not for the Americans, their products wouldn't even reach the shores of europe. Kaya nga sobrang walang halaga ng Japanese yen noon, nag-devaluate ng husto. But the one thing the whole world did not expect from the Japs, nag-improve sobra ang skills ng people nila when mass-manufacturing cheaper products, although it took them almost 3 decades to gain such reputation.

Now, it's china's turn. International corporations turned its eye on the Chinese bec. their workforce proves to be a lot cheaper, (hence more profitable) than the highly-skilled Japanese. Unlike in the past, when the Chinese were so poor & oppressed under the communist regime that they risked their lives & family just to get out of China. Sobrang dami Chinese refugees noon going to neighboring asian countries and the US. Napupuno nga ang isang container van ng Chinese illegal immigrants.

so why I am I saying this. without the intervention of an external or foreign super power, these countries, that you mentioned, are no different from us -> overpopulated and poor.

**civic1990** · June 2nd, 2005 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by oldblue

like I said, what is true to them may not be true to us. Africa & India too have a larger work force (close to a billion people each), but they're not progressive. Living conditions there are a lot similar to ours -> hot climate, tribalism, very rich in natural resources.

Oldblue,

It is easy to say that it MAY not be true for us. BUT A BIGGER POSSIBILITY IS IT IS.

Africa, although being rich in natural resources, and a small population density, has 2 problems: corrupt dictators, wars, and foreign interests. Who benefits the most from Africa's diamond and other natural resources? These are foreign-owned companies.

India: Well, their caste system says it all.

**civic1990** · June 2nd, 2005 09:53 PM

Originally Posted by oldblue

so why I am I saying this. without the intervention of an external or foreign super power, these countries, that you mentioned, are no different from us -> overpopulated and poor.

I don't think the Chinese, Japanese, Singaporeans, and Hongkong people will agree with you when you say that the reason they are progressive is because of AMERICA (foreign super powers?)??? Come on, give credit where credit is due. They had good governance and the people also had something to do with it too.

And China will never admit that they are where they are now because of America's aid??? If there are foreign-investments there, it is because the government made it conducive to investments. Their big population of 1 BILLION became an asset because foreign companies saw it as a potential consumer market, thereby attracting investments again.

And remember, we were 2nd to Japan in Asia during the 1960's. Following your logic, don't tell me that America helped all the other Asian countries during the 1970's to the present, except us, so that they are now more progressive than us????

**mazdamazda** · June 7th, 2005 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by civic1990

I don't think the Chinese, Japanese, Singaporeans, and Hongkong people will agree with you when you say that the reason they are progressive is because of AMERICA (foreign super powers?)??? Come on, give credit where credit is due. They had good governance and the people also had something to do with it too.

External influence, good governance & the people are just part & parcel of the whole deal. Without one or the other it will all fail. Don't try to just give credit to one and neglect the other.

By the way, haven't you noticed that the governments of Japan & HK were largely dictated by the American & British?

And China will never admit that they are where they are now because of America's aid??? If there are foreign-investments there, it is because the government made it conducive to investments. Their big population of 1 BILLION became an asset because foreign companies saw it as a potential consumer market, thereby attracting investments again.

They will never admit that but that is the truth. How many millions died in the twisted "reforms" that was instituted in China?

And remember, we were 2nd to Japan in Asia during the 1960's. Following your logic, don't tell me that America helped all the other Asian countries during the 1970's to the present, except us, so that they are now more progressive than us????

Which Asian countries are you referring to?