Things you need to know before idolizing marcos

[[archie]]

1980 = top 12.9 of population got 16.6% total income

Below 11% of population got 22.1% total income

1983 = top 12.9 of population got 45.5% total income.

Below 11% of population got 6.5% total income.

Inequality figures.

[[archie]]

That's the picture of income.

[glenn_duke]

Dude go to nso data.

Pards, nso data nga yan, hindi ba pamilyar sa iyo yung mga acronyms in enclosed parentheses? I fire mona yung researcher mo, mahina abilidad.

Presented sa mga statistical summit yang mga figures nayan. Kaya official and valid yan, quality controlled at quality assured, kumpleto sa PMS yan kahit HARI standard pa, pasado yan, hindi yan lemon data.

[[archie]]

Pards, nso data nga yan, hindi ba pamilyar sa iyo yung mga acronyms in enclosed parentheses? I fire mona yung researcher mo, mahina abilidad.

Presented sa mga statistical summit yang mga figures nayan. Kaya official and valid yan, quality controlled at quality assured, kumpleto sa PMS yan kahit HARI standard pa, pasado yan, hindi yan lemon data.

Good, now napakagat na kita sa data. Please see others...

Poverty line, inequality... That paints a picture for you.

[[archie]]

Finally average real gdp growth per capita

1951 to 1965 = 3.5%

1966 to 1986 = 1.4%

[confused shoes]

Again, where's your data. Magisip ka nga...

Sir [archie], hanap ka ng hanap ng data. Bakit di mo basahin ang sarili mong statement.

Madali mag work dati kahit no electricity. Hindi mo lang talaga gusto intindihin.

Kahit sinong bobo na matino ang pag-iisip, itanong mo kung sino sa atin ang dapat pagprovide ng data.

Ikaw sir, ang may sabing madali ang mag work kung walang electricity, o di mag provide ng work na pwedeng gawin na walang electricity para mapaniwala mo kami.

Ganyang mag-isip ang mga Marcos haters, kaya hanggang gayon nagtatanim pa rin sila ng kamote.

[jhnkvn]

Like I said, past performance are not inductive of future performance. Past performance can be very misleading if there are reasons to believe that future conditions are likely to be significantly different.

You're not looking at this from an economist view kasi. You're viewing it much like how our typical citizens do - without indepth critique.

Kahit ano gawin mo, kahit sinong Presidente ang nakaupo sa Malacanang, the country will still borrow. As the Philippines' economy was closely tied to the American economy, conditions then were statistically significantly different than the eras before and after. Inflation rate from pre-1970 was averaging at 2.5% but in the 1970s the average was 7.06%. By 1980, it was at 21.5%. It was often compared as the worst decade after the Great Depression -- walang wala ang 2007 crisis natin.

I'm not discounting that that our economy was damaged. But sinasabi ko is that it is unfair to pin this all to him. Kahit ano gawin niya or kahit sinong Presidente yan, they'll be instituting more or less the same economic policy and will borrow.

Don't fall into historian's fallacy. Just because we're in the future we can always judge the past because it's more rosy that way. Of course he will be building infrastructure regardless of economic standpoint.. because it's the most logical thing to do in a crisis.

Take a look into the 2007-2008 economic crisis in the US and influenced by the 2010 sovereign crisis in Europe -- what did world governments do? The US adopted a expansionary policy. The EU adopted the same. China adopted the same. Japan adopted the same. The Philippines adopted the same. In fact by today, park money into the ECB and you'll get negative interest rates. Saan ka pa nakakita ng central bank na if you park Php100 today it'll be Php98 by the end of a couple of years?

Criticizing the Marcos regime for mass borrowing and building infrastructure is like saying all these countries are idiots.

I keep on saying. If you stop building, if you do not borrow, the country will enter into a recession and you'll further compound your problems.. and it'll cascade into a chain effect. You get lower GDP figures, there will be less investment due to lower investor confidence, there will be more unemployed people, etc. so on so on.

[[archie]]

Sir [archie], hanap ka ng hanap ng data. Bakit di mo basahin ang sarili mong statement.



Kahit sinong bobo na matino ang pag-iisip, itanong mo kung sino sa atin ang dapat pagprovide ng data.

Ikaw sir, ang may sabing madali ang mag work kung walang electricity, o di mag provide ng work na pwedeng gawin na walang electricity para mapaniwala mo kami.

Ganyang mag-isip ang mga Marcos haters, kaya hanggang gayon nagtatanim pa rin sila ng kamote.

Puro electricity...

Meron ba korente Marcos era? Oo. Meron ba korente ngayon? Oo.

Ano pa pinaguusapan natin dito. Magtulak ng MRT? Magtanim Lahat ng kamote?

Wtf is the point? What is the relevance? WALA.

Statement ko yun. Para maintindihan mo, korente o wala kukuha ng trabaho ang mga tao.

Marcos lovers manalo ng konti, parang pyesta. Harapan ng data. Tameme.

Again and again, give me data.

[confused shoes]

China is making vast and impressive improvements to its transportation systems, but it may not have the demand required to finance the projects.

In 2009, China was reeling from the same collapse in global demand that had affected the United States after the Panic of 2008. China's policy response was a ¥4 trillion stimulus program (equal to about $600 billion) directed mainly at investment in infrastructure. The United States launched an $800 billion stimulus program at the same time. However, the U.S. economy is more than twice as large as China's. On a comparative basis, China's stimulus was the equivalent of $1.2 trillion applied to the United States.Three years after the program was launched, results are now visible.

One high-tech laboratory I visited was massive with spacious offices, conference rooms, and lab sites surrounded by attractive grounds and good transportation. For the time being it was empty, but officials assured me that 1,500 experts would soon arrive. This puts the concept of "if you build it, they will come" on steroids.

China's Infrastructure Trap - US News

[jhnkvn]

Mind you.. the first oil crisis depleted our foreign reserve holdings by quite a lot. Price of oil rose from $3 to $12 or a 400% increase. When energy costs increase by that amount... every damn country that doesn't produce oil will be in for a whole lot of hurt and that includes us.

400% is a huge number. Please don't discount that. Right now.. whatever you do. You're doing something that is a byproduct of petroleum. From your laptop plastic casing, your transportation costs, food manufacturing and delivery, to just watching TV.

A rise in oil prices will increase the cost of living. In fact, it's one of the largest proponents on how governments compute both minimum wages and cost of living. When cost of living rises, who do you think suffers the most? Of course it'll be the poor who has minuscule savings compared to the rich. That will explain your income inequality.

All governments one way or the other will hedge against that oil crisis usually by doing short-term subsidies because people will riot when all of a sudden their cost of living just tripled in two years and this places a burden on the treasury. Rather than allow a free-market policy on oil, governments will impose price controls. Without price controls, chaos will ensure. When the government is sponsoring part of your oil costs, of course it'll place a huge burden on short-term cash liquidity.