Things you need to know before idolizing marcos

[confused shoes]

Hahaha.

You are so far out of touch.

Now you know what the word means.

[[archie]]

Now you know what the word means.

Your really confused, confused shoes.

[confused shoes]

Your really confused, confused shoes.

Sounds fair.

[jhnkvn]

What? Infrastructure that did not do good for the country.

In the 50s to before his take over the economy was doing OK. During his time sadsad halos Lahat. After Medyo nakakaahon na.

Still refuse to see this.

"Infrastructure that did not do good for the country". Right.. have you taken the LRT? Did you go to NAIA to travel overseas? Did you open your computer while typing this message? (hint: dams) Congratulations! You just benefited from infrastructure. Ironic isn't it?

And what? Time din naman ni Fidel Ramos sadsad din ang ekomoniya natin due to the 1998 Asian Financial Crisis. Real estate companies gone belly up, businesses losing their customers, banks turning insolvent, and employees being laid off then afterwards we entered into a long drawn recession. It was only a decade after in 2008 where real estate (11% of GDP) and the accompanying financial services (7%) and construction (5%) began picking up due to better confidence in the market.

So, are you one of the people who blamed Ramos for this "mismanagement" of the matter when it's obviously out of his scope?

Let's say you invested in foreign equities as part of your retirement program and you've been building your nest egg ever since 2005 by putting a certain percentage of your savings into an index fund. In 2008, you'd have seen a -37% drop there because the aggregate market declined. So, you as an individual investor.. would you say you have sucked? isn't it illogical to think that the decline is due to your performance? Kahit ano gawin mo, if the aggragate market is going down.. statistical probability will tell you that you'll be declining too. And because of that decline, you grew fearful in investing ever again and threw all of your nest egg in treasury bonds and money market funds. However, that decision will prove to be a sad one because you'd have missed a 26% rally in 2009, 15% in 2010, 2% in 2011, and 16% in 2012.

[jhnkvn]

Let's say and what if are not facts.

Ayan investor na naman kasi it suits your argument.

Asaan progress?

Peso depreciation slowed
Better gdp to debt
International debt

As I've said ok lang borrowing and infrastructure as long as it does not bring the country to its knees.

Let's say and what if are not facts? Okay. Let's go at it from your point. But let me ask you just one thing?

1. Can you progress without trying?

[[archie]]

"Infrastructure that did not do good for the country". Right.. have you taken the LRT? Did you go to NAIA to travel overseas? Did you open your computer while typing this message? (hint: dams) Congratulations! You just benefited from infrastructure. Ironic isn't it?

And what? Time din naman ni Fidel Ramos sadsad din ang ekomoniya natin due to the 1998 Asian Financial Crisis. Real estate companies gone belly up, businesses losing their customers, banks turning insolvent, and employees being laid off then afterwards we entered into a long drawn recession. It was only a decade after in 2008 where real estate (11% of GDP) and the accompanying financial services (7%) and construction (5%) began picking up due to better confidence in the market.

So, are you one of the people who blamed Ramos for this "mismanagement" of the matter when it's obviously out of his scope?

Let's say you invested in foreign equities as part of your retirement program and you've been building your nest egg ever since 2005 by putting a certain percentage of your savings into an index fund. In 2008, you'd have seen a -37% drop there because the aggregate market declined. So, you as an individual investor.. would you say you have sucked? isn't it illogical to think that the decline is due to your performance? Kahit ano gawin mo, if the aggragate market is going down.. statistical probability will tell you that you'll be declining too. And because of that decline, you grew fearful in investing ever again and threw all of your nest egg in treasury bonds and money market funds. However, that decision will prove to be a sad one because you'd have missed a 26% rally in 2009, 15% in 2010, 2% in 2011, and 16% in 2012.

Huh? Your taking infrastructure to functionality? OK.

Sabi ko nga, ok lang infrastructure as long as it does not bring the country to its knees.

Ramos? We are talking about Marcos. As I've said before, the administrations after Marcos had wrong doings but did not come close to the devastation effects of Marcos era.

[[archie]]

Let's say and what if are not facts? Okay. Let's go at it from your point. But let me ask you just one thing?

1. Can you progress without trying?

Still, your in the "vision" argument. You still refuse to understand that the vision (progress) is building infrastructure until bankrupt na central bank.

Let's admit it, you will dismiss any historic data. It's pointless cause you still come with let's say and what if.

[[archie]]

Hindi na ko magrereply ng walang economic data ng Phillipines. Talagang mananalo ka sa futures kasi you can imagine wildly as you wish.

[jhnkvn]

Archie, your judgements is because you're in the future. Super comfy ng position na yan since alam mo na ano ang ngyari. If I may use a metaphor.. may I remind you that Marcos does not have a time machine that can peer into the future.

Time and time again, I have refuted your generalization with detailed arguments. Ridiculously detailed I might say so. So I'll sum it again.

In post #191, you gave me a reply (sarcastic.. but I'll brush it off) of our economic situation and "all infrastructure with no ROI". This no ROI argument is again repeated in #197.

Truthfully. I did not want to bring data up. This is because it appalled me on how people say "no ROI" with such confidence. Some infrastructure projects did not. Some did. But the fact is, not all infrastructure had no ROI. Did you not stop and think that our very economic health is grounded upon his infrastructure? LRT fares two million commuters daily. NAIA processes more than 8,000 passengers to their flights every day.

------------------

In post #232, you said you have historical data to prove na patuloy babagsak ang ecokonomiya under Marcos.

I refuted this in post #235 stating talagang babagsak ang ekonomiya natin whether or not Marcos is President or Mr. Banana (I made that up before anybody starts questioning who Mr. Banana is). I gave you strict statistical data of real oil prices

Real oil prices (constant USD as of July 2005) skyrocketed from under $20 in 1973 to peak at $90+ in 1980s

... of interest rates which increased our debt repayments

Worldwide the early 1980s ushered in recession. Paul Volcker as Fed Chairman tightened money supply and interest rates in the US shot up to 20% upwards.

and why he HAD to borrow..

The early 1980s was characterized by a second oil price shock that sent energy costs through the roof.

-------------------
In Post #237,

He has been building and building infrastructure regardless of economic standpoint. Bagsak economy? So what, skyrocketed debts? So what, etc

I replied in post #257 that it is only natural to build because the most logical thing to do in that crisis is to adopt an expansionary fiscal policy. Kung ayaw mo maniwala, I'll meet economic teachers from DLSU, ADMU, and UP and let's bet a million pesos on it on whether the expansionary policy is correct or not.

Unless masmagaling ka pa sa mga economists ng Federal Reserve, European Central Bank, Banco Sentral ng Philippines, Bank of Japan, and People's Bank of China. What Marcos did at his time was correct fiscal policy wise.

[confused shoes]

Ramos? We are talking about Marcos

<<<<<<<<