tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post2806452994578486429..comments2023-06-03T21:23:56.934+08:00Comments on Placeholder: The Benefits of Sharing the Income Tax Burden: A Possible Scenariocvjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00327799000000108953noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-5156989810361065662008-08-03T09:57:00.000+08:002008-08-03T09:57:00.000+08:00"Sunday, August 03, 2008 12:47:00 AM"I think you m..."Sunday, August 03, 2008 12:47:00 AM"<BR/><BR/>I think you may be right on all points. But is it fair to put under one umbrella all neo liberal presidents under one umbrella? <BR/><BR/>GMA and Ramos were only children when Diosdado instituted those "reforms".<BR/><BR/>And is it a wise solution to totally ignore our present neo liberal policies to solve the problems created by it? I mean, wouldn't the situation in the short term be further aggravated if we do a 180 degree turn and suddenly go protectionist?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-32157330744319268212008-08-03T05:06:00.000+08:002008-08-03T05:06:00.000+08:00FPJ supposedly said : "Kailangan konsultahin ang m...FPJ supposedly said : <I><BR/>"Kailangan konsultahin ang mamamayan. Hindi sugod ng sugod" (The people should be heard first and not make hasty decisions),</I> FPJ's campaign spokesman said on the type and system of governance the actor would employ once elected as president in May 2004.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Lahat ata ng kandidato, iyan ang sabi. "Makikinig ako sa mga mamamayan." Si Mar Roxas din. Si Loren Legarda din. Si GMA din. Si Makoy din. Si Ramos, ganoon din.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-121262941298787192008-08-03T00:47:00.000+08:002008-08-03T00:47:00.000+08:00Anonymous (at 4:33:00 PM), i don't think decontrol...Anonymous (at 4:33:00 PM), i don't think decontrol can make imported rice more affordable (quite the opposite because of devaluation) if that's what you mean, and i don't think that was the intent of decontrol in the first place.<BR/><BR/>From what i read, the push for decontrol was from the hacenderos who wanted to be able to <I>export</I> their agricultural products at more competitive rates with a devalued peso. This clashed with the interests of the local import-substituting manufacturers who needed to import capital equipment. (Decontrol was one of the main reasons why we failed to industrialize.) <BR/><BR/>Here's <A HREF="www3.pids.gov.ph/ris/dps/pidsdps0513.pdf" REL="nofollow">one study on rice-self sufficiency</A>. As per this study, one of our main problem is low productivity:<BR/><BR/><I>"The rice yield in the Philippines is 1/2 of China; 7/10 of Indonesia and Vietnam; 3/4 of developing Asia average; higher than Thailand but the latter has more land. Rice yield must grow by at least two and half times higher from 2003–2020 than during the 1990s in order to ensure self-sufficiency without increasing hectarage."</I><BR/><BR/>The Study goes on to say that low productivity is because of lack of irrigation and lack of investment in Research and Development (R&D). <BR/><BR/>As to available land, did you hear about the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the government and San Miguel-Kwok for the use of 1 million hectares of idle government land? This means that there is still some land available, around 3 million hectares of idle government land including the 1 million that was allocated to SMC-Kuok. For the record, I don't agree that the government let SMC use such land instead of allocating these for the poor to grow food. (I elaborate more in another blog entry.)cvjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327799000000108953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-84248900515850049732008-08-02T16:33:00.000+08:002008-08-02T16:33:00.000+08:00I'd like to think you're correct. But could the si...I'd like to think you're correct. But could the situation be that our leaders, from the time of Macapagal and Marcos, foresaw that the population is outstripping food supply so decided the best way to feed the population is to decontrol the currency so the country can afford to buy rice overseas?<BR/><BR/>If there's a study about this I'd like to know. Assuming our arable lands are utilized to close to 100% efficiency, can we supply for 80 million people?<BR/><BR/>It doesn't help of course that we are the most typhoon ravaged country in the whole world.<BR/><BR/>So maybe it's something to think about. Maybe without neoliberal policies, the middle class would be starving right now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-36982391562079304362008-08-02T10:08:00.000+08:002008-08-02T10:08:00.000+08:00Anonymous, thanks for your link on debt-swapping.I...Anonymous, thanks for your link on <A HREF="http://rationalchoice.blogspot.com/2005/09/millenium-debt-swap.html" REL="nofollow">debt-swapping</A>.<BR/><BR/>I do sense that you believe that the current situation is the best that can be managed under the present circumstance.<BR/><BR/>What i see instead is an epic con job where the neoliberals encouraged us <A HREF="http://cvjugo.blogspot.com/2007/03/foreign-borrowings-1987-to-2005.html" REL="nofollow">to accumulate debt</A> and let the world market supply our food needs (neglecting our local capacity to produce food), and then when things turn for the worse, someone like you will come along and say that we cannot afford to piss off our creditors because we depend on the world market for our supply of food. Doesn't that sound like the tactics of a drug pusher?<BR/><BR/>BTW, our present problems have a lot to do with a Middle Class that thinks it is justified to have the Masa cheated because the latter are not seen as equals. Well, it happens that Gloria was 'protecting her votes' from <A HREF="http://www.bulatlat.com/news/3-45/3-45-karonnie.html" REL="nofollow">a candidate who had Food Security as his number one priority</A>. So we end up shouldering the costs of expediency brought about by a superiority complex that turns out to have been misplaced.cvjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327799000000108953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-56007465255028926932008-08-02T07:45:00.000+08:002008-08-02T07:45:00.000+08:00"Though you come off as a neoliberal asshole"I'm b..."Though you come off as a neoliberal asshole"<BR/><BR/>I'm basically for the status quo. I used to think why the president is so dumb and fantasized about being president (this was during the time of Ramos). But as I got older and learned more I realized they're doing the best they can, given very precarious situation.<BR/><BR/>Ramos was doing things OK with all the liberalization stuff only for Erap to blow up the deficit with his war on Mindanao. That was the start of our downturn I think. Now GMA has to undo his crap. Which is why I thought it was understandable that she was "protecting her votes" and prevented another Erap (FPJ then) from winning the office during the whole Hello Garci affair.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-88711190597351761232008-08-02T07:37:00.000+08:002008-08-02T07:37:00.000+08:00"BTW, what's Debt for Sovereignty?"I meant debt sw..."BTW, what's Debt for Sovereignty?"<BR/><BR/>I meant debt swapping, which has proven to be an epic fail.<BR/><BR/>http://rationalchoice.blogspot.com/2005/09/millenium-debt-swap.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-50433537358829252152008-08-01T23:10:00.000+08:002008-08-01T23:10:00.000+08:00No worries anonymous. Though you come off as a neo...No worries anonymous. Though you come off as a neoliberal asshole, i do learn from your fortright inputs so keep them coming. In effect, what i hear you saying is that we shouldn't have to do an 'Argentina' unless our currency situation deteriorates and our resource situation improves. That's useful as far as sequencing is concerned.cvjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327799000000108953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-7620464654644991902008-08-01T21:17:00.000+08:002008-08-01T21:17:00.000+08:00"doing an Argentina is indeed an option"No offense..."doing an Argentina is indeed an option"<BR/><BR/>No offense, but this is probably you're dumbest suggestion. Argentina has half the population but eight times the land area. They're a net agricultural exporter. Their problem was similar to ours, <I>in the 1960's</I> that is. The solution they did recently is basically what Macapagal did in the 60's, which is decontrol.<BR/><BR/>Their problem is that they couldn't afford to go industrial, but have plenty of food and other basic necessities. Which is why in the article you linked it mentions "Argentina hasn't gotten a lot of foreign direct investment in the last five years, and it cannot directly borrow in international bond markets."<BR/><BR/>The Philippines is in an opposite situation. Bonds are basically our lifeline. Bond supply some of our dollar need from time to time when OFW remittances cannot cover the dollars that are needed to export oil and rice, two very basic necessities. Argentina has some oil and plenty of food.<BR/><BR/>Basically, the Argentinian solution only looked good because the currency situation was so bad. But in the context of a resource independent economy. But in our country, the currency situation looks <I>ok</I> (could turn bad intermittently but could turn worse if mismanaged) but in a very resource-starved environment.<BR/><BR/>These are two very different countries needing totally different solutions. So do you have any other suggestion to pay off our debt?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-42626854028056177352008-08-01T16:57:00.000+08:002008-08-01T16:57:00.000+08:00Anonymous (at 3:59:00 PM), i re-looked my numbers ...Anonymous (at 3:59:00 PM), i re-looked my numbers and it appears that because of the increased exemptions in <A HREF="http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=tax_Exemption" REL="nofollow">RA 9504</A>, you are right that the 12% rate on taxable income is too low if the exemptions are still in place when such a tax rate is applied. Otherwise, a higher rate is needed to achieve a target 12% effective rate (perhaps your recommended 20%). I'll discuss further in a future blog entry.<BR/><BR/>As for your request for a previous, <A HREF="http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-columns/op-eds-columns/how-argentina-jump-started-its-economy/" REL="nofollow">doing an Argentina</A> is indeed an option but not the only one. BTW, what's Debt for Sovereignty?cvjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327799000000108953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-35177779795633811582008-08-01T16:07:00.000+08:002008-08-01T16:07:00.000+08:00And I'm waiting to hear about you plans to pay off...And I'm waiting to hear about you plans to pay off billions of dollars in debt. I'm predicting debt for sovereignty crap. Pero mukhang wala nang GOCC na maibebenta pa. Maybe sell off more mining and forest concessions? Ubos na rin yun.<BR/><BR/>Government bonds? Debt forgiveness?<BR/><BR/>Hows about giving us a preview of this debt plan in a sentence?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-48808762097277528952008-08-01T15:59:00.000+08:002008-08-01T15:59:00.000+08:00"Anonymous, on your 20% to 30% tax rate, you'll ha..."Anonymous, on your 20% to 30% tax rate, you'll have to back it up with numbers and corresponding justifications."<BR/><BR/>My justification is simple: I am for the current tax rates.<BR/><BR/>Isipin mo na lang, with the current tax rate we're already having problems paying the debt and paying for public programs. Tapos, hahatiin mo pa at dodoblehin ang spending via socialized food stamps and socialized education? Imposible dre.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-33823066921962089002008-07-31T23:56:00.000+08:002008-07-31T23:56:00.000+08:00Anonymo us, ideally yes, but i don't think we can ...Anonymo us, ideally yes, but i don't think we can afford it. As it is, there is already <A HREF="http://cvjugo.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-social-contract-on-taxes-wages-and.html?showComment=1217486220000#c4160506106007599213" REL="nofollow">one commenter</A> in the previous thread who is dismissing the twenty pesos per day as barely enough for five pan de sal (salted bread). More importantly, i believe that given our population problem, i don't think we should on principle encourage the subsidy recipients to have more babies.<BR/><BR/>The above, however, doesn't preclude a separate set of school feeding programs.cvjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327799000000108953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-87310637291290766592008-07-31T21:46:00.000+08:002008-07-31T21:46:00.000+08:00the food subsidy should include all persons (yes, ...the food subsidy should include all persons (yes, babies too) in the family.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-90633410400820106762008-07-31T15:37:00.000+08:002008-07-31T15:37:00.000+08:00Anonymous, on your 20% to 30% tax rate, you'll hav...Anonymous, on your 20% to 30% tax rate, you'll have to back it up with numbers and corresponding justifications. As i said, i haven't forgotten your objection. I'll deal with that in due time.<BR/><BR/>I think the basic philosophy of the rich and middle class paying taxes while those who are poor are exempted is wrong headed because it encourages parasitism (already, there is another anonymous commenter complaining about <A HREF="http://cvjugo.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-social-contract-on-taxes-wages-and.html?showComment=1217472600000#c6280307879590195875" REL="nofollow">parasitism</A> in the previous thread, and rightly so). Everyone who earns an income has to pay taxes, if only to allow them to keep their dignity and self respect. As for preventing starvation, that's what the subsidies are for.cvjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327799000000108953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18212611.post-33294028410265610332008-07-31T14:23:00.000+08:002008-07-31T14:23:00.000+08:00Again you haven't taken into account the debt repa...Again you haven't taken into account the debt repayments. This flat tax should be around 20% to 30% for us to be able to repay the debt.<BR/><BR/>But if you bring it to those levels, it would be too high for the lower income to pay.<BR/><BR/>Hence the progressive tax rates. Richer pay more, poorer pay less or none. Hey wait a mintue, isn't that our present tax system?<BR/><BR/>Enough with your pontificating that the middle class are paying too much. Your solution essentially is to cut their taxes to half. But this "solution" would bankrupt the government.<BR/><BR/>There's not getting around it-the middle and upper class would be paying high taxes for the forseeable future and the government should reduce wastage of funds by corruption for the long haul.<BR/><BR/>Only when we've invested enough in infrastructure and education then can you talk about flat tax. Only second and first world countries as far as I'm concerned can afford those.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com