This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. VI, No. 8, March 26-April 1, 2006
Analysis
Unemployment, Poverty Worsen
under Arroyo The
worsening joblessness and underemployment reflect the backward and crisis-ridden
state of the economy. It shows the folly of the neo-liberal policies of
privatization, liberalization, and deregulation, not to mention the inability of
the Arroyo administration in addressing poverty. BY
BENJIE OLIVEROS A study by Ibon Foundation
reveals that the Arroyo administration has the worst sustained joblessness rates
compared to previous administrations after registering an 11.4 percent
unemployment rate in 2005. The unemployment rate has been registering double
digit figures since 2001. It was able to claim a single digit figure, an
adjusted rate of 7.7 percent for 2005, only after shifting to a “new” definition
to exclude those not “actively seeking for work”. While it claimed a slight
improvement in January this year, 10.7 percent by the old definition and 7.4
percent by the new definition, an analysis of the 750,000 jobs it supposedly
generated in 2005 shows that the country fared no better. Data from the
National Statistics Office (NSO) shows that 51.86 percent or 389,000 of the jobs
created were in unpaid family work mostly in agriculture. Another 35.06 percent
or 263,000 were in the own-account category. Thus, a mere 13.06 percent or
98,000 jobs generated since January last year were wage and salary workers. The number of wage and
salary workers already fell by 156,000 in 2005 as compared to 2004. On the other
hand, the number of own account and unpaid family workers increased by 855,000
in 2005. Aside from this, the underemployment rate is continuously increasing.
From 17 percent of the total labor force in 2004, it increased to 21 percent in
2005. Underemployment for January 2006 is at 21.3 percent or 6.9 million
workers, an increase of 1.8 million from its
5.1-million level in January 2005. In interviews with
BusinessWorld, Prof. Solita Monsod of the University of the Philippines
School of Economics said that the “quality of jobs created is not good.”
University of Asia and the Pacific economist Stephen Huang said that the “jobs
created were not productive or does not add to the economy.” In a press
release, Ibon Foundation said, “Even these already alarming figures do not
reveal the true extent of joblessness in the country. Ibon estimates that the
actual employment rate in the country is only 58.4% instead of the official
91.9%, while 41.6% suffer from job scarcity (including the underemployed,
workers who leave for jobs abroad, and housewives and other sectors considered
‘not in the labor force’ but would work if only jobs were available).”
This situation clearly
belies the Arroyo government’s claims that the economy is on the right track and
makes irrelevant the 6.1 percent growth in the gross domestic product (GDP) in
the fourth quarter of 2005. The worsening joblessness
and underemployment reflect the backward and crisis-ridden state of the economy.
It shows the folly of the neoliberal policies of privatization, liberalization,
and deregulation, not to mention the inability of the Arroyo administration in
addressing poverty. Worsening poverty and
hunger The
government’s statistics on poverty are likewise unbelievable. The latest data of
the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) shows that 30.4 percent of
Filipinos are poor in 2003, an improvement from the 33 percent registered in
2000. However, this
is due to the very low minimum annual per capita income. In 2003, the NSCB
claims that the threshold is at P12,475 ($243.37, based on an exchange rate of
P51.26 for every US dollar) for the whole country and P14,178 ($276.59) in urban
areas. For 2004, it set the national threshold at P13,113 ($255.81), of which
P8,734 ($170.39) was intended for sustaining food needs and the balance of
P4,379 ($85.43), for other basic needs. With this
threshold, a family of five needs a regular income of P65,565 ($1,279.07) yearly
or P5,464 ($106.59) monthly to meet essential needs.
This translates to a P1,092 ($21.30) monthly
income or a P36 ($0.70) daily income for every person. For the food budget, NSCB
claims that P727 ($14.18) per month or P24 ($0.47) per day is enough for someone
to survive. How on earth can he or she survive with this amount? What food can
one eat with P24 ($0.47) per day or P8 ($0.16) per meal? How can a P365 ($7.12)
monthly or P12 ($0.23) daily budget suffice to pay for utilities, personal
necessities, transportation, clothing, and rent, not to mention education and
health needs? The minimum fare for a jeepney alone is already P7.50 ($0.15).
The NSCB also claims that a
minimum wage worker in Metro Manila earning P325 ($6.34) daily can support a
family of five. However, workers have been demanding a P125 ($2.44)
across-the-board nationwide increase since 1999 since wages are not enough to
meet high cost of living requirements. For beyond government
statistics, which are being manipulated to paint a rosy picture, are the views
and experiences of the people themselves. The 4th quarter 2005
survey of the Social Weather Stations (SWS) reveals that
Self-Rated Poverty rose to 57%,
from 49% in the Third Quarter. It has fluctuated between 46% and 58% since the
start of 2004.
In a media release, the SWS survey
said that, “The
proportion of
Filipino households experiencing hunger hit an alarming 16.7% last quarter (of
2005), a new record high from the time SWS began surveying hunger in mid-1998.
It has now been in double-digits for seven consecutive quarters.”
The new record level of hunger, the SWS said, was due to an increase in Severe
Hunger. The latter, defined as families going hungry Often or Always in the last
three months, was at 3.9% in December 2005, affecting approximately over 600,000
families. This reflected an increase from the 2.6% registered in August 2005.
Moderate Hunger, defined as those experiencing it Once or A Few Times in the
last three months, was at 12.8% in December 2005, affecting 2.1 million
families. It was a very slight decrease from 12.9% in August 2005.
How then can the Arroyo government address poverty when its policies cause the
economy to lose wage and salary jobs steadily? How can an increase in unpaid
family work and own-account jobs enable a family to rise from poverty?
Even the much-trumpeted
business process outsourcing jobs, such as call centers and medical
transcription, cannot provide employment for the millions of unemployed and
underemployed Filipinos. Aside from this, call centers in particular employ
mainly graduates from reputable schools because of its strict English
proficiency requirements. It is not surprising then
that more and more Filipinos are intending to work or migrate abroad.
But how many overseas
Filipino workers (OFW) can be accommodated abroad? While OFW remittances prop up
the economy especially the gross national product (GNP), the balance of payments
(BOP) position and the gross international reserves (GIR), overseas work does
not strengthen the fundamentals of the economy, particularly domestic
employment. And while it provides relief from poverty to families of OFWs, the
effect is temporary. Once the OFW is unable to work abroad, these families are
back to where they were before except for a few. Radical solutions The worsening state of
unemployment, underemployment, poverty and hunger clearly shows the need for
radical solutions. The country has followed essentially the same economic
program for 60 years: export of raw materials and semi-processed goods,
dependence on imports for finished goods such as machinery, oil and consumer
durables, reliance on foreign investments for capital and technology, etc. And
the country has remained backward, agricultural, pre-industrial, cash-strapped
and capital-deficient. It never brought the country any nearer to
industrialization and prosperity. The country needs nothing
less than radical solutions. But the solution does not
lie in the charter change (Cha Cha) initiatives of the Arroyo administration.
Politically, it is a way to keep the incumbent in Malacanang by skirting the
issue of legitimacy hounding Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and by providing her with
more power, that of the president and prime minister combined. It is also an
attempt to water down the Bill of Rights provisions of the 1987 Constitution. Worse, it is a concession
to her most reliable ally, the U.S. government. The proposed amendments
practically reverse the hard-earned victory of the Filipino people when they
rejected the continued stay of the U.S. military bases in the country. Gone
will be the provisions disallowing foreign military bases and nuclear weapons in
the country. Economically, charter
change merely enhances the neoliberal polices of the administration by removing
all restrictions on foreign capitalists from owning land, exploiting our natural
resources, and extracting profit from the provision of basic utilities and
services. These are the very same policies that put the country deeper and
deeper into crisis and backwardness. The solution lies in
freeing the majority of the Filipino people from feudal bondage and backwardness
through a genuine agrarian reform program and rural industrialization;
optimizing local capital to enable the country to produce the needs of the
domestic market and the local economy and provide gainful employment to the
populace through nationalist industrialization; judicious use of our natural
resources for local industry; developing our human resources through a
scientific, patriotic, and democratic culture; undertaking an independent,
mutually beneficial foreign policy and relations; installing a patriotic and
pro-people government and instituting a sovereign and democratic constitution.
In the last five years, the
Arroyo administration has shown that it will never undertake these measures. On
the contrary, it has pursued the very same policies that are causing widespread
poverty and has engaged in nothing more than transactional politics to appease
its allies. What then is left for the Filipino people to do? Bulatlat
© 2006 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
Bulatlat