WHAT’s the true state of the nation? This question looms in the mind of every Filipino as President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s third State of the Nation Address (SONA) is fast approaching. Indeed, as Marcos approaches his third SONA on July 22, 2024, assessing his administration’s performance over the past two years is critical. Such evaluation delves into various sectors to determine where he has succeeded or fallen short.
Social welfare and economic stability
A downward spiral trend is taking place regarding social welfare, economic development and stability. The latest Pulse Asia survey, taken from June 17 to 24, revealed that as far as the most pressing issue, 72 percent of Filipinos clamored for the Marcos Jr. administration to control inflation or the rate of increase in the prices of goods and services. Unmitigated inflation remains the primary concern across all socioeconomic classes, particularly affecting essential commodities and services. At the same time, 44 percent of Filipinos identified low wages and demand to increase wages as another critical issue that underscores the public’s concern about their purchasing power and living standards amid rising prices.
Moreover, the same survey says that 30 percent of Filipinos are concerned about job creation, and 35 percent are concerned about addressing the problem of involuntary hunger. More significantly, the survey revealed that only 4 percent of Filipinos believed the Marcos Jr. administration fulfilled its campaign promise of reducing rice prices to P20 per kilogram. This is quite telling.
Furthermore, the Pulse Asia survey further reveals that some of the pressing concerns of Filipinos under Marcos Jr. include fighting corruption in government at 22 percent, lack of support for farmers at 13 percent, peace and order at 13 percent, rising crimes at 11 percent and none or lack of equality before the law at 9 percent. All these indicate that there’s also a downward trend when it comes to good governance under Marcos Jr.
What does this tell us? All these indicate that Filipinos demand economic stability and growth. Furthermore, this means that Filipinos are facing significant economic challenges. Note that inflation and wages are measures of the strength of the purchasing power of an individual and the quality of the standard of living of a populace. If there’s an increasing trend in inflation and wages remain low or static, this leads to or means that the purchasing power of Filipinos is weakening by the day. This also tells us that the living standards of Filipinos are deteriorating, which also implies that the country’s poverty index is rising. True enough, based on the latest Pulse Asia survey, the Marcos government’s attempts at reducing poverty received the second-highest disapproval percentage; 51 percent and 32 percent of Filipinos feel that poverty is one of the most pressing concerns under the administration of Marcos Jr.
Hence, by implication, the Filipino people are urging the current government to reduce poverty by implementing effective poverty alleviation programs, not being tied down in transforming the whole country into an “ayuda capital” of the world.
Pitfalls of ayuda
Addressing poverty and economic hardships in the Philippines has been a persistent challenge for successive administrations. Under Marcos Jr., providing “ayuda” (financial aid) has been a prominent strategy to mitigate economic distress and poverty-related issues experienced by Filipinos. However, while ayuda offers immediate short-term relief, it is often criticized as a band-aid solution that fails to address the root causes of poverty. Such an approach is often inadequate or problematic in the long run. Why? Because these temporary measures do not contribute to sustainable economic stability or growth, recipients often return to the same precarious situation once the aid is exhausted. Also, reliance on ayuda without a long-term plan can foster dependency and not encourage self-sufficiency or economic resilience among beneficiaries. Hence, what is needed if the structural causes of economic hardships and the worsening poverty situation in the country are to be addressed?
The solution is not ayuda per se, for it does not create jobs or enhance employment opportunities. What is needed is sustainable job creation and skills development programs, which are essential to reducing poverty and economic hardships sustainably and permanently. However, the high unemployment rate remains a significant concern among Filipinos under the Marcos Jr. regime.
Also, long-term solutions to poverty include improving the education system and providing vocational training to increase employability and income levels. However, this remains a challenge under the current government. Likewise, ayuda does not stimulate broad-based economic growth. It is a redistributive measure rather than a productive investment. What is needed are policies that promote inclusive economic growth, support small and medium enterprises, and attract foreign investments, which are crucial for sustainable development.
Furthermore, while ayuda helps with immediate expenses, it does not address the underlying causes of inflation and the erosion of purchasing power. Persistent inflation can negate the benefits of financial aid. Economic policies that stabilize prices and enhance Filipinos’ purchasing power are needed and essential to combating long-term economic hardships. Ayuda is also often ad-hoc and not part of a comprehensive social protection system. It lacks the framework to provide consistent and reliable support to those in need. Thus, establishing robust social safety nets, including unemployment insurance, health care and pension systems, would provide more comprehensive and reliable support.
Most importantly, the distribution of ayuda is sometimes inefficient and marred by corruption, leading to unequal distribution and exclusion of the most needy. Transparent and accountable systems for distributing aid are necessary to ensure that help reaches the intended beneficiaries effectively. However, this is problematic and very challenging under Marcos Jr.’s administration.
Conclusion
In retrospect, while ayuda provides necessary and immediate relief to those facing economic hardships, it is not a substitute for comprehensive, long-term strategies to combat poverty. The Marcos Jr. administration must balance short-term assistance with sustainable development policies that address the root causes of economic distress. This includes job creation, educational reforms, economic policies for inclusive growth, robust social protection systems and empowering initiatives that foster self-reliance. Only through such integrated and holistic approaches can the Philippines hope to achieve lasting economic stability and prosperity for all its citizens.
With the SONA just around the corner, Filipinos await Marcos Jr.’s plan and strategy for combating and controlling inflation, and what economic policies he will lay down in his SONA on Monday that will address price stability, the demand for higher wages and job creation, which indicates a need for robust labor policies and economic reforms to boost employment and improve living standards, and addressing poverty and corruption, which will require comprehensive social programs and stricter governance to rebuild public trust and ensure equitable growth. Indeed, it remains to be seen if Marcos will tackle all these issues in his SONA on Monday. He needs to address these critical issues if his administration is to maintain public support.
Source: The Manila Times
https://www.manilatimes.net/2024/07/20/opinion/columns/marcos-pre-sona-assessment-pass-or-fail/1958517
