How to stop or solve the poverty in the Philippines?

[tattee]

---

in short, love our own! di ky imported dayon pangitaon!

[jofritz]

education...para balu ang mga pinoy kung kinsa jud ang
botaran nig election...dili kay mag base ra sa TV ad ug sa suhol...

[gunbalina]

nothing can solve this problem..if datu tanan taw kinsa mu buhat sa dirty jobs?hehehe!but seriously this problem cannot be solved.every nation on this planet has poverty...sa MARS kaha?hahaha!

[foolonthehill]

Tarmac,
Too many words, too many mistakes. You have drown yourself with useless false arguments in details.


The lawyers have a maxim, RES IPSA LOQUITOR. (the thing speaks for itself)

When New Jersey increased its wages (only the min. wage) by 19% in 1990, did their economy GO DOWN DOWN DOWN by -19%?

NO NO NO..

price vs wage is NOT NOT NOT LINEAR.. non-linear

but i think you did not read the posts before about Non-linear.

Maybe tarmac you are not an engr or mathematician.. its hard for you to follow analysis

If 19% increase in wages did not result in 19% negative destruciton in the econmohy, then its a good thing bec the poor have more wealth (19% more food in teh table)


My advice to you Tarmac is, dont get lost in a single detail. Your mistake is looking at the leaves and not seeing the forest..

Therefore Hyperwage in Nj (19% step in one year) did not destroys its economy in 1990 and did not destroy its economy 10 years later.

that is physical proof (and I suppose hundreds of thousands of pinay went to New Jersey since 1990s)

Sorry Tarmac, you are wrong again.

Mr. Bentulan uses the "CK 1994" study as validation of his Hyperwage theory. To summarize, New Jersey passed a law in the early 90s that upped minimum wage by 18.8%. Instead of increasing unemployment, the study showed the opposite happened. Employment in the fastfood business (the sector analyzed in the study) in the State of New Jersey increased instead.

Using this study, Bentulan triumphantly declares his hyperwage theory has been validated. He harps on it constantly.

I see one major flaw in this argument.

How are we to know that the increase in employment was brought about by increased minimum wage and not by other factors? Does the CK study itself explicitly credit the increased employment solely to a rise in wages, as Mr. Bentulan might suggest, or did he just read that into the study? Did New Jersey's higher minimum wage in fact allow its denizens to eat more burgers?

Nope. At least not by its lonesome. CK1994 did not happen in a vacuum. It must be placed in proper context.

Remember that in the 90's, the United States experienced a prolonged period of rapid economic expansion. The increased prosperity was brought about not so much by legislated increases in minimum wage as Mr. Bentulan would have us believe as it was by an explosive growth in consumer credit. The 90's saw a 90% rise in consumer credit. As never before, Americans could suddenly buy a house (or two), an SUV, a computer, kids' college education, an expensive pair of shoes or that dream vacation--all on credit. And it couldn't have been easier. Credit card companies were dealing out credit cards like they were playing cards. Mortgages were being granted with little regard for capacity to pay.

President Clinton did not involve the United States in any prolonged and debilitating military campaigns (outside of peacekeeping missions). Because of this period of relative peace, Federal and military spending decreased. This meant he could introduce tax cuts in 1997. This resulted in putting even more money in the hands of the American citizenry and economic growth accelerated some more. As did easy credit.

In fact, the 1996 legislated increase in the Federal minimum wage which Mr. Bentulan implies was a way of increasing employment (and hence purchasing power) in states other than New Jersey, may have been passed on the back of a general rise in prosperity. People simply felt they could afford to pay minimum wage workers more and backed it up with legislative fiat.

Purchasing power certainly increased, that is true, but not entirely due to increased minimum wage. Credit growth far outstripped any legislated wage increase 18.8% to 90%.

In the end, this increase purchasing power was merely illusory. While easy credit played a big part in fueling the economic boom of the 90's, it finally came home to roost last year when Americans suddenly realized they had houses they couldn't pay for and that they were in hock for many years. In effect, their salaries for the year and the year after were already spoken for. But then that's a subject matter that deserves a thread of its own.

But to summarize, New Jersey's new wage law by its lonesome did not result in increased employment in the New Jersey fastfood industry as Mr. Bentulan believes. The increased employment could instead be attributed to the significant rise in economic activity that prevailed throughout the 90's aided by the rise in consumer credit and a feeling of general well-being.

(Note: the CK1994 study compared NJ vs Pennsylvannia growth figures. PA did not increase minimum wages in tandem with NJ. According to Mr. Bentulan, the CK study showed that NJ showed a higher employment growth figure than Eastern Pennsylvannia. Perhaps this can be explained by the fact that dominant industries in Eastern Pennsylvannia--iron, steel and coal--were in decline even through the 90's)

If Mr. Bentulan wants to convince us that his hyperwage theory has been validated historically by CK1994, he'll have to do better. CK1994, which examines only the fast food industry in New Jersey, fails to prove his case, in my opinion.



Federal Statistics on Consumer Credit:

Federal Reserve Statistical Release G.19 Historical Data

[foolonthehill]

I agree with your AL1974

But many, including this forum, are not capable of understanding a contrarian concept.

They say, it can be done there bec it is US or Japan etc., bec the context is different.

They are not math or engr who can see the essence of the equation (not the wordy problem given).

But many this theory is not for their minds. This theory was designed by a person who has worked an economic analyst for a very long time

(it is a fallacy to say bentulan is not an economist, they just read in the internt and they assume ...they falsely thing he does not have an economic background or that a bacheloers degree in economics is what makes an economist.. funny, a few years copying the textbooks and verbatimly reciting the textnbook is their false idea of an econonomist.. they are so constrained to think that economist is by a degree not by knowledge)

they have forgotten that bentulan in his book wrote he was enrolled in an M.A. Economics program!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These detractors are not really bright people saying bentulan is wrong., they are actually not ecnomomist, have not worked as economic analysts, nevery read advance book on economics, and now they pretend to say they can undo what bentulan has done which is to organize into a single theory what should have been done for that last 100 years.

I heard him say that all stimulus packages in the world in this crisis have one objctive: To increas the purchasing power of the people. (US Austalia, Japan Taiwan giving cash direclty to the people)

THose who are against hyperwage are teh same peopel waiting for their yearly hyperwage called 13trh month pay. DOnt you know that 13th month pay is actuall hyperwage every 12 months? tahts a 100% increase in wages.

Hypocrites. Return your 13th month pay if you actually believe increaseing wages is bad for the ecnomy.

They are inconsistent.

for everyone following this thread, I suggest you read the Hyperwage Theory. The author is proposing a single ultimate solution to eliminate poverty- and not only that- it also eliminates other non-economical issues like political corruption, broken families, OFW hardships, poor education, moral degradation, etc.

I am pro-Hyperwage because I fully understood it and just like the author, I want a better Philippines, not for me but for my kids and the generations to come. I am even thinking of creating a Hyperwage Advocacy just so I can spread this brilliant idea of solving our present problems. That there is still a solution to our problems. That there is still hope. I always believe in the adage " There are no hopeless situations only people who have gone hopeless over them."

For those of you out there who are thinks our country is hopeless, I pity you and your kids who will feel the burden of despair that you carry.
For those of you who are NOT serious of helping our country, I hope you come to your senses.

I am not an example of a perfect Filipino, but I always am thinking of how to improve our country even if I dont enter into politics.

This Hyperwage thing is a well-thought of concept. With my years of experience in my job and with my educational background, I believe this Hyperwage Theory does make sense and is doable.

[foolonthehill]

Of course hes not an economist. He just told you his grades in his "M.A. Economics" program didnt he?

Or did you even read his book wherein he wrote that.

You suffer the same errors again Unsay Ngaln
1. You believe everything the internet you read withou critical thinking.
2. you assume many things without proof
3. You dont read the basic (THE BOOK itself)
4. You dont use use your common sense and attacks the personalityh of the author and not his ideas.

I am NOT crtizng you as a person, it is your process of argument and debate that i disagree.


And did you even realize, that if he is a formal economist then he will be thinkiong like you and will not be able to invent his own idea called Hyperwage?

he probably read hundreds of book more than the ordinary econ graduate does, and has even disagreed with what he found and invented his own theory.. a theory like gravity, that is used to explain an already existing phenomenon.



Mr Ngalan, you havent so far presented any original idea of your own. unlike the hyperwage inventor
so stop maligning or critizing the the person.. focus on ideas.

Like what I told Al1974 it is useless to debate with uinformed debaters like you . (uninformed on the topic being debated)

Im sure you are a good political scientist as I have seen in your postings so far.

mr.bentulan is not an economist either...

[foolonthehill]

Let the market decide. Why do you think anchor bolts in SM City are made from a small country called Leichenstein with a population about 1/10th of the Philipines?

Why? Bec anchor bolts made in the Philippines will snap and cause the floors to collapse down.

Do you want that?

Like selling labor, (come to us, we are the cheapest labor in the world) do you want to say (come to us we have the cheapest anchor bolts in the world?)

Imported anchor bolts are 10 to 20 times stronger, so you pay for the 10 to 20 time safety factor.

Correct?

Again, in the Hperwage book, let the market decide whether imported or local. His only concern is give the purchasing power to the people so they can afford safe quality products.

in short, love our own! di ky imported dayon pangitaon!

[foolonthehill]

Daw? WHo said? You believe him? have you read teh boook and make a judgment for yourself?

And then, if nOT hyperwage, what policy do you want?

The one we have been foolowing since 50 years ago? and still we are thirdl world country?

So how many years do you need to make Phils a First World? an extension of 5 years, or 10 years ? HOw many?

Or maybe the current policy is wrong?

And hyperwage is the solution?

I've heard about the hyper wage theory sa economics class nako 5 years ago. It's very hard to implement daw, near to impossible. So, better focus on something near possibility.

[foolonthehill]

Ikaw ang faulty parts.

Hyperwage is NOT about pop. control. that is just a side effect. Dont confuse the main issue.

Dont throw the baby with the bath..

And I answered you already. You havent lived in a first world country enough to realize that indeed the cost of raising a child is a MAJOR factor in the number of children they want.

YOu are wrong to say bentoln lgoic is faulty. His logic is correct., it is yuour uninformed statement that is faulty.

Can we pls raise the level of debate to a min. level of common sense, logic and knowledge on the topic?

i think mt. bentulan also made the same faulty logic when he said that high prices of commodity will make people think twice about their family size... if you will look in other thread on church role on reproductive health the problem is those who cannot afford are the one who actually have bigger families.. therefore mr. bentulan's stament is an error... beacuse its not actually high prices of commodity which makes people think twice about family size...

...

[Tarmac]

Sorry Tarmac, you are wrong again.

Hello Fool,

My, my. If there's one thing you've taken to heart from the Hyperwage paper is it is to denigrate the intelligence of people who disagree with it or at the very least ask questions about it. Not exactly the best way to advocate something, is it?

You obviously didn't read my post correctly. Why? Too many words for you?

I'll spell it out for you.

Mr. Bentulan said in Chapter 17 (sorry to disappoint you, I actually read the entire paper) that CK1994 shows an increase in wages led to a slight increase in employment. He did not just say, as you think, that it did not destroy the economy, he actually said it actually led to an increase in employment.

To quote Mr. Bentulan in Chapter 17: "I must make this distinction: A slight increase in wages (18.8 % in the case of New Jersey) will lead to a slight increase in employment as found by the CK 1994 study."

and

"When I read CK for the first time, my mind leaped and jumped with joy. Here was an actual study of an actual wage increase that resulted in an increase in employment. At that moment, I knew I was in the right direction. But then again, I was bereft of any economic education enough to be credible to economists."

and

"Thus, on two occasions, in 1992 and in 1996, the Card-Krueger studies confirmed that the increase in minimum wages did not result in huge unemployment, instead it resulted in slightly faster increases in employment."

My issue with those statements is that there is the possibility that the increase in employment was due to other factors, namely accelerating economic activity brought about by a rise in consumer credit (among other things), rather than a rise in minimum wage itself. It is hard to prove that hyperwage alone contributed to the rise in employment figures.

He says CK1994 validates hyperwage. You say Res Ipso Locquitor. I say it doesn't necessarily do that. I simply meant to say CK1994 should not be taken in isolation but properly contextualized.

And dismissing the issue of CK1994's validity or lack thereof as a single leaf in a vast forest is a major cop-out. If CK1994 doesn't validate hyperwage historically, then Mr. Bentulan has to date no empirical study to point to that would say hyperwage works in the real world.

And sorry to disappoint you again, I understand non-linear equations perfectly. But where does that even figure in my post? How is it relevant? We don't even have to talk about that. You've been harping about Istoryans here not understanding non-linear equations so you're stuck in that mindset. The moment someone questions hyperwage, you immediately say "you don't understand non-linear. Non linear this, non linear that..." like some broken record.

Did you just bring that up to sound smarter or intellectually superior?

Perhaps the non-linear nature of price vs wage is the only other thing you've learned from the hyperwage paper aside from hostility and arrogance towards people critical of the theory.

Clever, but clever by half. Try harder next time. Sorry.

And the sad part here (for you) is I'm not even questioning hyperwage in its entirety. I enjoyed reading the paper tremendously. Do I agree with everything he says? No. I still believe implementation will be a bitch. Especially in a third world country like the Philippines.