MERGED: FEDERAL DEMOCRACY: A solution to the sick country, the Philippines.

[Rajzh_niX]

---

ginahan unta ko sa source nga nag-ingon how our budget in our current system is distributed......this way, makit-an nato ang inyong gipang-ingon, kung tinuod ba ug kung sayup ba sad ang gipangsulti sa majorityy.....

[Rajzh_niX]

[quote=okah;8153519]

exactly even 10 years di pa na ma achieve ng federalism, 20 years di pa na sure. whats the point changing to an expensive system kung doubtful man pud ang result [/QUOTE

unsay Doubtful, mau nalang ng 20 or 50 years kay sa kana nga years pa ang mo labay using the current system unsa kaha ang itsura sa Pinas. i have no Doubt for that. pobre pa sa ilaga ang Pinas ana nga time.

unsa ka mahal ang pagchange sa system....unsaon paggasto ana....utang na sad....nagpatung2 na atong utang sa World bank....and you think makabawai ta....LOL, even if we select the best if the best politicians, dili gihapon coz ang nature sa mga tao, mukontra jud....naanad na sa systema and it is too late to change it...ok ra unta kung sauna pa, katong inyong gihisgot nga niseparate ang singapore sa malaysia....it would've been possible....karon, daghan pa kaayo problems ang Pilipinas, this will not pursue and is illogical...humana sa ang mga problema ron before such FEDERALISM...

[Peace]

its not the system but the people who runs the system

i couldn't agree more. . .
bisag unsa pa nga matang sa pang-goberno, if ang taw mismo magpabilin nga mao japon wa japon ayo.

change comes within ourselves.

[RMK711]

Exactly what kind of federalism (decentralization) are you talking about? when we say decentralization, central government will not give a bigger role (and budget), all government services will be provided by the Federal State.. which mean every government branches should had a HQ in every state cause they cant coordinate well within sa state, alangan ang budget sa DOH sa usa ka state diretso lang ihatag sa whatever infrasture naa karon.

No you're wrong. Name a single Federal state wherein all the institutions are converted to state institutions. I bet you won't find even a single one. As I said before, there are some institutions that have to remain national in scope, for example the military as well as the Constitutional High Courts (Supreme Court), also the CDC (center for disease control) but these are institutions that have functions that are national in scope. This line of argument is disingenuous because it feebly attempts to prop up "Federal is more expensive because of duplication".. but you didn't mention or don't realize that there is duplication in a centralized government as well, because some institutions have to be local in scope, for example the L.T.O. (there's an LTO office in every region or city). There's also a BIR office in every city. Isn't that duplication too? See, federal is not just about decentralizing institutions, it is about decentralizing money.

And your use of the word duplication is misleading. Just because a certain institution, lets say the courts, have a presence in every district, does not mean they are duplicating their functions. They are doing the same thing, but serving different areas. That's not duplication. Unless your implying that the national office is going to be doing all the work, and the exact same work is going to be done by the local offices. Nah, that doesn't happen, or at least, if it does, it also happens in a centralized system. Have you ever dealt with the stupid BIR here? Their work is checked and audited by Manila frequently. And you don't call that duplication? Wouldn't this be eliminated in a federal system, where the final say on taxes resides not in the national government but the states?

So proper infrastructures should be provided and that itself would need investments, some state may not afford it. Now for the maintenance... we spend most/less 500billions in government wages, and that amount will be divided among states again that will be costly to some plus we will hire more people and elect more officials to run the state and again poor states may not afford it to run at optimum level. This is the price of government duplication..

As there is no proof of this duplication, there is no need to address this comment.

and what kind of decentralization you talking about without duplication na every article of federalism talks about this duplication? dont give me crap na ang Philippine government pa mo handle sa mga branches ng government within the state, naa sila head sa each department sa national level but a large part bya ng budget padung sa state so another head na pud, inefficient kaayo. ang national government pa pud mo maintain sa military, coast guard, foreign affair, congress etc sunod 20% lang ang budget makuha sa entire nation. At least with our present centralized government we can always set priorities and adjust. eg. if naay dengue outbreak in one region the national government can always increase health budget in that area.

What makes you think that under a Federal government they won't be able to set priorities and adjust? What part of Federal still has a national government don't you understand exactly? Under the present system, what's to stop a stupid president from allocating all our budget to war and destroying this country? If there's a dengue outbreak in any region, that region would be able to handle itself, given that its taxes stay there rather than go elsewhere in the first place. So that point is moot.

Do you know that the proposal is splitting to 11-12 states, what are you talking about na ang provincial capitol himuon ug state capitol? so if one state lang ang Ilocos (north and south) ang capital city is what? Laoag or Vigan or both lol ok lang tana kung mamili lang sa duha kung naa pay maapil sa ilang state... ofcourse mo build gyud ng state capitol and same goes to other government branches and elect more officials. its clear more congressmen needed to debate/ammend/deliberate laws at state levels. again all these is expensive/costly... this is what USA had. Naturally taxation will increase to cope up with these expenses. I raise this issue kay dili ka afford ang poor state ani or maybe below optimum level lang sila. State may have a greater share of tax earnings but yet they pay the price of decentralization. Inefficiency kaayo ang federalism, sa atong current system insufficient ang fund what more kung decentralized na ta. unsa ibayad? you think sakto lang budget para sa poor state kahit na dako ang tax nakuha nila?, di man pud ka utang kay national policy man ang foreign debt.

It's just a proposal. There's no saying that a Federal system here must have 11 states. That's ridiculous, and it's nonesense to lambast the whole idea just based on the concept that someone suggested there should be 11 states. Australia is a much larger country and only has 3 main states, Victoria, NSW and Queensland (there are other minor states, called territories but they are small and they don't construct billion dollar capitol buildings in each state). If you ask me, the Philippines should retain the provincial structures, then there will be no need to construct new state capitols.

Prove nga inefficient ang federal system. As I said before, what you call duplication is not really so in most instances. In order for something to be called a duplication there must be a repeat of the exact same work by two offices. Just having two offices in two locations doesn't mean there's duplication. They could be catering to completely different sets of people.

For the economic issue. there is no positive relation between economic growth and decentralization di ni nako opinion I based that from a study and this forum section opinions is not as valuable as the sources so paki show lang inyong mga proofs na malambo atong ekonomiya with federalism. i will quote a part of that study by Andrés Rodríguez-Pose and Adala Bwire titled The economic (in)efficiency of devolution, i google lang ang title and download the pdf.

There is evidence of regional economic growth though, which is where we are again back at square one. Why should we care only about national growth, we should care about the growth of our region, cities and towns, the people we care about who are close to us, and let those people who live farther away worry about themselves. Of course I'm not talking about being selfish in times of calamity, I'm speaking generally. Is there anything wrong with thinking regionally? I want my hometown Cebu to grow, even if Manila doesn't. What's wrong with that?

and now in the case of Malaysia
This is what we lack.. a good economic policies, we are not attractive to foreign investments. ang atong systema ron benefits the oligarchs and our progress is slow. di ni mausab ng federalism kay ang economic policy is at the national level dili sa state level. If foreign direct investments were free to move into the country, many of the country’s major problems become more manageable. The fight against poverty will become more successful at home. With jobs being generated, the unemployment rate will become less bothersome. A further outcome will be rising wages and incomes for those who live in the country. Macroeconomic gains will strengthen the health of the economy. As argued elsewhere, among the major macroeconomic benefits are the reduction of the fiscal deficit, the lessening of the external debt, the improvement of external trade and payments, the stabilization of the peso and the increase of the national saving rate. what we need is economic reform with our current system without spending/running a costly federalism and we may not know the consequences, most likely mapareho ang Cebu sa Singapore, mubuwag ta sa Pinas. maypa mo call mo ug Special Region ang Cebu.

There's so many reasons other than the one you cited why Malaysia is what it is. As I said before it is both the system and the people (and their circumstances) you won't see me saying it is solely the system but there are people like yourself who think it's solely the people, when that really doesn't amount to saying much of anything. Also, there are multiple systems at play here, that differentiate Malaysia from Philippines. Malaysia is not just about the federal system, they also have a system of judiciary called common law system which is derived from England. That is also a source of their success, as I said it is both the system and the people, but I should have said it is the people and the many systems they adopt, since countries are far more complex than just the federal/centralized dichotomy being debated here.

What you need to prove, firstly, is that a federal system is really more expensive than a state system. You can prove this if you show me that federal governments have a higher deficit or annual budget in running their country as a proportion of GDP than our so-called "efficient" centralized system that never fails to run a deficit every damned year and never fails to pass new taxes every term. Until then, I kindly ask that you stop saying that federalism is more inefficient than centralized government. You haven't proven it, so you've no right to keep repeating it.

I think theres no other similar country like ours but Indonesia almost same problem and same geography. Indonesia's government structure was based on a federal union. In the 1950s, it was the so-called United States of Indonesia. Within a short while however, and for unique reasons to Indonesia, the government decided to revert back to a unitary framework of government. Fear of breakup of a nation of big island archipelago led to the consolidation of the nation into a unitary state. If we compare the various restrictions that have marked our policies compared to those of Indonesia today, Philippine policies are more restrictive in terms of foreign capital with respect to natural resources, to land, to public utilities in terms of participation of foreign direct capital. Indonesia was once very restrictive in the matter of trade and industrial policies. Indonesia has more open sectors sectors to foreign capital. There is wider economic participation of foreign direct capital in their economy than we do. Indonesia and Philippines are both centralized but see teh difference.

Indonesia is still a very screwed up country, so what's your point?

The best example today of growth being supported by economic policies within a unitary form of government is China. Most of the steps undertaken in China had been through the realization that economic reforms in the direction of encouraging markets to grow will make the country produce a high rate of economic performance. China has a highly centralized government, but it is trying to give a greater role to the provincial economies in the form of nationally initiated economic policies that has transformed many provinces of China.

Don't you know that some cities are considered municipalities under direct rule by the central government and have received funding disproportionate to their actual income? That's why if you go to Shanghai or Beijing you get a completely distorted picture of the real China. Try going to the regions and see how the people there are doing. Oh yea, so China is now the posterchild of centralization... It's not just a centralized state, it's a one-party dictatorship. But yea let's neglect to mention that. You want efficiency man kaha, how about no elections, and dictatorship? Isn't that the most efficient form of government?

[BIGMAN]

unsa ka mahal ang pagchange sa system....unsaon paggasto ana....utang na sad....nagpatung2 na atong utang sa World bank....and you think makabawai ta....LOL, even if we select the best if the best politicians, dili gihapon coz ang nature sa mga tao, mukontra jud....naanad na sa systema and it is too late to change it...ok ra unta kung sauna pa, katong inyong gihisgot nga niseparate ang singapore sa malaysia....it would've been possible....karon, daghan pa kaayo problems ang Pilipinas, this will not pursue and is illogical...humana sa ang mga problema ron before such FEDERALISM...

If ma solve pa ning mga problemaha Bro, sa una ra unta. Political problems in the country are very hard to solve because it has been a cycle due to the inefficiency of our officials.

[masakiton]

refresh sa ato gi istoryahan
Muhahaha. that i find funny.
diba oil rich nation man ang malaysia? [yes/no]
wala ta nag istorya about oil rich nations

note:
before ang singapore is part sa malaysia which has federal system
pobre ang lugar... kadto under pa sila sa federal system
pero after na kick out sila sa country... diha sila na dato

Pobre ang singapore adto kay pobre man sad ang malaysia, bag-o lang sila naka-kuha og independence.

diba oil rich nation man ang malaysia?

Indonesia is oil rich, not Malaysia. They are a lot like the Philippines, except of course, richer but not because of oil.

Malaysia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Malaysia is ranked 24th in terms of world oil reserves and 13th for gas.

repost

Hahaha wurag broken record. But you still havent proven nga it's the people, not also the system that they adopt.

federal countries - mas dako pa GDP ang pinas
iraq , ethiopia, sudan

non federal country - nag lisod ila taw tungod mga ila great leader
north korea
Vietnam - communist state pero arrang2x ug kahimtang

same gov system different people managing the country

[okah]

i couldn't agree more. . .
bisag unsa pa nga matang sa pang-goberno, if ang taw mismo magpabilin nga mao japon wa japon ayo.

change comes within ourselves.

Unsa? Usbon nimo ang batasan sa tawo? Ang Pilipinas Catholic country na. pila na ka tuig nag sige balik2
ang mga pare sa ilang SERMON. wala man lagi ta na buotan. unya nag usab naka?

[RMK711]

@masakiton:

What about kung dili na gusto mo tigstorya nimo ang tao masakiton inya magsige nalang ka og repost arun wra kag buang? Mas kataw-anan man tingali na. Mas ganahan ko motobag ni romeojin kay naay siubstance iyahang post, ikaw ambot usahay wura man kog gastorya og walay grado. Kung disagree ka ani, ok ra, dili nalang ta maglalis kay di naman ko gusto mo tubag nimo.. kanang imong gipamutana gitubag naman na, dili man ko broken record parehas nimo, so dili nako usbon og tubag ang gitubag na.. yes/no question? hahahahaha.. dili man tingali ka abogada, ayaw intaon pag sunod sunod sa telenobela nga imong gitanaw dai...

[masakiton]

naka hinomdom nata sa ato gi istorya an

As I said before it is both the system and the people (and their circumstances)

People runs the system

Indonesia is still a very screwed up country, so what's your point?

Gross domestic product - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The gross domestic product (GDP) or gross domestic income (GDI) is a measure of a country's overall economic output.

Indonesia -GDP $1,027.279 billion Indonesia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Saudi arabia - GDP $618.774 billion Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
malaysia - GDP $402.042 billion Malaysia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (using federal system)

[Rajzh_niX]

If ma solve pa ning mga problemaha Bro, sa una ra unta. Political problems in the country are very hard to solve because it has been a cycle due to the inefficiency of our officials.

that is why federalism in our current state may just lead to chaos and poverty esp nga ang mga tao mismo, for pila ka years, wa gihapon nagbag-o....dili ra baya ang economy ug politics ang basehan, apil baya ang society, ethnic groups, culture, and ang psychological effect sa mga tao....sa Cebu siguro daghan uyon ani as evidenced sa poll diri sa istorya, but how about other provinces.....