BIMBO CABIDOG
Product and manifestation of the failure of the economy to grow
Mass poverty is by and large an ill of developing
countries. The biggest number of people victimized by extreme deprivations is
from them, as shown by the Human Development Report (First of Series).
The fact that about four billion folks
living only on $2 and below a day come from the Third World shows that the
general problem of underdevelopment has got to do with poverty on a very wide
scale. It is the offshoot of the failure
of national economies to grow.
The Philippines belongs to the
underdeveloped or Third World countries. More than half the people here rate
themselves poor. The country’s per capita GDP (gross domestic product) is one
of the lowest in the world. Agriculture, which continues to be the basis of its
economic viability, is stuck up in an age-old mode of production characterized
by backward underproductive tillage, and single planting of low-value crops for
export.
Eastern Visayas is one of the country’s
poorest regions. Poverty incidence here has been officially recorded at 48.5
percent. But with how its economy has been performing, the data may still be understated.
Below is a case in point.
In 2008, the Eastern Visayas had a Gross
Regional Domestic Product of P28,997,747,000. Its annual per capita income was
P7,020. This means each person in the region had only a theoretical income of
P585 per month or P20 per day. The term theoretical is used, because such is if
the output is distributed evenly on the whole population. Of course, it is not.
The impoverishment of a large number of the
population constrains economic growth. It emaciates labor power, preventing it
from creating greater wealth. Marginalized workers are condemned to a fate of expending
energy in labor without proper replenishment, because they barely have food on
the table, or sometimes forgo with it at all.
The situation either discourages workforces
from engaging in production or constricts productivity. Misery demoralizes labor.
The inability of a worker’s earning to support even his/her bare existence discourages
work, because what labor offers is only slow death.
Meanwhile, because labor gets only a tiny share of the value it produces, the capacity of the working class and the rest
at the lower strata of society to purchase the goods and services in the market
is diminished. Demand tends to fall short of supply. Industries pile up
commodities that are not bought and become moribund surpluses.
Progress is thrown back by failing markets,
and neither does it happen at all with sluggish markets, for there is no reason
or motivation to produce goods in high quantities if they cannot be sold.
But large production and economies of scale
is what drives spiraling economic growth. They not only fuel material
prosperity by increasing the social output, they employ the vast reserves of industrial
labor and put money in their pockets. In the final analysis, by increasing the
purchasing power of the general populace, they buy themselves the products that
they send to the market.
Nothing of these happens when millions of people
agonize below the poverty line. With very little to satisfy their basic needs,
they also have very little energy and motivation to intensify labor and boost production.
The condition turns the cycle of poverty and underdevelopment.
On the one hand, underdevelopment causes
poverty and folks hardly subsisting. The economy fails to grow. Agriculture stagnates.
Industry could not take off. More than half of the population depends on
farming to live. But even the farmers who produce food have no food security.
The result is the impoverishment of huge segments of the population.
On the other hand, poverty perpetuates underdevelopment.
The penury of the masses discourages increased large-scale production, or
modern industrial production, because the population doesn’t have the capacity
to buy its output. Mass indigence therefore itself stymies progress.
Import-dependent
export-oriented economy
With a sluggish domestic market, manufacturing
naturally depends on export. But in producing for export, it competes against
an advantage exclusive to the developed countries where it destines its
products: industrial might. Besides the built-in competitive disadvantage, it often
has to deal with onerous terms, vagaries of the market, and price uncertainties.
It only hopes to offset these by one factor: lower priced commodity made
possible by cheapened labor power.
Export-oriented manufacturing can only
succeed by perpetuating poverty. This is by paying the lowest minimum wage for
labor.
Dependence on foreign market is inherent in
continuously underdeveloped societies. The reason is that the domestic market cannot
yet fully support manufacturing. Thus,
the tendency not to produce what the people need, but what other countries
need. Export-oriented production is indeed ironical for a country with a high
number of people unable to meet their basic needs?
Because of the virtual absence of
industrialization, the country must get so many of the goods it needs from outside.
It must import not only consumer goods, but inputs to the making of such products
as pins, clothing, milk, chicken, household appliances, personal gadgetry, etc.
Here is where the bind comes in. Imports need
international currency. And foreign exchange may only be provided either by
overseas Filipino labor or foreign trade. Exporting goods again cannot be
avoided, because of another imperative: getting dollars to buy imports.
Such a mode of existence ends up
reproducing underdevelopment and the inter-generational cycle of poverty. For
the country to develop, it must embark on full industrialization. But this
cannot proceed purely reliant and attuned to foreign markets. Industrialization
can only take off on the assurance of a robust domestic market.
Import-dependence in goods and export-reliance
in production constitute a sure-fire formula for perpetuating the country’s
Third World status. This is one big reason why the curse of mass poverty with
all the ills it spawns stays.
No comments:
Post a Comment