Last week, Major Tom posed five questions for me. 

I promised to respond sooner, but the questions were not that easy to

answer.  Here you go, Major Tom.  To summarize:

• I am living life.  I have yet to find out what’s best about being jangelo.


• I like rock, the oldies and classical (and baroque).  I’m
  
  too busy to read novels and longer pieces of literature; I do most of
  
  my reading online.


• There is no perfect economic formula to escape poverty.  It depends on resources, timing, and attitude.


• I’d take the DTI portfolio.


• Debt amnesty is good, but I worry about moral hazard.
  

1. What’s the best thing about being jangelo?




I have this good thing about me that I sometimes also consider a

curse.  I am a jack of all trades, but that also makes me a master of

none.  I do try to get by with whatever I have; I get to be resourceful

and flexible.

To tell you the truth, in the end, I can’t think about one best thing

about being jangelo.  Life, for me, is “make it up as you go.”  I have

no real drastic, major, stringent plans I stick to.  I basically adapt

to whatever situation I am in.

So you ask, what’s the best thing about being me?  I’m still looking out for that.  I’m living life.



2. What kind of music do your ears find more pleasurable and who are the authors that challenge your mental prowess?




Lately I don’t listen to music much, as I’m into podcasts (hence, my daily commute consists pretty much of tech ‘casts like TWiT).  But as I posted before, I’m into acoustic and rock-type music, such as that by the Goo Goo Dolls.  I also listen to classical music and oldies (I love Bach–so I should include Baroque pala,

but everything during those periods are commonly classified as

classical nowadays).  What’s pleasurable for me is the meaning I find

in the lyrics of a song or the beauty in the structure of a musical

piece (in the case of instrumentals).  I’m a musician myself.

As for authors, I don’t really have the time to read novels and such

literature these days.  But I do find myself reading much on tech and

economics stuff.  So the authors who challenge my mental prowess would

be the tech industry analysts and economists who get published in

international news and tech mags or their counterpart online

publications.  And don’t forget the bloggers!



3. Being an economist, is there such a thing as a perfect “economic

formula” that could make a nation rise from the cruel stranglehold of

poverty?




There is no perfect economic formula that can help a nation

break away from the chains of poverty.  It’s all dependent on the

available resources, the timing, and most especially the attitude of a

nation’s citizens.

Resources because nations differ in available and useable resources. 

We should capitalize on what we have, hence we may not necessarily be

able to adopt outright the schemes other countries have used in their

path to industrialization (heck, it may not necessarily be

“industrialization” that’s appropriate for us).  Timing, because we can

have all the good plans and all the best resources, but execute at the

most inappropriate time.  And attitude, because the process of economic

growth and development requires a positive and forward-looking outlook

for all the stakeholders involved.  We should help one another, instead

of getting into petty bickering and politicking.

There are a lot of things a nation (both leadership and constituency)

can do in an attempt to bolster economic growth and development.  But

what’s essential is sustainability,

and this is pretty much a long-term thing.  We have to make certain

sacrifices in the present to ensure a good future for our descendants. 

And we need to set up a solid foundation on which to build our

long-term development goals.

I believe the Philippines is not so much of a forward-looking nation in

terms of economic growth and development.  And this is not because our

development plans are geared more towards short- and medium-term

development, but because our institutions are riddled with people who

have a twisted outlook on life.  And I write not only about our

leaders, but about everyone who needs a change in attitude and

perspectives.

We can set ourselves free from the chokehold of poverty.  But I do not yet have an exact answer on how we can do this.



4. If you were made to choose a government position

aside from the presidency, what would it be and how would you use this

position to help our country achieve vibrant economic and social

progress?




I’d take the position of Trade and Industry Secretary.  For me,

vibrant economic and social progress can be brought about by strategic

interventions by the private sector.  Government can only do so much in

terms of development work.  But the capital needed to catapult our

economy forward is in the hands of the private sector.  And the trade

and industry portfolio can serve as a good catalyst to progress brought

about by the enterprises.

Give the people incentives to go into business, and you’re geared towards a good investment climate.



5. Do you think condoning Africa’s debt by the G8 do

more good than harm to the global economy taking in consideration how

it would affect the flow of credit and grants in the future to third

world countries?

Reneging on debt and being granted amnesty are different things altogether.

Reneging on obligations is bad.  That lowers your credit rating to

crap, and results in sky-high interest rates both locally and when

borrowing from abroad.  And this is not very good for investments.

Amnesty is good, in that it helps the recipient economy start from

scratch.  In lieu of servicing debts, their governments can instead

focus on more pressing needs like providing the urgent and necessary

social services to their extremely impoverished citizens.  And an

improved credit standing for the economy (including the private sector)

is good too, in that it can bolster investments, with a healthier flow

of capital in the financial sector.

But a cycle of lend-and-forgive is not necessarily a good thing either.  This may entail a moral hazard problem among the borrowers, who may tend to plan on not paying debts in the first place.

My take on this issue: middle-ground.  Amnesty from debt is good in

this case, especially since the countries involved include the most

impoverished in the world.  But it cannot be outright amnesty.  I

believe conditionalities must prevail: the recipient economies should

enforce institutional reforms that will ensure more efficient and

accountable use of funds henceforth.  They cannot afford to be heavily

debt-ridden again.  So future borrowing must be very, very well thought

of.