Friday, February 22, 2008 Roperos: Our alienated poor By Godofredo M. Roperos Politics Also
SOME of the country’s economic observers that include private sector economists feel that the “benefits of an improving economy have yet to trickle down to the poor as many Filipinos remain unemployed.”
This notion surfaced during the socioeconomic forum held the other day at the Ateneo de Manila University in Makati City. They claim that the drop in the unemployment rate, as indication of economic vibrancy, is artificial being influenced more by people “leaving the labor force.”
The rationale behind the claim is that there are many employable Filipinos who refuse to work because the job openings are not of the quality they desire or “because of their dependence on remittances sent by family members who work abroad.”
This is a credible assumption, for I know of many husbands in the countryside who no longer feel compelled to work because their wives have found employment abroad and are regularly sending them dollar allowances.
Actually, according to a former government economist, the nation’s labor force is dwindling, as the latest unemployment rate translates into 2.2 million jobless Filipinos, based on the National Statistics Office’s (NSO) new definition of “labor force.” I believe the new NSO definition is designed to reduce the number of the unemployed to suit our economic profile.
The new definition of jobless excludes “those not looking for jobs” and “those not immediately available for work during the time of the survey.” Under this new government view, many of the “standbys” or jobless are not included in the unemployed data.
Under the earlier definition, there would have been 3.5 million jobless in October, 2007 or 1.3 million higher than what the NSO is giving out now.
Former economic planning secretary Cielito Habito, said that “to allow the benefits of high economic growth to trickle down to the masses, job creation should be centered on the agriculture sector only 25,000 new jobs was generated in October, in contrast to the 500,000 new jobs generated in the industry and services sector the same period.
In sum, the blossoming of the economy under GMA’s administration is a questionable claim.
“Decrease in labor force participation has led to lower unemployment but is not necessarily a sign of increased worker welfare,” said another economist, Leonardo Lanzona.
In a sense, GMA’s claim to economic health, is actually benefiting only the upper end of our population.
