My article in interksyon, "Population decontrol, not RH bill",
gathered lots of comments, mostly critical of my paper by the pro-RH camp. Copy-pasting them here, typo errors included, zero alteration. This will be a good reading material for those who are still learning the pros and cons of the bill. Some of the pro-RH here are full of angst, anger and intolerance, resorting to name calling and insults why their very "bright" idea encounters opposition.
Thread #2 below has the most recent exchanges, until today. Exchanges in other threads have stopped a few days ago. Long exchanges, about 19 pages total, so get your favorite snacks.
Baron Von Doughiestahl
First of all, you have to understand that the HSBC report is NOT PROPHECY, it is just a projection. And not only is it just a projection (or "guesstimate", as Anti RH Bill people would like to call the Guttmacher Institute's study on Abortion in the Philippines), it is not even a CONSENSUS projection by financial bodies out there.
Second, HSBC's projections only show the size of the economy like the GDP, but it does NOT tell us their projected economic indicators for the QUALITY OF LIFE by 2050, like the PER CAPITA INCOME, for example. Or the POVERTY RATE. For me, the size of the economy of a country is no use if the people living in it has low per capita incomes, and high poverty rates.
The "People are asset" argument is hogwash. You need people, but only up to a certain point, one that the economy can EFFECTIVELY SUPPORT. Look at all our more progressive Asian neighbors. Every single one of them advocate the use of Artificial Contraceptives because they know that too many people will worsen poverty.
Nonoy Oplas People are not assets? Who watch the kids, clean the house, of many middle class and rich people here including the pro-population control camp, robots? government bureaucrats?
True that HSBC report is projection, like IMF or ADB or UN or NEDA projections, of GDP size only. Disprove that govt prevents the poor from improving their lives via endless bureaucracies. The photos are posted for your convenience.
Ike Aseoche Nonoy Oplas Assets should be able to generate income. That is why those with too many children use them for medicancy. I'm sure their quality of life is so great.
Let's just tell everyone that you will have more children and therefore you have the more assets. And therefore, you will raise your quality of life. How many assets do you want?
Dismala Carmen Dear Mr Oplas as the author of that article I would like to ask you, are you familiar with this quote?
"If it moves, tax it. If it moves further, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it." -- Ronald Reagan
Now back to your article
(b) reducing the welfare dependency and various entitlements mentality
Some how that's not subsidizing at all.
Furthermore, overpopulation isn't the number of people. I mean 100 million is chump change compared to the population of China.
Overpopulation is better defined as the resources of the country over the population.
Given that you are wholly ignorant to the minimum wage, profit from micro businesses and the required family income to support at least a family of 3, I'd like to ask you this:
Do you seriously think that the Philippine economy will be able to give out salaries that can support families as large as 6 or even 12?
You haven't done your research well.
Baron Von Doughiestahl @Nonoy Oplas, as I said, you need people, but only up to a certain point, and that point means the number of people that an economy is able to support. In our case, we obviously have gone beyond that.
26 years after EDSA, what happened in a country that the Catholic Church has insisted that Artificial Contraceptives should not be promoted and distributed? 26 years after EDSA, the country is still a Basketcase, with the lowest per capita income in Asia, and the highest Poverty Rate in Asia.
There are 5 million CHILD LABORERS in the Philippines (source: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/-depth/07/20/12/infographic-still-not-child-labor-free), children who instead of going to school are forced to work to help their families earn a living.
You say the people are assets, how can they be "assets" when they are wallowing in desperate poverty like this: - http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3347/3299674549_3cef13ed9b.jpg
Nonoy Oplas Ike, see the photos again of business bureaucracies, the confiscation of property rights of the poor by certain government agencies simply because they don't have the energy or resources or patience to deal with those bureaucracies. Then accuse again the poor of being unable to generate income by themselves.
Dismala, that Reagan quote is among my favorites. Given that you are wholly ignorant of the potentials of civil society to voluntarily help the poor to improve their productivity, cases of many poor people with many children breaking out of poverty on their own, then the solution is always more government, more government, more government.
Baron, I have zero religious or church argument for my position, just plain economics. For the second time, I say, "Disprove that govt prevents the poor from improving their lives via endless bureaucracies. The photos are posted for your convenience."
Baron Von Doughiestahl @Nonoy Oplas, no, the government is NOT keeping the poor from improving their lives. So what is your point in saying that "the government is not preventing the poor from improving their lives?"
Ano ang punto mo diyan? Na kasalanan ng mga mahihirap na hindi sila yumaman dahil hindi naman sila pinipigilan ng gobyerno yumaman?
It is pretty NAIVE (to say the least) that just because you try hard, you will get rich, and that if you are poor, it is your fault because you are not trying hard enough. You VENDORS on the street spending 12 hours a day exposed to rain, heat, pollution, etc. just to earn a living, and are you saying they are just not "trying hard enough"?
You should try walking in their shoes and going thru life with their disadvantages before saying such things.
Nonoy Oplas See 3rd to the last paragraph again.
It is pretty NAIVE (to say the least) that the poor need more government, more government, in improving their lives. See the photos again of various business bureaucracies that are required by govt. You don't have them, the barangay, the police, the BIR, DTI, etc. will gang up on you as an economic saboteur. And the various criminals are happy doing their job as govt attention is on people who do not have enough business permits.
Baron Von Doughiestahl The country has a a 33% Poverty Rate. That's around 30 million people.
You have people eating PAGPAG because of Poverty (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/30/world/asia/philippines-pagpag-slums/), and you are telling me they don't need more assistance?
Nonoy Oplas Repeat, for the nth time: people want to stand on their own, generate jobs for themselves, or the poor and jobless, and govt keeps saying, "You cannot do that! You must first get our permits, from barangay to city hall to BIR. Then pay these taxes, fees, penalties, before you can create jobs." And some guys keep blaming people for having more kids, keep arguing "more government, more government".
Baron Von Doughiestahl You're just making GENERALIZATIONS, Mr. Oplas, blaming the government bureacracy for the not generating enough jobs kuno. Free Enterprise is very much alive in the Philippines, and if you don't believe that, then go to your nearest mall.
Go ahead and try again.
Nonoy Oplas So the photos on too many business permits and bureaucracies above are not real and products of photoshop? The confiscation of the poor's buko kariton, the mango vendors' fruits, are products of photoshop?
People really want coercion. They got a "bright" idea, they want everyone else to finance that idea, including those who do not support their idea and even think of such as irrational. They are angry that there is contrary opinion to their bright idea. An idea if it's really bright, does not need coercion to be implemented. Gawad Kalinga is a real bright idea that got implemented with zero legislation, zero taxation.
Baron Von Doughiestahl "Photos" of "too many business permits and bureaucracies" doesn't mean much when you can out and see the number of business establishments in the malls, Mr. Oplas. You talk about confiscations of karitons and vendors fruits, and yet these are obviously still around when you go around the city.
If you want "convincing" proof, cite official numbers, not just a couple of "photos".
As for "bright" ideas, that applies to you, too.
Nonoy Oplas See the number of business bureaucracies here, official data from WB-IFC annual study,
As to coercion, never advocated coercing anyone in this planet to follow a bright idea. An idea if it is indeed bright, does not need coercion; otherwise it is simply an irrational if not idiotic idea.
Edwin Federigan Mr Oplas, you seem to raise a valid observation but your end opinion is flawed to whats really happening..let me summarize your blog. 1) //You think the reason for irresponsible parents is because Government provide too much for the people (healthcare, education etc)//...If this is the case, then I guess Europeans(which IMO are the real progressive nations) are all irresponsible parents because education and healthcare (even nanny) are all free. Oh and they pay a hefty tax too. (by the way, in US, healthcare/education are free as well for the poor) 2) //You think the reason for high un-employment is because of too many bureaucrats in application of small business (I assume small because I think corporation don't have this problem)// I agree with you on this but what percentage does small business generate jobs. Not to mention, Corporation are sure to crush (or buy out) the small businesses anyway as one of their goal is to monopolize everything. But I don't see the relation here with the RH Bill. RH Bill does not promise to solve the economy(but i do believe population control is a right step) but to provide the necessity for responsible parenthood. We need it.
Nonoy Oplas Hi Edwin, you seem to have misread what I wrote:
1. "Theoretically, it is possible to have 3 or more kids and be an irresponsible parent." Not an explicit "reason for irresponsible parents is because Government provide too much..." Govt welfare can create moral hazards problem but there is no explicit causality between the two as responsible parenthood, parents who do not want to depend on anyone else except their hard work, are everywhere.
2. The table I showed are bureaucracies for medium-sized corporations, not small or micro enterprises. The WB-IFC study standardize the size of companies being surveyed to allow for more comparable data..
3. Many RH provisions are good, like reducing maternal death and teenage pregnancies. The big question is do we need legislation and coercion to achieve this? I already gave the example of Gawad Kalinga, realists and bleeding hearts build homes for the poor with zero legislation, zero taxation, zero coercion involved. Why can't the millions of RH supporters follow this kind of volunteerism? You achieve you goal at little or zero politics and divisiveness involved.
Pepito Edison · Top Commenter · Public Health Nurse at DOH (RN Heals)
I will try to answer you one by one, pardon me if I have some inconsistencies in my english. :)
1.* "So China, India, Brazil, Indonesia are poor, while small population countries like Guyana, Bhutan, Timor, Botswana, Namibia are rich?"
>how about those developed countries that I've listed below? do you consider them poor?
New Zealand 4,434,340
Czech Republic 10,504,203
and so on and so fort...
this is not about how big your GDP is, It is about your GDP in correlation with the population or GDP per capita.
2.* From the arguments of the groups who say that bigger household size means more poverty, their solution is that to fight poverty, human population, the poor more particularly, should be limited. Population control in short.
>so, who has more poor people? China, India, Brazil, Indonesia or those countries that Ive mentioned earlier, who has the higher quality of life?
3.* Many advocates of the RH Bill deny that it is a population control measure. But those two sections are clear. Modern contraception should be made available to the poor for free. The number “two children as ideal family size” is very suggestive.
>RH bill is not mandatory to all filipinos but this bill will help those families specially those poor filipinos to have an access to different kind of family planning and this bill is not all about contraceptives. pls read it again.
4.* To sustain economic growth, the country’s population should remain at its current rate. Here is one reason why.
Notice that countries projected to leapfrog several notches higher are mostly those with high populations: China (+2), India (+5), Brazil (+2), Mexico (+5), Turkey (+6), Philippines (+27), Indonesia (+4), and Egypt (+15).
>You have to remember that this is only about GDP or gross domestic product, if you re arrange them into GDP per capita, you will see that china, india, brazil etc will still be lagging behind other developed countries that Ive mentioned earlier. we might have a huge GDP but if our population will double or triple to its current state, we will still be poor.. come to think of it, if new zealand is considered as developed econmy who has 122 billion GDP only, why is the philippines considered as a 3rd world nation if we have higher GDP than new zealand? our GDP is more or less 390 billion compare to new zealand's 122 billion.
5.* Why is this so? Simple: people are assets, not liabilities. A bigger population means more workers and more entrepreneurs; more producers and more consumers.
>yes, the bigger the population means more workers and consumers but it also means that our country should provide more jobs and more products for the consumers. if our country is just a lower middle income economy, how are we going to meet those demands?
6.* On the contrary, the poor will be able to uplift themselves if there is little or zero government bureaucracies.
A mango vendor whose products were confiscated by barangay officials for some flimsy reasons (upper photos); a coconut or buko kariton confiscated by city hall trucks for lack of a permit (middle photos); and other ambulant or sidewalk vendors subject to harassment or extortion by the police or LGU (lower photos).
>what do you mean by these zero government bureaucracies? you want them to do what they want, do business in the streets and other pedestrian places, of course you should have some permit to do that, specially medical permit. do you want to bay a kwek kwek to a street vendors with hepa B? of course not!
7.* People are assets, not liabilities. This should be the “default mode” in looking at them. The real liabilities – criminals – should be apprehended. That is the most important function of government: to promulgate the rule of law, to protect private property rights, to protect citizens from bullies and lawless elements, to institute a fair and credible justice system.
>yes people are asset, but they become liabilities if we have too much. why do they become criminals? most of them will say, they don't have jobs, they have a sick child who needs medical attention etc etc.. that is because our country is a middle income economy and has a high population that we cant provide those basic needs and services.
Nonoy Oplas Hi Pepito, some quick answers to your points above.
On #1, countries or economies are rich, like the ones you mentioned, are mainly because of their promulgation of the rule of law, protection of private property rights. See again my last 2 paragraphs in the article.
On #2, big population countries like China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, etc. have more poor people, but they also have more rich and middle class people. Many rich countries like the US, Japan, tend to have more trade, more businesses with countries with more consumers.
On #3, RH bill is not an explicitly population control measure but read the explanatory notes of the earlier bills (Lagman, et al), the sentiments of many pro-RH people (see above comments), they pin down on big population as a problem. So the bill and its supporters are very implicit, some are more explicit, in advocating population control.
On #4, rich NZ, Japan, Taiwan, Sing, UK, etc., would soon be begging for more workers from the Philippines, Indonesia, etc. Who will take care of their ageing population given their natural popn growth is flat or nearing negative, robots? government employees and bureaucrats?
On #5, that is one problem with more government, more government thinking. Who said that govt should provide for the needs of the rising population? Check again the photos on business bureaucracies and confiscation of private property of the poor by some govt agencies. People want to stand up on their own, let government allow them to do so.
On #6, have "little or zero government (business) bureaucracies", check again. Govt shd focus on going after criminals -- killers and murderers, thieves and snatchers, rapists and extortionists, other criminals, both in private and government sectors.
On #7, there are possibly more criminals and thieves in government than in private sector on a per capita per sector basis.
Pepito Edison Nonoy Oplas,
On #1, can you imagine if they had a population as big as ours, their GDP per capital will drop significantly and economist might reconsider these countries as a developing nations, a big drop from their current status of being a developed nations.
On #2 yes they have more rich people, but those countries that I have mentioned earlier have a better quality of life over all. we will still be a consumer what ever happens but we will be a better consumer if we had a better quality of life. for example Netherlands, they only have 16 million population but their purchasing power is far more grater than the Philippines which has more or less 90million people. in effect, these countries have better options when it comes to buying products and will view the Philippines as a price sensitive country. china might be the center of the world now, they are the manufacturing superpower of the world, but they still cant provide basic necessity to some of their people. china's economy is slowing down now, how can they support those people. some analyst say that the problem in south china sea is the result of china's growing consumer.
On #3 do you know something about 1 child policy of china? that is far more worst then the RH Bill. RH bill is not mandatory to all filipinos. RH bill will just give them options, but this bill cannot force them to have one or two child. it is their personal choice. I know that this is somehow a population control measures. and what is wrong with that? most Filipinos I think will agree with me that a family of 5 will have a better chance to have a better quality of life then a family of 10 if they have the same income.
On #4 I think it is better that way then the other way around. I mean hiring someone to take care of your family member is better then one of your family member have to work abroad to take care someone. do you agree with me?
On #5 if they want to stand up on their own, they should do that fare and square and without violating the rights of others. you cannot do business anywhere and everywhere you want.
On #6 taking care of public interest is equally important. this bureaucracies are important in taking care of this interest.
On #7, until you provide relevant datas regarding this, i will not accept this argument.
Nonoy Oplas Instead of replying point by point, here's a questionPepito: We really need legislation and taxation, coercion and dictatorship, to ram this proposal to the rest of the Philippine population?
Gawad Kalinga, Books for the Barrios, various medical and dental missions, Rotary projects, etc., all were done with zero legislation, zero taxation, zero coercion, zero dictatorship over those who are not convinced of those ideas, and yet projects are done.
I think some provisions of RH are good, some are plain lousy and dictatorial. Why go through all these coercion and politicking? There are millions of pro-RH guys, what prevents them from putting in their own resources to do what they advocate? Put money where their mouths are, the way the GK, BftB, other voluntary projects, are done.
Mazinger Zeta That argument also holds true for the anti-RH advocates...
Pepito Edison Nonoy Oplas
1* We really need legislation and taxation, coercion and dictatorship, to ram this proposal to the rest of the Philippine population?
>you mean the RH bill? I will say yes, just like what Dr. Felipe Medalla, said that "Although the poor’s access to family planning services can be improved even without the law, the absence of the law makes it easier to block the program."
2* Gawad Kalinga, Books for the Barrios, various medical and dental missions, Rotary projects, etc., all were done with zero legislation, zero taxation, zero coercion, zero dictatorship over those who are not convinced of those ideas, and yet projects are done.
>who would block this kind of program? tell me, those people must be insane, gawad kalinga is providing shelter to the poor filipinos, books for every barrios and othe medical or dental missions. RH Bill is different, there is a strong opposition from the catholic church and various sectors, they are willing to impose their belief at the expense of others. just like what DR Medalla said, it is easier to block the program without a law. This bills does not undermine the rights of the people to choose for them self but the anti RH bill does. and for me, that is more of a dictatorship then what you are trying to imply.
3* I think some provisions of RH are good, some are plain lousy and dictatorial. Why go through all these coercion and politicking?
>like what sir? can you give me a list of this lousy and dictatorial provisions of the RH bill?? I just want to know.
4* There are millions of pro-RH guys, what prevents them from putting in their own resources to do what they advocate? Put money where their mouths are, the way the GK, BftB, other voluntary projects, are done.
>this is a nationwide program, we need the machinery of our government to implement it. this will affect all health centers, hospitals etc etc and even government employees of various government institutions.. unlike those groups that you mentioned earlier, those are voluntary contribution to our society. they do projects at a certain place but not on a nationwide scale. Did you see the difference sir??
Nonoy Oplas The dictatorial policies of the RH bill are, among others.
1. taxation to finance it. Even those who do not support it are obliged, coerced, forced, to finance it.
2. Requiring OB-Gyne or related practitioners to produce certificates of 48 hours at least pro-bono services to the poor, as if those professionals are heartless people who never participate in any medical mission, or treating poor people silently.
3. Requiring companies to provide RH services to their personnel.
4. Mandatory sex education from Gr. v to HS. Many students in public schools are weak if not idiots in science and math, they can hardly do multiplication of fraction, then they will learn additional subjects on RH.
5. others. The church groups have their own reasons for opposing the bill which I do not share.
There is deep angst and intolerance among the RH proponents, to force, to coerce everyone in the country, to support it. By hook or by hook. And the RH camp are so angry that their very very bright idea is encountering opposition.
Pepito Edison Nonoy Oplas
1. so basically you are arguing that because you dont support it. first and foremost sir, paying our taxes is our obligation as a citizen of this country. if you dont pay it, the authority might use some coercion or iven force you to pay your taxes. if you dont they might put you in jail. so what is the big deal?? whether you support this bill or not, the authority will still obligate you, and will use coercion or force you to pay your taxes.
2. if they do some charity works, this 48 hrs should be a past time for them.
3. and what is wrong with that? people are not obligate to strictly use or follow these RH services.
>if I may ask sir, what part or section of the RH bill stating that 48 hrs should be used to provide service to the poor.
4. just like what I have said to the other anti RH bill, children from before are different from children of today, they already knew sex at an early age. they get their info primarily from internet porn site and other types of media. this media will teach them pure lust, sex sex and a little bit of sex. at least if we talk about this in a class room, we can have some decency.
6. that is also true to most of the anti RH bill. just like what I have said before, these people are willing to impose their belief at the expense of others. they call us demons and devils advocate in some churches. if I may use your word, they are so angry that their very very bright idea is encountering opposition.
you call us dictators sir, how ca we be dictators if we are pro choice, I just want to re-post this.
This bills does not undermine the rights of the people to choose for them self but the anti RH bill does. and for me, that is more of a dictatorship then what you are trying to imply.
Nonoy Oplas ·You are not reading well. I said "taxation to finance it" referring to RH. I believe in taxation to finance the police, the justice system, to go after killers and murderers, rapists and kidnappers, thieves and carnappers, etc. But taxation to finance RH, whether you like it or not, is unfair and one form of dictatorship. The state and the RH champions, dictate upon the non-supporters of the program, "you finance it, whether you like it or not."
The 48 hrs mandatory pro bono per year is unnecessary, why put it in the law? the RH camp and the state does not believe in voluntary capacity of OB professionals to do it by themselves? Do the state politicians and bureaucrats believe they are of higher humanitarian molecules they can impose it better than the health professionals themselves? Btway, SEc. 22 of HB 4244 contains that mandatory, obligatory pro-bono provision.
Requiring companies to provide RH serivces -- "what is wrong with that?" There are so many mandatory requirements for companies now. They shd give their employees, especially the unskilled, (a) min wage, (b) COLA and other allowances, (c) sick leave with pay, (d) vacation leave with pay, (e) SSS contribution, (f) Philhealth contribution, (g) Pag-IBIG contribution, etc., on top of the various taxes and fees to the govt like corporate income tax, doc stamp tax, real property tax, percentage or franchise tax, VAT, etc.
Many bureaucrats and statist think that entrepreneurship is a walk in the park. If so, what prevents them from putting up their own company and have a stroll in the park, provide more to their workers than what are mandated by various laws? Like give their pregnant women one week paid leave for every month of pregnancy? I bet that statists can only impose and dictate what others should do, how others should conduct their lives and businesses, but never do those things themselves.
As I have said earlier, I have zero, nada, church position on this issue. I argue clearly on economics. I have lots of criticisms of the church myself, I favor divorce for instance. So I can sympathize with you when church leaders would call you as demons and evils.
The reason why I call the RH imposition a dictatorship is precisely because you want to impose, to dictate, on us to do those things that I have enumerated as wrong and irrational. If your boss will ask you to jump in the dirty waters of Tullahan river for no reason at all, otherwise he will terminate you from work, is that not dictatorship? Forcing you to do against your will?
Let the RH be done voluntarily. Like millions of people helping their fellows that were victimized by the heavy flooding, helping the poor build homes for free via GK, helping the poor children get books for free via Books for the Barrios, etc. Volunteerism to have RH services nationwide is highly possible. The RH camp simply does not believe in it, so they need coercion, imposition, against the will of people who are not supportive of some or all provisions of the bill.
Mazinger Zeta Mr. Oplas, if we go by your argument on taxation, then public education should not be financed since bulk of the tax burden is imposed on those who do not use public education anyway. The same goes for free immunization since those who will foot most of the bill don't get immunized in health centers at all.
Nonoy Oplas True Mazinger. Much of the powers given to governments are done via coercion, imposition and dictatorship, many people just learned to accept them as "there is nothing they can do" anyway. one cannot say, "I bring my kids to private school from kinder to college, I bring my family to private clinics, hospital and private health insurance... so I do not want to pay the extra taxes alloted to DepEd and DOH." It is not possible. In government, whether we like it or not, we obey, we pay, we comply with various regulations, restrictions and prohibitions.
BIG Governments do not believe in the capacity of individuals to help their fellowmen voluntarily, that the rich and middle class cannot put up lots of scholarship schemes and opportunities for children of the poor, for healthcare for the poor. That is why governments force and coerce everyone to pay for government-run programs. Governments also think that their politicians and bureaucrats are of higher form of molecules they cannot commit abuses and robbery for their self interest, so these guys are imposed on ordinary people to implement those coercion. Do you believe them?
That is why since there are so many coercion already around our lives, let us not add more. We see in the on-going flood devastation how private individuals go out of their way to help their fellowmen, even if there is no law, no regulations that coerce them to do so, otherwise there are penalties and imprisonment if they will not do so. So let us leave RH services be done voluntarily, not via legislation and coercion.
Pepito Edison Nonoy Oplas
1* MR oplas, what I said is whether you support or deny the RH bill, or even if you dont have a stand regarding this matter, you will still have to pay your taxes. if you call that dictatorship well then all nations who collect taxes from their citizens are dictators. of course if the majority of the congressman and senator pass this bill, this will become a law. I think your argument is quite flawed, you already answered it from your next post and I quote " In government, whether we like it or not, we obey, we pay, we comply with various regulations, restrictions and prohibitions".. so basically it is not the RH bill who will force you to pay your taxes, it is the government or specifically the law of taxation who is forcing you.
2* > it is stated there that this professionals should provide information and education to rendering medical services free of charge to indigent and low income patients, especially to pregnant adolescents. this provision might be quite frustrating to some medical professional who dont want to allot 48hrs of their time , and I know that. the PMA has a;ready have their position letter and this is not one of their concern so you dont have to worry about that.
3.* > and I have to ask you again, what is wrong with that? if it can help those families, I'm all for it.
4.* >just what I have said earlier, they are free to do what they want but they should respect the rights of others. you can do business in your own backyard but not on the streets and other pedestrian places. we also have the right to use this places as intended by the law and why those things are made. why this pregnancy leave bother you so much? it is not only the philippines who impose this law. you have to much grudges on this people, if they implement those things in their own company or not, I dont care. let us not argue if these people are like this and that because we dont know them.
5.* OK, I am just responding to what you said about those people who support the RH bill like me.
6* >I believe that this law is for the people. if you view this as forcing someone to allot 48 hrs of their time in community service or a company should provide RH bill services as a from of dictatorship. well I have to say that you are wrong. dictator by definition is a person who assumes sole and absolute power. if this bill will be put into law, this will be agreed upon by a group of people and not a single person, this is a democratic act and not a from of dictatorship. enforcing a law is not a form of dictatorship, we live in a system and in a system there is guidelines and this guidelines are laws promulgated by the people and for the people of this country. You might say that I am contradicting my self about this dictatorship argument because anti RH bill are also a group of people. I admit that I was wrong for the reason that I am just defending my arguments.
>I cannot accept your argument sir because those are different scenarios, if you are still talking again about this 48Hrs community service, there are penalties but jumping in tulyahan river is not one of them.
7* >just like what I have said earlier sir that we need the machinery of our government so that we can fully attain the purpose of the RH bill. is gawad kalinga better in providing shelter for the people than NHA? of course not. how many books did "book for the barios" given to the community compared to DepEd?? Volunteerism is not enough in providing services to the community. Volunteerism is just an answer to the governments inefficiency.
>the same is also true to Anti RH Bill camp sir, so I dont have to say something, you just have to reverse your accusation in favor of Pro RH Bill camp. :),
Nonoy Oplas Well, that's one of the negative aspects of democracy: mob rule of the majority over the minority. If the majority will say, "we want free food even if we do not work" and the majority, 50% + 1 of all voters will say so, woe upon the the below 50% of the population who disagree.
Statists simply want coercion. Volunteerism for them is not working. People have to be forced, obliged, arm-twisted, into following the rule of the mob and the majority. What's next, disaster solidarity bill, penalizing people who will not give any kind of support to others who were victimized by flooding and other natural disasters, etc.
Reply · Like · 3 hours ago
Pepito Edison 1* well I have to agree with your argument, but that is better than communism for me.
2* sir dont put your words into their mouth, just like what I have said before, we dont know this people. you are living in a democratic nation so live with it. I thought you dont like dictatorship where few people or a single person has an absolute power over the course of our nation. and pls sir, stop assuming something that is not inevitable coz that is purely unacceptable.
Nonoy Oplas Nope, I am saying, over and over again which you do not seem to appreciate or understand: Let us have less government (democratic or republican or federal or dictatorial), less coercion, less legislation, on things that can be done voluntarily. If the GK supporters pushed hard for a GK law before they will start building a single house, they would have accomplished nothing. So if the RH supporters did the things they advocate many years ago, they could have accomplished many things by now. Things can move even with less government, less coercion.
And lastly mr oplas, you are suggesting anarchy by letting each and every "poor" out there to become entrepreneurs without supporting documents or regulation from the government.
Those bureaus are there to regulate businesses for the safety of the people.
You want the poor to be able to do business WITHOUT THE FOLLOWING.
barangay permit, HEALTH AND SANITATION PERMIT, FIRE DEPARTMENT PERMIT, mayor’s permit, Department of Trade and Industry and Bureau of Internal Revenue permits.
I really wonder WHY you're writing for interaksyon.
Nonoy Oplas Dismala, government is busy regulating the poor if they have brgy permit, sanitation permit, fire dept permit, DTI permit, etc., that government often cannot catch killers and murderers, thieves and plunderers, rapiss and kidnappers, bombers and extortionists, many other criminals. Maintenance of peace and order is a basic function of the state and yet it is private security agencies that maintain peace and order in shops and malls, schools and universities, villages and condo offices, airports and seaports, etc.
If you wish to apply to write for interaksyon to argue more statist, more government advocacies, contact the interaksyon admin. I think they might give you a chance.
Dismala Carmen Please state the article or data that makes you say that the government cannot catch those criminals.
Again you want the poor to create food stalls WITHOUT THE HEALTH PERMIT
ok lang sana if and when they get sick sila sila lang magproblema. What do they do?
Once the get sick the approach government hospitals, the poor DEMANDS health care for Acute Gastroenteritis, typhoid fever, dysentery and more!
In the end what you are asking will DRAIN the Philhealth treasury because the poor are given Indigency Philhealth and/or subsidized by the LGU!
You are thinking in linear means mr Oplas. You think the world can be solved one problem AT A TIME.
Just because RH bill will pass, it doesn't mean that the government will FOCUS solely on the RH bill.
Laws in place even for crimes will RUN simultaneously so AGAIN do not think in LINEAR MEANS.
Nonoy Oplas Rule of law, the certainty of conviction and punishment if people will sell adulterated or food and drinks, fake or substandard medicines, is the best deterrent for this. Since the rule of law function of the state is often skirted in favor of certain advocacies like population control, that is how criminals expand.
The number of private security agencies/guards watching shops and malls, schools and universities, subdivisions and condos, etc., is directly proportional to the distrust of the public of the peace and order situation in the country, their distrust of the police to do such function.
two thumbs up for this article. no to the rh or rp bill. we do not need another avenue for corruption. overpopulation is a reality only in urban areas, but not in rural areas. where I am are parcels of land waiting to be tilled. where I am are areas without people...people are assets. the country is an agricultural country which needs all the manpower it could get. the government should do something to highlight this fact. we do not need to waste government money on condoms etc. we need a government that would uplift the spirits of its people to work hard....
Dismala Carmen Let's say you hire people to become farmers. How much do you think is the salary they get? If they'd reach minimum wage that would be like 250 a day or roughly 7000 a month.
Do you even know how much is needed to support a family of 6 people?
Even companies/businesses offering minimum wage to ordinary people is an illusion. Maids, fast food workers, sales persons, janitors barely reach minimum wage. What do you think will happen if they have 4 to 6 children?
Popular comments from those families with a large number of children.
"Wag nang ipag aral ang bata, ipatrabaho na lang para makatulong sa gastusin"
Maricon Sison Rombawa the 250 daily wage would easily support a family with 4 to 6 children in the provinces. this is real. farmers become the richer ones where i am.
di kailangang makipagsiksikan sa mga lungsod. sa mga barrios pwede kang makisaka. magsipag ka lang ay uunlad ka.
ang hirap kasi sa iba mas gusto nasa mga lungsod, kahit maging squatters pa. malayong mas marangal ang umuwi sa mga probinsya at doon magsikap. libre naman ang public education hanggang high school. pagkatapos ng high school may mga state colleges naman. nasa tao na yan. kaunting tulong lang mula sa pamahalaan ang kailangan, but definitely, di na mahalagang maisulong ang rh bill na yan....
Dismala Carmen Wow, you really DO NOT have an idea.
250 x 22 working days = 5,500
Rent = 500
Utility bills = 500
Food 10 pesos per meal x 6 family x 3 times a day x 30 days = 5,400
This doesn't even count income tax, vat and seriously who can live on only 10 pesos per meal?
do you know the frequent solution farmers do?
They make their children WORK in the farm instead of growing up normally going to school to learn
So I don't know where you come from but 250 to support 4 or 6 family size?
Maricon Sison Rombawa it's true. not everybody is as rich as maybe you. some people are as simple as can be. some people make do with the minimum wage. am in the 6th district of pangasinan. maybe you could visit the area one time so you would see the reality that not everybody has to pay rent and utility bills, and that a big family could spend less than 5k a month for food. so the answer is yes...i got your idea and reality. you have to respect mine....
Dismala Carmen Then those parents of 4 children spending less than 5k a month for food should be penalized according to RA 7610 obviously for malnutrition
and by the way, I'm not rich. I earn only 3,500 as an internet shop attendant. However I have not married anyone yet as I know my salary is not enough so I use condoms with my girlfriend.
Furthermore, you must mean about farmers who OWN lands and don't need to pay utility bills. Technically under BIR they are not considered as poor. The land the own can be considered as assets equal to their market value.
Yes some people make do with minimum wage only because they reduce their food intake, they stop children from going to school, they reduce their quality of life of all family members, they make their children work to meet monthly needs.
Maricon Sison Rombawa definitely malnutrition is out of the question since these people eat the freshest produce, either free or very cheap. by farmers i mean everybody who's into farming. some landowners here hire farmhands. these farmhands are considered part of the owner's family. they could provide for their family until the children are eligible to work....
by the way, why are you receiving below minimum wage?
Dismala Carmen Then those patients with indigent philhealth are ghosts that never existed in government hospitals.
I invite you to check your local government hospital and tell me if that's not a cause malnutrition.
Maricon Sison Rombawa we're talking about farming and farmers...not indigents- because these do not go together. farmers are the most industrious lot thus they are considered assets. i wont tackle the issues on why some people are very poor since this is a very long subject. my main point is for pinoys to realize that life in provinces is much better so it would be good if they would go back to the barrios and live simpler lives. let us all go back to the basics where overpopulation is never a reality....
Dismala Carmen Then we're not on the same page because the poor being identified are indigents dahil nga galing sila province and migrated to manila.
Tell that to them but the law states that anyone has the freedom to live anywhere they want kaya forcing them to return to the province would be unconstitutional.
Overpopulation is a reality not because of the quantity rather the quality of life.
I live in Bukidnon, majority here are FARMERS and I beg to disagree with your statements. Those "hired" farmers are mere workers working below minimum wage.
They get sick and if you look at the records of hospitals they get sick with Acute Gastroenteritis. Children who are malnourished spend days in the ward with CAP (community acquired pneumonia) and you think they can pay the expensive antibiotics? Taxes are funneled to pay the indigency philhealth for these "farmers" because their quality of living has lowered just to "make do" with their measly 5k a month salary for 5 or more children.
That's not even counting pulmonary tuberculosis or incidental diseases like alcoholism, smoking and yes STD usually passed off as UTI dahil sa kahihiyan.
So I don't know which fantasy land you are living in but rest assured I respect your views even though I think they're unrealistic.
Dismala Carmen Again as I have stated, farmers who OWN land cannot be considered poor because by definition LAND is an asset, therefore farmers have income or asset equal to the market value of the land.
So maybe you are in the wrong article @maricon sison rombawa
Maricon Sison Rombawa that's okay. we have different realities. some people are really more disillusioned than some, while some work harder to prevent it. thanks for your time. tho am still bothered with your 3.5k salary. God bless!
Maricon Sison Rombawa may pahabol pa, hahaha...relax...we read the same article. ganyan talaga, people interpret/see things differently kasi iba iba naman tayo. enjoyed exchanging ideas with you. until then!
Ike Aseoche Maricon, be a farmer, earn Php250/day with 6 children. Let's see how you manage.
Maricon Sison Rombawa my parents are farmers. they were able to send me to school. now, i am a part time farmer with small businesses on the side. my parents have two children and i have two children without the rh bill. i manage, thank you....
Pepito Edison Maricon Sison Rombawa
there is a big difference between a farmer who owned a farm and a farmer who worked for a farm owner, which of this two are your parents??
Threads 5 and 6:
While China, India, Brazil and Indonesia are all in the top ten most populous countries of the world, they have tremendously reduced their population growth rates (0.48, 1.46, 1.26, and 1.16 respectively). They realize that for the population to be an asset, investments must be made, and given scarce resources, lowering the dependency ratio through lower population growth can ensure that QUALITY investments will be made per child. It's not just about QUANTITY. BTW I think many of your arguments suffer from the FALLACY OF COMPOSITION.
Let's not point to corruption like it's the only reason this country has more poor people than those who can afford a somewhat better and comfy lifestyle. And there's no such thing as a government suppressing or preventing the growth of its people. The country is also not over-populated. Instead, the majority of the citizens lack the KNOWLEDGE. Remember that KNOWLEDGE is POWER and without it, you have no OPTIONS. Therefore lack of KNOWLEDGE limits a individuals income opportunity. Thus, contributes further to the country's unemployment crisis. everyday, hundreds of thousands are being scouted by local and multi-national companies here in the Philippines alone. probably out of 10 applicants in general, only 2-3 lands a decent job,. while the rest resort to being "under-employed" just to get-by.
Anybody watching Rated-K? (8/5)
This is a very very good example of a family whose parents were not or are not well-educated in terms of family planning.
13 children? 13 children who were deprived of their right to proper education.
And all these 13 children don't have quality jobs to even support their own existence. THEY DON'T HAVE JOBS & that NOT because there are no jobs available but merely because they are not qualified. 15 family members who doesn't pay their dues.
This family is the best example of such reasons why the RF Bill is important and why it should be enacted as soon as possible. Had the parents been presented or made aware of family planning options, they most likely would have been ABLE to send all their kids to SCHOOL to be more competitive and be able to land a decent job that will allow them to pay their bills and at the end of the day, still have some money left to put in the bank.
Dismala Carmen it's almost impossible to get quality education and feed your family at the same time if you are on limited resources. I agree, we can't do anything more to those big families but what about their children? can't we teach them to hope for an adequate family size and not follow in the footsteps of their parents? Without education many if not ALL of the children will become their parents. That is if malnutrition won't kill them first.
Threads, 7 to 12:
Do you people even read?
Who said anything about the government giving-away free condoms?
Read FACT # 8.
These are real issues which we should not trivialize by irresponsible statements that the government would freely give away contraceptives to the youth under the RH bill. As I emphasized on the floor, the mobile health care unit is not a ‘contraceptive ice cream truck.’.
Ricardo Regis Fernandez · Top Commenter · Afghan Tappeh, Jowzjan, Afghanistan
Wag natin gayahin ang CHINA na pati FETUS ay ipinapakain pa.... Poverty is d mother of all crime...... may mayaman at may mahirap.... paano ano ba tayo makaahon sa kahirapan..... may namumuno at may tagasunod......
So if people complain that RH bill is expensive.
The how about the 10 billion needed to relocate the squatters of Manila alone?
How about the 30 billion peso budget of CCT that gives 2,500 to poor families? (soon to be 44 billion pesos in 2013).
How about the looming deficit of Philhealth in paying hospitals bills of indigency philhealth holders?
Mr Oplas, how many children do you have?
Nonoy Oplas Got two kids. See more discussions here, http://funwithgovernment.blogspot.com/2012/08/population-control-9-on-so-called.html
Ok fine, kung ayaw nyo sa RH bill let's use RA 7610 instead. This act was made 1992.
Under the law.
(b) "Child abuse" refers to the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the child which includes any of the following:
(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for survival, such as food and shelter;.
(3) Living in or fending for themselves in the streets of urban or rural areas without the care of parents or a guardian or basic services needed for a good quality of life;.
I think that earning only 200 pesos a day but having 8 children or more is unreasonable.
So let's start penalizing those parents, wag na natin bigyan ng chance with the RH bill to educate them. Penalize na agad ayan na ang RA 7610.
let's do it.
people must be assets to the country, not liabilities. it is not wrong to have a big population if everybody is an asset. but look at what kind of population philippines have? a lot of us are liabilities, who came from poor families who cant even support their needs but manage to have a lot of children.
Reply · Like · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Nonoy Oplas Check the exchanges in the above threads, started by Baron, Pepito especially, cheers.
Population Control 6: Debate with Filipino Freethinkers, November 06, 2011
Population Control 7: I am Supporting the RH bill, November 23, 2011
Population Control 8: People and Economic Growth, January 16, 2012
Population Control 9: On so-called "Expanding Choices" for Couples, August 01, 2012
Fat-Free Econ 19: Population Decontrol, Not RH Bill, August 08, 2012
I dont think people think people arent "assets" in the sense that they have the potential to earn.
the problem is how much would they be able to earn? what would they have to do to earn it?
one can become a thief -- this person is technically an asset (to himself!).
not all assets are the same. you have to KNOW that, right?
Read again above. If people becomes thieves, whether as small time pick pockets or plunderers in government, they are liabilities. The role of government is to go after and penalize those liabilities, send them to jails, protect private property rights. All others are assets, whether they are nannies or scientists, jeepney drivers or company executives.
so, if not all people are assets, what is the rationale for writing "People are assets, not liabilities" in your original article?
you continue to say " A bigger population means more workers and more entrepreneurs; more producers and more consumers."
which is something you deny above... a bigger population also means more theives, bad people, etc....
the latter becomes ESPECIALLY TRUE when they grow up poor. they become deliquent youths.
This is only the comments section. Read again my original article, I wrote in the 2nd to the last paragraph,
"People are assets, not liabilities. This should be the “default mode” in looking at them. The real liabilities – criminals – should be apprehended. That is the most important function of government: to promulgate the rule of law, to protect private property rights, to protect citizens from bullies and lawless elements, to institute a fair and credible justice system."
maybe you can write another essay to clear up "default mode" means.
people don't have "defaults". default means :" a selection made usually automatically or without active consideration due to lack of a viable alternative "
people dont have defaults, in the sense as above. we are products of our environments, our history, our genetics and our society.
this process begins even before people are born, and continue until a person dies.
thus, a person born into a poor circumstance is SHAPED by that circumstance.
as public policy people, we have to ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. di ba?
so maybe you can think deeper about what "people" are.
if you say that theivery is not an asset (u can see that it is an asset for the person!), you have to re-think what that means for "people are assets".
if people arent all assets, how does that impact a more nuanced form of the ability to shape family size?
lets think about "people are assets" again.
actually, practically anything can be an asset. anything can earn some return.
the ONLY question is "how much"?
the return rises as you pour in money and improvements on assets. land can be fallow or fertile, di ba?
fallow people are pretty sad, and pretty desperate to earn whatever to live.
the ability to control family size encourages more investment in assets, and raises their return.
FROM POPULATION TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH: MALTHUSIAN ARITHMETIC by Mohan Rao.
Published in 2004. Exactly as Mr Oplas said it, larger population, better economy. Google it.
I hear you Mr Oplas. I'm a believer.
Post a Comment