Showing posts with label migration and freedom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label migration and freedom. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Migration and Freedom 17: US Taxing Nationals Abroad

Migration allows people to move to other places or countries that give them some optimal utility and satisfaction. No place can be perfect of course, but depending on one's priorities in life, say a good paying job, children's education, pursuit of arts and leisure, marrying someone, other reasons, people settle on a place, even temporarily, that give them that optimal degree of satisfaction or fulfillment.

Many foreigners go to the US to work, study, or stay temporarily. Many US citizens also go abroad to work, study, or stay temporarily. Fine, it gives people freedom to pursue their goals and priorities in life.

But a problem will arise if the US government will impose tax obligations to their citizens who have lived and migrated abroad. Or even people who happened to be born in the US and hence, have US nationality, single or dual citizenship, but have moved and grew up abroad. This situation is considered by some people as "tax imperialism" by the US government to their citizens abroad.

Below are three news reports of some Americans moving out and renouncing their US citizenship, or children of migrants born in the US and going back to their parents' home countries.

The first is a rather perplexing story. With the new tax regulations by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), these Americans have two choices: pay up those tax obligations in the US to avoid further fines and penalties, or renounce their US citizenship and cut clean from such tax obligations as they already pay taxes to their home or host countries where they are staying and working now.

Here are the news reports:'s an interesting news report from the NYT yesterday.
--------

(1) Many Americans Abroad Surprised by Tax Code's Nasty Bite







http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/11/us/11iht-expats11.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=global-home

WASHINGTON — As Americans abroad chafe under sharply increased U.S. pressure to declare foreign holdings and catch up on back tax filings, one group with tenuous ties to America and the benefits of citizenship is feeling particular pain and unease.

They might be called “accidental” Americans, born during their foreign parents’ brief stay on U.S. soil, or born abroad to American parents who long ago settled elsewhere.

After lifetimes abroad, many in this group, whose total size is impossible to estimate, had believed that because exemptions left them owing no U.S. income tax they had no obligation to file returns; many have been tripped up by a requirement that they still declare their foreign bank and financial accounts.

In interviews, several people declined to allow their full names to be used for fear of complicating already complex tax situations. “Some people have never even lived in the U.S.” and learned belatedly of American tax responsibilities, said Sonia Stewart, a tax accountant in Grayson, Georgia, who works exclusively with overseas filers. “People are panicking.”

Some typical laments include:

•Roy, 37, a lifelong Canadian resident and citizen whose dual-national mother fears the U.S. tax authorities will target the modest savings account the Canadian government provides him as a developmentally disabled adult;

•Jonathan, 34, a teacher whose American parents migrated to Canada 39 years ago. He considers himself 100 percent Canadian — a maple leaf is tattooed on his back — and believed until last year that he did not need to file a U.S. return. Tax advisers now tell him he must file eight years’ returns, at a cost in fees and fines in the thousands, lest an eventual U.S. inheritance be jeopardized;

•The teenage children of Peter Hallworth, a Briton married to a Swede living in Malmo, Sweden; the children were born in the United States but lived there only as infants. Mr. Hallworth, having heard horror stories, now expects to urge his children, when they reach adulthood, to renounce the U.S. citizenship that up to now he had treasured.

Friday, February 03, 2012

Migration and Freedom 16: Mobility and the Heckscher-Ohlin Theorem

(This is my article for the online magazine last night. I did not put the graphs in the original article, I only added them here, from a web lecture, The Heckscher-Ohlin Model,  http://www.valt.helsinki.fi/katal/opiskelu/ka6a/heckscher-ohlin.pdf)

http://www.thelobbyist.biz/perspectives/less-gorvernment/1269-migration-mobility-freedom

Migration = Mobility = Freedom

THURSDAY, 02 FEBRUARY 2012


Migration, whether short-term or long-term, allows an individual or a household, to pursue their dreams in other places or countries which they think they may not be able to pursue in their current work and residence. Thus, migration represents mobility across regions, countries or continents and hence, expands individual freedom.

The expensive welfare system in many rich countries though results in one bad policy: migration paranoia by their governments and certain organized sectors in the destination countries. They think that in general, new migrants are just welfare seekers, and the labor unions think that new migrants are out to steal their jobs even if many of them are not willing to do "dirty work" at lower pay.

In international trade economics, if factors of production (labor, capital, technology, etc.) are mobile and free to move across countries, there will be factor price equalization (FPE) among countries, the FPE theorem. A labor-deficit or shortage country cannot always use robots and machines to do certain jobs, they need to import workers and managers from other countries. Taking care of the sick and aged for instance, cannot easily be done by robots, an economy must import nurses, caregivers and other health professionals from other countries. The migrant workers will receive higher pay (high compared to the prevailing wages and benefits in their home countries, but may be low temporarily in the host countries). The outflow of some workers will result in reduction in labor supply and hence, partial increase in wages in the country of origin. When this process continues over the long term, and skills training keeps improving in labor-surplus economies, like the ocean around the world, wages and benefits will somehow equalize worldwide.


If there will be FPE, poverty will be eradicated. Only the lazy and highly irresponsible people will become poor, and they need not be bailed out or subsidized with various welfare programs because they have willingly chosen the path of laziness and irresponsibility. Then all the complaints and advocacies of the bleeding heart activists, trying-hard and hidden socialists, and social equality campaigners will be answered. No need for higher or new taxes, new UN and foreign aid central planning like the MDGs, new government bureaucracies and their endless global junkets.

A cousin concept of FPE is the commodity price equalization (CPE) theorem. If goods and services are free to move across countries, then products that are produced abundantly in one country resulting in cheaper prices can be exported to countries which have small or zero production of those goods and hence, prices there are high. Again, like the ocean around the world, commodity prices will somehow equalize worldwide. Whatever price differential across countries will just be due to transportation or shipment, storage, insurance and related costs. The existence of local trading monopolies and oligopolies can also account for such price differential but we will assume that such practices are kept to the minimum.

Both FPE and CPE are offshoots of the Hecksher Ohlin model of comparative advantage (CA). It took off from David Ricardo’s theory of CA and the model says that “countries will export products that use their abundant and cheap factor(s) of production and import products that use the countries' scarce factor(s).” (Wiki definition)


Migration paranoia, like climate paranoia and population paranoia, are of the same ideological DNA. All of them hate spontaneity and natural path of nature and human evolution, so all of them have one solution: more or big government. So government will control migration, and visa, more than a dozen types of visa -- migrant, dependent, student, working, visitor, training, etc. -- was invented by many governments. This is a big milking cow for many governments as there are plenty of direct and indirect fees to get a visa, lots of revenues that go to the governments’ treasury. And lots of possible extortion opportunities are opened up for the different government migration bureaucracies, like the Bureau of Immigration, POEA and OWWA.

In the US, both Republicans and Democrats, both socialists and democrats (and greenies, etc.) in Europe, other dominant political parties in rich countries in Asia, have invented various migration controls and regulations. There is discrimination and double standard, of course for their migration policies. European countries may impose strict and rigid migration and visa granting policies to many Africans, South Americans and mainland Asians, but not from oil-exporting Middle East Asia and North Africa. My Venezuelan friend was jokingly bragging his passport to us in our training in Sweden in 2003, he said that he does not need any visa to go to France, Germany, Italy, etc. because of Venezuelan oil, petroleum.

I got my second, multiple entry 10 years US (visitor) visa in April 2010. My first US visa was given in 2000. When I went to the US embassy for the interview for my second visa, I noticed that about 95 to 100 percent of the interviewees that day were smiling after the short interviews, usually only about 2-3 minutes on average. Meaning the US embassy was literally giving away (i.e., approving) US visa that time (or until now?) as the US was in deep economic recession then. So one lesson here is that economic hardships can prod a slightly migration paranoid economy to relax its visitor/migration restrictions to encourage more foreigners to visit their country and spend money there.

My last trip to Europe was in October 2008, I attended an FNF political seminar in Germany for 8 days, then I applied for 4 days extension to visit a friend in Bavaria (who then brought me to a glacier in Austria, nice), total of 12 days. The German embassy here gave me a Schengen visa for exactly 12 days, single entry.

One fear of the locals in host or destination countries is that migrants might abuse their expensive welfare system. While one long-term solution is to reduce the lenient welfare and subsidies given by the government to the sick, the unemployed and the young, the locals should also realize that migrants are taxpayers too, they contribute to the fund that their governments use for their welfare and pension. Migrants are usually willing to work on tasks that the locals would shun. Where there is more production of goods and services, there is more wealth in the economy. Both the migrants and the locals will benefit.
--------

See also:
Migration and Freedom 8: Denmark's immigration policy, May 17, 2011
Migration and Freedom 9: Immigration bureaucracy, July 19, 2011
Migration and Freedom 10: Multiculturalism and the Norway massacre, July 25, 2011
Migration and Freedom 11: Two migration theories, September 03, 2011
Migration and Freedom 12: Visa-free entry in Asia, October 24, 2011
Migration and Freedom 13: Travel Tax Robbery, December 06, 2011
Migration and Freedom 14: Shrink or Abolish the POEA, January 01, 2012
Migration and Freedom 15: Visa Free for Filipinos, January 02, 2012

Monday, January 02, 2012

Migration and Freedom 15: Visa Free for Filipinos

I saw this interesting info -- some 89 countries do not require any pre-departure visa for Philippine nationals for short visits. For longer stay, a visa will be required.

Personally, I believe that the visa system should be abolished. All travelers will only be required to bring their passports as their "national ID" just to determine that they are a national or resident of a particular country, that they have no outstanding criminal record in their country that their passports have to be cancelled. We do not want murderers, rapists and thieves to be roaming around the world.

What will prevent "abuse" of travel by some people is the prospect of starving and/or harsh weather or cultural conditions in foreign land if the traveler is unskilled or have no definite job or schooling to land there. Governments only have to promulgate the rule of law in their respective countries, and normally there are certain laws that are universal: no killing/murder, no stealing. Protection of citizens' right to private property, right to life.

I'm not sure if this list is found in the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) website, I think not. But nonetheless, prospective Filipino travelers can check with the embassy or consular offices of their destination country/ies before flying.
--------

http://twentyfive.hubpages.com/hub/Visa-Exemption-for-Filipinos

Visa Free for Pinoys
By twentyfive

If you’re a Filipino and a holder of Philippine passport who likes traveling and exploring the beauty of the world, but hates the visa requirement to some countries, frown no more for you can still go to wonderful places without hassle-visa-appointments.

The list of countries below doesn’t require a visa for Filipinos prior to arrival. All you need are passport, plane tickets / itinerary, and some money for your tour.

No Visa Required for Filipinos in the Following Countries…

Asia

ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations)

Brunei Darussalam - 14 days
Cambodia - 21 days
Indonesia - 30 days
Laos - 30 days
Malaysia - 30 days
Singapore - 30 days
Thailand - 30 days
Vietnam - 21 days

Sunday, January 01, 2012

Migration and Freedom 14: Shrink or Abolish the POEA

Employment, whether domestic or foreign, is a private contract between the employers and employees. If the terms and price are right, a contract can be signed between the two; if not, the employers will turn down a job applicant, or the latter will turn down a prospective employer's offer. The role of government is mainly to enforce the rule of law, the private contract between the two, to set transparency mechanisms so that both camps are really what they say they are. That is, a prospective employer is indeed a hotel/restaurant and not a prostitution house looking for innocent women to traffic and victimize.

When a government agency comes in to make such private contract as complicated and as costly as possible by requiring lots of permits and certificates, both from employers and would be employees, that agency is becoming a parasite and hence, should either be drastically shrank or abolished altogether.


Here are three papers that argue for the shrinking or abolition of the Philippine Overseas and Employment Administration (POEA). The first is a newspaper commentary yesterday, the other two are my old papers on the subject.
--------

http://opinion.inquirer.net/20199/second-class-citizens


Second-class citizens

By:  *


THIS Christmas season, thousands of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) will have had their constitutional rights violated at the world’s worst airport.

I met Marc one Sunday evening at NAIA 1. He skipped dinner with his family, not wanting to risk a long Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) desk queue and miss the 10 p.m. flight back to Singapore. An elite Ateneo Management Engineering graduate now in a global investment bank, he is one of thousands of young professionals in Singapore and Hong Kong juggling priceless short trips home with an international career. He is one of thousands of young professionals resigned to sacrificing brief moments with their families for inane POEA queues.

After my first Christmas home, I found myself begging a POEA officer to issue my clearance because my plane was taking off in 30 minutes. Without looking up, he sternly ordered me to return to the queue and wait. I boarded only after staring down the guard at immigration, claiming to be a tourist.

It is an open secret that the POEA was formed by torturers left jobless by Edsa. In Singapore, I must travel during office hours to our embassy, not the most accessible of places, to purchase an Overseas Employment Certificate (OEC). My papers are never checked and I routinely write conflicting information in the forms. (I will try “drug mule” on my next OEC). I must then have the OEC certified at NAIA’s POEA desk because it might be fake.

Being the world’s worst airport, NAIA 1 requires Filipinos to queue outside to enter; foreigners have heralds who shout “Business class, business class!” and ask Filipinos, guards included, to make way. Because the POEA desk is brilliantly located outside the departure area, one better be early to first queue at the POEA desk then queue to enter NAIA 1 before one’s check-in counter closes. One may be forced to queue to enter, queue to check in, exit NAIA 1 to queue at the POEA desk, then queue yet again to reenter. Especially if a 747-load of travelers to Los Angeles intervenes, one can readily miss one’s flight and get fired.

The best part is check in, and immigration officers ask to see my Singapore employment pass anyway. Shown my hard-won OEC, they explain that it and the POEA certification may be fake.

Amid such silliness, picture OFWs clutching thick envelopes of documents and their last shreds of dignity as they make obeisance to the POEA. Picture a Filipino professional, trying to be taken seriously in an international team, forced to beg one’s colleagues to leave early for the airport because his OEC might be declared fake.

Monday, October 24, 2011

Migration and Freedom 12: Visa-free entry in Asia

Next month, I will go to Taipei, Taiwan, to attend a conference on generic drugs in Asia. I have not been to Taiwan before, so I am excited to see this place.

In the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), citizens of the 10-member countries (Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia) can travel to other member-countries visa-free for visits of 30 days or less. I am not sure though if Myanmar gives the same privilege to all citizens of the other 9 countries.

Since Taiwan is not a member of the ASEAN, then I must get a visa even for short stay (just 4D/3N). I went to their embassy website to see the procedures in getting a visa.

I was very happy to see this:
Notice: Online for visa-free entry into the Republic of China (Taiwan).
Effective from 3:00 pm, March 15, 2011, passport holders of the Republic of the Philippines may apply for an authorization certificate online for visa-free entry into the Republic of China (Taiwan).

These photos are from www.tripadvisor.com.

Yes! The notice gives this detail:

Passport holders of the following five (5)countries traveling to Taiwan are exempt from visa and can stay in Taiwan up to thirty (30) days provided that they have never worked in Taiwan as blue-collar workers before and are currently holding valid visas or permanent resident cards of U.S.A., Canada, Japan, U.K., EU Schengen, Australia and New Zealand.

1. Philippines(菲律賓) 2. India (印度) 3. Indonesia(印尼)
4. Thailand (泰國) 5. Vietnam(越南)

Since I have a 10-years multiple entry US visa (2010-2020), then I am qualified for online visa-free entry into Taiwan.

I have argued before that in really free societies, migration and visit to other countries should be free, meaning visa should be waived if not abolished, except for those with outstanding criminal cases, or have records of engaging in political violence in the past. For the latter group of people, then visa requirements should apply. This should be one incentive for people to abide by the laws of their own country as much as possible.

I hope that more countries in the future will relax their visa restrictions. Despite the threats of terrorism, only a very-very small portion of the world's population is engaged or be attracted to engage in terrorism, so why punish the majority who are law-abiding people through bureaucratic and costly visa application process? Sure, collections from visa application is one source of revenue for many governments. If that is their goal, then just slap a specific fee that should not be too high that will effectively act as restriction to people mobility.
--------

See also:
Visa-free entry and people mobility, February 23, 2006. It's about the 145 countries whose citizens can enter the Philippines visa-free.
Pilipinas Forum 10: Migration and Singapore as a Social Contract, September 17, 2011
Migration and Freedom 6: Passport and People Mobility, November 30, 2010
Migration and Freedom 7: Restrictions to OFWs , April 13, 2011
Migration and Freedom 8: Denmark's immigration policy, May 17, 2011
Migration and Freedom 9: Immigration bureaucracy, July 19, 2011
Migration and Freedom 10: Multiculturalism and the Norway massacre, July 25, 2011
Migration and Freedom 11: Two migration theories, September 03, 2011

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Pilipinas Forum 10: Migration and Singapore as a Social Contract

Another long discussion here from pilipinas forum yahoogroups more than 10 years ago. Get your favorite snacks and enjoy the exchanges and debates :-) This is PF column that I submitted to inq7.net (that site is now non-existent). I was busy reading then editing the exchanges for the column, did not participate in the exchanges anymore.

Related articles here are PF 6: Middle Class Exodus (September 02, 2011), and Migration and Freedom 7: Restrictions to OFWs (April 13, 2011).
--------

Migration and Singapore as a Social Contract
July 4, 2001

Consider this World Bank paper on globalization:

"Globalization is not a panacea. It can increase many countries' susceptibility to shocks and can subject states to checks and disciplines that circumscribe sovereignty. But reversing globalization, were it possible, would be an enormous setback. One of the author's (Yusuf) observations: Trade, by enlarging markets, reinforces those gains, and the option to migrate further augments the value of skills. The growing worldwide gap in income between skilled and unskilled workers suggests how much more fruitful skills are under globalization."

Could the exodus of the middle-class be the result of globalization, where they recognize the increased return on their skills abroad (with maybe the lower cost of airfare and improved communications offsetting the social dislocation)?

-Bob Herrera Lim

I'd like to believe that those leaving have reasons other than low AQ (adjustment quotient) or low FT (frustration tolerance). They may just be exercising their rights -- of life, liberty and particularly, pursuit of happiness. They may find much more meaningful and worthwhile challenges abroad than here.

Anyway, we can use what is said as the Law of Substitution and free will, turning negatives to positives, problems and obstacles to opportunities, etc. Filipinos abroad make fifth columns. They may also provide a network of personal, professional and business contacts. Come to think of it, we also have Filipino multinationals: Jollibee, a chemical industrial Filipino firm which supplied COMELEC with its superior indelible ink. It has already subsidiaries in Thailand and Mexico.

-Roy Picart

If the best option available means a better life elsewhere, why should it be a problem? I think no one will disagree that the average Filipino is quite resilient. He is quick to adopt the ways of his host country when necessary. I am sure some of you will have better stories to tell, but from my own limited experience people from other countries are surprised when they learn I am Filipino. They aren't even being insulting; they just don't know. Unfortunately, their experience is limited to domestics and I happily disabuse them of the notion that we are a nation of domestic and other blue-collar workers. To all the immigrant families, expats who help to change our image outside the Philippines, more power to you!

My concern is not so much of the 1st generation migrants, but rather the 2nd or even down the line. It doesn't apply to all of course, but I've come across a few who have zero appreciation for their heritage. They despise what we are, and think that their short visit to the Philippines is equivalent to hell on earth with the gigantic mosquitoes and all. I'm not sure what the problem is here--maybe the 1st generation was unable to impart enough Filipino culture, or maybe adapting to the host country was 101% so that there wasn't any room for anything remotely Filipino.

-Llana Domingo

I'm a Filipino by birth, now a U.S. citizen by choice, and still truly love the Philippines. In 1990, my wife and I visited the Philippines. Upon arriving at MIA, I just acted like any ordinary balikbayan. Things got rough when I was already trying to pick up our luggages. Well, it didn't take long to decide that I have to identify myself that I am in fact a lawyer although I hate to be showy and only then an attendant became very hospitable.

Observe how the U.S. custom and immigration officials and employees treat us in coming back in as U.S. citizens. We felt that each time we "came home" to the U.S. just like other U.S. citizens, we were made to feel as if we are welcomed with open arms and with warm and friendly atmosphere given by those officials and employees in our port of entries without the necessity of finding means to show that we are somebodies or lawyers, except by showing our U.S. passports.

How I wished that if we visit the Philippines again, we Filipinos from abroad, be given the same kind of treatment at Philippine customs and immigration gates as much as we get in coming back to the U.S. After all, we still have the same color as Filipinos.

-Marlowe Camello

If everyone will complain about what is happening around, every one will head for the easiest port of entry to find out what is happening on the other side. They will be disappointed at the start. They might adjust to a new situation. But they will always come back. That is a true Filipino middle class. Filipinos given a chance will rise and compete with the rest of the world.

-Paul Alli

We do not need another charismatic person to rally all Filipinos and finally occupy a small space on the world stage. We can do it on our own, with our families, with our own little groups that do not WALL OUT the balance of our race.

What we lack is pride, the will to forge on. Every bad news is a setback, and not an opportunity. Every misstep a chance to castigate and not to correct. Every blot on the face a lifelong handicap. Pardon me Mr. Churchill, but I must quote you, "It is not that our strength is seriously impaired. We are suffering
from a disease of the will."

-Lardy Caparas

Saturday, September 03, 2011

Migration and Freedom 11: Two migration theories

While reviewing some of my graduate Econ notes, I saw these two theories of migration.

A. Network theory.

Migrant networks are sets of interpersonal ties that connect migrants, former migrants, and non-migrants in origin and destination areas through ties of kinship, friendship, and shared community origin. They increase the likelihood of international movement because they lower the costs and risks of movement and increase the expected net returns to migration. These "declining costs" and "declining risks" results in a self-sustaining diffusion process with the following implications:



1. Once begun, international migration tends to expand over time until network connections have diffused so widely in a sending region that all people who wish to migrate can do so without difficulty; then migration begins to decelerate.


2. The size of the migratory flow between two ountries is not strongly correlated to wage differentials or employment rates due to the falling costs and risks of movement.
3. As international migration becomes institutionalized through network, it becomes progressively independent of the factors that originally caused it, be they structural or individual.

4. As networks expand and the costs and risks of migration fall, the flow becomes less selective in socioeconomic terms and more representative of the sending community or society.

5. Governments can expect to have great difficulty controlling flows once they have begun, because the process of network formation lies largely outside their control and occurs no matter what policy regimes is pursued.

6. Certain immigration policies, however, such as those intended to promote reunification between immigrants and their families abroad, work at cross purposes with the control of immigration flows, since they reinforce migrant networks by giving members of kin networks special rights of entry.

B. Institutional Theory.

Once international migration has begun, private institutions, entrepreneurs and voluntary organizations arise to satisfy the demand created by an imbalance between the large number of people who want to move out and the limited number of immigrant visas the receiving countries offer. This yields hypothesis such as:

1. As organizations develop to support, sustain, and promote international movement, the international  flow of migrants becomes more and more institutionalized and independent of the factors that originally caused it.

2. Governments have difficulty controlling migration flows once they have begun because the process of institutionalization is difficult to regulate. Given the profit by meeting the demand of immigrant entry, police efforts only serve to create a black market in international movement, and stricter immigration
policies met with resistance from humanitarian groups.

(source: Massey, DS, et. al, 1993. "Theories of International Migration", Population and Development Review, 19 (3), pp. 431-66)


I think both theories reinforce each other. The network among migrants, potential migrants and returning migrants allowed and encouraged the formation of institutions and support groups that respect or encourage more migration. Of course there are also groups and institutions that want to limit if not ban migration, say from a certain country or cultural/religious group, towards their country. But the latter are just reactions to the successful entry or wave of migrants.


I also like the implications and conclusions made by both theories, that governments (of both origin and destination countries) will have difficulty limiting or controlling migration. People move out in pursuit of freedom, and people in destination countries accommodate migrants also in pursuit of freedom. Like they want freedom from "dirty" and time-consuming work like taking care of the oldies in their homes, in  hospitals and homes for the aged, so they take in migrants to do such work at a rate much lower than if they  get locals. 


Migration is freedom and freedom connotes migration and mobility -- within and outside one's community,   province, country or continent. The goals of governments that control or limit migration are mainly bureaucratic and to raise more state revenues.  There is big money involved in the various visa application fees and procedures. 
-------


See also Part 8, Denmark's immigration policy, May 17, 2011,
Part 9, Immigration bureaucracy, July 19, 2011, and
Pilipinas Forum 6: Middle Class Exodus, September 02, 2011 

Friday, September 02, 2011

Pilipinas Forum 6: Middle Class Exodus

Another discussion here from PF yahoogroups more than 10 years ago. This is related to the "Migration and Freedom" series in this blog.

Middle Class Exodus

June 13, 2001

My folks have a travel agency here in
Makati. Of late, I have noticed quite a rise in the sale of one way tickets. I suppose at one time or another we have all gotten exasperated with the state of this country and toyed with the idea of immigrating, but it is only now that I have seen this many people actually go through with it.

I was never really too concerned about the high number of OCW's. Most of them leave their families behind implying that they do intend to return and once they do bring back their skills. However, the people I am referring to buying these one-way tickets, buy them for their entire family. They are what I would refer to as a middle class.

Many of these people occupy middle management positions in corporate Philippines. Immigration abroad to return later would in no way help their career and it seems quite a waste to leave now after investing so much in a company. The fact that these people would choose to uproot their young children from family and school, and gamble on a uncertain future must mean that they to are losing hope for the long-term prospects of this country.

If this trend continues, what kind of a country will we have? A country divided between the super rich and the dirt poor? I believe it almost universally accepted that the true catalyst of change is the middle class, but as we lose them, what indeed are out long term prospects? The issue really goes beyond Erap to what he represents.

-Victor A. Limlingan Jr.


Just talked to Sam the other night, he said for 1 week after the Dos Palmas incident, he's been on "deep period of reflection". On what? basically, "should we stay or should we go" thing. In particular, he said:

- 2 of his friends have left the other week with their entire families, no goodbyes, nothing, they just left!
- parents of his son's HS classmates just last sunday were talking the same thing: stay or pack up? if so, when? the feeling is so pervasive among many middle class parents.

Earlier I posted that there's really no short-term solution to our country's problems except more OFWs and out-migration. If our political leaders can't assure good governance, and police officers can't assure peace and order, why stop these people who have the means and resources to leave this country? If our local entrepreneurs and bleeding heart militants who oppose foreign investors
and economic liberalization can't provide enough high paying jobs, why stop our underpaid or jobless countrymen from leaving and be employed abroad?

-Nonoy Oplas

I believe that many of these middle class Filipinos are immigrating because they have lost hope in this country. While they have achieved a measure of economic well being, I wager many feel that this is not a country that they want to see their children grow up in. Whether or not they are correct is debatable, but the phenomenon of their immigration proves that this perception indeed exists.

What is especially shocking is that I expected this to abate after the ouster of Erap. Clearly, it has not. I am told that after the ouster of Marcos, their was so much renewed optimism - this is why my father decided to uproot us from
Cambridge and return to the Philippines. There seems to be no such feeling after the ouster of Erap. I am not to sure if this is a good thing, it may well be that people view Erap as merely a manifestation of a greater social wrong and therefore, a new President will not change this. This I suppose is good because people are after more fundamental change, the dark side however to this hypothesis is perhaps they have concluded that such fundamental changes are not possible.

-Victor A. Limlingan Jr.

I just want to confirm the same mood of hopelessness that now runs amok among the middle class. I have a friend (a stockbroker) who's just waiting for his "landing permit" (which I was told is different from a visa) to settle in Canada. At first he was hesitating, but the events of 2001 have now convinced
him that nothing's going to happen here. Especially, he said, with a looming Noli de Castro presidency as early as 2004. A cousin of mine with Kodak Phils. is also now finalizing his papers to go where there are now more sheep than humans (
New Zealand).

The local entrepreneurs want a fair shake, i.e., if you're going to slap a 12% tax on transaction charges for loans taken out by multinationals, you ought to slap the same rate on similar transactions by local companies -- not the 32% corporate income tax. That effectively makes Filipinos the subsidizers of
foreign bank transactions for multinationals.

MNCs should stay, and we should do everything to make them stay. And one of the things that will make them stay, I believe, is not the bending-over-backwards incentives but a clear and equal application of policy -- whether it's with respect to taxes, incentives, and penalties. A survey we at
PricewaterhouseCoopers did some years back confirmed this. If the outsiders know the rules as we do, and are certain that they're not going to be changed overnight by some bureaucrat's whims, they're going to stay.

-Reuel Hermoso



Monday, July 25, 2011

Migration and Freedom 10: Multiculturalism and the Norway massacre

Norway is a famous country for various reasons, like its very rich economy and expensive welfare system that does not seem to bleed its fiscal resources compared to other welfare states in Europe and North America. Norway is also the home of the Nobel Foundation which every year gives the famous Nobel awards in various disciplines, including the Nobel Peace award.

That is why the bombing in Oslo and the massacre of so many young Norwegians by their fellow national, Anders Behring Breivik, was a very shocking news. Plain barbaric and condemnable. Whatever political and economic ideology, religious belief and cultural advocacy that a person or group of persons hold, there is no justification, nothing, zero, to use violence.

From the various reports that I have read, Breivik was described as a “right wing extremist/fundamentalist”, or a “far right Christian” or “ultra-right anti-Muslim”. He is said to hate the growing presence of many migrants, Muslims especially, to Norway and other rich economies of Europe, and that he and his fellow extremists who do not like multiculturalism, were planning some attacks against the government which allows, if not encourage, multiculturalism and the high presence of foreign refugees, asylum seekers and migrants who may be after the expensive welfare system.


Thus, the target of attack was a government building in Oslo, then the young leaders where many are children of members and officials of the government Labor Party in Norway. An attack on a government structure and then the future leaders of Norway who will most likely continue the policies of the ruling administration that is deemed too friendly to the migrants.

The welfare system, especially those in Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark, is very expensive to maintain as it practically provides free or highly-subsidized services “from cradle to grave.”

And it is this expensiveness and too welcoming to migrants of the welfare system which attract both the welfare-seeking immigrants and the envy of the locals. A section of the locals are jealous or envious that the system that is supposed to benefit them only is being extended to, and being enjoyed by, many immigrants.

I am not a fan of a BIG state that provides big and expensive welfare to the people, mainly because it substitutes personal and household responsibility with big government responsibility big time, there is big coercion involved, especially in taxation and plentiful regulations. But I also do not support any form of violence, especially massacre and bombing, to criticize and attack that system. There are always peaceful and transparent way to convey their message and opposition to certain policies on migrants and their entitlement or non-entitlement to certain subsidies that are enjoyed by the locals.

Thus, the state should not use violence and coercion, explicit or implicit, too often to implement whatever new regulations and restrictions that it has invented.
-------

See also:
Part 3, Remittances and Guest workers, March 25, 2008
Part 4, Filipino entrepreneur in Germany, June 04, 2009
Migration and Freedom 5: Conferences on Liberty and Migration, October 19, 2010
Migration and Freedom 6: Passport and People Mobility, November 30, 2010
Migration and Freedom 7: Restrictions to OFWs , April 13, 2011
Migration and Freedom 8: Denmark's immigration policy, May 17, 2011
Migration and Freedom 9: Immigration bureaucracy, July 19, 2011

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Migration and Freedom 9: Immigration bureaucracy

Last July 6, Atty. Gregorio "Goyo" Larrazabal (@GoYoLarrazabal), a former COMELEC Commissioner, tweeted the following:

Did I hear it right that immigration officials will start profiling OUTGOING Filipinos, presumably to help curb human trafficking? And the immigration official may prevent the Filipino traveller from leaving the Philippines.

The point is d prevention of free movement. So if d immigration does't like ur answer and prevents you from flying what do YOU do?

A few minutes before I saw his tweet, I also saw this from philoquotes' tweet:
Free people, remember this maxim: we may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost. ~ Rousseau

I replied to Atty. Goyo that most government agencies can actually profile us citizens anytime they want to because they centralize many information about us -- the SSS, LTO, BIR, DFA, etc. That there is danger when government bureaucrats will use their power of prohibition, like prohibiting us from travelling, etc. And that government bureaucracies' profiling of citizens is idiotic and unfair if they themselves are not transparent. I went to the Bureau of Immigration website, there are no names or pictures of officials and other personnel. It is sort of a secret club with a website because it has to have one.

I also saw this report, Philippine Justice Secretary Sacked 18 Bureau of Immigration Personnel

Meanwhile, I have a friend who is going as a UN volunteer in one of the poorer countries in Asia. I asked him why he has not flown yet, he said that he and his batch of other Filipino volunteers are still waiting for the go-signal of the Bureau of Immigration.

I asked further why the Philippines' immigration office will hold them and not the immigration office of their destination country. The latter will decide if they are good and desirable aliens.

It turns out that BI made a wholesale suspicion of volunteers going abroad. BI caught 1 (or more?) Filipina/s who was posing as nun and UN volunteer, gave questionable papers, and BI presumed that many volunteers are now part of the human trafficking racket, even including UN Volunteers.

My friend said that some of his fellow UN volunteers were already about to board a plane, then they were prevented by the BI, not once but twice. They have to unload their baggage from the plane, got out of the departure lounge in embarrassment, and the flight of the remaining passengers was delayed.

Since those were legitimate UN volunteers, did the BI give an apology, or reimburse their unused plane ticket? I heard that BI gave neither. The organization/s that finance the trip of those Filipino volunteers has to spend extra for the flight re-booking of the volunteers.

There is a supposed memorandum of agreement (MOA) among BI, NEDA and the Philippine National Volunteer Service Agency (PNVSA) after that fake nun incident. But as of this week, the MOA has not been signed yet as the BI Chair is on leave.

The fake nun incident and the "profiling of outgoing Filipinos" that Atty. Goyo mentioned above could be related. It is a dangerous risk if BI personnel will prevent someone with legitimate trip abroad to be prevented from flying because of mere suspicion of something.

BI or other government agencies that will cause such unpleasant and unnecessary prevention of flying should get some penalty if their "intelligence" is wrong. Like suspending or sacking a whole team of officials who made the false accusation.
------

See also Migration and Freedom 7: Restrictions to OFWs, April 13, 2011

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Migration and Freedom 7: Restrictions to OFWs

A friend based in the Middle East, Cynthia D., commented to my earlier discussions now contained in Nanny state 2: Entrepreneurship vs. bureaucracies. She made the following observations on new regulations by the Philippine government that make it more difficult and more costly for aspiring overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) to be hired abroad. She wrote,


Hi Noy,

You are unfortunately correct about our country steadily becoming more of a nanny state. So many of the things that are done supposedly for 'the good of our people' end up either reducing our freedoms or are simply ruses to line different official's pockets. One of the things that has really bothered me over the last two years are the continual additional items that our immigration personnel at the airports require for people to travel out of Philippines. About a year ago, for travelers to the Middle East, the airport authorities started wanting an approval certificate from the Phils. Embassy in the country people are traveling to which stated that the people are legally invited and their expenses will be taken care of while there. To obtain this certificate a foreign company or one of us living in that country has to write a letter to the embassy stating they will provide support and of course pay a fee to obtain the stamped and sealed certifcate. Each time I have people travel for interviews or visits since then the immigration people have steadily wanted more and more documents to the point that I can never be sure if the people will be refused from their flights for some new document. Of course they will let people through for a small gift of money but I always insist our visitors don't play these games.

The problem is that the people enforcing such requirements claim they are protecting our poor and 'ignorant' population from human trafficking or from being taken advantage of... If a person has a ticket and a visa to visit a country that is not on the banned list they should be allowed to travel, but according to our nannies, that is not necessarily the case...

It is especially frustrating when I come across a really good job that I would love to see filled by a kababayan but am constantly frustrated by the endless obstacles placed in our path by our own government. When I question our officials all I get told is "we are protecting our citizens from human trafficking..." Unfortunately they are often preventing our citizens from getting good paying jobs since others can deploy an Indian IT tech or an aircraft mechanic much faster than I can bring a Filipino.

Sometimes I can bypass the system by bringing the person on a visit visa instead and then starting the paperwork processing after he or she arrives, but with these rules limiting travel that becomes more difficult. What is a shame is that I find these rules can all be 'bent' if I go through an 'agent' who has a friend in the management of the POEA but who wants to charge 2 months salary to make that happen. That's not small when some of these salaries are $5000 or $6000 a month.


If those observations are not nightmarish yet, here's another government regulation -- requiring OFWs to have mandatory insurance -- that was implemented last year.

A report from The Standard in HK last November 10, 2010, Maids on the shelf as new insurance charges hurt said,

..More than 100 residents have shelved plans to hire helpers, it was claimed yesterday, as a push to revoke a new law on insurance picked up steam... The law, revealed by Manila last week, makes workers carry policies costing US$144 (HK$1,123) to cover a two- year contract, with premiums paid by employers or recruitment agencies.

Coverage includes US$15,000 for death in an accident, US$10,000 for natural death, and US$7,500 in case of permanent disablement. There are about 130,000 Filipino domestic helpers in Hong Kong affected by the law.

"The new measure was hastily adopted by the Philippine government with no transparency," Lau said. "The Philippine officials involved have not considered the responses and feelings of overseas employers."

Under SAR law, about 280,000 employers take out insurance costing about HK$900 every two years. But many employers have voluntarily purchased comprehensive insurance of about HK$800 to HK$1,000 a year to cover medical expenses on top of compulsory labor insurance, Law said....

The same issue was carried in the local media BusinessMirror that same day, HK employers hit law on insurance. It reported,


... The new policy, an amendment to the Migrant Workers Act of 1995, took effect on November 8 and requires employers or agencies to pay $144 as insurance for every worker they hire.

...Deputy Consul General Kira Christianne Dañganan-Azucena said, “The reaction was significant, so we’re responding by making sure that their sentiments reach the proper authorities in Manila. There are still some things not clear. Their questions is if this mandatory insurance apply to Hong Kong-bound domestic workers, considering the employers have to pay already some kind of insurance for every worker they employ under Hong Kong law. What happens to the worker if terminated? Is the insurance transferable? Can the person who paid the premium get back the money? Details like that.”  

She said while the law explicitly says that workers will not be made to bear the cost of cover, it is not clear if the employer or the recruitment agency should carry the burden of paying premiums.

Azucena said the consulate was not consulted before both houses of Congress passed the law. According to her, what was asked of the post was a certificate noting that Hong Kong has existing labor laws that protect migrant workers.

These new laws and restrictions that were passed with little or no transparency, were likely trigged by cronyism by certain Philippine legislators and POEA officials in the local insurance industry.

Employment, whether local or foreign, is strictly a private contract between an employer and an employee. Government is outside of the picture. Only when one of the parties, employer or employee, breach the contract, then government can come in to enforce the rule of law. Like when the employer does not give the stipulated salary and other benefits, or when an employee has caused physical harm to the employer and his/her family. Government comes in after the breach or non-obedience of contract, not before. Because if government will intervene in each and every employment contract with ever-rising regulations and restrictions, then a hell of bureaucracy is slapped on everyone, including the law-abiding employers and employees.

The usual reason of "protecting our OFWs from human trafficking and abused by foreign employers" is a catch-all alibi to create new restrictions and rackets that are in fact indirect robbery. To require for instance that the employment agency will get one or two months of an OFW's salary on top of other fees for facilitating a private contract between a foreign employer and an OFW is tantamount to robbery sanctioned by the government. And to require another round of work insurance when foreign employers are already required by their own governments to provide insurance for the OFWs that they hire, is simply raising the cost of employment, and reducing the chance of employment by Filipinos who want to try their luck abroad.

See also
Part 3, Remittances and Guest workers, March 25, 2008
Part 4, Filipino entrepreneur in Germany, June 04, 2009
Migration and Freedom 5: Conferences on Liberty and Migration, October 19, 2010
Migration and Freedom 6: Passport and People Mobility, November 30, 2010

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Migration and Freedom 6: Passport and People Mobility

I originally wrote this in May 15, 2008

Passport, Travel Tax, and People Mobility

One indicator of how free a country or society is, is the ease of mobility of its citizens to travel both within the country and abroad. The easier and less costly it is to move around, the more freedom the people have. On the contrary, the more bureaucratic and more costly it is to travel, the less free the people are. In short, mobility = freedom. Less mobility, less freedom.

To travel abroad, a Filipino needs (a) a Philippine passport, (b) a plane ticket, and (c) a valid visa of the destination country whenever it is needed. For many Asian economies like Hong Kong and member-states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), visas are not needed for visits of less than 30 days.

For Filipinos traveling abroad to attend a conference, to study, a business trip, or as tourists, they have to pay (a) travel tax of Php1,620 per passenger, and (b) airport terminal fee of Php750. Hence, even before one can board a plane, he has to shell out nearly Php2,400 already and it is not a small amount. Overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) are exempted from paying travel tax and also the terminal fee, I think.

Getting a new passport, whether for the first time or for renewal of the expired or expiring passport, can be costly. The cost of passport, the new machine readable passport (MRP), is Php500 for regular processing (released after 14 working days) and Php750 for fast/overtime processing (released after seven working days).

Other costs are (a) passport pictures, Php150 for six copies, definitely a monopolistic price, service provided by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) multi-purpose cooperative; (b) securing birth and/or marriage certificates, other papers and clearance from other government agencies when necessary, and (c) taking a leave from office, first to get a schedule for application processing, and second, actual processing day, payment, data encoding, etc. Some people apply through their travel agents, and normal processing fee by the travel agencies is Php1,000 per passport, but the applicant still has to go to the DFA for the electronic signature and perhaps interview for first-time passport applicants.

Those long queues are stressful and costly for passport applicants. Long queues mean only one thing: the supplier of the service or a commodity is small or few relative to those who demand the service. In order to reduce, if not remove the long queue, the supplier should either expand the staffers who attend to the long lines of people, or expand the number of offices (or shops) in different places to attend to more people from more places.

Fastfood chains do that. Banks too, and malls and convenience stores, gasoline stations, repair shops, Internet shops, barber shops, and so on. All private enterprises operating in a competitive environment are stretching wide and hard to reach out to more people, to serve and satisfy more customers.

Why can’t the DFA and many government agencies follow that? If the current number of personnel is not enough, then DFA should rechannel some of its staff from other departments or divisions to help in the passport processing work; or hire more staff. If eight hours on 5 ½ days are not enough, then work 12 hours on six days per week. If the DFA building is not enough, then get or rent additional offices in other cities, both in Metro Manila and the provinces. Many DFA regional offices across the country are also experiencing long queues for passport applicants. There are additional costs for this expansion of offices and staff, definitely, but there are additional revenues too that can more than finance the additional expenses.

I suggested the re-channeling of some staff from other DFA offices and divisions because I have noticed that while the staff at the Passport Director’s Office and related offices working on passport issuance are harassed and seem to be overworked, the staff from neighboring rooms and offices at the DFA seem idle.

If the DFA cannot have the flexibility or will to expand its staff and/or offices, then it may consider allowing and accrediting some private travel agencies to process passport applications. Then the DFA main office can attend more to those applicants with special or urgent need for a passport.

Like my case. Last month, I was going to Atlanta, Georgia to attend the Atlas Liberty Forum. The sponsor paid for my hotel and subsidized my plane fare. Less than a week before my flight, my passport accidentally got wet; my travel agent advised me that I need to get a new one as my current passport might be declared “mutilated” and hence, invalid, by the immigration officers of the Philippines and the US.

With the help of some friends who have friends at the DFA, I was entertained at the Passport Director’s Office, where there is a long queue of people who may have the same urgent need for a new passport. Anyway, I had to cancel my original flight, got my new MRP after four working days, flew the following day, and caught up the conference on the day it started.

The high cost of getting a new passport plus travel tax and terminal fee constitute an indirect restriction to some people who maybe poor and desire to be more mobile across the country. The world is globalizing fast, and there are not too many opportunities in the country given the bad state of governance. Those unnecessary but indirect restrictions to people’s mobility should be reduced. The travel tax, for instance, looks like extortion since there are no corresponding services to the public who paid the tax. It should be abolished.
------


Passport and People Mobility, Part 2

May 18, 2008

I circulated my article on “Passport, travel tax and people mobility” to some of my yahoogroups, got comments from 7 friends. Below are the summarized comments and my reply to them.

(1) From Prince:

I think the bigger issue with the slow processing of passport is not the number of staff but the equipment for the electronic signature and thumb mark. I assume the equipment is very expensive that is why the government cannot acquire more of it. Another issue there is an unusual increase in demand for passports with the issuance of machine-readable passports (MRP) Several people want a new MRP even if their current ones are not yet expired. Another problem that they need to look at is the number of fixers and unscrupulous people trying to exhort money from passport applicants near the DFA national office.

(2) From May:

This means poverty stricken countries will never be considered free. What’s the meaning of “free”? According to David Schwartz, if you believe you are free, you can be free.

(3) From Eunica:

The problem is in the system. I doubt if the size of the bureaucracy is the problem for I am sure that more than one of the employees there could be considered redundant. So I doubt if a Jollibee-and- Starbucks- type of expansion is the solution.

Subjecting it (DFA) to competition could be given a thought but only up to the point where some steps in the processing could be outsourced. But the nature of information handled by the particular agency could raise some important issues. Given the massive outflow of overseas workers and the rise of budget airlines, business related to this will be viable.

All those expenses and the pressure from predatory Customs officials that OFWs face are just too much and indeed need some drastic measures. Mobility matters to the middle class more than to other people whose major concern is meeting the basic needs that could tide them over a day. Hence, as a barometer of freedom, its application is limited.

(4) From Emir:

Why do we have to pay airport terminal fee anyway? Countries with much more modern terminals don’t even charge any fee. There was a time we used to pay for using those old luggage carts. If they were able t abolish the push cart fee, why not also the terminal fee. If the collection of the fee is for terminal maintenance, the money does not obviously go there. Our terminals are probably the oldest and the worst in Asia. Vietnam or even Cambodia (au naturelle) terminals are even more impressive. The low cost carrier terminal in KL is a lot better that terminal 2.

Whoever is managing the PAL terminal (NAIA 2), has not even heard of an invention called ESCALATORS. When you arrive via NAIA Terminal 2, you need to drag your carry-on luggage down the stairs towards the immigration counters. And you need to pay them P750 for the inconvenience?

(5) From John:

Why can’t the DFA make our passports expire in 10-years, so that we don’t go to them every 4 ½ years since we cannot travel anymore if our passport will expire in 6 months or less?

(6) From Jay:

The lines are long because many people need passports. Passports are needed because the places they want to go to require visas before they let them enter… Even if the government handed out passports for free, that still doesn't result in greater mobility because ultimately it is not the issuance of a passport, but the respective countries who decide whether you can go in or not.

In your conclusion you say that high passport costs "constitute an indirect restriction to some people who maybe poor and desire to be more mobile across the country." There is no connection. No one needs a passport to travel anywhere across the country.

Having traveled very extensively, I agree that there is something that needs to be done about the travel tax, costs of service, and efficiency. Far more efficient systems exist than what is currently in place at DFA, and given the number of people who need passports, it is proper to demand an accounting and better services for the money that is paid. But efficiency takes more than reducing taxes and increasing staff.

(7) From Jim:

For comparison, a U.S. Passport cost about $100 or Php 4,200 (for applicants over 16 years of age) and $85 or Php 3,570 (for applicants 16 years of age and younger). It generally takes about 4 weeks to process, but I know that in case of emergencies one can go directly to a Passport Processing office and get it the same day. So basically Philippines is a bargain compared to the U.S. But with a Philippine passport you'll need a visa to visit most countries, while with a U.S.
passport a lot of countries will allow entry with out a visa. I guess it all boils down to planning, if you know you're going somewhere a months ahead of time kuha ka na ng passport.

My reply to them:

(1) To Prince:

I think it's not with the machines. If it were so, the long queues would be in the passport release section, where people were waiting for 2, 3, or 4 weeks for their passport to be released. The long queues are in the processing, 1 or 2 days before the application forms will reach the machines that produce the MRP. And that is why the number of fixers cannot go down: they know that many people are stressed by the long lines, they want someone who can help them shorten the process, even if they have to pay a big premium.

If there's a long line for customers, fastfood chains open up a dozen more new stores/shops in different locations. The banks, gasoline stations, car repair shops, vulcanizing shops, barber shops, do the same. So why can't the DFA do it too? "Limited funding" cannot be the answer to this question because passports are not free, there's a fee to get it. DFA being a bureaucracy and a monopoly, it need not be too sensitive to the needs and frustrations of the citizens. Unlike private enterprises who are forced by circumstances to be sensitive to their customers; otherwise, the latter will simply go to other firms and suppliers of the same or similar commodities/ services.

Nonetheless, I have respect for the staff of the Passport Director's office. They were really over-worked and they work hard, I could see it. It's the staff of other offices within the DFA who are often idle.

(2) To May

As I defined it earlier, mobility = freedom. Less mobility, less freedom. And according to Friedrich Hayek, freedom = absence of coercion.

Poverty-stricken countries need to simplify and liberalize the issuance of passport for their citizens who want to escape their country and work/move somewhere else. Or their governments need to liberalize the entry of foreigners -- investors, tourists, professionals -- who want to come to their country, and these foreigners can help generate jobs for their people.

If you believe you are free, fine. You have the freedom to go to Kuala Lumpur or Bangkok tomorrow, fine. Assuming you already have the passport, and going to those cities is visa-free for visits of 30 days or less, there are lots of government-imposed costs: (a) travel tax, (b) terminal fee, (c) inspection fee, security fee, embedded in the plane ticket. Which makes your foreign travel more expensive than what it should be if some of those government-imposed costs are reduced or removed.

(3) To Eunica

The DFA is a big bureaucracy in charge with different political and economic diplomacy, trying to save some OFWs from being hanged in the Middle East, attending and organizing different summit (ASEAN, APEC, ASEM, Ministerial meetings, etc.), issuing RP visa to some foreigners coming in, and so on. Issuing passports is only one of its functions. And it is here where the DFA is sometimes getting the public's ire and frustration, instead of support and commendation.

When a government, like the Philippine govt., will impose many taxes and fees on each step, from getting a passport to getting an OFW permit at POEA, OWWA, Bu. of Immigration (if any), etc., including preliminary papers like NBI clearance, PNP clearance, brgy clearance, etc., that government is putting indirect hindrance to people mobility and their freedom to travel.

To correct such hindrance, the burden of proof that a person trying to travel abroad could be an "undesirable" citizen, should be shifted from the people to the government. Thus, instead of the person producing different clearances and permits from different government agencies (NBI, PNP, brgy, POEA, etc.), those agencies should reconcile their data and watch out only for those with some criminal records, all the rest should not be harassed and not be required to secure and pay those unnecessary clearances and fees.

(4) To Emir:

Tama Emir. The terminal fee should either be abolished, or be reduced by 1/2 at most. Airport operators like MIAA earn enough from (a) airlines, (b) rental from shops inside the airport terminals, (c) ads from billboards inside the terminal, (d) airport taxis and rent-a-cars, (e) parking fees, etc.

(5) To John:

I was also thinking that passport validity should be more than 5 years since its effective usefulness is only 4 ½ years. It could be made 6 to 10 years, so there will be less people that go there, which adds to longer lines of passport applicants.

(6) To Jay

Getting a visa is a privilege to be given by foreign governments, and it was not the subject of my paper. Rather, it was about the privilege to travel abroad to be given (or denied) by the Philippine government -- hence, my discussion on RP passport, travel tax, terminal fee, etc. And my beef was that the Philippine government should reduce some unnecessary hindrances to Filipinos desiring to be mobile abroad, like the abolition of travel tax, reduction of long lines for passport application, etc.

"Travel across the country" was a typographical error, my mistake. I meant "travel outside the country".

Increasing staff at DFA passport processing is only one of about 4 options I made. Another option is rechannel some staff in other DFA offices who I saw, were idle, just chatting and laughing in their offices while the passport-related staff were harassed and over-worked.

(7) To Jim:

Not exactly "bargain" the RP passport fee. A $100 can be earned in one day perhaps by a minimum wage earner in the US. A P4,200 can be earned in 2 weeks work by a minimum wage earner in the Philippines. Also, as I mentioned in my paper, you pay not only P750 passport fee, you also pay P150 for those small pictures alone, another P150 to P180 for "notarized" statement that your passport was lost due to theft or fire, or damaged due to water or fire or babies, etc.
Then you also have to take a leave for about 1day from your office to file the application form, processing, etc. If you don’t like long lines, you pay P1,000 to travel agencies to help you, but you still have to go to DFA for e-signature, etc. You also pay sometimes for NBI clearance, PNP clearance, plus birth certificate, marriage certificate, etc. to NSO. DFA gets the original copy, not photocopy. You sum up everything, you could be near P4,000.

Sometimes you cannot just "plan" your trip. You have no money to be a tourist abroad, neither you want to work abroad, you don’t apply for a passport. Suddenly a relative will tour you to HK or Bangkok for free, or you get an all-expenses paid conference, you run to the DFA.