The Stockholm riots last February 21 and the refugees question

In 2003, I attended a 7-weeks training on sustainable agriculture in Sweden. We stayed in Lund most of the time but we also saw Stockholm, Uppsala, other cities for several days. Very peaceful country, Cabinet Secretaries and legislators would go to malls and shops with zero security aides. 2017, things are different. many stories of riots, arson, looting, sexual assaults. Not in the entire country of course but in some parts of it.

The usual NYT, always blame Trump for his comments or non-comments. If rioters dislike Trump's comment about Sweden and the huge influx of immigrants from Syria, why not rally in front of the US embassy, why burn their neighbors' cars and loot shops and attack a journalist?

I think it is the usual case of high expectation, high disappointment. 200k+ of migrants in 2015-2016 alone, many of these migrants expect the good life, expect high, generous welfare enjoyed by the locals be given to them too like free healthcare, free education to universities, free child support, etc. But government money does not come from the air or ocean, it comes from taxpayers and sale of govt-owned assets like land.

There is a limit to the welfare system. The rioters who burned cars, looted shops and attacked the police, they don't understand that? They only believe that inequality is wrong as peddled by the UN and many central planners, so there should be forced equality for everyone?

My proposal to help the huge volume of political immigrants and refugees is for rich countries to buy some islands in Europe or north Africa and relocate the migrants there. Give them immediate needs like food and housing, initial infra like roads and airports, initial peace keeping forces with time table for withrawal then leave the migrants to sort things on their own. What is important is they can escape massacres and pol persecution from their home countries.

BWorld 113, Peace talks with CPP-NDF for another 30 years?

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last February 17.

After three decades (1987-2017) of peace talks between the Philippine government and the Communist Party of the Philippines-National Democratic Front (CPP-NDF), all held in Europe (Netherlands, Norway, Belgium, Italy, etc.), what lessons have we learned?

There are at least two. One is that the “endless peace talks” for the past 30 years might continue for another 30 years or more. Here is a brief time line of those peace talks that I gathered from various sources.

Joma Sison and his team in Europe have earned huge media and political mileage. They can continue getting funds for these high-profile peace talks so they will want the talks to continue for the next 30 years or more, with their kin and buddies as future negotiators.

Similarly, media and political mileage have also benefitted negotiating teams of the Philippine government, regardless of administrations. At least they get frequent, all-expenses paid trips to Europe. So there is also incentive for them and future government negotiators to continue the talks for the next 30 years or more.

Second lesson, since the CPP-NDF negotiators have been residing in Europe for decades, could it be that the Philippine government is negotiating with foreigners but previously Filipino citizens? My source says several negotiators have become either Dutch or Spanish citizens.

I am not a big fan of nationalism so this issue is not that important to me. I am just curious if some groups will insist on the citizenship issue, will there be no legal problems?

The Philippine communist movement has already been a spent force for so many years. The Philippine government should treat them just like other organized criminal groups engaged in extortion and armed attacks.

Likewise, the Europe-based CPP-NDF negotiators are spent leaders who are better ignored than heard, for the next decade/s to come. They will continue making unreasonable demands to cover up their irrelevance.

Bienvenido Oplas, Jr. is the head of Minimal Government Thinkers and a Fellow of SEANET. Both institutes are members of EFN-Asia.

------------

See also:

BWorld 110, Should we go federal or not? February 19, 2017 

BWorld 111, Electric cooperatives and unstable power supply, March 01, 2017

BWorld 112, Asia Liberty Forum 2017 in Mumbai, March 01, 2017

Energy 91, Thailand's bright nights (part 2)

My Mumbai-Bangkok flight (Jet Airways) was delayed last February 12 due to some mechanical problems, delayed by about 3+ hours, it landed at Suvarnabhumi/Bangkok airport evening already. My co-participant at the Asia Liberty Forum (ALF) in Mumbai, Mai Tansakun from Thailand, was with me in that flight, I asked her to take photos of Thailand as our plane was descending because my cp was low-batt that time.

Mai took good photos of the areas around the airport, her camera phone is also more modern than my old Samsung phone. Thanks for these pics, Mai.

I am always fascinated by bright cities at night which for me is a good indicator of the material wealth and prosperity of a city or country. And Thailand's bright Bangkok and nearby cities is among them.

The main roads are easy to see, dotted with bright yellow lights for many kilometers. The secondary roads are also dotted with bright lights, not as bright as the main roads though.

Thailand has electricity output 2x that of the Philippines and they rely more on natural gas, followed by coal. Their natgas is mostly domestically sourced?

There is also better zoning in TH compared to the PH. The roads are generally more straight.

Meanwhile, I was lucky that I have a long lay over in Bkk airport so I was able to catch my Bkk-Manila flight that night.

This is from ADB's Key Indicators 2016. The most natgas-dependent ASEAN countries are Brunei (it is a big nat gas exporter), Singapore and Thailand. The more coal-dependent countries in the region are Indonesia, Philippines and Malaysia.

When I arrived Manila from Bacolod last Sunday night, I was pleasantly surprised to see that Manila is much brighter at night than a few years ago. Thanks to more stable, more reliable and cheaper power sources like coal. Also, energy efficiency is also kicking as more houses, offices and buildings are using brighter but lower electricity consumption lights and bulbs.
---------------

See also:
Energy 45, Thailand's bright nights and nat gas power, October 19, 2015

Energy 88, Letter to ERC re petition by 3 wind companies for higher FIT, January 10, 2017 

Energy 89, DOE not concurring with PH's Paris agreement, good, January 14, 2017 

Energy 90, On having mandatory RES for contestable electricity consumers, January 28, 2017

NO to the reimposition of death penalty in the PH

As I grow older, my patience for violence, especially state-sponsored or state-inspired murders, goes down to zero. Many state bureaucrats and officials are lousy at enforcing the rule of law even for minor offenses, so how can they be trusted to enforce death penalty to all, rich and poor convicts? 

The death penalty bill has passed on 2nd reading at the PH House of Representatives the other day. 

From the CNN:

“The entire process moved very fast — taking only 30 seconds from the closure of the period of amendments to the passage on second reading.

After pro-death penalty congressmen won in the voice vote, anti-death solons tried, but failed, to move for nominal voting — because session was immediately adjourned after the bill was approved.”

From Philstar:

“The approval of a controversial measure pushed by President Duterte came after the chamber agreed to drop plunder, among other crimes, from the list of offenses that will warrant capital punishment.”

One possible reason why the Congressmen/women rushed the passing of this evil bill is that the legislators are cooking something more sinister and the death penalty is a good cover to divert the people's attention. The legislators and Pres. Du30 want to institutionalize state-sponsored murders. Masakit pakinggan ang EJK, masarap naman pakinggan (sa tenga nila) ang LJK (legal judicial killing).

The plunderers of today and the future want to "feel good" that drug offenders will easily die while they do large-scale stealing and extortion.

In a society with weak rule of law culture and practice, majority of those convicted are poor and it's also them who will easily go to the death chamber. 

One more reason why BIG government is wrong and evil.

BWorld 112, Asia Liberty Forum 2017 in Mumbai

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last February 15, 2017.

Mumbai, India -- The title of this piece is from JP Narayan of the Lok Satta Party in India, who made that comment during the Asia Liberty Forum (ALF) that was held from Feb. 10 to 11, 2017 in Mumbai.

That remark seems to apply in many countries where the rule of law is weaker and the rule of men -- especially those in charge of several forms of regulations -- are stronger. These are the types of people who also impose restrictions and prohibitions on their political enemies and ordinary folk but exempt themselves, their friends, supporters, and families.

Below are other insightful quotes and comments from other speakers during the ALF. The conference was jointly sponsored by the Center for Civil Society (India), Atlas Network, John Templeton Foundation, Smith Family Foundation (USA), and the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom (Germany).

1. “The word ‘Freedom’ has been lost because we mean ‘freedom from’ while an enormous number of people mean ‘freedom to.’” -- Linda Whetstone, Network for a Free Society (UK).

That quote is correct and the confusion may be rooted from the common definition of freedom as “freedom from coercion” (by the State or government, clan, church, gang, etc.) and is similar to Friedrich Hayek’s definition of liberty as “absence of coercion.” Linda also added that “Trade and exchange is not a zero sum game... both sides can be better off.”

2. “Inequality is not the issue; what bothers people is the ‘psychological threat to my perceived status.’” -- Tom Palmer, Atlas Network.

Again, I agree.

Take note that free people are not equal and equal people are not free. Freedom allows people to be super-efficient or be super-mediocre or absolutely irresponsible in their own lives. This personal decision automatically results in material inequality among people. The only equality that matters is equality before the law, or the equal application of the law on unequal people. Thus, the law against robbery should apply to all, from the President to the richest people to middle class, down to the poorest people.

3. “What we have in India is a PPP -- Perpetually Planned Poverty” -- Rajesh Jain, Free a Billion (FAB).

This is a funny but brutal parody and satire of an otherwise famous catchword in the Philippines and other countries of PPP (Public-Private Partnership) for big infrastructure projects. Rajesh was referring to various laws and restrictions by the government of India that he also called as “like air, it is all around you in India.”

4. “Top communist individuals in this country come from the upper class of society... Capitalism and Caste cannot coexist.” -- Chandra Bhan Prasad, a public intellectual and commentator, India.

He is referring to the various privileges and perks that cronies and state-protected corporate interests enjoy but are withheld from the rest of society. This is true because competitive capitalism is driven only by endless innovation and is anathema to state protectionism.

5. “Demonetization is the biggest assault on property rights in India... Nehru nationalized industries, Indira nationalized banks, and Narendra Modi nationalized private cash holdings.” -- Barun Mitra, Liberty Institute, India.

In November 2016, the Modi government pursued demonetization, a policy to remove all 500 and 1,000 (about $15) rupees from circulation to supposedly curtail the huge black market economy and counterfeit currency that funds illegal activities. These are exactly the currencies that hundreds of millions of poor Indians hold because of their low income and government has disallowed use of these. Very autocratic indeed.

6. “Globalization of capital is the most liberating force particularly for the poor.” -- Christopher Lingle, Universidad Francisco Marroquin, Guatemala

Contrary to common belief that globalization only favored big capitalists and businesses, globalization has benefitted the poor more in the form of (a) being employed locally by foreign investors that were otherwise prevented from coming in, (b) being employed abroad as they were assigned by their multinational firms or being hired by competing foreign firms, (c) being stockholders through time of both local or foreign firms as enterprise competition intensifies.

7. “Regulatory focus is to tap down on innovation because nobody understands something new. Lack of rule of law leads to adverse selection. Legitimate firms exit, leaving only bad actors.” -- Susan Thomas, Indira Gandhi Institute for Development Research, India.

This is true. The implicit or explicit purpose of regulation is to limit and restrict innovation that can lead to business disruption and more income inequality. Some regulations simply kill innovation and we do not see or realize it because it was not initiated in the first place. Lack of rule of law means high rule of men; only friends and cronies of rulers will prosper while the non-cronies will remain small or exit the market.

8. “There is a messianic belief among regulators that if there is any money made in India it must be taxed. Also underlying core belief among regulators that India is the fastest growing economy so the world owes us investments.” -- Sudeepto Deb, Minerva Consulting, India.

This attitude by regulators of tax-tax-tax whenever there is perceived new income seems to apply in many other countries too. Former US President Ronald Reagan has a good summary of this when he said: “If it moves, tax it; if it keeps moving, regulate it; if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

9. “There are only two political philosophies: liberty and power.” -- Simon Lee, cofounder of Lion Rock Institute, Hong Kong.

Ultimately, yes. It is a battle between state-worshippers and regulators and the public or regulated parties who want more economic freedom. There are in-betweens of course, like people who move from the regulated to becoming regulators and vice versa.

There were many other useful comments and ideas during the conference but there is not enough space for this column. I am simply thankful to the Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia for giving me the travel grant to attend the event.

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the head of Minimal Government Thinkers and a Fellow of SEANET. Both institutes are members of EFN Asia.

----------------

See also:

BWorld 109, Asians' march to liberty and progress, February 16, 2017 

BWorld 110, Should we go federal or not? February 19, 2017 

BWorld 111, Electric cooperatives and unstable power supply, March 01, 2017

Mining 47, JB Baylon on the DENR Secretary

I am reposting here two of JB Baylon's facebook postings about the new DENR Secretary Gina Lopez and the mining industry. These 2 papers were posted by JB last February 26. 

For me, there are two issues here in the on-going controversial policies of Sec. Lopez: (1) heavy government regulations and taxation of the mining industry, and (2) rule of law, when government revokes the mining/business permits that itself has granted.

--------------

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CBCP

It seems that some members of your ranks are raising the flag of LAUDATO SI to call for the confirmation of the DENR secretary designate.

Please ask these individuals to make sure they have read it and read it well.

Because if they did they should have noticed this:

1. The Holy Father mentions mining directly ONLY ONCE - on Paragraph 51 where he rails against the harm caused by mercury pollution in gold mining and sulphur dioxide pollution in copper mining.

That's in one line in one paragraph out of 246.

2. But the Holy Father mentions "impulsive and wasteful" consumption (par 162), "scandalous level of conusmption" (par 172), the need to modify consumption (par 180) over THIRTY TIMES!!

That's THIRTY TIMES versus ONCE.

------------

WHY SHE IS A BAD CHOICE EVEN IF SHE IS A LOPEZ

(Or maybe because she is one?)

SHE SAYS: : mining is damaging our environment! If you love your country, really really love your country, you should be against mining. The environment is more important than the money the miners make!

THE TRUTH: mining covers less than 3% of our TOTAL LAND AREA - so if as she claims that mining does damage the environment in 3% of the country. who inflicts the damage on the rest, on the 97%???

But more importantly RESPONSIBLE MINING means PROGRESSIVE REHABILITATION... and over the last five or so years mining firms have planted over 20 MILLION TREES nationwide.

Not to mention coral reef rehab.

Finally she has not acted against illegal mining especiallly the small scale operations that pollute the environment, are not required to rehabilitate their mining areas and do not pay taxes properly!

SHE SAYS: Mining makes communities poor. Look at Caraga it remains the poorest region in the country!

THE TRUTH: Mining communities are far better off with responsible mining that brings electricity, schools, Clinics, scholarships, roads and other businesses. Mining firms spend BILLIONS to fill the void that Government misses in remote areas. Without mining, the residents of these otherwise remote communities will have to fall back on subsistence farming or subsistence fishing. Most mining areas are inhospitable areas or areas whose soil is not loam soil that is perfect for agriculture.

Without mining they won't be poor - they'll be dirt poor!

SHE SAYS: There is no such thing as RESPONSIBLE MINING.

THE TRUTH: On her first day in office (July 1) she was told by Leo Jasareno that all mining firms had to undergo ISO 14001 certification which is the HIGHEST international standard. She hailed ISO 14001 as "another way of saying responsible mining." But maybe the next day she found out that most mining operations obtained their ISO 14001 certifications - so she scrapped that and conducted her own audit. But if ISO 14001 is the HIGHEST standard, then her audit has LOWER STANDARDS, yes?

SHE SAYS: Embrace Laudato Si, the Papal Encyclical on Climate Change! Those against mining use Laudato Si to condemn the industry.

THE TRUTH: Laudato Si is made up of 246 paragraphs. The Holy Father only mentions mining ONCE, in paragraph 51. But he lambasts wasteful and shameful consumption more than 30 times and points out that MEDIA fuels the consumption mindset.

She should be LAUDED for her passion.

But she should be REJECTED for the position she aspires for because her PASSION colors her MINDSET.

Just because she is passionate and a Lopez do not make her a good choice to be Secretary of the Environment and Natural Resources.

We need a better one/ someone who knows the Law, is incorruptible, has a fear of God and is no-nonsense. Like lawyer Tony LaViña or geologist Caloy Arcilla. You cant run circles around either of them even if you tried.

Reject Gina Lopez.

Let the DENR's loss be the ABS CBN Foundation's gain!

---------------- 

See also:

Mining 44, Presentation at the Mining 2015 Conference, September 17, 2015 

Mining 45, Presentation at UP Diliman, October 02, 2015

BWorld 19, Taxation and regulations in PH mining industry, September 24, 2015 

Mining 46, The new DENR Secretary and other watermelon activists, July 07, 2016

Pol Ideology 69, Math can show that small or minimal government is optimal

As humanity modernizes further, complexity and diversity among people increases. Forcing a big number of people into a centrally-planned design to achieve social coherence will only mean more bureaucratism if not dictatorship. Here's one proof.

                                           

Mathematicians Prove Society is Way Too Complex to Have A President

November 18, 2016 at 11:18 am

Written by Alice Salles

http://theantimedia.org/mathematicians-society-complex-president/

“[T]he concept of civilization as a complex organism,” mathematicians concluded, “is qualitatively different than either [democracy or communism].”

According to NECSI’s director, Yaneer Bar-Yam, “[t]here’s a natural process of increasing complexity in the world” that at some point will “run into the complexity of the individual.” Once we reach that point, Bar-Yam added, “hierarchical organizations will fail.”

From The Mind Unleased,

“There’s a natural process of increasing complexity in the world that at some point will run into the complexity of the individual. Once we reach that point, hierarchical organizations will fail.” http://themindunleashed.com/.../society-complex...

From Motherboard,

"It is absurd, then, to believe that the concentration of power in one or a few individuals at the top of a hierarchical representative democracy will be able to make optimal decisions on a vast array of connected and complex issues that will certainly have sweeping and unintended ramifications on other parts of human civilization." https://motherboard.vice.com/.../society-is-too...

The full paper by Bar-Yaam is 23 pages long, http://www.necsi.edu/research/multiscale/EOLSSComplexityRising.pdf

I like this chart. As society progresses, as humanity modernizes, we need more lateral connections and network, not vertical hierarchical ordering. Only ego-tripping central planners and dictators would love more hierarchy.

A friend Eric T asked, "What if, instead of forming a network with lateral connections, each new state ended up operating in a silo?"

From this chart, Eric is referring to the hybrid set up, somehow vertical and horizontal, pwedi, but I think modern societies with small population like SG, HK, Switzerland, are in a hybrid state now.

Another friend, Winthrop added, 

The danger of 'silos' has made the lateral linkages even more important. Even in civil society - old-style 'united fronts' are increasingly being superseded by 'dynamic coalitions', hindi na uso yun one-size-fits-all.... In the end -- individual effort by key persons within the various companies, organizations and institutions.But the organization culture will have to be flexible and open to these dynamic linkages and engagements - it cannot be - "you're either with us or against us"

Good points there by Wyn, the hybrid is the optimal set up for societies in the present. My article last Monday in BusinessWorld was about federalism and disintegration of the Philippines.  To have one President or PM over 103 M people is lousy. Whereas it is more manageable to have 1 PM over 5.7M people (SG) or 1 Chief Exec over 7.5M people (HK) or 1 King/PM over 0.4M people (Brunei), they would somehow fall under the hybrid set up.

-------------

See also:

Pol. Ideology 66, On institutions, constitutional monarchy and liberal parliamentary democracy, May 10, 2016 

Pol. Ideology 67, Socialism and Venezuela, June 08, 2016 

Pol. Ideology 68, On factions and diversity in society, thoughts of James Madison, October 10, 2016

BWorld 111, Electric cooperatives and unstable power supply

* This  is my article in BusinessWorld last February 08, 2017.

Almost everything we do now requires energy and if we stay in non-mobile structures like buildings and houses, everything requires electricity. Energy precedes development so unstable and expensive energy means unstable and poor economy.

Given the technological revolution the world has experienced in recent decades, it remains a tragedy that many countries still have low electrification rates and very low electricity consumption per capita.

Unfortunately, the Philippines is among those countries with still not-so-high electrification rates until today and its electricity use is among the lowest in the ASEAN (see table).

Electricity consumption in kWh per capita is high for the following developed and emerging Asian economies: Taiwan, 10,460; South Korea, 10,430; Brunei, 9,550; Singapore, 8,840; Hong Kong, 5,930; Malaysia, 4,470 (6.5x of PHL); China, 3,770; Thailand, 2,490 (3.6x of PHL). These countries and economies also have 100% electrification rate except perhaps China.

There are two reasons why the Philippines has a relatively low electrification rate and low per capita electricity use.

First is due to its archipelagic geography.

Many municipalities and villages are located in islands that are off-grid and, as a result, their residents rely on biomass like firewood for cooking and gensets running on diesel for lighting although some do use solar.

Second is due to politics.

There are not enough base-load power plants that can provide electricity 24/7 even in major islands like Luzon and Mindanao. This is because of political opposition by certain groups to cheap and stable fossil fuel sources like coal. Also, there are many bureaucracies (national and local) that discourage the quick construction and commissioning of new power plants. There are also weak, inefficient, and even corrupt electric cooperatives (ECs) that are given monopoly privileges to serve certain provinces and municipalities.

There are 119 ECs in the country from Luzon to Mindanao plus private distribution utilities like Meralco and those in PEZA/ecozones. All ECs are supervised and regulated by the National Electrification Administration (NEA).

Of the 119 ECs, some remain financially weak and problematic until today, like the Abra EC (ABRECO) and Albay EC (ALECO). These two ECs are so deep in debt they are unable to provide stable electricity to their customer-members and have arrears with power generating companies (gencos) that supply them electricity at the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM).

According to National Electrification Administration (NEA), from 2004 to 2014, it has released subsidies to ABRECO worth P56.6 million for the implementation of the Sitio Electrification Program (SEP), Barangay Line Enhancement Program, and its procurement of a modular generator set.

For ALECO, it was badly managed and was on the brink of bankruptcy that local business and political leaders proposed and supported its corporatization and take over by more established energy players.

In January 2014, ALECO was acquired by San Miguel Energy Corp.’s subsidiary Global Power Holdings Corp. (SMC Global) and renamed it as Albay Power and Energy Corporation (APEC). ALECO then was the first EC in the country that was corporatized.

Upon takeover, SMC Global and APEC inherited a P4-billion debt by ALECO including overdue payments at WESM of nearly P1 billion.

More than two years after the takeover, the debt ballooned to P5.6 billion, mainly due to low collection efficiency. APEC said its database of customers has been sabotaged since about 80% of its customers are not on the database.

APEC resorted to disconnecting some big customers that do not pay but disgruntled ALECO employees and officers have resorted to reconnecting them.

The ball and accountability is in the hands of NEA. Why are these things allowed to continue for years, to the detriment of paying customers and generation companies that are not paid on time.

In 2015, NEA reported that it lent a total of P2-billion loans to 51 ECs to finance their capital expenditure projects, rehabilitate their power distribution systems, among others.

NEA should perhaps consider slowly stepping out of the sector and push all the ECs to move towards full corporatization with full exposure to expansion or bankruptcy. The sector that needs protection should be the electricity consumers, not the ECs.

Consumers should be protected from expensive and unstable electricity as well as disconnection because the DU or EC has been disconnected by gencos and WESM for huge unpaid accounts.

The NEA, along with other government agencies in the energy sector, should look at the above table again, and try to find out why our electrification rate and electricity use are at the level of Pakistan and Mongolia instead of at the level of Thailand, Vietnam, and Malaysia.

Bienvenido Oplas, Jr. is the President of Minimal Government Thinkers and a Fellow of SEANET and Stratbase-ADRi.

-------------

See also:

BWorld 108, Rising feed in tariff (FIT) due to more wind-solar power, February 06, 2017 

BWorld 109, Asians' march to liberty and progress, February 16, 2017 

BWorld 110, Should we go federal or not? February 19, 2017