Candidates woo the C, D, E voters, pledge more social welfare ang aid

It is more fun criticizing

Rizal Philippines

As is the usual wooing strategy, the Presidential candidates  have promised ayuda:   one of them a P200 Billion ayuda, more free education, lower priced goods.  That is the easiest way to say but funding those promises is another story.  The additional taxes would be another matter and the voters to be affected would surely be alienated.   One even proposed of selling govt properties to fund the welfare The CDE, Socio economic class compromise 70% of the total population  (about 49 million) and hence it is better to appeal to the sense of free and entitlement of the many of the populace

Some of the promises if done would make the country a socialist one, and /or the country would resort to massive foreign and local borrowing (We are criticizing the current administration for trillion additional debt.  

It is very usual that candidates (even the Democrats) to profess balanced budget, lower taxes, but as soon as they get elected run afoul with reality and then increase taxes, or water down their promises.  

Is social welfare the best way to run the govt?

It is more fun criticizing

There is a question regarding buying a one million pesos car, and or giving this away to people as charity?

There is a nagging question -  why spend billions of dollars in space exploration while hordes of people lack basic services.

A businessman answered the first question and said that buying a car generates jobs and souruce of income in buying a car -  the car company,, the dealers, the suppliers of the car assembler, the after sales people who benefit from the car - gasoline, tire companies  spare companies.  This is much much more beneficiaries vs the social welfare beneficiaries who burn the cash for the one million to perish.  Even charities are thinking stopping the cash burn by being social enterprise.

So when a candidate who sold a mall, owned by the city govt said he is willing to sell even the city hall to feed the hordes of poor and needy may have exceeded the  limits of good smart sense of running the govt.  We all hated the administration which did nothing but sell govt assets.  There is such thing as ways and means revenue generation, borrowing vs simply consuming assets of the  govt to feed  the  poor.

The statement is populist and intends to get votes but does not mean good governance and or sound leadership as a nations leader.   

https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/03/28/22/isko-ready-to-sell-idle-govt-assets-to-address-hunger-if-elected

https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/03/28/22/isko-ready-to-sell-idle-govt-assets-to-address-hunger-if-elected

Is PH fast becoming a FREE COUNTRY - social welfare state?

It is more fun criticizing

Rizal Philippines
September 25, 2017

This post think that the country is becoming a free country.  A social welfare country.  Where many things are free and may be this will disincentivize the peoples desire to be disciplined to be in hard work,  And maybe to encourage them to be lazy.  Marami nang libre:

       1.  The 3 c for those without jobs
       2.  The free tuition for SU and colleges
       3.  And now a  young congressman from Davao seeks to end poverty

Siyempre maraming bibilib diyan may buy in.  Kasi libre.  As we saw the throngs that gathered in Los Banos for the alleged return of Marcos wealth.

But where do we get the money?   All ready the govt the Treasury is running into deficit.  Again the taxpayers who sweat blood and tears will bear the burden.  And how about the free loaders?

Kung US kaya nilang mag deficit,eh hindi naman ganong kalakas ang economy natin.  Even US is finding difficulty in legislating for the continued US public debt which may be all ready in $20 trillion.  Mostly because US has become a welfare state too with the health care, the food stamps, the subsidies etc.

Venezuela, an oil rich country is running into trouble, may be a civil war, because it became a welfare country.  Even its oil revenues can not keep up giving free loads to its people.  It is now into deep shit,and the peoples conditions are bad.  That is why there is an on going protest.  Baka mangyari sa PH. The land of the free

                                         Trouble in Venezuela, gutom at hirap matapos nag enjoy
                                        ng free;  nabankcupt ang govt; people loot a supermarket
                                                    because they have nothing to eat

Can politicians really deliver promise to save citizens from poverty?

Social and political criticisms

Rizal PHL  May 17, 2013

The election is over and looking back the winners won on slogans of protecting the poor, and lifting them from poverty.

The leading senatorial lady elect candidate just did that -  promising to take care of the poor.  How noble and how stately promises.

But can they really do it?

Erap went for motto, "Erap para sa mahihirap" and easily won.

But poverty is a complex situation in life.  The government is not equipped to solve the personal problems of citizens.  The responsibility to exist and survive and be successful belongs to the individual and not government.

To pretend that the public sector leadership can solve the problem is a deception if not an outright lie. Yet many are gullible enough to believe.

If we are to solve poverty through  budgets and social welfare legislature, then we simply defer the inevitable and states are ill equipped to administer dole outs and social welfare.   There is simply too little resources to feed millions of hungry mouths.  If at all activists hate and wants to remove politics of patronage.  Ie the feudal landlord relationships, where feudal landlords dictate the lives of their fiefdom.  Nothing is achieved to repair/recast the system and the whole cycle of poverty remains.

In European countries and USA, the socialist leaning of governments to fight poverty through state welfare, without corresponding productive and adaptive capabilities has resulted in financial bankruptcies of states.  Their governments borrowed heavily to fund social programs:   health, education and welfare, resulting in massive billions of debt that governments can not hope to pay.

Even more so, how can you not charge taxes and still finance the social welfare, and/or service the huge debts?

The other alternative/options would be to fund this from:   PCSO, lotto, or contributions by contractors, lobbyists, other vested interests,  and /or jueteng.  And eventually, the politician would be labelled as corrupt.

Are the promises too simplistic, not well understood by those who mouthed them, or they just took the gamble. 

At the end of the day, they would be unable to keep their promises and be junked later in the next election