I am following closely developments regarding the Legacy Group and the financial fraud that they supposedly committed. While the Legacy case has numerous similarities to the Madoff (pronounced as Made off) Scheme in the US, there are striking differences.
The fraud basically begins with the promise of huge returns for deposits and investments. Both Legacy and Madoff ask their clients to trust them with their money, explain somehow that they are good financial investors and they can produce substantial returns.
In the case of the Legacy Group, they provided "double your money in 5 year scheme with free insurance." An interest rate of about 20% per year.This a substantial return given the microscopic 0.8% interest rate on regular ATM savings accounts (less 20% withholding tax). The amount of return should really be a cause of concern for potential depositors and investors. Government concessionaires of public utilities such as water, electricity and toll ways are only allowed a net return of around 8%.
The only other investment I know that produces 20% return are the 5-6 schemes of loan sharks (locally known as Bumbay). And people know that the loans made by loan sharks are very risky: no collateral, no credit investigations done, no receipts.
In the case of Bernie Madoff, he did not really promise huge returns but showed consistent annual returns of around 10%. Which is a substantial amount given the relatively low level of interest rates in the mid-2000s, at around 4% to 5%.
How were they able to produce huge returns? Through a ponzi or pyramid scheme! Returns on the investment of person 1 are paid by the investment of person 2 and 3. Returns on the investment of person 2 are paid with money from persons 4 and 5, and so on and so forth.
With huge returns, existing investors encourage their friends, relatives and office mates to invest also. As the number of new investors increase, the amount the perpetrator can stash away increases. It also benefits that fraud master if existing investors re-invest their money.The pyramid's base continue to grow until there are no more new investors or new money to invest. And then, the pyramid collapses.
In the case of Albania (a small country in Europe), the collapse of a nationwide Ponzi scheme led to the collapse of the financial system and the government. Riots ensued with more than 2,000 people killed. Similar riots led to several deaths due to the collapse of ponzi schemes in Latin American countries.
In the case of Legacy and Maddoff, the government halted their operations before the pyramid collapsed. Some people who were able to pull-out their money early enough actually made profit. Now, here are the differences. In the case of Madoff, people invested their money. As an investment, they knew that they can either gain or lose money. Because Madoff committed fraud, they can get some of their money once Madoff's assets are liquidated. Fraud was committed against the investors. Given the opportunity, these investors (which included charitable institutions and schools) would probably lynch Madoff to death.
In the case of the Legacy Group, they took in the money as deposits, not investments. As deposit, it is protected by the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corp. (PDIC). They made sure that the huge bulk of the deposits were under PhP250,000, the maximum insurance payment the PDIC can provide. Hence, in case the Legacy banks collapse, it is actually the PDIC (and the government) which loses money (and some people that deposited more than 250,000). Fraud was committed against the government. Some depositors were actually mad at the government for taking away their "high return-investments."
Perpetrators of ponzi schemes are intelligent people, to bad that they use their talents for fraud. Behind the Legacy Group is Celso Angeles, Jr., a graduate of Ateneo and AIM, the premier business schools in the Philippines. He worked in the US for almost 10 years where he probably mastered his craft. Bernie Madoff, on the other hand, was a former chairman of NASDAQ, one of US major stock exchanges. Both men probably used their excellent pedigrees to gain trust from potential investors.
Anyway, the Legacy Group's attempt was not the first time that the government was duped using the banking system. Once upon a time, there was a businessman who owned a small bank and a rapidly growing real estate company. To be able to sell houses in his subdivisions built on the hillsides of Rizal, he provided housing loans through his bank. In effect, he transferred money from depositors to his real estate company using his bank.
Eventually, home buyers were not able to pay their loans and the bank went bankrupt, but the business did not mourn. He already earned a lot from it. Most of the depositors were compensated by the PDIC. No cases were filed, no investigations were done. He is now a successful politician and will probably run in 2010.
That is bank fraud- RP Style.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Presidential Legacy
After George W. Bush became the 43rd US President in 2001, he said that his father's presidency (George H.W. Bush, the 41st President) failed, mainly because daddy-Bush was not reelected in 1992.
To win and re-win the presidency, Bush employed the services of Karl Rove, the engineer and mastermind behind the most vicious and dirtiest campaigns in modern US history. In 2001, Rove launched an attack on John McCain, Bush's strongest contender for nomination of the Republican Party. While campaigning for reelection against John Kerry in 2004, they discredited Kerry's service record during the Vietnam War including the multiple medals he received.
At the end of Baby-Bush's presidency, he is perceived as one of the most unpopular presidents ever. But baby-Bush can still be considered as an achiever compared to his dad. Daddy-Bush launched the Iraq War, Baby-Bush launched two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan. Daddy-Bush left the economy weak, Baby-Bush wrecked the economy into recession. Daddy-Bush failed to capture Saddam Hussein, Baby-Bush captured Saddam Hussein but failed to get Osama bin Laden. Other than that, Baby-Bush can boast of other legacies including his failures regarding Katrina, Guantanamo, sub-prime mortgages, financial market collapse, debt and deficit, and the list continues (no comparison for daddy-Bush).
With all the wrong intentions to become the president, baby-Bush's legacy is still debatable, whether he is "the worst president ever" or just "one of the worst" or "the worst so far".
Back home, with a more than a year left in the GMA administration, I wonder what her legacy would be. On the negative side, I think GMA is really not worse compared to past presidents. GMA failed in battling poverty, unemployment, homelessness, corruption, cronyism, nepotism and others, just like her predecessors. We still have a failed agrarian reform project, no centralized land registration bureau, cumbersome and inadequate social security programs, peace in Mindanao and the countryside is still elusive, just like when Aguinaldo proclaimed independence in 1898.
Nevertheless, Marcos definitely has the worst record in terms of corruption, human rights and temper. But it can be mainly due to the length of their presidencies. When GMA steps down in 2010, she has been president for 9 years, the second longest in Philippine history after Marcos' 21 years in power.
On the positive side, I think the following are GMA's greatest legacies (in no particular order):
1. E-VAT (Expanded Value-Added Tax Law raised the rate from 10% to 12% and widened its scope)
Th E-VAT helped diffuse the impending fiscal crisis the Philippines chronically faces. VAT is relatively easy to compute and collect. As a consumption tax, it follows the principle of taxing people based on what they take out of the economy instead on their contributions to the economy, i.e., VAT discourages consumption while income tax discourages work.
One of the greatest advantages of the E-VAT is its imposition on oil, a highly unpopular decision avoided by Aquino, Ramos and Estrada. VAT on oil is good for several reasons:
i. Richer people (private vehicle owners) pay more compared to poorer people (those who take public transport).
ii. It serves as a pollution tax, thus discourages the use of gas-guzzling SUVs and encourages walking, biking and the use of mass transport systems.
iii. It is the only way that the highly informal transportation industry is taxed (most public utility vehicle operators, drivers and owners don't pay income tax... but I still cannot use this argument when talking to a tip-asking-taxi-driver).
With the unpopular E-VAT already in place, the next president should personally thank GMA for it. Let us just hope that E-VAT will not be scrapped due to populist tendencies of politicians.
2. Holiday economics (the practice of moving national holidays to a Monday or Friday)
As a promdi, the holiday economics allowed me to spend more time with my family in Bulacan. It also helped me and my friends plan out-of-town trips, (we have visited numerous places and islands around the country). With tourism, income and wealth is distributed more equitably around the country. With tourism interlinked with numerous industries such as land, sea and air transport, food, hospitality and local handicraft, the multiplier effect is much much bigger. Aside from providing numerous jobs, tourism allows people from different places to interact and learn from each other.
3. RORO (Roll-in Roll-out) Facilities
As an archipelago with 7,107 islands (is the Kalayaan Group of Islands included in this count?), the transport of goods and services within the country is hampered by high cost and the lack of infrastructure. The RORO System lowers cost, minimizes spoilage of agricultural products, promotes tourism, increases productivity and brings people together. I really wonder why this project was not launched earlier by other administrations.
4. Bridges, Airports and Public Infrastructure
Going around the country, we saw the numerous infrastructure programs launched by this administration. Although these projects are typically overpriced due to multi-billion dollar worth of kickbacks, the final output is still very useful.
Aside from being an archipelago, each island is dotted with several rivers, lakes, mountains and hills, making transportation difficult. It is sometimes surprising how much improvement a new road can bring to far flung town. Bridges that connect communities to major markets, can lead to substantial increase in income for farmers and craftsmen. These were complimented with new and expanded expressway systems and airports.
I most excited with the new mass rail transit systems (North Rail, South Rail and new lines of MRT), that I hope can be finished much sooner.
5. Bayani Fernando's Metro Manila
Bayani Fernando at the MMDA is the longest serving member of GMA cabinet after his appointment in 2002. Although his tactics are controversial, his methods are unpopular and his decisions and gut instinct questionable, he has brought so much order into Metro Manila's chaotic nature.
Most of his projects were initially greeted with skepticism, protests and sometimes outright rejection. However, he pushes through with pure political will. Way back in college (early-2000s), I can distinctly remember the we were often stuck in traffic for 30 minutes or more in-front of Muñoz market in Quezon City. That is no longer the case, thanks to the much derided U-turn slots.
I don't agree with all of Bayani's projects, some are downright wasteful while some are obviously kickback-friendly. Bayani might be corrupt or Machiavellian, but he has done so much for Metro Manila that I hope he can be MMDA chairman forever. And I salute GMA for not axing the controversial, unpopular but very effective MMDA Chairman.
Now, if only he can remove those kotong traffic enforcers and implement a bus-scheme similar to those in Hong Kong and Singapore...
To win and re-win the presidency, Bush employed the services of Karl Rove, the engineer and mastermind behind the most vicious and dirtiest campaigns in modern US history. In 2001, Rove launched an attack on John McCain, Bush's strongest contender for nomination of the Republican Party. While campaigning for reelection against John Kerry in 2004, they discredited Kerry's service record during the Vietnam War including the multiple medals he received.
At the end of Baby-Bush's presidency, he is perceived as one of the most unpopular presidents ever. But baby-Bush can still be considered as an achiever compared to his dad. Daddy-Bush launched the Iraq War, Baby-Bush launched two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan. Daddy-Bush left the economy weak, Baby-Bush wrecked the economy into recession. Daddy-Bush failed to capture Saddam Hussein, Baby-Bush captured Saddam Hussein but failed to get Osama bin Laden. Other than that, Baby-Bush can boast of other legacies including his failures regarding Katrina, Guantanamo, sub-prime mortgages, financial market collapse, debt and deficit, and the list continues (no comparison for daddy-Bush).
With all the wrong intentions to become the president, baby-Bush's legacy is still debatable, whether he is "the worst president ever" or just "one of the worst" or "the worst so far".
Back home, with a more than a year left in the GMA administration, I wonder what her legacy would be. On the negative side, I think GMA is really not worse compared to past presidents. GMA failed in battling poverty, unemployment, homelessness, corruption, cronyism, nepotism and others, just like her predecessors. We still have a failed agrarian reform project, no centralized land registration bureau, cumbersome and inadequate social security programs, peace in Mindanao and the countryside is still elusive, just like when Aguinaldo proclaimed independence in 1898.
Nevertheless, Marcos definitely has the worst record in terms of corruption, human rights and temper. But it can be mainly due to the length of their presidencies. When GMA steps down in 2010, she has been president for 9 years, the second longest in Philippine history after Marcos' 21 years in power.
On the positive side, I think the following are GMA's greatest legacies (in no particular order):
1. E-VAT (Expanded Value-Added Tax Law raised the rate from 10% to 12% and widened its scope)
Th E-VAT helped diffuse the impending fiscal crisis the Philippines chronically faces. VAT is relatively easy to compute and collect. As a consumption tax, it follows the principle of taxing people based on what they take out of the economy instead on their contributions to the economy, i.e., VAT discourages consumption while income tax discourages work.
One of the greatest advantages of the E-VAT is its imposition on oil, a highly unpopular decision avoided by Aquino, Ramos and Estrada. VAT on oil is good for several reasons:
i. Richer people (private vehicle owners) pay more compared to poorer people (those who take public transport).
ii. It serves as a pollution tax, thus discourages the use of gas-guzzling SUVs and encourages walking, biking and the use of mass transport systems.
iii. It is the only way that the highly informal transportation industry is taxed (most public utility vehicle operators, drivers and owners don't pay income tax... but I still cannot use this argument when talking to a tip-asking-taxi-driver).
With the unpopular E-VAT already in place, the next president should personally thank GMA for it. Let us just hope that E-VAT will not be scrapped due to populist tendencies of politicians.
2. Holiday economics (the practice of moving national holidays to a Monday or Friday)
As a promdi, the holiday economics allowed me to spend more time with my family in Bulacan. It also helped me and my friends plan out-of-town trips, (we have visited numerous places and islands around the country). With tourism, income and wealth is distributed more equitably around the country. With tourism interlinked with numerous industries such as land, sea and air transport, food, hospitality and local handicraft, the multiplier effect is much much bigger. Aside from providing numerous jobs, tourism allows people from different places to interact and learn from each other.
3. RORO (Roll-in Roll-out) Facilities
As an archipelago with 7,107 islands (is the Kalayaan Group of Islands included in this count?), the transport of goods and services within the country is hampered by high cost and the lack of infrastructure. The RORO System lowers cost, minimizes spoilage of agricultural products, promotes tourism, increases productivity and brings people together. I really wonder why this project was not launched earlier by other administrations.
4. Bridges, Airports and Public Infrastructure
Going around the country, we saw the numerous infrastructure programs launched by this administration. Although these projects are typically overpriced due to multi-billion dollar worth of kickbacks, the final output is still very useful.
Aside from being an archipelago, each island is dotted with several rivers, lakes, mountains and hills, making transportation difficult. It is sometimes surprising how much improvement a new road can bring to far flung town. Bridges that connect communities to major markets, can lead to substantial increase in income for farmers and craftsmen. These were complimented with new and expanded expressway systems and airports.
I most excited with the new mass rail transit systems (North Rail, South Rail and new lines of MRT), that I hope can be finished much sooner.
5. Bayani Fernando's Metro Manila
Bayani Fernando at the MMDA is the longest serving member of GMA cabinet after his appointment in 2002. Although his tactics are controversial, his methods are unpopular and his decisions and gut instinct questionable, he has brought so much order into Metro Manila's chaotic nature.
Most of his projects were initially greeted with skepticism, protests and sometimes outright rejection. However, he pushes through with pure political will. Way back in college (early-2000s), I can distinctly remember the we were often stuck in traffic for 30 minutes or more in-front of Muñoz market in Quezon City. That is no longer the case, thanks to the much derided U-turn slots.
I don't agree with all of Bayani's projects, some are downright wasteful while some are obviously kickback-friendly. Bayani might be corrupt or Machiavellian, but he has done so much for Metro Manila that I hope he can be MMDA chairman forever. And I salute GMA for not axing the controversial, unpopular but very effective MMDA Chairman.
Now, if only he can remove those kotong traffic enforcers and implement a bus-scheme similar to those in Hong Kong and Singapore...
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Prophets of Doom and Economic Forecasts
A journalist once told me that I am her "Prophet of Doom." Apparently, some journalists call me if they wanted to paint a bleaker picture of the real estate market or as a counterweight to the often very rosy picture painted by real estate developers and companies.
Last year, I receive probably one call every week or two. As the global financial meltdown unfolded, journalists ask me what will happen to the local real estate market. I was also made to react on press releases by developers boasting that they remain resilient and optimistic despite the crisis.
Recently, calls from journalists are becoming more scarce. The last one I answered was a query on the proposed extension to the lapsed rent control law. Probably, it is no longer difficult to find doomsayers. It is now easier to find analysts, pundits and experts that forecasts that the country and real estate market will be in a tougher situation this year. It is probably time that I shelve my Prophet-of-Doom hat, even for just two or three years.
Predicting an economic crisis is not easy. Every now and then, people comment that nobody saw the crises coming; US housing market crisis, the subprime mortgage crisis, the financial meltdown and the global economic crisis. Not true. A lot of economists and experts have warned about it, including Nouriel Roubini (called Dr. Doom due to his pessimistic forecasts) and Nobel Laureates Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman (also New York Times Columnist). The problem was that nobody listened or very few people listen or those who listened didn't or couldn't do enough.
Or people who were in the position to deal with the impending crisis did not, could not or does not want to listen. Probably, due to ideological or philosophical reasons. Much worse if they did not want to listen because they were benefiting from the financially rewarding but structurally unsustainable system.
It is also possible that those who are willing to listen, asked the wrong people, making them clueless when the crisis struck.
From the point of view of an individual (buyer, investor, or developer), I understand why it is also difficult to listen to economists, especially when they foretell economic disasters.
First, most economists find it difficult to talk to a laymen (or journalists... and most of the time you'll ned up misquoted). Well, Roubini is really difficult to follow but Krugman is a bit easy to comprehend. In the Philippines, we have former NEDA secretary-generals and economics professors Cielito Habito and Winnie Monsod as regular columnists at the Inquirer (although Mareng Winnie often writes about things other than economics). Occasionally, former NEDA chief Cayetano Paderanga and former Ben Diokno writes for the BusinessWorld. A segment in BW called IDEA Corkboard also does a good job.
But these are all in expensive broadsheets. How about the majority of people who listens to the radio or reads tabloids (if they read at all)? So far, there are very few mediums where regular folks can get sound economic and financial advise.
A second problem is with the way economists talk. Good economists are either modest or ambiguous. They never claim that things will certainly happen. They explain both sides of the argument and leave the decision to the individual, leaving the individual, most of the time, more confused.
Q: Will the housing market go up or down?
A: These are the factors that can push the market up, Blah, Blah, Blah. On the other hand, here are factors that can pull it down, blah, blah, blah.
Q: So, is it going up or down?
A: It depends... on the magnitude of the effect of each of the factors, the time frame, and whether you are at the side of the winner or the loser, blah, blah, blah.
Third, the time frame also poses significant problems. Some things will happen in the short run, another thing can happen in the long run. But how long is the long run? (Keynes said "in the long run, we are all dead"). Most economists can indicate the direction where the market is heading, but they are reluctant to say exactly how fast the wind is blowing and how long the wind will blow.
During my first few years working as a property researcher, I followed The Economist on their their coverage of the global house price boom. Every year since 2004, they predicted that the market will crash. And the market did crash, in 2007 for some countries like the US, Ireland and Estonia and in 2008 for UK, Russia, New Zealand and Singapore.
If you are an investor, you followed The Economist and pulled out your property investment (i.e. sold your house you bought for the sole purpose of selling it again) in 2004, then you would have missed the enormous property gains in 2005 and 2006. Seeing your neighbor who made tons of money back then, you might feel sorry for the opportunity you missed and blame The Economist and other economists.
But then, your neighbor got more audacious and decided to borrow more money and invest more in housing in 2007. Suddenly, the crash that The Economist warned will come has finally arrived. Your neighbor is now broke and was forced to sell all his belongings while you remain secure with your finances. You congratulate yourself for following your instincts.
So, should you follow an advice from an economists? It depends, whether you are risk averse or a risk taker. It depends on how much you are willing to risk and how much you are going to secure for your family. It is really very tricky and an economists job is never easy.
Most of the time, you feel nobody is listening to you and when people finally do listen to you because your gloomy prediction has finally happened, you are not allowed to say "I told you, so!"
"An economist is an expert who will know tomorrow why the things he predicted yesterday didn't happen today." - Laurence J. Peter
Last year, I receive probably one call every week or two. As the global financial meltdown unfolded, journalists ask me what will happen to the local real estate market. I was also made to react on press releases by developers boasting that they remain resilient and optimistic despite the crisis.
Recently, calls from journalists are becoming more scarce. The last one I answered was a query on the proposed extension to the lapsed rent control law. Probably, it is no longer difficult to find doomsayers. It is now easier to find analysts, pundits and experts that forecasts that the country and real estate market will be in a tougher situation this year. It is probably time that I shelve my Prophet-of-Doom hat, even for just two or three years.
Predicting an economic crisis is not easy. Every now and then, people comment that nobody saw the crises coming; US housing market crisis, the subprime mortgage crisis, the financial meltdown and the global economic crisis. Not true. A lot of economists and experts have warned about it, including Nouriel Roubini (called Dr. Doom due to his pessimistic forecasts) and Nobel Laureates Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman (also New York Times Columnist). The problem was that nobody listened or very few people listen or those who listened didn't or couldn't do enough.
Or people who were in the position to deal with the impending crisis did not, could not or does not want to listen. Probably, due to ideological or philosophical reasons. Much worse if they did not want to listen because they were benefiting from the financially rewarding but structurally unsustainable system.
It is also possible that those who are willing to listen, asked the wrong people, making them clueless when the crisis struck.
From the point of view of an individual (buyer, investor, or developer), I understand why it is also difficult to listen to economists, especially when they foretell economic disasters.
First, most economists find it difficult to talk to a laymen (or journalists... and most of the time you'll ned up misquoted). Well, Roubini is really difficult to follow but Krugman is a bit easy to comprehend. In the Philippines, we have former NEDA secretary-generals and economics professors Cielito Habito and Winnie Monsod as regular columnists at the Inquirer (although Mareng Winnie often writes about things other than economics). Occasionally, former NEDA chief Cayetano Paderanga and former Ben Diokno writes for the BusinessWorld. A segment in BW called IDEA Corkboard also does a good job.
But these are all in expensive broadsheets. How about the majority of people who listens to the radio or reads tabloids (if they read at all)? So far, there are very few mediums where regular folks can get sound economic and financial advise.
A second problem is with the way economists talk. Good economists are either modest or ambiguous. They never claim that things will certainly happen. They explain both sides of the argument and leave the decision to the individual, leaving the individual, most of the time, more confused.
Q: Will the housing market go up or down?
A: These are the factors that can push the market up, Blah, Blah, Blah. On the other hand, here are factors that can pull it down, blah, blah, blah.
Q: So, is it going up or down?
A: It depends... on the magnitude of the effect of each of the factors, the time frame, and whether you are at the side of the winner or the loser, blah, blah, blah.
Third, the time frame also poses significant problems. Some things will happen in the short run, another thing can happen in the long run. But how long is the long run? (Keynes said "in the long run, we are all dead"). Most economists can indicate the direction where the market is heading, but they are reluctant to say exactly how fast the wind is blowing and how long the wind will blow.
During my first few years working as a property researcher, I followed The Economist on their their coverage of the global house price boom. Every year since 2004, they predicted that the market will crash. And the market did crash, in 2007 for some countries like the US, Ireland and Estonia and in 2008 for UK, Russia, New Zealand and Singapore.
If you are an investor, you followed The Economist and pulled out your property investment (i.e. sold your house you bought for the sole purpose of selling it again) in 2004, then you would have missed the enormous property gains in 2005 and 2006. Seeing your neighbor who made tons of money back then, you might feel sorry for the opportunity you missed and blame The Economist and other economists.
But then, your neighbor got more audacious and decided to borrow more money and invest more in housing in 2007. Suddenly, the crash that The Economist warned will come has finally arrived. Your neighbor is now broke and was forced to sell all his belongings while you remain secure with your finances. You congratulate yourself for following your instincts.
So, should you follow an advice from an economists? It depends, whether you are risk averse or a risk taker. It depends on how much you are willing to risk and how much you are going to secure for your family. It is really very tricky and an economists job is never easy.
Most of the time, you feel nobody is listening to you and when people finally do listen to you because your gloomy prediction has finally happened, you are not allowed to say "I told you, so!"
"An economist is an expert who will know tomorrow why the things he predicted yesterday didn't happen today." - Laurence J. Peter
Monday, January 5, 2009
Best and Worst Jobs in the US (Economist at 11)
In an article posted in the Wall Street Journal, these are the best and worst jobs in the US according to a recent study:
It is a very interesting list, but it seems highly unlikely to be applicable to the Philippines. Among the top 20 jobs, more than half are related to natural sciences. In the US where Science and Math education is valued greatly, NERDS RULE!!!
Most of the people on the top-20 list would likely be college professors and/or researchers. In the Philippines, most college professors and/or scientists are overworked and underpaid.
Economists at no. 11, how about that? Well, most economists are underpaid unless they are UP Econ professors with lucrative consultancy projects... but they are still overworked. But there are also not-underpaid economists in Financial Institutions, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas and multilateral institutions. Probably, economist will be ranked higher in the Philippines.
Accountant at number 10. Wow!?! Tell that to the people at SGV.
My friend who graduated with a Sociology degree who is now a Project Manager while holding an Urban Planning License will be interested to see Sociologist at number 8. Aside from Randy David, I actually do not know any other sociologists.
Philosopher at no. 12, I am not sure if there are living, working Philosophers outside colleges and universities. Or who would actually put Philosopher as a Job Title? Historians (7) in the Philippines are mostly government workers and/or teachers, most likely they are also underpaid and overworked.
Paralegal Assistant at 17...hmmm... I wonder what is the rank of lawyers (probably close to Politicians and Lobbyists). I can't imagine how being an assistant to a lawyer be a wonderful, rewarding job... and how being a parole officer be a better one (at 14).
With the 20 worst jobs, most of them are self-explanatory. I would not want to be a nuclear contamination technician. But its is interesting that most of the jobs that goes to our OFWs are included at the bottom twenty.
If you are wondering what a roustabout (193) is... I looked at the all-knowing wikipedia and here is the definition:
A roustabout is a labourer typically performing temporary, unskilled work. The term has traditionally been used to refer to traveling-circus workers or oil rig workers.
| The Best | The Worst |
| 1. Mathematician | 200. Lumberjack |
| 2. Actuary | 199. Dairy Farmer |
| 3. Statistician | 198. Taxi Driver |
| 4. Biologist | 197. Seaman |
| 5. Software Engineer | 196. EMT |
| 6. Computer Systems Analyst | 195. Garbage Collector |
| 7. Historian | 194. Welder |
| 8. Sociologist | 193. Roustabout |
| 9. Industrial Designer | 192. Ironworker |
| 10. Accountant | 191. Construction Worker |
| 11. ECONOMIST | 190. Mail Carrier |
| 12. Philosopher | 189. Sheet Metal Worker |
| 13. Physicist | 188. Auto Mechanic |
| 14. Parole Officer | 187. Butcher |
| 15. Meteorologist | 186. Nuclear Decontamination Tech |
| 16. Medical Laboratory Technician | 185. Nurse (LN) |
| 17. Paralegal Assistant | 184.Painter |
| 18. Computer Programmer | 183. Child Care Worker |
| 19. Motion Picture Editor | 182. Firefighter |
| 20. Astronomer | 181. Brick Layer |
It is a very interesting list, but it seems highly unlikely to be applicable to the Philippines. Among the top 20 jobs, more than half are related to natural sciences. In the US where Science and Math education is valued greatly, NERDS RULE!!!
Most of the people on the top-20 list would likely be college professors and/or researchers. In the Philippines, most college professors and/or scientists are overworked and underpaid.
Economists at no. 11, how about that? Well, most economists are underpaid unless they are UP Econ professors with lucrative consultancy projects... but they are still overworked. But there are also not-underpaid economists in Financial Institutions, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas and multilateral institutions. Probably, economist will be ranked higher in the Philippines.
Accountant at number 10. Wow!?! Tell that to the people at SGV.
My friend who graduated with a Sociology degree who is now a Project Manager while holding an Urban Planning License will be interested to see Sociologist at number 8. Aside from Randy David, I actually do not know any other sociologists.
Philosopher at no. 12, I am not sure if there are living, working Philosophers outside colleges and universities. Or who would actually put Philosopher as a Job Title? Historians (7) in the Philippines are mostly government workers and/or teachers, most likely they are also underpaid and overworked.
Paralegal Assistant at 17...hmmm... I wonder what is the rank of lawyers (probably close to Politicians and Lobbyists). I can't imagine how being an assistant to a lawyer be a wonderful, rewarding job... and how being a parole officer be a better one (at 14).
With the 20 worst jobs, most of them are self-explanatory. I would not want to be a nuclear contamination technician. But its is interesting that most of the jobs that goes to our OFWs are included at the bottom twenty.
If you are wondering what a roustabout (193) is... I looked at the all-knowing wikipedia and here is the definition:
A roustabout is a labourer typically performing temporary, unskilled work. The term has traditionally been used to refer to traveling-circus workers or oil rig workers.
Driving in the Philippines
I have spent the holiday season driving...
From QC to Makati.
From Baliuag (Bulacan) to the Fort (Taguig) and back.
From the Fort to QC.
From QC to Makati, to Better Living (Parañaque), to Cabuyao (Laguna), to Laiya, San Juan, Batangas then back to QC.
From QC to the Fort, then to Baliuag and Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija.
From QC to Cabuyao and back.
I passed through the SkyWay, the South Luzon Expressway, the Southern Tagalog Arterial Road (STAR) Tollway, and the North Luzon Express Way (I haven't been to the new Subic-Clark-Tarlac expressway).
During this driving mania, I have driven three types of vehicles, a Toyota Innova, a Honda Civic and a converted Toyota Hi-Ace (with the wiper and light switches reversed). The first two were manual, the third was automatic. It can be very confusing shifting from manual to automatic.
Driving in the Philippines is no easy feat. I have met a lot of people (foreigners and balikbayans) who are willing and able to drive abroad but not in the Philippines. Actually driving in the Philippines makes Grand Theft Auto boring. In a video game, you can always save and restart your game. You can get cheat codes and practice your maneuver.
In actual driving, game over is really game over. The risks are all too real, a bump or a scratch on a borrowed car is not easy to forgive, a confiscated license (unless you are willing to pay bribe money) is difficult to retrieve, or an accident leading to a loss of limbs or life is never an option.
One thing for sure, driving in the Philippines is never a dull moment. You have to watch out for potholes, swerving buses that move as if they are little motorcycles, motorcycles that ride a family (dad and mom with children at the front and back) also swerving as if they are buses, jeeps that suddenly stops to drop off or pick up passengers also swerving to overtake another jeep, and tricycles that tries to match the jeepneys ability to swerve. Drivers must be able to calculate and adjust (can I overtake a trike- bus- trike combo? how about a tractor- bus- trike- bus combo?). The vehicle must be able to speed up and slow down in a moment. The driver must also be able to battle lack of sleep, stress, fatigue and pesky backseat drivers (It is always easier to drive when you are at the backseat).
And if you think only a fool is willing to drive in the Philippines, wait until you drive along EDSA. Aside from the dangerous combination of city buses, provincial buses, taxis and fxs, there are yellow lanes, u-turn slots, fly-overs, underpasses and bonus MMDA traffic enforcers (or any of the city traffic enforcers like the yellow boys of Makati) waiting for every chance to get some money. There should be a game on EDSA driving. I know a lot of people who can drive in the provinces but not in Metro Manila.
Here are some tips on how to keep your sanity if you have to drive in the Philippines:
1. Prepare to press your horn (release that anger, bully that bus, blow your horn, honestly, I feel cannot drive a hornless car)
2. Prepare to curse (if those two buses suddenly swerve into your lane and your horn cannot do anything, release that anger, curse. Cursing can actually be therapeutic for drivers. But please stop cursing once you get off your car.)
3. Prepare to get lost. Driving involves skills, memory and a lot of instincts. It is okay to get lost as long as you have enough fuel, you are not late for your appointment, you will not be apprehended for entering a one way street and you are not being nagged by backseat drivers.
Wishing you all a smooth sailing 2009!
From QC to Makati.
From Baliuag (Bulacan) to the Fort (Taguig) and back.
From the Fort to QC.
From QC to Makati, to Better Living (Parañaque), to Cabuyao (Laguna), to Laiya, San Juan, Batangas then back to QC.
From QC to the Fort, then to Baliuag and Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija.
From QC to Cabuyao and back.
I passed through the SkyWay, the South Luzon Expressway, the Southern Tagalog Arterial Road (STAR) Tollway, and the North Luzon Express Way (I haven't been to the new Subic-Clark-Tarlac expressway).
During this driving mania, I have driven three types of vehicles, a Toyota Innova, a Honda Civic and a converted Toyota Hi-Ace (with the wiper and light switches reversed). The first two were manual, the third was automatic. It can be very confusing shifting from manual to automatic.
Driving in the Philippines is no easy feat. I have met a lot of people (foreigners and balikbayans) who are willing and able to drive abroad but not in the Philippines. Actually driving in the Philippines makes Grand Theft Auto boring. In a video game, you can always save and restart your game. You can get cheat codes and practice your maneuver.
In actual driving, game over is really game over. The risks are all too real, a bump or a scratch on a borrowed car is not easy to forgive, a confiscated license (unless you are willing to pay bribe money) is difficult to retrieve, or an accident leading to a loss of limbs or life is never an option.
One thing for sure, driving in the Philippines is never a dull moment. You have to watch out for potholes, swerving buses that move as if they are little motorcycles, motorcycles that ride a family (dad and mom with children at the front and back) also swerving as if they are buses, jeeps that suddenly stops to drop off or pick up passengers also swerving to overtake another jeep, and tricycles that tries to match the jeepneys ability to swerve. Drivers must be able to calculate and adjust (can I overtake a trike- bus- trike combo? how about a tractor- bus- trike- bus combo?). The vehicle must be able to speed up and slow down in a moment. The driver must also be able to battle lack of sleep, stress, fatigue and pesky backseat drivers (It is always easier to drive when you are at the backseat).
And if you think only a fool is willing to drive in the Philippines, wait until you drive along EDSA. Aside from the dangerous combination of city buses, provincial buses, taxis and fxs, there are yellow lanes, u-turn slots, fly-overs, underpasses and bonus MMDA traffic enforcers (or any of the city traffic enforcers like the yellow boys of Makati) waiting for every chance to get some money. There should be a game on EDSA driving. I know a lot of people who can drive in the provinces but not in Metro Manila.
Here are some tips on how to keep your sanity if you have to drive in the Philippines:
1. Prepare to press your horn (release that anger, bully that bus, blow your horn, honestly, I feel cannot drive a hornless car)
2. Prepare to curse (if those two buses suddenly swerve into your lane and your horn cannot do anything, release that anger, curse. Cursing can actually be therapeutic for drivers. But please stop cursing once you get off your car.)
3. Prepare to get lost. Driving involves skills, memory and a lot of instincts. It is okay to get lost as long as you have enough fuel, you are not late for your appointment, you will not be apprehended for entering a one way street and you are not being nagged by backseat drivers.
Wishing you all a smooth sailing 2009!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)