You are on page 1of 7

AQUINO-DUTERTE ECONOMY DISCORD

From one administration to another, the public segregates one over the
other. Like a merchant who advertises his wares, every presidency has its own
gimmick on nation building and it served as their legacy during their reign.

To be more specific, hereunder is the comparison of the economic status


as to Inflation, Educational System, International Relations and Employment under
the leaderships of former President Aquino and of incumbent President Duterte.
Data herein suggests the hallmark made by said administrations on the
abovementioned economic facets; consequently, such hallmarks will be
subsequently elucidated.

Aquino Administration Duterte Administration


Inflation Highest at 4.1% Currently at 6.7%
Educational System Focused on Technical Focuses on State
Education and Skills Universities and Colleges
Development Authority
International Relations Maintained Widened
Employment Focused on the Private Focuses on the Public
Sector (Government) Sector

Inflation

Inflation connotes an impinging impression to the public as it serves as a


sign that prices of commodities will shoot up. By definition, it is the long-term rise
in the prices of goods and services caused by devaluation of currency.

While it is perceived as a negative event, the same is indicative that the


economy is on the right track. For one, inflation is caused by an increase in the
circulating money in the market. Second, inflation is caused by an increase in the
wages or salaries within an economic system. Lastly, inflation is caused by the
increasing exposure to foreign market places.

The Aquino administration had a good job in maintaining the inflation rate
at a minimum. It claimed that the economy was blossoming and the public rode
well to it as we did not feel the effects of the 4.1% inflation rate when it struck the
highest at that time. Referring back to the causes of inflation, we can deduce
that the money circulating in the market was stagnant and no further supply was
added thereto, that the wages or salaries remained untouched nor increased,
and that our economy was less exposed to foreign market places since we only
have limited foreign economic partners. Overall, we can assume that there are
no perceivable dramatic improvements in the economy during the previous
administration.

Public outrage manifested when the inflation rate during the Duterte
administration plummeted to 6.7% this September and is further expected to go
as high as 6.8% in the succeeding months. This only means that the value of our
money in the current administration waters down since we actually now have a
lot of it. Nevertheless, this must be an acceptable occurrence in our present
economy as since it suggests that there are dramatic and drastic changes at
hand. First, it is worthy to note that the current administration pushed for the tax
exemption of the employees earning less than Php 250,000 per year;
consequently, it raised the take home pay of employees as their wages or salaries
had an increase. In effect, the additional take home pay by these employees
actually added up to the circulating money in the market. Second, the current
administration broadens its economic horizon when it amplified its international
relations. In effect, the Philippines increasingly exposed itself to foreign market
places.

Indeed, inflation affects us acutely when we are not able to buy the same
goods and services at its conventional price but it would affect and hurt the
general design of economic growth if we continue to resist on this change. We
are exactly where we want our economy to be. To compare our economy to a
child under growth and development, it would take time until it reaches its full
maturity.

Educational System

With the revision of our current educational system, it made itself parallel
with the educational system abroad. The K-12 Program was a major stride in the
Philippine education as it gave Filipinos the chance to study anywhere in the
world without the hassle of starting back from scratch due to curriculum
incompatibilities. But by looking at it deeply, the intent of incorporating the
technical skills education was the paramount consideration in this program. The
introduction of the senior high school introduced the strands of their
specializations, to wit: (1) Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
(STEM); (2) Accountancy, Business, and Management (ABM); (3) Humanities and
Social Sciences (HUMSS); (4) General Academics (GAS); and (5) Technical,
Vocational, and Livelihood (TVL). The fifth being the flesh of the educational
system revision.

The basic question that needs to be resolved here is, what is the relationship
between the educational system and the economy? There could be no direct
response to this but this can be indirectly attributed to the most vital resource in
business administration – Manpower.
The Aquino administration highlighted its legacy when it made efforts to
revise the traditional educational system into a competitive one. They have
mentioned that high school graduates are occupation- or work-ready without a
college education nor degree. For its achievement, the Technical Education and
Skills Development Authority (TESDA) spearheaded the conduct of the TVL strand
with the senior high schools all throughout the country. Further, TESDA courses
were also offered to universities, colleges, and private institutions so as to cater all
Filipinos interested therein; consequently, the funding thereto was
correspondingly increased and allocated. Currently, this approach had been
effective since it raised employment of skilled workers domestically and abroad.
This also benefits and gives alternative to individuals not capable of sending
themselves for a college education to eventually earn a living.

On the other hand, the Duterte administration addressed concerns on


education by instigating a revision the current laws and implementing rules and
regulations for State Universities and Colleges (SUCs). Despite the upsurge of
manpower and human resources made possible by the skills education and
development by the previous administration, the demand for college education
and its subsequent professional qualifications remained towering. Here, the
current administration made efforts to make college education feasible without
the burden financial difficulties and hindrances as it made a free-tuition fee
program to several SUCs nationwide. Similar to the Aquino administration’s intent
of providing the country with sufficient skilled manpower, the Duterte
administration has a potential to provide the country a pool of eligible
professionals that will surely play necessary roles in the economy.

To compare the above actions, the latter would be susceptible to critiques


as it only touches on the SUCs. Be it of information that the government has no
control over private universities and colleges for them to be subjected to a free-
tuition program as those private institutions are privately owned by private
individuals, while the government can only control institutions owned by it – as in
this case, the SUCs.

International Relations

No man is an island. This mantra has been long standing not only in human
and individual relations but also to international relations. With the passing of the
reins of governance to a new one, it should carry with it the responsibility of
broadening the channels and connections a country must have. Over the past
decades, the Philippine-American bond was at its finest and had been
maintained and fortified by several administrations until it reached its twilight
when the current administration came.
During the Aquino Administration, the Philippines and America had a
servant-master relationship. Philippines being the former and America, as usual,
being the latter. This kind of relationship had built Philippine dependence to Uncle
Sam. To note, Aquino Administration had strengthened our ties with America and
unknowingly weaken the potential ties with other nations, especially when the
Philippines entered into a territorial dispute with China over the islands at the West
Philippine Sea. Figuratively speaking, we continually sought refuge to others for
help and shelter even if we have the capabilities to solve such problem on our
own. In effect, we are somehow morally bound to pay debts of gratitude over
countries which extended their help to us, and in further effect, we only had a
ceiling in terms of improving our economy since we are restrained to and
exclusively bound with a limited array of international partners for economic
growth.

The tides had changed when President Duterte took control over the reins
of administration. On the advent of his incumbency, he had strong convictions
over China’s claims on the disputed territory and had disgusts and words to say
against America – such actions that could have insinuated a World War and
would have imperiled the Philippines. But it turned out that we had fostered
another partnership in China and eradicated the once hostile bond in between.
Russia also welcomed the Philippines as its new ally alongside China. To note,
Philippine relations as to both nations has never been this intimate as compared
to the past administration; moreover, America made efforts to restore its ties with
the Philippines as if we play a vital role with them. To this effect, we have wider
horizons as to enriching our economy due to the broader connections we have.

Ultimately, the economy of a country would soar high even without the aid
of others, but it would definitely soar the highest when backed up by
economically stable countries. In analogy, a person can enrich himself through
his own efforts, but he can attain the pinnacle with the aid of others. Indeed, no
man is an island.

Employment

With the passing of several administrations, Filipinos had been urging the
government to create and open stable jobs that would at least bring food on
their table. To heed this demand, previous administrations made efforts to provide
means of living available to its people but to no avail, it reneged on its promises
of employment. Indeed, it is easier said than done.

But what makes employment so sensitive to address roots on its category.


Employment in the private sector is one thing, while employment in the public or
government sector is another. The Aquino Administration failed to deliver on its
promise, and actually worsen labor practices since he continually tapped the
private sector – the sector which the government has a lesser control. Violations
on the right to security of tenure had infested the Philippine economy as private
sectors were compelled to provide jobs to the public where in fact they actually
cannot. The employment being offered in this administration is indeed countless
but definitely short-lived as employees is at the mercy of a 5-month contract.

On the other hand, Duterte Administration heeded on this challenge in an


unusual way. Many administrations had passed but they did not touch into
increasing the quota of hiring government employees, but the Duterte
administration did otherwise – it opened its doors and the assurance of security of
tenure is right at its doorstep. As of writing, the government offers careers as
uniformed personnel e.g. Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National
Police, Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, Bureau of Corrections, Bureau
of Fire Protection, and many other related agencies. Upon first glance, it would
be a bland of an employment as it pertains to non-popular careers, but if
scrutinized, a person entering said careers would earn a remuneration of at least
Php 29,000 and at most Php 40,000 per month.

In considering the viability of employment being guaranteed by the


government, one must consider the security of tenure. While the Aquino
administration offered hundreds of thousands of jobs in the private sector,
employees remained at risk for termination at the end of their contract. Contrarily,
the Duterte Administration offered only tens of thousands of jobs in the public
sector, but employees are assured to enjoy the full benefits of employment.
A MAKESHIFT FROM MACROECONOMICS TO MANAGERIAL ECONOMICS

The makeshift from Macroeconomics to Managerial Economics is favorable


and is more acceptable from a student viewpoint.

The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) has been instrumental in


enhancing and amplifying the college curriculum, its accompanying subject and
courses so as to provide a more meaningful approaches to education. The triad
of Knowledge, Skills, and Attitude served as guidelines whether or not a student
had really acquired the needed knowledge in a specific expertise enabling him
to perform certain skills with due diligence for a sound purpose - to put this in
question form, did the student practiced what he preached?

Brushing aside the above statement, the study of a certain field of discipline
would render it stupid and foolish if the student does not know the relevance of a
subject matter he undertakes. All his efforts on that subject matter remains
nugatory as it creates no impact onto his dealings in life. To put this also in question
form, how can it help me in reality?

Before touching on the above statements, what is it in Macroeconomics


that prompted the shift to Managerial Economics?

Macroeconomics deals primarily with the study and determination of


economic activity as a whole, while Managerial Economics concentrates on the
application of the tools of economic analysis in business management decision-
making, further, it focuses on: (1) concept of profit and wealth maximization; (2)
price determination and characteristics of the different markets; and (3)
government intervention and regulation in the market economy.

Terse and clear, Macroeconomics purely deals with Knowledge, while


Managerial Economics deals all with the Knowledge, Skills, and Attitude to be
harnessed by a student. Hence, the latter indubitably weighs more than
Macroeconomics.

To put more meaning on the question statements above, those suggest


that education, in general, must be a bow and arrow to hunt down prey and not
just merely an idea that one must hunt in order to survive. In the study of
Macroeconomics, it merely presents and describes the factors influencing the
economic activity of a country. Simply put, it is a bland presentation of statistics
and lifeless terminologies. Whereas Managerial Economics provides us not only
the statistics and basic definitions but the necessary actions to address
contingencies in the economy; moreover, the latter touches on the concept and
wealth maximization which, at contemporary, is needed not only by students but
by the public at large. Albeit the fact that the public at large earns its income by
means of salary or wage, the same alone may not suffice to their needs especially
to those families having more than usual members and dependents. Aside from
employment, the public at large must delve into microbusinesses, or even in large-
scale business if with substantial capital, having the Knowledge, Skills, and Attitude
from the study of Managerial Economics as their armaments.

Ultimately, the Commission on Higher Education’s issuance of a new


curriculum having Managerial Economics in lieu of Macroeconomics must be
leaned on with unanimous favor as it would provide the students the needed
remedies available in the future should contingencies pertaining to economy
arises.