Recently I had an interesting conversation here with Steven, a frequent and valued reader. He an I have a bit of a difference of opinion on the role of government in a country’s day yo day life. here’s an excerpt:
@Steven: Hi Steven. I guess we need a dictionary as well, because my sense of your comment is you confuse my advocacy of government workers being strong in their charter to actually perform their duties with what seems to me to be a different slant
Where I feel we will always differ significantly is in areas like the belief that ‘the government’ has a role in providing infrastructure. I feel that is very much an outmoded way of looking at it.
So what seems to be the underlying issue here and just what might be a proper role of government?
The role of national government is to keep the peace, guard the borders and get the hell out of the way of people who want to earn a living …or so I opine.
Now, what in the world has all this to do with the Philippines? The whole conversation between Steven and I got started over the role of the Philippine government micro-managing right down to the point of telling an individual Jeepney owner, the epitome of an independent small businessman how much he could charge for fares. The exact type of action which drives up fares and hurts the very poor people that the lawmakers ‘say’ they are out to protect.]
Let’s look for a moment at just a few things that _do_ work in the Philippines. Good toll roads in Luzon … private enterprise that took over former government boondoggles.
Hospitals. Government hospitals are scary. The first thing the reception staff will ask you when you arrive at one and appear to be able to pay for care is, “Sir, why don’t you go to a private hospital”? been there, done that. There are good hospitals here in the Philippines … but they are private enterprise.
Postal Service … there’s a prime example to anyone who grew up in a country with a strong postal system. Surely the role government is to provide an effective, cheap mail service, isn’t it? Well, I don’t know how it works in Australia, but I know how it works in the USA … not nearly as well as it should, and not nearly as cheap as it ought to be. Here in the Philippines there is a postal system … in nearly two years I have seen our local mail carrier twice. How does routine mail service get carried out … things like my monthly bills? Again, private enterprise courier services which are cheap and actually reach more parts of the Philippines than the government mail service does. It also makes a profit and pays taxes instead of sucking the life out of poor taxpayers.
So next time you make the pronouncement that ‘the government should do something, stop and think if that is really what you want or if you’re just frustrated because private enterprise hasn’t yet filled the gap.
(by the way, I hope this discussion isn’t going to just die here between a Yank and an Aussie, neither one of whom is an expert on each other’s country .. are there no US folks who have their own doubts about the role of ‘the government’?)
G'day Dave,
Let the debate begin, our postal service here in Australia is actually very good. All government services here are run very much like a private enterprise system, even defence is run very much on best business practises, naturally it is not there to make money, but on doing things efficiently as possible.
I was in defence for over 25 years and have seen the vast improvement this has made to the defence and the public service.
Nearly all government projects are done by private enterprise here through a tendering system. It works very well and is very fair.
As for the hospital system it has its faults, but I know if I get sick I do not have to show a credit card to get into hospital or go into bankrupcy if it is really bad.
Australia is a very large country with a very small population so efficiency is paramount. I am not saying Australia is perfect, but other countries can certainly learn from Australia's way of doing things.
I know with the Philippine mail system I am better bringing my love letters with me when I fly up in October as I know my lady friend will get them, also she will get them with a smile.
Any dealing I have with the Philippine public service, they always look at you with an upside down smile.
So I hope our debates keep going and more join in, there is nothing wrong in expressing ones opinion or beliefs.
Steven
Dave: I like your article. It seems that the older I get, the less faith I have in government to solve any ills in society. One of my heroes is Milton Friedman. My boss, however, said: "Never has someone received so much accolade for being completely WRONG!"
I do business with both the Australian and US government (Along with many, many others) and see first hand the successes and failures in each one. Regarding the Philippine government, this country is still going through a painful transition from colonialism. Huh????? That's right. A colleague in India told me this: "We are very aware of the problems here… You must remember that India has only been independent for 60 years. The States have had over 200 years to sort things out!" The parallels with the RP are striking. Similar problems, none of which carry easy solutions. In India, they are just starting to solve some of these problems (Like poverty). If you look back on American history, Australian history, Canadian history, or countless others, most modern nations have had to go through this painful process and the RP is no different. Corruption and inefficiency? Think back on Boss Tweed or the first Mayor Daley (Or second one, for that matter). What about the TSA?
Hi Dave – I'll sum up my feelings in one sentence:
"The Government that governs least, governs best."
I don't know for sure who coined that phrase. I find various sources giving credit to Thomas Paine, and others to Thomas Jefferson.
@Bob: Absolutely, Bob. I think I used it recently and like you, could not find an authoritative attribution, but whomever uttered it first (or last) will earn a drink from me in any bar. You know this thread got started from a post you made about the government setting Jeeney fares. Just think what Jeepney fares would be today if the government stayed out of the way. Higher? Lower? Who knows, but at least the passengers would be paying and the drivers living on a fair market fare, not one set by some bureaucrat who signs the document and then drives home in the back seat of his chauffeur-driven Mercedes (or "Beans" as it would be called here).
@John Miele: Hi John. Not really sure how Friedman was wrong in any consistent manner, but hey it's your boss, not mine, so you have to live with him 😉
I think you may be quite perceptive with the colonial holdover thing. Many time the people in power seem to doubt thier power, or continually look for other's opinions to back them up before reaching a decision.
Not long ago I was watching live coverage of a hearing in the Philippine Senate … investigating and alleged "Overpricing" matter (which is not overpricing at all, it's a formal 'code name' for bribery, a word almost never used in Philippine English).
The guy testifying was droning on and on so I wasn't listening close until I heard someone question the legality of somehting he said.
The fellow stood up straight, looked his questioner in the eye and said, "Of course it is legal, the US Supreme Court ruled so in xxx vs yyy" (stating some case I can't remember.
Umm, hello, the US Supreme court has what authority in Philippine law? Hmm, I must have missed something last time I was researching. Imagine. Fifty-plus years of independnce and yet when questioned, running back to 'daddy' for an answer or reasurance, like a 4-yo who just fell of his bike.
It's not just the traffic that will amaze you here.
@Steven: I'm looking forward to vsiting Australian someday soon. It does amaze me how there can be any services at all at times, given the vastness of the land and the small popuation (about the size of Metro Manila for those not up on their stats.
The Philippines (and indeed the US) could learn a lot from the Australians, if either were willing to learn. I feel that in your examples, though, you make my case for less government, not more.
Look, for example, at medical services in the Ausrtralian ourback. If the service were run by the government no telling what they would cost or how long one would wait. The various Flying Doctor and Air Ambulance seevices are very much supported by private fund-raising and donations, are they not?
Hi Dave,
I'd like to point out a situation in Ontario, Canada whereby powerful privately controlled professional associations conspire to prevent the government from providing the best services and/or the most cost-effective services to the general public. For example;
The Ontario Medical Association refuses to grant medical licences to foreign trained doctors even when the've proven their skills and passed all tests. The result is a doctor shortage while experienced surgeons from India work here as security guards.
Ontario Nursing Association refuses to acknowledge or make it difficult for experienced Filipino nurses to work in hospitals. Instead they work as health care aides in nursing homes.
Engineeering, Architecture, Legal Associations severely restrict the ability of immigrants to work in their professions even if they pass all qualifiying tests.
The reason is to keep their own fee structures high and restrict competition. These organizations were granted the right to licence individuals in their respective professions so that it would REDUCE THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT in professions.
If I look at the United States I seem to recall about 100 years ago that anti-trust laws were passed by the government because too much economic power was amassed by too few businessmen. They used this power to crush smaller competitors so the U.S. government stepped in to put a stop to the abuses by private enterprise. Perhaps the name John D. Rockefeller and the Sun Oil Company will ring a bell.
I do think that private enterprise and initiative are the keys to a country's prosperity. However it also seems to me that sometimes government needs to step in and provide some checks and balances.
Hi Dave.
I agree that the Philippine government should release more of its clutches from a lot of services and businesses that private enterprises can do better. It must also liberalize and deregulate essential industries. Past experiences support this.
Some cases in point:
1). In 1995 the govt. deregulated the airline industry. It privatized the govt. owned Philippine Airlines. Cebu Pacific, Air Philippines, Asian Spirit, SeaAir and Grand Air entered the market. Result: Ticket prices were reduced and flight services vastly improved and increased to more areas in the Philippines.
2). Philippine Long Distance Telephone (PLDT) Monopoly. After this stranglehold was broken in 1995 with the telecoms industry´s deregulation, Globe Telecoms came in. Before, it used to take us years to obtain a new telephone line. With competition, the waiting time eventually became a matter of days. The monthly rates went down. Then, the cellphone technology arrived, serviced by more private companies. Now, even the remote islands of the Philippines and the lower income class have access to this useful technology.
3.) Manila Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS). For a long time, water service in Metro Manila was very inefficient and the govt. was leaking so much money just to keep the entity running. In 1997, the govt. relinquished this to private enterprise. Surprise, the former moribund MWSS is now gushing money for the Ayalas, United Utilities and Mitsubishi, major shareholders of Manila Water Company while delivering a wider and more efficient water service at a fair price to the public.
With the Philippines being an archipelago, imagine how good it would be for the general riding public and businesses to have the Philippine shipping transportation industry vastly improved by competition. Cheaper rates and safer ships am sure will sail thereafter. Yes, the shipping industry should be deregulated soonest.
The government needs to focus in strengthening its legal system, its police and military organization and its tax collection system.
This way, it can better enforce and uphold its laws and be able to pay for this herculean task. Congress can create laws to prevent and punish potential abuses while it continues to deregulate and liberalize services and industries.
Yes, many of us Filipinos still continue to dream and work for a better Philippines despite the din of politics.
Hello Dave,
To answer your question on the Royal Flying Doctor Service, yes they supported by private donations and fund raising, the Federal government also provides annual funds.
I think I need to clarify what I mean by a strong government. What I am talking about is leadership, the ability to give the country a sense of direction, a clean and open government. I am not talking about a government which sends its citizens to prison for re-education just for voicing their concerns their own rights, e.g two old ladies in China for wanting to protest about losing their homes because of the olympics.
We seem to forget that conservative governments and business are very much in each others pockets, how do you think European countries got so rich in 400 hundred years colonization of other countries.Do not forget how the USA broke away was because the rich got sick of paying to much tax to a British king.
Lets not forget that it unscrupulous business pratices that have caused the finanical melt down in the USA, which has hurt many countries around the world.
I am not a businessman or a socialist, but I do know niether governments or business can take the moral high ground on their performances since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
Steven
@Steven: Thanks for the clarification on that, Steven. I'm fully in agreement with you that the proper role of government is to lead, not herd. Here's an excellent example of what government "shouldn't" be doing, by the way, from my own country (which is no longer a worthy example of governemnt to the world, in my opinion) http://www.boingboing.net/2008/08/21/mayor-shuts-…
Oh the horror of it all if that were to spread? 🙁
@I.M. Schneider: Thank you for visiting and for your very useful comment. Indeed the airline deregulation is one of the jewels in the crown I was going to point out. PLDT is another great example, you know many Amerucans probably don't even know that PLDT is a NYSE company, not one of those 'foreign' investments.
I think I'll write another post on this subject becuase I think there is a lot to say about how government can lead people to a better life rather than trying to drive them there.
@Randall Jessup: I guess I could paly real devil's advocate here and ask it it even government's tole to control who can hang up his shingle. If a person has tghe proper degrees from institutions whom the patient trusts, what really is "government's" role? I dunno. There are certainly 'quack" doctors discovered every year in spite of supposedly rigorous controls, so would the patient be any safer if the arbitrary rules were just done away with. Interesting question and I am happy you posed it.
There's alot of hidden (and not so hidden) racism or favoritism flying about in these issues as well. One of the better doctors I had in my younger days in the US was a Filipino MD, educated in the Philippines. At one time Filipino doctors had no problem getting licensed in the US but Indian docs, as one example, weren't recognized.
Now, there is virtually a conveyor belt bringing Indian and Pakistani doctors to the US on long-term work visas, but Filipino doctors can not even apply.
Go take the niursing exam they are told, you can 'downgrade' to an RN and we'kl be happy to have you, but you won't be a doctor here, ever. Strange actions in a country supposedly chronically short of physicians, don't you think? Do you think it might prove my point that the government should get the heck out of the way?
Hello Dave,
I had a look at liitle article and was pretty disgusted myself on how petty some politicians can get, to say in Australia we do not get these sort of small minded people I would be lying to you.
No matter where you go you will get those sort of parasites, who do not like anybody with an once of independent thinking. Those sort of people have around since Adam was a boy.
Polical,religious and business or come to think of any organisation has its far share of "Pocket Nazis or Baby Stalins". Unfortunately these people stand out a lot more than others, who are actually doing some good.
So what do we do point the finger at an entire system or the individual.
Steven
Hi Dave,
I feel comfortable with having the government taking a regulatory role in society. I like the idea that a federal aviation inspector checks to see the airlines are doing the maintenance they are supposed to do and not cutting corners. Same with meat inspectors. I trust the government more than the companies to keep the food supply safe. A few years back in Ontario, Canada, a provincial government decided that it should cut back on municipal water inspectors to save money. A short time later a small town's water supply became contaminated and people died because of the incompetence of the local water management. That wouldn't have happened if the provincial inspectors were breathing down their back.
In the professions I prefer that the government have a
registrar issue licences to those qualified and capable of providing the required service to the public. The system whereby the licences are issued by a close-knit and powerful professional association doesn't always work in the public's interest.
As for business, I do agree that the role of government is to provide the framework politically and otherwise that allows the free market to bloom and encourages entrepreneurism. There are times that government has to step in to prevent abuses by business such a price-fixing and fraudulent misrepresentations.
That being said it's interesting to note that in Ontario, the government has a monopoly on the sale of alcohol in bottles. If you want to buy a bottle of booze you have to go to a government-owned liqour outlet. And boy do they overcharge you big time! They passed a law against competiton so they could charge whatever they can get away with. Good thing I'm not a big drinker.
But just to show what nice folks the provincial goverment is they decided that beer would be sold by a private cartel of the three biggest breweries. So now you can only buy beer at this cartel's stores which coincidentally are called " The Beer Store ". And guess what? All the companies sell their beer for the exact same high price!
Nothing like price-fixing when you've got a monopoly!
Of course the government gets a piece of this action too but don't complain you can trust the government to spend your money wisely!?
@Steven: You are so correct that it is not possible to eliminate the worst clases of people. But going back to my original premise, the least amount of government … and thus the least chance for these parasites to get a chance to find a perch, has a lot to be said for itself.
@Randall Jessup: Well as you can see from today's installment, Randall, I'm calling it quits on 'the role of government'. Those monopoly situations you mentioened are replicated in a numbe rof uUS statesas well. Whatever must folks like the "two Tom's (Jefferson and Paine) think when they see what they risked their very lives for being mismanaged today. Government selling (and controlling the price of) booze. How foreign to anything in either the US or the Canadian constitution *sigh*