The myth of PH’s collapsed labor market
people and can thus make or break the future of Filipino families.
In the Aquino era, the number of employed Filipinos increased from 36 million to about 40 million. Yet, the number of unemployed stayed at around 2.5 to 3 million. In the Duterte era, the number of the employed has climbed to close to 42 million, whereas the number of the unemployed has fallen to 2 million to 2.2 million.
Here’s the bottom line based on existing longer-term indicators: the Aquino administration spoke eloquently about reducing unemployment and attracting foreign investment, yet failed in both efforts.
Another manufactured friction
In each of the three articles—IBON, Rappler and Forbes—the myth of the collapsed Philippine labor market is attributed to the Duterte administration, while the Aquino administration is portrayed as “10 times better,” even though it employed fewer and had more unemployed.
Unlike the Aquino administration, the Duterte government has succeeded in creating a momentum for investment-led growth for years to come. So, why do manufactured frictions continue to spill from questionable research to biased commentaries to international denunciations?
In 2016 election, Duterte won the presidency by a landslide, whereas the Liberal Party (LP) suffered a meltdown. In most countries, electoral losses encourage the opposition to examine what went wrong and what can be done about the future. However, that was not the case in the Philippines.
Instead of adjusting to new realities at home, some of the party’s leaders seek to revive LP extraterritorially—hence the effort to exploit foreign governments, agencies and lobbies, billionaire speculators, international NGOs and media.
It is a very polarizing path in an era when the world economy hovers at the edge of a Cold War. It does not bode well for the future of the LP. It has diminished the country’s international reputation. And it certainly does not contribute to job creation at home.