Economic Liberalization Without A Better Framework Can Be Disastrous

Some people advocate for merely making a few changes towards the 1987 Constitution. Some think that it's best that the Philippines should still stick to the presidential-unitary system because of the whole "hundreds of years experience" argument -- while uplifting unnecessary restrictions on Foreign Direct Investors. They think that the only problem of the Philippines is simply easing FDI restrictions like what they did in China and South Korea. Some argue that China and South Korea as first world countries is presidential-unitary with adjustments every now and that it doesn't matter if a country uses a parliamentary, presidential, federal or unitary as these are merely frameworks. It's time to take a look at the efficiency in first world countries that use presidential vs. parliamentary and between countries that use federalism vs. unitary.

China itself is a country that sticks to presidential system.The presidential system in China still lacks real efficiency. It doesn't matter how many corrupt officials get axed since the presidential system's impeachment system takes much longer than a vote of no confidence. Checking out Transparency International will reveal that Presidential China still has a corruption index of 77/180 in contrast to Parliamentary Japan's 20/180 last 2017.

Another problem with China is also its adherence to the unitary system. It's such a huge country and putting all affairs in Imperial Beijing is no better than the Imperial Manila system. China's size means it would even be more inefficient than the Philippines even if it has better income from FDIs. I remembered having gone to China 11 years ago and traffic in Beijing is really that horrible. Yes, traffic is a sign of progress but it can also kill progress. People in Beijing benefit the most from the economic boom to the point almost everyone gets a car to the point that traffic becomes unbearably horrendous. Also, focusing almost all activities in the capital of China means that there will be more traffic in contrast to if the country had a federalized government -- where provinces in China have a share in delegation which may significantly cut down traffic in Beijing.

Opening the Philippines to FDIs is a good thing but there's always the need for cautionary measures. After all, if Filipinos get higher income from higher minimum wage then shouldn't it be time to give measures like taxing vehicles and gasoline like in Singapore? If there's going to be more FDI then shouldn't it be time to consider having a better framework in order to make sure certain areas of the Philippines can benefit from it? That's what should be thought of in constitutional correction.