What to do with the rural poor

The poor in this country are mostly located in the rural areas. They are prone to be poor because they have no choice but to engage in old-fashioned and outdated farming and fishing activities. They remain marginalized because, apart from their continued use of ancient equipment and methods as exemplified by the carabao, they are open to exploitation by unscrupulous middlemen who capture their produce at the lowest price possible thereby preventing the farmers and fishermen from realizing the real value of their hard work.

Indeed, the obstacles to a better life for our rural brothers and sisters are tremendous and myriad. The cards are stacked against them. There are limited economic opportunities in the provinces. As disheartening is the fact that they have little means and cash to be able to engage in even household livelihood such as in handicrafts that could augment their miniscule agricultural income. They likewise do not have sufficient capability to buy the essential inputs and components of farming and fishing such as fertilizers, modern pre and post-harvest equipment or reliable fishing boats and gears. To top it all, there is an insufficiency of governmental support by way of an integrated total approach to the multifarious problems and concerns of our rural brethren.

To be sure, there are several rural development programs and projects of government aimed at uplifting their lives. Government has an agrarian reform program, a cooperative reform program, a human settlement program, a community development program, a nutrition program, an integrated area development program, a rural electrification project, fishing resources management, medium and small-scale industry development as well as a family planning program. There are also various rural development initiatives such as the Presidential Assistance on Community Development (PACD), the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM), the Philippine Rural Improvement Services (PRUCIS), and the 4-H Clubs (Heart, Hand, Head and Health).

There appears at first blush, therefore, that there are serious and concerted efforts on the part of government to help our fellow countrymen in the rural areas improve their quality of life. The sad truth, however, is that despite all these government attempts more and more are joining the ranks of the rural poor. The gains in the drive to help them is outweighed by the quicker rise in their population. The small pieces of land the farmers till to eke-out a living for themselves become less and less adequate as their children grow in numbers.

Because of this unhopeful state of affairs, many of our rural folks are enticed to migrate to the cities hoping to find jobs for themselves there and winding up in the squatter colonies of the urban centers. There they lead squalid lives, endangering their health and safety. Many become easy recruits and victims of vice syndicates. Their once dreamful migration into the urban centers are shattered by a worse fate, even as they have compounded the problems of the metropolis.

Let us analyze why this is happening. Of the already meager money supply of the country, 70 percent of it is circulating in the urban centers while only 30 percent of the remaining is relegated to the countryside. Yet, the urban centers comprise only 10 percent of the total land area while 90 percent make up the vast countryside. Even more revealing, though, is that of the 84 million Filipinos today, 60 percent live in the metropolitan areas while only 40 percent are in the rural areas. In short, 60 percent of the population with 70 percent of the money are living in 10 percent of the land. Stated otherwise, 40 percent of the population with only 30 percent of the money are living in 90 percent of the land. For our fellow countrymen in the countryside, there is just too little money circulating in such a large area. The odds are, indeed, stacked against the rural folks.

A full 90 percent of our rural brothers and sisters live below the poverty line. They have no decent homes, no proper home conveniences for fitful living, no potable water in their faucets, no light in their shacks. They cannot send their children to good schools. They cannot buy the requisite medicines for themselves and their lifespan is shorter than their middle-income leveled urban counterpart.

These dismal conditions of our countryside brethren must be immediately addressed. For the myriad attempts to do so by our government, none could amply work and succeed unless the fundamental problem of lack of money in the rural areas is headlong confronted.

In this connection, we suggest a massive infusion of fresh capital to the countryside. The local governments, the provinces and the municipalities, must be allowed to raise money by floating long-term bonds secured against future taxes that the central bank shall purchase by the issuance of the corresponding new money. But this can only be possible by amending the restrictive provisions of the Charter of the Bangko Sentral, particularly section 117, that prohibits the central bank from purchasing government securities, which is precisely the mechanism to raise the finances for government development projects.

With the amendment of this debilitating provision in the law, the local governments will then be able to raise and infuse into the rural areas the proper amount of money that is needed to finally create the economic activities that will revive the rural economy from its perennial lethargy. Then the rural lands can at last be developed to their full and contribute to the wealth generation through higher productivity on the part of the farmers and businessmen and higher revenues, through taxes, on the part of the government. The wherewithal will be at hand to construct the irrigation systems, water encatchment facilities and water and electricity for the households. There will be cash to engage in research and development so that the quality of the produce of the farmers as well as the catch of the fishermen shall improve. Even more, agricultural and fish products need not be marketed in its raw state as they can now be processed, thereby giving them a longer shelf-life and thereby opening their possibilities for export. Spoilage of fish, meat and vegetables would thus be avoided.

Indeed, our rural areas imbued as they are by nature with ample sunshine and rain are veritable golden fields for fresh fruit production which, when processed into fresh fruit juice and exported the world over can be a gold mine for earning valuable foreign currency that we so badly need. There is so much demand for fruit juice in the world market waiting to be met, even more so than for soda drinks, and much healthier at that. Our rural folks could organize themselves into self-help and mutual-aid associations and cooperatives and, by pooling their resources, can very well venture into the export of processed fruit juices.

As equally important when massive capital is infused into the rural areas is that there will be money now to build good schools both for youth and adult education and for training and skills development centers. Our rural brothers and sisters, young and old, men and women, could be properly educated and be trained with practical skills for business ventureship and enterprise. Most importantly, they can be taught the proper values of love of country, love of fellowmen, love of learning and love of work.

In sum, the key to helping our rural poor is in applying the Keynesian economic theory that government must be an active player in the development process by doing the spending and investing, especially during times of economic stagnation and slump, so that business and economic activities can be spurred. Of course, for government to be able to do this, it is a requisite sine qua non that government, both local and national should be able to float long-term bonds collaterized against future taxes that shall be purchased by the central bank through the creation of the corresponding new money. There is no other way, therefore, if we are to move forward and help our rural poor but to amend that constricting provision of section 117 of the Central Bank Act.

We have been repeating and repeating this imperative in our previous articles. Is anyone from government still willing to hear?

You may write your comments / suggestions at 15/F Equitable Tower, Paseo de Roxas, Makati City or through e-mail at HYPERLINK "mailto:[email protected]" [email protected]

(Note: We beg the indulgence of our leaders who are at times tasked to read a lengthy piece. The purpose of our writings, however, being advocacy and not merely commentary in nature, compels us to dissect a given problem, analyze its causes and effects, and offer studied solutions. The length of the article should be irrelevant to such an approach.)