Local 'psychics' accept challenge of skeptical subversive

In a post on November 2, we discussed our doubts on the remote-sensing and spoon bending tricks played by members of the local Psychic Entertainment Network on ANC. The PEN has invited us to witness their tricks under 'laboratory' conditions or conditions we ourselves will specify so as to preclude any foolishness. Nomer Lasala of PEN has told me that Jaime Licauco will also be invited to vet what should be a public demonstration. We're meeting on Thursday and we'll keep you updated.

Bali high, Bali low: engaging the Rizalist on global warming and prematurely melting snow

Is global warming the new Y2k bug without a deadline? Dean Jorge Bocobo asks. His post on climate change has the promise of reason, but quickly degenerates into a polemic against environmentalism, the media, politics, and Al Gore.

• First, we agree with Dean that on any issue, a fair amount of skepticism is always healthy. But skepticism must be followed by due diligence, that is to say, an articulation of the reasons for skepticism. Otherwise it is simply contrarianism and obscurantism.
  
• We also are, like him, uncomfortable with science by consensus, and this discomfort has support in the history and the philosophy of science itself. Listening to the chair of the IPCC with Al Gore with CNN's Jonathan Mann made me squirm in my seat a little. Pachi sounded like a bureaucrat/propagandist who could tolerate a little dramatization of 'facts' for the purpose of 'raising consciousness.'
• Lastly, we think that any scientific assertion has to have a null hypothesis falsifiable under Karl Popper's definition.

Dean proceeds to ask:

• But is the price of further human progress the end of the world? Have we made war on the Earth itself, as Al Gore suggests and are locked in a relationship of Mutually Assured Destruction? Al Gore does not say this at all and never has.
• Can a tax save the earth from the laws of economics and thermodynamics, as well as close the Gap between the Rich and the Poor? Do the rich nations of the world owe pollution reparations to the poor nations, and do poor nations have an equal right to pollute the atmosphere, at least for a while until they have both sinned the same amount against Gaia? In fact, for a tax to be effective, it has to be designed with the use of economic theory, and theory does suggest that taxes can be used judiciously to narrow the gap between rich and poor.
  
• Is green the new yellow journalism? Is global warming the new Y2K Bug without a deadline? Well, media is always susceptible to yellow, regardless of the issue, and it is up to critical bloggers like Dean to help enlighten us.

Dean then calls our attention to the letter of Freeman Dyson and others "urging adaptation instead of futile attempts to 'fight' climate change with sin taxes." Adaptation is one of the options for mitigating global warming impacts and should always be on the menu, and sin taxes to punish polluters is an entirely different issue.

Economic theory suggests that markets cannot be relied on to bring the most efficient outcome in the presence of so-called 'externalities,' to which the phenomenon of air pollution belongs. If an individual does not consider the effect of his or her action on others, how can that bring efficiency indeed? The post also revisits the problem of the commons first elucidated formally by G. Hardin. But then Dean draws the wrong conclusion:

"An important conclusion about problems involving public commons is that there is no "technical solution" to the basic problem. It's like the game of tic-tac-toe. There is no way to win once all players become familiar with the game. Keeping the "commons" publicly accessible inexorably leads to the destruction of the commons. The only solution is to turn such commons into private property. I don't know how we do that to the global commons."

In fact, economists since Hardin have proposed many effective solutions to the 'commons' problem and a rich theoretical and practical literature has blossomed since then, from where political acts followed. To cite a few:

• Particulate matter pollution, addressed with economic measures guided by technology. In the Philippines, we took lead out of and reduced aromatics in gasoline, reduced sulfur in diesel, enforced emission standards on vehicles and factories.
• Water and solid waste pollution, similar measures.

" I am also not sure yet how Gore's ideas fit into this framework. If the new CO2 tax he is proposing is likened to a sin tax, we only have to look at the continued prevalence of gambling, drinking and smoking to wonder if this is the right way to go. On the other hand, if it spurs the development of new technologies that don't have the problem of discharging CO2 into the atmosphere, could a case not be made for such taxes being beneficial?"

Sin taxes are not meant to eliminate bad behavior, bad to reduce incidence. The reason sin taxes are superior to income taxes is simple: the latter punishes effort, the former discourages 'sin.' In fact, the argument is independent of how the proceeds are eventually spent, but if these are spent for the 'public good,' so much the better.

Notes:

1. I didn't go to Bali thinking I had better use of my time. But the conference did redound to some good.
2. I have no pretensions of being an 'environmentalist,' but with my white hair and limited experience, I have successfully passed myself off as an 'environmental and energy economist' and have contributed to some national legislation.
3. In the summer of 1993. I attended an environmental economics policy course in Harvard at a time when climate science still had a lot of room for doubt. The call at that time was for no-regrets policies, which meant addressing problems with clearer impacts but had the side effect of reducing GHG emissions. Since then, there has been sizable progress in the theory. But that does not mean skepticism is no longer warranted.
4. On the eve of New Year's eve 2000, I missed my train to Grand Rapids from Chicago and had to pay an extraordinary amount for an ordinary room in the windy city.
   
5. In a future post, I will try to discuss the political economy of the issue.
   

Why a win-win outcome is unlikely: Sumilao (3)

Mrs. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has agreed to meet with the Sumilao farmers on Monday, after the agrarian reform secretary issued his earth-shaking decision: status quo! What's on Mrs. Arroyo's mind? I asked the spouse of a cabinet secretary. Nothing really. She just wants to listen, or to appear to listen. What should we advise the farmers? Go to Malacanang and have merienda, it is their right, after all that's supposed to be the hall of the people.

But is a win-win outcome possible? Yes, but highly improbable. Based on the legal briefs I've studied, the land rightly belongs to the farmers. If San Miguel Foods claims that it can put the land to much better use, and for the benefit of not just the Mapalad farmers to boot, then it should first make a decent proposal to compensate the farmers for the land, to include the foregone income for the past 10 years or so. Instead, it has evidently chosen the tack of divide and rule, dangling the prospect of income for the non-claimant farmers in Sumilao, after probably having bribed the governor and father of this dubious character in the senate, who is full of crap about biofuels blah blah blah and advocating without understanding, and Sumilao town officials. This much was evident to me when the San Miguel Foods cabal, including Jess Arranza of the Federation of Philippine Industries appeared in Korina Sanchez's show last Wednesday. She was apparently not well-prepared and did not ask the right questions of the farmers who were on the show earlier.
I'm not an advocate of national food security because I believe millions more Filipino consumers deserve the best prices for staple and other food. Agrarian reform is a means for asset redistribution and not to tie farmers to the land forever. What they want to do with the land is up to them. The greater and more realistic aspiration is income stability, security, and mobility. I am not sentimental about land, but if the farmers are, that is their right.

Notes:

1. I don't really know what the liability of Norberto Quisumbing Jr., whom I worked for in the 1980's, is. I hear from Cebu that he's busy trying to leave a legacy, and has just sued a columnist for The Philippine Star.
2. After having been barred from entering the compound to deliver their position paper last Monday, the farmers relented and had it received at the gate. Such law-abiding and humble citizens in contrast to the officials of San Miguel Foods. Yesterday, all they could do was stage a sit-down strike and noise barrage against the status quo order, which is not a good idea; they'd only ruin their eardrums and get 'kubal' on their 'lubot.' A better idea is to stalk Nasser Pangandaman and invade the privacy of his home.
   
3. In my visits to the Soviet Union and the East Bloc in the 1980's petty or small-holder farmers were looked down on with great suspicion as lacking in revolutionary spirit in contrast to the real proletariat. I have since then taken a more liberal view.
4. I've got nothing against Korina Sanchez. In fact, I really like her program, especially when she's absent and Pia Hontiveros or Twink Macaraig or Pinky Webb sub for her.
   

DAR's gift to the Sumilao farmers on Human Rights Day (2)

The Department of Agrarian Reform celebrated Human Rights Day by betraying the human rights of the very farmers whose existence is its very reason for being. As the farmers prepared to go up to the offices of the DAR secretary, they were barred from entering the compound by about eight security guards, on orders of the secretary himself. . Minutes later police from Camp Karingal arrived to keep the peace, very likely the peace of mind of San Miguel Foods’ Danding Cojuangco and Ramon Ang, whose well-paid lawyers pleaded ignorance about the laws of the land they have so obviously violated. Where were the born-again stars in national politics?

How do I know all these? Simple, I was with the farmers from two in the afternoon up to almost eight in the evening. And why did I feel obliged to lend my support in body and not just mind? Never mind, but you can read the previous entry in this blog. I will not go into the chronology on the issue. If you are concerned, there’s enough material on the web. Among those are the essays of Winnie Monsod, who discussed the latest findings of Arsenio Balisacan, my professor almost 20 years ago in agricultural economics; and Joaquin Bernas, as my atheism does not bar me from admiring Jesuit scholarship. Here, I would rather discuss what has not been reported in the mainstream media, including the Philippine Daily Inquirer and ABS-CBN.

Earlier in the afternoon, the farmers and their leaders inside their talipapa camp just outside the gates of the DAR discussed the position paper the DAR secretary had asked them to submit by the end of Monday. They felt they really didn’t have to anymore as their positions and petitions were already known not only to the guards of DAR but also to the lizard population on the ceiling of Nasser Pangandaman’s well-appointed office. (Much as I would like to sympathize with Pangandaman who has been busy counting the white hair in his nose and daydreaming about Christmas lechon, he makes me want to go vegetarian). But they did, like lowly farmers who obey the laws of the land. Or wanted to. The rule of law? Whose law and whose rules?

At around five, the guards suddenly padlocked and chained the gates. Then a receiving clerk appeared and said she was authorized to accept the position paper.

“Why don’t you relocate your office to the gates then?” the farmers asked. The clerk said those were her orders.

“Has San Miguel submitted its position paper?” lawyer Marlon Manuel asked the clerk. She didn’t know or would not say.

“Where is the secretary?” A few minutes later a young man who claimed he was from the secretariat explained to ‘Kaka,’ a coordinator for the farmers, “We don’t want any trouble.” “And neither do we,” Kaka said.

“Who gave the order to lock the gates?” I asked the guards. “We don’t know,” they replied.

After more than an hour, the farmers decided to cool off and celebrate mass with priests and nuns from Mindanao. At the risk of being excommunicated from my own congregation, I stayed. When I left before eight, it wasn’t clear whether the Sumilao farmers would be home for Christmas.

Notes:

· I was impressed by niece Charo Logarta who interviewed the leaders of the farmers in fluent Cebuano. Because I know my cousin (her dad) had left Cebu as a child, I assumed the daughter would know only English and Tagalog. I was wrong. Noel Cabangon came to sing a few songs in solidarity and I could not hold back tears. Someone let out air from the left rear tire of my car, but a farmer who also drives a jeepney in Bukidnon took care of it. There are Cebuano words which can’t be expressed in Tagalog or English: Pastilan! Intaon! Lechong baboy! Lecheng yawa! And that was exactly how I felt).

· It may very well be that the San Miguel plan would be better for the economy overall, but this a question of social justice and law and not of gross domestic product. It’s not jiust the economy stupid! It’s human rights and justice. If our national life were to be dominated by just economic efficiency, we would reopen the debate about democracy,dictatorship and development. Nyet! But more on this in the next post.

The rights of the Sumilao farmers (1)

Among the strange coincidences in my long life are that in some way I had been associated with the anti-heroes in the struggle of the Sumilao farmers for land:

1. After graduation (chemical engineering) in 1980, I was appointed executive assistant to the president of the Norkis Group of Companies, a certain Norberto Quisumbing Jr.
2. About a year later, a certain Ruben Torres interviewed me for a job in the Ministry of Energy.
3. In 1993, I was asked to comment on proposals in the Senate to make agrarian reformed lands fungible by a senator considered close to Fidel Ramos.

Last Friday I paid the farmers camped in front of the Department of Agrarian Reform a brief visit. I hope to be able to converse with them again today. They have my undying support.