Unfortunately for us, opinion polls are in fashion during our time. They ask the totally uninformed to render an expert opinion.
The results are treated as news. They grab the headlines. They influence the design of policy. They dictate the behavior of political leaders. They shape public expectation of what ought to be done. They conserve dogma.
And it is called democracy. The way that word is understood these days is that it is a condition where the banal opinions of the uninformed should take precedence over the sound conclusions of the expertly informed.
If we take this notion of democracy to undue extents, much tragedy could be produced.
For instance, if we ask people by means of an opinion poll if they wanted to be taxed, guess what the outcome would be? If, by means of an opinion poll, we asked them to choose between a proper national budget or simply distributing cash to every citizen, they will likely choose the latter.
If opinion polls were to be obeyed, we would have a regime that collects no taxes, subsidizes oil and food and gives away housing to all who have none. It would be a regime that is bankrupt, paralyzed and mired in debt. But what the heck, it will be a regime with high approval ratings — although eventually it will be a regime that runs out of the means to meet pompous public expectation and be overthrown.
A few days ago, the SWS released a poll where 13% said they were better off now after the peso appreciated and 30% said they were better off before appreciation. 57% said things were the same. In the usual neat way that SWS outcomes are reported, the numbers are broken down into income brackets and across regions of the country.
The news media dutifully carried out the results as a big story, concluding, as the SWS does, that the peso’s appreciation by a net effect of -17% harmed more Filipinos than it helped. The implication is that the peso’s appreciation is bad.
But how did we know that?
Those who said their lives were better before might have been simply reporting the usual erosion of inflation on fixed incomes rather a negative effect of peso appreciation. But since the SWS questionnaire linked income erosion to peso appreciation, we are all brought to what might be a contrived conclusion. It is entirely possible we might get the same profile of responses (or even worse) if the peso was depreciating.
And what about the 57% who said the behavior of the currency did not matter? That is a pretty impressive number. Why was this not the headline story?
Some of my readers have asked me this really unwarranted question: If the peso was behaving so well, why are oil prices still rising?
Well, over the past few months, the price of crude simply rose faster than the peso appreciated. From about $30 a barrel, the price in now well over $90 so quickly. If the exchange rate remained the same, we would be paying P100 per liter for fuel. *(Prof. Alex Magno) Read more...
The results are treated as news. They grab the headlines. They influence the design of policy. They dictate the behavior of political leaders. They shape public expectation of what ought to be done. They conserve dogma.
And it is called democracy. The way that word is understood these days is that it is a condition where the banal opinions of the uninformed should take precedence over the sound conclusions of the expertly informed.
If we take this notion of democracy to undue extents, much tragedy could be produced.
For instance, if we ask people by means of an opinion poll if they wanted to be taxed, guess what the outcome would be? If, by means of an opinion poll, we asked them to choose between a proper national budget or simply distributing cash to every citizen, they will likely choose the latter.
If opinion polls were to be obeyed, we would have a regime that collects no taxes, subsidizes oil and food and gives away housing to all who have none. It would be a regime that is bankrupt, paralyzed and mired in debt. But what the heck, it will be a regime with high approval ratings — although eventually it will be a regime that runs out of the means to meet pompous public expectation and be overthrown.
A few days ago, the SWS released a poll where 13% said they were better off now after the peso appreciated and 30% said they were better off before appreciation. 57% said things were the same. In the usual neat way that SWS outcomes are reported, the numbers are broken down into income brackets and across regions of the country.
The news media dutifully carried out the results as a big story, concluding, as the SWS does, that the peso’s appreciation by a net effect of -17% harmed more Filipinos than it helped. The implication is that the peso’s appreciation is bad.
But how did we know that?
Those who said their lives were better before might have been simply reporting the usual erosion of inflation on fixed incomes rather a negative effect of peso appreciation. But since the SWS questionnaire linked income erosion to peso appreciation, we are all brought to what might be a contrived conclusion. It is entirely possible we might get the same profile of responses (or even worse) if the peso was depreciating.
And what about the 57% who said the behavior of the currency did not matter? That is a pretty impressive number. Why was this not the headline story?
Some of my readers have asked me this really unwarranted question: If the peso was behaving so well, why are oil prices still rising?
Well, over the past few months, the price of crude simply rose faster than the peso appreciated. From about $30 a barrel, the price in now well over $90 so quickly. If the exchange rate remained the same, we would be paying P100 per liter for fuel. *(Prof. Alex Magno) Read more...
No comments:
Post a Comment