The Book Thesis: A book by Henry Grady Weaver, first published in 1947 by Talbot Books, “The Mainspring of Human Progress” [1] extolled on the achievements of the Saracens, and the building of the American empire, and how it sustained several changes. The premise of the book is: “Individual freedom is the natural heritage of each living person; freedom cannot be separated from responsibility.” For a free copy of the text, refer to mises.org or you could order your own paperback copy from Amazon.
Weaver: MMP = NR + HE x T: a formula devised by the American Economic Foundation translated into “man’s material progress depends on natural resource plus human energy multiplied by tools.”
The Philippine Scenario: Poverty in the Philippines is on the rise. [22] ADB [3] reported, ” . . . the magnitude of income poverty in the Philippines worsened from 1985 to 2000.” Furthermore, it declared that the “Sustained economic growth from 2000–2003 has not been pro-poor.” The Philippines has a rich and vast natural resources, most of which, however, remains untapped. Although some have been cultivated, developed, or used, most of the key players are not even Filipinos. Take the case of the drilling of oil in the Kalayaan Islands.[4]? Take the case of National Steel Corporation . . . sold to an underfunded Indian national and after four years still declaring they haven’t profited? Even the natural capacity [human energy] of Pinoys inventing/discovering something new, like the fluorescent lamp [patented by GE], the sing-along [patented by the Japanese, now popularly known as the "karaoke"], the Dingel water-based fuel [Toyota?] [tools], are sold to the highest bidders. The ADB report[3] looks at access by the poor to five important assets: human, physical, natural, social, and financial capital. Then, found that Pinoys have deficient access to four out of five assets.
Weaver: “Individual persons, left to their own volition, rarely choose to do the same things in the same way at the same time.”
The Philippine Scenario: Remember the EDSA revolution? Left to their own volition, Pinoys toppling a dictator, Marcos, was a rarity! Neither the two later copycats of the first could overshadow the latter! Remember the last national elections? Left to their own volition, Pinoys either choose to do the right thing: vote; or choose to de-enfranchised themselves! Remember the __________? Left to their own volition, Pinoys _______ [supply your own words in lieu of the blanks].
Weaver: “Free competition is, within itself, a co-operative process.”
The Philippine Scenario: Yeah! especially during elections in the Philippines. Eventhough a multitude is competing for a few number of seats on the House, co-operation can be seen through the changes in political color [balimbings] on the fly, the under-the-table dealings of the powers-to-be, or the passing of the political fiefdom like a family heirloom?
Weaver: “In America, the planning was . . . decentralized, or grassroots, basis. . . Free men were to have an opportunity to live their lives, plan their own affairs, and work with one another–not under the lash of coercive authority, but under the discipline of enlightened self-interest and moral responsibility.”
The Philippine Scenario: The Philippine history, however, show that although the islands comprising the country is considered a unit, the planning is not decentralized, but rather regionalized. Manila is seen as as coercive authority by the promdis.
References:
1 Weaver, Henry Grady (1947), The Mainspring of Human Progress
2 National Encyclopedia (2007), Philippines: Poverty and Wealth
3 ADB (2005), Poverty in the Philippines: Income, Assets, and Access
4 (2008), The Secret Sale of Kalayaan
Disclaimer: The posts on this site do not necessarily represent any organization’s positions, strategies or opinions; and unless otherwise expressly stated, are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
