Philippine
GDP grew 7.6% in 2010, spurred by consumer demand, a rebound in exports
and investments, and election-related spending, before cooling to 3.7%
in 2011. The economy weathered the 2008-09 global recession better than
its regional peers due to minimal exposure to troubled international
securities, lower dependence on exports, relatively resilient domestic
consumption, large remittances from four- to five-million overseas
Filipino workers, and a growing business process outsourcing industry.
Economic growth in the Philippines averaged 4.5% during the
MACAPAGAL-ARROYO administration. Despite this growth, however, poverty
worsened during her presidency. The AQUINO administration is working to
reduce the government deficit from 3.9% of GDP, when it took office, to
2% of GDP by 2013. The government has had little difficulty issuing
debt, both locally and internationally, to finance the deficits. The
AQUINO Administration reduced public debt to below 50% of GDP and
obtained several ratings upgrades on sovereign debt so that the
Philippines is now close to investment grade. However, the lack of
government spending, especially on infrastructure, was one of several
factors which slowed GDP growth in the second half of 2011, leading the
government to announce a stimulus effort and increased public spending
on infrastructure in 2012. AQUINO's first budget emphasized education,
health, conditional cash transfers for the poor, and other social
spending programs, relying mostly on the private sector to finance
important infrastructure projects. Weak tax collection, exacerbated by
new tax breaks and incentives, has limited the government's ability to
address major challenges. The AQUINO administration has vowed to focus
on improving tax collection efficiency, rather than imposing new taxes,
as a part of its good governance platform. The economy still faces
several long-term challenges, including reliance on energy imports and
foreign demand for overseas Filipino workers.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$389.8 billion (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 33
$375.9 billion (2010 est.)
$349.2 billion (2009 est.)
note:
data are in 2011 US dollars
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$216.1 billion (2011 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.7% (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 111
7.6% (2010 est.)
1.1% (2009 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$4,100 (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 158
$4,000 (2010 est.)
$3,800 (2009 est.)
note:
data are in 2011 US dollars
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
agriculture: 12.3%
industry:
33.3%
services:
54.4% (2011 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
39.81 million (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 15
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
agriculture: 33%
industry:
15%
services:
52% (2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7.2% (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 83
7.3% (2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
32.9% (2006 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lowest 10%: 2.4%
highest 10%:
31.2% (2006)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
45.8 (2006)
country comparison to the world: 38
46.6 (2003)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
19.8% of GDP (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 123
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
revenues: $31.99 billion
expenditures:
$36.71 billion (2011 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
14.8% of GDP (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 189
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-2.2% of GDP (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 83
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
49.4% of GDP (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 53
52.4% of GDP (2010 est.)
note:
data
cover central government debt, and includes debt instruments issued (or
owned) by government entities other than the treasury; the data include
treasury debt held by foreign entities; the data include debt issued by
subnational entities, as well as intra-governmental debt;
intra-governmental debt consists of treasury borrowings from surpluses
in the social funds, such as for retirement, medical care, and
unemployment. Debt instruments for the social funds are not sold at
public auctions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5.3% (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 128
3.8% (2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.8% (31 December 2010 est.)
country comparison to the world: 95
3.5% (31 December 2009 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7.3% (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 127
7.673% (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$32.09 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 57
$29.08 billion (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$105.7 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 52
$97.35 billion (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$108.7 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 50
$98.22 billion (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$202.3 billion (31 December 2010)
country comparison to the world: 37
$130.5 billion (31 December 2009)
$85.63 billion (31 December 2008)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sugarcane, coconuts, rice, corn, bananas, cassavas, pineapples, mangoes; pork, eggs, beef; fish
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
electronics assembly,
garments, footwear, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, wood products, food
processing, petroleum refining, fishing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6% (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 54
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
59.19 billion kWh (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 44
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54.4 billion kWh (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 45
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0 kWh (2009 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0 kWh (2009 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33,110 bbl/day (2010 est.)
country comparison to the world: 67
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
310,000 bbl/day (2010 est.)
country comparison to the world: 40
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60,460 bbl/day (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 75
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
338,400 bbl/day (September 2010 est.)
country comparison to the world: 31
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
138.5 million bbl (1 January 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 65
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.15 billion cu m (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 54
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3.15 billion cu m (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 71
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0 cu m (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 167
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0 cu m (2009 est.)
country comparison to the world: 118
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98.54 billion cu m (1 January 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 55
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$7.044 billion (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 31
$8.465 billion (2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$54.17 billion (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 58
$50.68 billion (2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
semiconductors and electronic products, transport equipment, garments, copper products, petroleum products, coconut oil, fruits
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
China 19%, US 13.4%, Singapore 13.2%, Japan 12.8%, Hong Kong 7.6%, Germany 4.2%, South Korea 4.1% (2010)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$68.84 billion (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 47
$61.07 billion (2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
electronic products,
mineral fuels, machinery and transport equipment, iron and steel,
textile fabrics, grains, chemicals, plastic
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Japan 14.1%, China 13.6%, US 9.9%, Singapore 9.3%, Thailand 6.5%, South Korea 5.6%, Indonesia 4.1% (2010)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$72.3 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 27
$62.37 billion (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$62.41 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 53
$62.62 billion (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$27.37 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 63
$25.27 billion (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$7.002 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 55
$6.582 billion (31 December 2010 est.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
43.44 (2011 est.)
45.11 (2010 est.)
47.68 (2009)
44.439 (2008)
46.148 (2007)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SOURCE: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rp.html | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Biyernes, Mayo 4, 2012
inflation rate
Huwebes, Abril 19, 2012
Economic Crisis
Aquino Takes Charge
As Corazon Aquino begins the tasks of reuniting a divided Filipino people, rebuilding the institutions destroyed by a discredited dictatorship and reviving a devastated economy, she has chosen to combine the spirit of reconciliation with measures to place her new government in firm control.
In view of the Marcos legacy, her task will not be an easy one. Ferdinand Marcos divided Philippine society. In a country accustomed to frequent and peaceful alternation of power among competing political groups, Marcos and his followers used corruption, violence and fraud to entrench themselves as a permanent ruling group. Their opponents remained outside, in embittered frustration. Now that the tables are turned, bitterness is on the other side. It will not be easy to restore good feeling.
Marcos also leaves a legacy of institutional decay. Repeated constitutional changes, devised by the former president and pushed through by means of questionable legality, produced a presidentially dominated system of rule. Under Marcos, a clever lawyer adept at using legalistic forms to distort the spirit of the law, the system became a self-serving autocracy.
Long established and respected institutions were turned into caricatures. The Commission on Elections, once an impartial guardian of honest elections, became an instrument for the subversion of the electoral process on behalf of the regime. In the armed forces, heirs to the American tradition of nonpartisanship, major elements were transformed into a praetorian guard whose main task was to protect the president against his countrymen rather than the country against its enemies.
Other institutions lost their independence. The judiciary, including the Supreme Court, became a pliable instrument of the president’s will. Civil servants lost both security of tenure and the right to vote as they pleased. The financial agencies of the government, no longer subject to full accounting, became milch cows for members of the presidential circle, who appropriated huge sums for their private purposes. In a most cynical example of the president’s willingness to corrupt his countrymen, public school teachers, who traditionally serve as polling officials because of their presumed integrity and impartiality, were bribed in 1986 to help defraud the opposition. Thus these underpaid and overworked professionals were robbed of one of the few rewards of their calling, the respect of their pupils...
When Cory Aquino became the President, the Philippines economy became higher than before. Many people loves her and they voted her as a President of the Philippines. The people voted Cory's son Noynoy Aquino to follow her footsteps. But many people were complaining that Noynoy Aquino doesn't make his duties as the President of the Philippines.
Mag-subscribe sa:
Mga Post (Atom)