Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube
Home Blog Page 7490

Mbappe strike gives France 2-1 win in Croatia

ZAGREB — France stretched their unbeaten run against Croatia to eight games after a late goal by Kylian Mbappe gave the world champions a 2-1 win in their Nations League top-tier Group 3 match on Wednesday.

The result left France second in the group on 10 points from four games, behind Portugal on goal difference after the European champions brushed aside Sweden (3-0). Croatia have three points and the Swedes none.

France beat Croatia 4-2 in the 2018 World Cup final before defeating them by the same score in last month’s reverse Nations League fixture.

“We knew we’d be in a real battle,” France coach Didier Deschamps told French TF1 television.

“We started very well and it’s a pity we didn’t go two goals clear as Kylian had a big chance. We did what we needed to do in the second half.

“It’s not because we won a trophy in 2018 that you win by clicking your fingers. You have to look at the way the opponents play too.”

Antoine Griezmann fired France into an eighth-minute lead when he drilled the ball home off the underside of the bar from 12 metres after Domagoj Vida failed to clear a Ferland Mendy cross from the right.

Mbappe missed a gilt-edged opportunity to make it 2-0 as he shot wide from close range with the goal at his mercy, while visiting keeper Hugo Lloris kept out Mario Pasalic’s shot from three metres with a reflex save.

Croatia midfielder Nikola Vlasic equalised in the 65th minute, unleashing a sublime shot with the outside of his foot past Lloris after good work by Luka Modric and Josip Brekalo.

Substitute Paul Pogba missed a sitter for France before the visitors secured victory 11 minutes from time.

It was a crafty three-touch move as Pogba found Lucas Digne with a long pass from inside his own half and the left back volleyed a cross into the penalty area for Mbappe to slide in and steer the ball past keeper Dominik Livakovic.

Croatia defender Dejan Lovren rued his team’s concentration lapses.

“France are ruthlessly efficient and they will punish you every time you switch off, even for a split second,” he told reporters.

“Playing against them is very frustrating because you can be as entertaining as you like but to no avail. The three points is all that matters.” — Reuters

Eriksen penalty earns Denmark win over 10-man England

LONDON — Christian Eriksen’s penalty on his 100th appearance for Denmark earned his side a 1-0 win over England in their Nations League clash at Wembley on Wednesday as the hosts played more than half the game with 10 men.

Former Tottenham Hotspur midfielder Eriksen powered his spot-kick past Jordan Pickford in the 35th minute, a couple of minutes after England centre back Harry Maguire had received a red card for a second booking.

Defeat ended a run of nine successive home wins for England, who beat top-ranked Belgium on Sunday, while Denmark, who have lost just two of their last 40 international matches, celebrated their first victory over England at Wembley since 1983.

To rub salt into the home wounds, Reece James, England’s best player on his full debut, was also shown a red card after the final whistle for confronting referee Jesus Gil Manzano.

England slipped to third place in Group A2, which is now headed by Belgium with Denmark above England on goal difference.

“Disappointed to lose the match, but extremely proud of how we responded to going down to 10 men,” said England manager Gareth Southgate, who rather surprisingly opted not to send on Aston Villa’s creative midfielder Jack Grealish when chasing the game.

“We had a few chances that on another day would have gone in. The 10 men changes the game and they get a soft penalty.”

While it was a memorable night for Danish playmaker Eriksen, it was a disappointing one for England who suffered only their second home defeat in 32 competitive internationals.

There were some positives, however, notably an encouraging full debut for Chelsea right back James who was arguably England’s most effective attacking option, only to blot his copybook as tempers flared at fulltime.

Denmark, playing with the same side that beat Iceland at the weekend, started brightly with Kasper Dolberg having a couple of half chances and Eriksen pulling the strings, but England had begun to dominate when everything changed after 32 minutes.

Maguire, who had been booked for a rash foul on Yussuf Poulsen, took a poor touch near the halfway line and his attempted recovery tackle, while taking the ball, also caught Dolberg to earn the Manchester United man a second yellow.

Three minutes later, with England still re-organising, a long ball into their area caused hesitation in the home defence between Kyle Walker and Pickford and when Thomas Delaney went down the referee pointed to the spot.

It was a harsh decision but with no VAR to save England, Eriksen thumped his penalty past Pickford.

England enjoyed plenty of possession after the break without looking overly dangerous, although Denmark needed an incredible save by Kasper Schmeichel to preserve their lead.

When Declan Rice headed the ball into the area and Mason Mount connected with his head from close range, a goal looked certain but somehow Schmeichel clawed it away.

England huffed and puffed late on and Harry Kane’s goalbound header was cleared off the line as Denmark hung on. — Reuters

King of Clay

Rafael Nadal didn’t exactly have the best of tuneups heading into the French Open. In fact, he wound up playing just three matches at the Italian Open; his quarterfinal round stint ended in a straight-sets defeat to Diego Schwartzman, against whom he hitherto had a career nine-zero slate. Clearly, his seven-month absence from competition — owing to the novel coronavirus pandemic and borne of his refusal to play without spectators — told on his preparedness. It likewise didn’t seem to help that the major tournament changed its schedule to autumn and in type of balls used to a more moisture- and sediment-absorbent one; not a few quarters figured the conditions would stunt the powerful groundstrokes that made him all but invincible on red clay.

The turns of events understandably had conventional wisdom leaning Novak Djokovic’s way. Adding to the positive prognosis for the World Number One was the fact that he stayed active — perhaps even too active — through the sport’s forced hiatus. The ill-fated Adria Tour and his ensuing contraction of the virus notwithstanding, he seemed to have built the momentum he needed to claim his second French Open crown; he was a remarkable 37 and one for the year entering the Grand Slam stop, with the lone blemish on his record coming from an unfortunate disqualification at the United States Open. Which was why he oozed confidence as he surveyed the scene and then blitzed his way to the final. As he noted in the aftermath, “I was feeling great throughout the tournament, playing great tennis, winning in Rome, being very confident about my game.”

As things turned out, though, Nadal encountered no trouble — make that absolutely no trouble — en route to his unprecedented 13th victory at Roland Garros. He won all his contests in the minimum number of sets, and so dominant was he that Djokovic could do no better than take five games all told in the final; he even handed his supposed superior (under the aforementioned circumstances) a bagel in the first set. And because it was also his 20th major triumph to tie erstwhile clubhouse leader Roger Federer, talk naturally turned to whether his ultimate haul would place him at the top.

In typical fashion, Nadal brushed off speculation revolving around his veritable arms race with his contemporaries. Heck, he didn’t even indulge in the privilege of recognizing his status as undisputed all-time King of Clay. Instead, he saw fit to focus on his continuing affair with Paris and, in particular, Court Philippe-Chatrier. “The love story that I have with this city, and with this court, is unforgettable,” he admitted. And rather than delve on what ifs on the court, he found cause to underscore imperatives off it. “We are facing one of the worst moments that we remember in this world, facing and fighting against this virus. Just keep going, stay positive, and together, we will go through this, and we will win [against] the virus soon.” Enough said.

 

Anthony L. Cuaycong has been writing Courtside since BusinessWorld introduced a Sports section in 1994. He is a consultant on strategic planning, operations and Human Resources management, corporate communications, and business development.

Inequality and inclusive prosperity

 

Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century was named the 2014 Financial Times Business Book of the Year. The book explained wealth and income inequality in Europe and the US over 300 years. Piketty argued that when profit exceeds economic growth over a long haul, there is wealth accumulation and concentration. Social and economic instability ensues. Capitalism sows the seeds of inequality. To address this, progressive wealth taxes must be imposed to reduce inequality and mitigate wealth concentration. Piketty then revised his thesis to say that the relationship between profit and economic growth constitutes only one of various instruments to explain income inequality and wealth accumulation.

This year, Piketty published Capital and Ideology (2020) which goes a step further. The book explains how capitalists seek to maintain power over the working class. Social and political institutions come handy in achieving this end. He began with a formidable declaration that “every human society must justify its inequalities.” Retaining their dominant positions requires capitalists to propagate an ideology.  Piketty thus advocates a transition to socialism. The Economist calls this “millennial socialism” because it involves “democratizing” the economy, transferring control from capitalists and the government elite to ordinary folk. Unlike Marx, Piketty proposes to resolve social issues, in the words of The Guardian, “on the terrain of capitalism itself.”

Today, there is an increasing preoccupation of economists with social issues of rising poverty and inequality. It is no longer enough to produce growth. It is imperative to ensure that growth does not lead to more inequality and concentration of wealth. Growth must be more inclusive and self-sustaining. It is not just the distribution of income and wealth that is problematic, it is capitalist production that is the fundamental challenge.

Inclusive growth is more urgent today because of the debilitating pandemic. As Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz recently wrote, “while the pandemic has revealed the enormous cleavages across the countries of the world, the pandemic itself is likely to increase disparities.”

Based on the IMF’s latest estimate, with lives and livelihoods destroyed, governments have undertaken fiscal interventions costing some $12 trillion, to provide lifelines. With business and consumer sentiment remaining low, tax revenues continue to decline while public debt is bound to rise close to the global output. This is also being experienced in the Philippines.

This is a wake-up call. It is a call to action. With a deep recession, unemployment is in double digits. In the Philippines, the numbers are staggering. In April, the jobless rate stood at 17.7%. This translates to more than seven million without work. In July, it somewhat moderated to 10% with nearly five million jobless. Social assistance and small business support are bound to continue but governments have budget constraints, and their access to the debt market is not exactly limitless.

Fiscal space is fast eroding. Poverty could worsen.

Atif Mian and Amir Sufi’s book House of Debt (2014) becomes illuminating. In a recent interview with IMF’s Hyun-Sung Khang, Mian, a professor from Princeton, argues that excessive borrowing is proof that the economic system has become distorted by rising income inequality. He observed that “it’s almost as though the modern economy has become addicted to credit.”

Their thesis about the Great Financial Crisis offered a fresh perspective on where governments should focus. Supported by a vast amount of data, House of Debt posited that the dramatic increase in household debt among borrowers — the NINJA (no income, no jobs, and no assets) or the sub-primes — who are least able to pay back helped cause the modern-day Great Depression. Therefore, policymakers committed a grave error by unduly focusing on the banking system and in bailing out banks instead of the borrowers themselves.

Former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers praised Mian and Sufi saying it “could be the most important book to come out of the 2008 Financial Crisis and subsequent Great Recession.” He agreed that more consideration should have been given by policymakers to households’ balance sheets during the Great Recession. While conceding part of the authors’ arguments, Summers defended the policymakers of the day, including himself. He highlighted the need for academic economists to understand that some policy choices are found outside simple econometric models.

To Mian, Summers’ position was no less than “political timidity,” an error in itself for not appreciating the seriousness of the situation. Bailouts for indebted households, rather than banks, could have made a lot of difference, then and perhaps even now in the face of the global pandemic.

In the Philippines alone, household debt rose from P357 billion in July 2014 all the way to P887 billion by July 2020 with a six-year average of 19%. Household debt, comprised of auto loans, housing loans, and credit card receivables, accounted for 10% of the total loans outstanding of the banking system. It looks like the thesis of House of Debt scarcely applies because the numbers do not look daunting. But if we consider informal loans as well as the ubiquitous cash remittances from overseas now at around $30 billion or P1.5 trillion, it is not unreasonable to say formal household debt with banks is on the low side. Households are borrowing from relatives and friends, as well as from the informal lenders. The propensity to borrow is also tempered by regular remittances of overseas family members. Without these safety valves, Mian and Sufi are spot on.

The simple measure of poverty incidence in the Philippines from 2012 to 2015 to 2018 tells us, some progress has been made. Eight years ago, 25.2% of the population were considered poor. Three years later, this declined to 23.3%. Three years after in 2018, we saw a more dramatic decline to 16.6%. Per capita poverty and per capita food thresholds also confirm this. The percentages of households with savings and those with savings in banks also point to good progress.

Two points.

One, relative to other countries in ASEAN, while we have sustained 21 years of uninterrupted economic growth, the pace of mitigating poverty and the state of our infrastructure pale in comparison. There are more miles to go before we can afford to sleep.

Two, as the latest research made by Jose Ramon G. Albert, Michael Ralph M. Abrigo, Francis Mark A. Quimba and Jana Flor V. Vizmanos (“Poverty, the Middle Class, and Income Distribution amid COVID-19,” September 2020) of the Philippine Institute for Development Studies shows, COVID-19 has increased the vulnerability of the lower income class  on account of the economic lockdown. Unless the government sustains its social amelioration support —  perhaps even help small businesses employing lower-income workers — we are bound to see an exacerbation of income distribution and poverty.

We draw from Mian’s arguments that due to ultra-easy monetary policy driving interest rates down, some kind of a liquidity trap is created to motivate loans. To Mian, this credit “supercycle” is about to end. One cannot generate sufficient demand for growth by creating credit after credit.

Monetary and supervisory policies should involve central banks and treasuries consulting with banks. Banks could be reminded that the benefits of cheaper money and regulatory relief must be devolved to their household and corporate clients. Mandating moratorium may also be considered. After all,  no one is strong enough to be buying bad loans that have accumulated since the economic lockdown.

Short of these considerations, we are bound to see rising inequality, public discontent and in some jurisdictions, angry populism.

In the midst of these urgent and troubling times, the congressional intramural in the Philippines that has interrupted needed budget deliberations only serves to exacerbate our helplessness in the fight against the pandemic. The politicking will produce disturbing social implications in its selfish and shameless aftermath. 

 

Diwa C. Guinigundo is the former Deputy Governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001-2003, he was Alternate Executive Director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is the senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.

Surveys and the fear factor

 

The results of the September 2020 Ulat ng Bayan (literally, the People’s Report) survey of Pulse Asia released on Oct. 8 surprised — and, said one of their fellow political observers, even “appalled” — some of the polling firm’s own executives. Indeed, in response to the skepticism of those citizens aware of, and deeply concerned over the gross incompetence and corruption rampant in government, at least two of the latter went out of their way to try to explain what could have led to the unbelievably high approval and trust ratings of President Rodrigo Duterte and his administration.

Pulse Asia reported that 84% of Filipinos said they approve of the way the regime is addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. Only 3% of those surveyed supposedly disagree with the statement that Mr. Duterte has succeeded in preventing the spread of the disease. With 5% uncertain, a huge 92% purportedly agree that he has done well in controlling the contagion, although, with an average of 3,000-plus new cases daily, and with a total of over 300,000 cases as of last week (Oct. 5-11), the Philippines is now 18th in the world among those countries with the highest number of coronavirus cases.

The relatively poor sector of the population, socio-economic classes D and E, seemingly gave him approval ratings of 93% and 95%, respectively. Even classes ABC, which are presumed to be better informed, apparently gave him 78%. Mr. Duterte’s performance rating also rose by four percentage points to 91% from its previous 87%, said Pulse Asia.

The results were surprising enough for some groups and individuals to question the survey methodology and to even imply that they were deliberately skewed. In protest, the head of Pulse Asia said the firm has been using the same methodology for 20 years and that as a group mostly made up of academics it is not in the business of lying on behalf of any interest.

Pulse Asia’s record and reputation do speak for themselves. It has accurately polled voter preferences during past elections, for example, and in those 20 years has demonstrated that the opinions of the population it solicits during its surveys are truly reflective of the views of the entire Filipino people. How representative is the survey population is crucial in canvassing public opinion, and both Pulse Asia and Social Weather Stations have apparently found and habitually access such a body of men and women.

As astounding as they are, the September 2020 Pulse Asia findings are not the only survey results that have surprised academics, independent journalists, and even foreign observers. Even before the pandemic, some of the latter, among them political scientists, human rights defenders and journalists from other countries, had raised in public forums questions on the reasons for the apparent popularity of Mr. Duterte despite his profanities, threats, misogynist remarks, invitations to violence, and authoritarian mode of governance.

Pulse Asia competitor Social Weather Stations has also released public opinion poll findings on Mr. Duterte and his administration that seem to defy explanation. His so-called “war on drugs,” despite its huge toll on the lives and fortunes of the poor — it has left in its bloody wake wives widowed and children orphaned by the killings — has consistently received high approval ratings in both Pulse Asia and Social Weather Stations polls even from classes D and E. One survey, however, at the same time found that most of the respondents favored arresting and charging suspected drug pushers and users in court rather than summarily executing them as the regime has been doing.

The conflict between the two findings in the same opinion poll was enough to suggest to some journalists and academics that most Filipinos actually disapprove of the way the Duterte regime’s brutal anti-illegal drug campaign is being waged. When directly asked if they approve of it or not, they were moved to say “yes,” but when asked if they agreed with the killings that primarily characterize what they said they approved of, said “no.”

Something similarly in conflict with the Pulse Asia findings was among the results of another recent opinion poll. Most Filipinos, some 85%, Social Weather Stations found in a September survey taken almost at the same time as Pulse Asia’s, still fear catching COVID-19 despite the six-month long (and counting) lockdown the country has been subjected to. That sentiment contradicts the supposedly overwhelming support for the Duterte administration’s handling of the pandemic that Pulse Asia found. If in the opinion of 84% of Filipinos the regime is doing so well in reducing the contagion, why would 85% of the population still fear catching it?

What is evident in both cases is that the respondents said “yes” when directly asked if they approve of what the Duterte regime is doing about the COVID-19 crisis, but contradicted themselves when answering a question that did not imply any criticism of the government.

If that suggests anything, it is that there are widespread fears among the people that criticism of the present regime can be dangerous, as it has indeed demonstrated in a number of instances, among them in the harassment, intimidation, and even the imprisonment and killing of critics, dissenters, human rights defenders and independent journalists. The use of its coercive powers — the police, the military, the courts — to compel obedience and conformity is inherent in the very nature of the State. But uniquely among Philippine administrations since that of Ferdinand Marcos’, and far more than that of Fidel Ramos’, Joseph Estrada’s, Benigno Aquino III’s, and even Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s, Mr. Duterte’s regime has used fear and terror most to assure its dominance not only over every institution of government but also over the rest of the population.

The only conclusion that can be drawn from the above contradictions in survey results is that while the methodology of polling groups like Pulse Asia has remained the same over the last two decades as its president has admitted, it is the context in which it is still being used that has changed.

The fear factor has to be integrated into that methodology, perhaps by pollsters’ making sure that in the effort to get a sense of public sentiment on any issue involving governance, the questions they ask are phrased in such a way that they do not suggest any direct criticism of the present order. Perhaps then there will be less skepticism and a better sense of what the public is really thinking. Assuring respondents that their names and other information about them will be kept confidential could also help.

Although false, inadequate, or no information at all does have a bearing on the results of public opinion polls, it won’t do to just dismiss them as merely indicative of the distressing ignorance that afflicts vast segments of the population that is at least partly due to the regime’s keyboard army of trolls. The transformation of the country’s political context from one that prior to 2016 was relatively threat-free to the climate of fear that now defines it is most certainly a factor as well in the way the populace responds to surveys and public opinion polls. In much the same way, in warlord-dominated areas the results of elections are decided by fear and coercion rather than by informed democratic choice — and are as ghastly as the Duterte regime’s allegedly universal approval and trust ratings.

 

Luis V. Teodoro is on Facebook and Twitter (@luisteodoro).

www.luisteodoro.com

A different crisis

“The characteristics of a spiritual crisis are nearly identical to that of clinical depression… except that the cause is a crisis of the soul,” remarked five-time best-selling author Caroline Myss in a brief excerpt from her workshop. It is a timely topic during this pandemic and how it affects society.

An internationally renowned speaker on human consciousness, energy, spirituality and medical intuition, Ms. Myss explained that she has met many people who declared that they were in states of depression and anxiety. The symptoms are basically the same. However, they were undergoing spiritual crises — not psychological or mental crises. The terminology was just different.

How do you treat or respond to it?

The question we often ask is, “What is happening in our spirit or soul?”

The spiritual crises need to be identified. They are considered “the epidemic of our age… Prayer is essential to navigating your way through ‘a dark night of the soul,’” Ms. Myss remarked.

In this context, people do not realize the power of prayer and its healing value.

She observed that we have become “people of the interior world” through the past seven decades. There is an emotional language involved. The term “Empowerment” has emerged. It has changed our values and inner vocabulary.

A spiritual crisis is different from a psychological depression and anxiety. What many people now have are called “sufferings of the soul.”

Over the past century, survival has changed meaning. We used to be focused on physical survival. Now, we are inwardly focused. This shift has changed our terms.

The interior life has great value.

The dividing point was World War II — when we entered the nuclear age. Survival used to be just the physical world. After that period, we developed “the body, mind, spirit template.” There is a new understanding of our energetic nature and physical anatomy. We want to pursue what makes up a happy, healthy human life. In the transition, there was a shift in our “inner calculus.”

What makes a happy, healthy life?

The focus is on the self.

This is critical to understanding how much our values have changed. “We have pointed the arrow from the outside world to the world behind our eye.”

“That inner world has always been a part of the human experience,” Ms. Myss emphasized.

It is important to note that the big questions have been worked on in “monastic settings” and universities for centuries, by people who had access to “refined methods of asking.” They were the monks and professors, the intellectuals.

“What is the meaning and purpose of life?” This is the great cosmic question that has changed the direction. We are preoccupied with the game changers.

What is the power of the human soul? What is the purpose of my life? What has value?

People are in search of the most extraordinary questions.

Prior to the pursuit of the self, that was a question restricted to “the luxury of one who could ask the question and who could handle the answer.” There is a need for someone who can handle the question. When we dwell on the question, we are asking to know.

We ask the Divine, “Reveal to me why you gave me life? Why did you send and want me here now? Not 100 years ago or 100 years later? What am I doing here? Why was I born in this country, as a female? I realized that I couldn’t comprehend why am I a Taurus? Or a Leo?”

We are asking for and expecting “soul knowledge to bubble up and make its way to the conscious mind.”

“From whence did I come?”

The answer is — “The warehouse of the eternal.”

This time and culture have produced what are called “oddities.”

Studies show that people have contempt for the “ordinary.” It is considered “the most unappealing thing in the world. Being and doing ordinary.” We were brought up to think, “I was born to be something special.” This is the curse of “specialness.” It provokes someone to start imagining that life is disappointing unless it is “gargantuan” and glamorous. We expect that the measure of success in life is the Hollywood style. It has to be extra-special.

What makes something ordinary?

“Ordinary means subject to the laws,” Ms. Myss explained. This refers to the law of nature, the law of gravity, the tides, the law of ageing, the law of change. “The cycle of life. The birth of the phoenix.”

We think that we can transcend the laws. That means we think of ourselves as being extraordinary. Therefore, we feel entitled in doing or dealing with small, meaningless things. For example, we say, “I don’t have to wait in line.” Then we are negotiating the laws of longevity, youth or ageing.

“We are unconsciously negotiating with the sacred… The striving to be extraordinary.

“We think we have clout with the unfolding of life itself.”

When we realize that we cannot be extraordinary, we feel the pressure and we suffer.

There is no instant solution to the spiritual crises. The slow process of understanding will happen when we learn and accept that we are ordinary.

We can pray. Perhaps, we can do things, like the saints, in extraordinary ways.

 

Maria Victoria Rufino is an artist, writer and businesswoman. She is president and executive producer of Maverick Productions.

mavrufino@gmail.com

The WHO on lockdowns: ‘It wasn’t me’

As the song goes, a guy (the part sung by English-Jamaican singer RikRok) was caught cheating by his girlfriend. Despondent, he went to Jamaican-American reggae artist Shaggy for advice. The latter gave his version of “wisdom”: Deny everything. Regardless of facts and logic. Just repeatedly say: “It wasn’t me.” That song became one of the highest selling singles of 2000.

Unfortunately, the World Health Organization (WHO) seems to have taken Shaggy’s advice to heart.

Just last week, the WHO’s Special Envoy on COVID-19 David Nabarro said in an interview: “We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” adding that “lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer.”

Of course, lockdown supporters (writer Alex Berenson aptly calls them “Team Apocalypse”) tried to defend the WHO’s inconsistency. And yet, the WHO, particularly through its Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, could be seen from April to June repeatedly encouraging countries to continue with their lockdowns and actually blamed countries that decided to lift lockdown restrictions for rising COVID-19 cases.

But all the flip-flopping, followed by attempts to dish off blame on someone else, is par for the course for the WHO this COVID-19 season: last February it mistakenly called out countries that wanted to issue travel bans on travelers from China; from March to early June the WHO correctly advised the public not to wear masks, only to reverse itself afterwards.

Nevertheless, Dr. Nabarro is right about lockdowns: “Look what’s happened to smallholder farmers all over the world. Look what’s happening to poverty levels. It seems that we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition.”

Our own data has been saying this all along. As an example, take the snapshot as of Sept. 10 (23 days after the lifting of the Aug. 4-18 Modified Enhanced Community Quarantine or MECQ, the second strictest level of quarantine).

Were hospitals prevented from being overwhelmed? Were benefits attained? But if one looks at the NCR numbers for Aug. 4 (1st day of MECQ), there were 1,360 ward beds occupied and 413 occupied ICU beds. By the last day of the MECQ (Aug. 18), instead of a reduction, there were 1,377 ward beds occupied (an increase of 17 new patients) and 446 ICU beds (and increase of 33 patients). [*One should ignore the percentages stated in the Department of Health updates, as the total number of available beds changed several times. Instead look at the actual number of beds occupied.]

Even allowing for time lag for incubation, by Sept. 1, there were 1,314 ward beds occupied (a mere decrease of 4.6%) and 445 ICU beds. But note, as of Sept. 10, as mentioned 23 days after lifting of the MECQ (and even allowing for a 12-14 day COVID-19 incubation period), for which pro-lockdown people were openly seen hoping for an upsurge in cases, instead there were only 1,235 beds occupied (a decrease of 10%) and 436 ICU (a decrease of 10 patients). The point is that the MECQ made no difference in the number of patients infected and needing to be hospitalized. In fact, if one looks at Aug. 18, there was a 40% increase in active cases during the 14 day MECQ but only a 9.6% increase in the 23 days after the lifting of the MECQ.

Lockdowns simply don’t work. One would think that people living in the world’s longest lockdown would know that.

The clincher, the proof that even pro-lockdown supporters don’t really believe in “following the science” was their increasingly hostile reaction when a number of renowned epidemiologists finally said “enough!”

Harvard’s Martin Kulldorff, PhD, Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya, PhD, and Oxford’s Sunetra Gupta, PhD, came out this October with the Great Barrington Declaration, saying that “lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health.” These experts instead recommended that:

Schools and universities should open for in-person teaching.

Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should resume.

Restaurants and other businesses should open.

Arts, music, and other cultural activities should resume.

The young and those not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal.

Practice simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick.

Emphatically, these are not the products of hindsight. Medical and economic experts, and particularly this column have been saying the same things as far back as April.

Interestingly, Dr. Kulldorff even pointed out (in an interview with Spike on Oct. 9) that contract tracing “doesn’t work for COVID if it has already spread in the population.” Again, something this column pointed out back in May (“Thoughts in a triple lockdown”).

Perhaps the WHO should have listened more closely to RikRok. In the end, he wisely tells Shaggy that repeatedly saying “it wasn’t me” actually “makes no sense at all.”

 

Jemy Gatdula is a Senior Fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence.

jemygatdula@yahoo.com

www.jemygatdula.blogspot.com

facebook.com/jemy.gatdula

Twitter @jemygatdula

Thailand bans protests as challenge to monarchy, prime minister escalates

BANGKOK — Thailand’s government banned protests and police arrested at least three protest leaders on Thursday in the face of escalating demonstrations targeting King Maha Vajiralongkorn as well as Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, a former junta leader.

Within 30 minutes of emergency orders, justified partly on the grounds of disturbing a royal motorcade, riot police drove away protesters who had camped outside Mr. Prayuth’s offices to demand his removal and a new constitution. “The situation right now is tantamount to a coup,” said Tattep Ruangprapaikitseree, one of the few protest leaders still free.

Police said they had arrested more than 20 people for refusing to cooperate with officers clearing the protest from the prime minister’s office. Among those arrested were two of the most vocal critics of the monarchy. Another was picked up later.

Three months of protests have been largely peaceful, as was a march by tens of thousands of people on Wednesday. But in one incident, police pushed jeering protesters away from a motorcade carrying Queen Suthida.

That was used as a reason for the emergency measures that include a ban on gatherings of five or more people. Publishing news or online information that “could create fear” or “affect national security” was also forbidden.

“It is extremely necessary to introduce an urgent measure to end this situation effectively and promptly to maintain peace and order,” the government said in the order.

Other reasons for the emergency measures were damage to the economy from protests and the risk of spreading the novel coronavirus, of which only one locally transmitted case has been reported in more than four months.

“What was done today is pushing Thailand to a breaking point,” said opposition politician Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit.

“The government must release the protesters and end the emergency decree.”

Police said they had arrested protest leaders Parit “Penguin” Chiwarak and rights lawyer Arnon Nampa. Mr. Arnon said on Facebook he was being forced to board a helicopter to the northern city of Chiang Mai, where he faces sedition charges over a speech in August. 

Pictures on social media later showed student leader Panusaya “Rung” Sithijirawattanakul being taken away in a wheelchair as she gave the three-finger salute of pro-democracy campaigners.

She was arrested shortly after she had urged people to take part in a protest planned for 4 p.m. (0900 GMT) despite the emergency order. Other protesters said they still planned to go ahead.

The protest movement aims to remove Mr. Prayuth, saying he manipulated an election last year to keep hold of power. He says the election was fair.

Those marching on the streets also want a new constitution and have called for a reduction in the powers of the king. They want his role to be clearly subject to the constitution and they seek the reversal of orders that gave him control of the palace fortune and some army units.

Criticism of the monarchy is punishable by up to 15 years in prison under lese majeste laws, though Mr. Prayuth said earlier this year the king had asked that they not be enforced for now. — Reuters

Proper treatment of employees is the best form of ‘employer branding’ during COVID-19

How a company treats its employees during the pandemic will be a deciding factor in how successful it is in attracting top talent. 

 “When you start hiring again or when you’re looking to retain your best employees, they are going to ask you, ‘How did you respond during COVID-19?’” said Andrew Tan, country manager of job-matching platform Wantedly Singapore, during a virtual workshop on human resources. 

 This may also extend to the availability of flexible work options, as many employees have become accustomed to the convenience of a remote work setup. “If we’re moving into another role and that flexibility is no longer there, it’s almost like a gap,” said Angel Kilian, founder of Career inFocus, a professional training and coaching firm.

A company that addresses these needs must indicate so on their hiring platforms, along with their product or service, mission, and values.

Once a company reaches out to a job seeker for an interview, the common goal must be to discover if there is a right fit based on shared values and purpose. Communication must be open and two-way.

When onboarding, the employer must introduce team members and discuss work culture and the work environment as early as possible in order to manage the new employee’s expectations. “You hear too many examples of new employees getting a culture shock in their first week, being thrown to the deep end so that they can try and learn how to swim on their own, or thinking about job-hopping less than a few months into this new role,” said Mr. Tan.

 If a company is able to fulfill its promises in valuing employees, then the employees themselves will be the best advocates of employer branding.

 “They will then be your best talents and they will, in turn, refer lookalikes to your talent pool… A boss, he or she is likely to say, ‘My company is the best.’ But when the employee says it, it adds that much more weight, that much more validation,” said Mr. Tan. 

“HR of Tomorrow: Thriving Amidst Change,” a virtual workshop on human resources, was organized by coworking space WeWork. — Mariel Alison L. Aguinaldo

South Korea’s Big Hit market debut tempered by reliance on K-pop group BTS

SEOUL — Big Hit Entertainment, the management label of South Korean superstar K-pop group BTS, hit the stock market with a 9.6 trillion won ($8.38 billion) valuation on Thursday before worries over its narrow revenue stream pulled shares below the debut price.

Big Hit, which relies heavily on the boy band for revenue, opened at 270,000 won—double its initial public offering (IPO) price—and surged by as much as 30% in early trade before dropping back to just under the list price.

Interest in South Korea’s third largest IPO of the year was high, with almost half of Big Hit’s 10 million tradable shares changing hands on Thursday morning amid a weaker wider market, according to the Korea Exchange website.

Analysts say the company has proved itself online savvy, using YouTube and social media for market infiltration since in-person performances were cancelled because of the coronavirus pandemic.

But there are some concerns about Big Hit’s reliance on its star artists. The Billboard Chart-topping BTS, which has a huge global following, accounted for 87.7% of the label’s revenue in the first half of 2020, according to a regulatory filing.

It’s a scenario common among South Korean entertainment companies and one investors are familiar with, but it makes revenue especially vulnerable to any disruptions in output from key talent.

“The industry is booming, but it’s also very cyclical, and undergoes a lot of fluctuations,” said Kim Hyun-yong, analyst at Hyundai Motor Securities, citing potential obstacles such as the country’s mandatory military service.

That service is looming for BTS, with the eldest member of the band currently required to sign up by the end of next year and the remaining six members over the following five years.

Calls have been mounting for the band to be granted an exemption from or postponement of the two-year commitment, with some lawmakers and fans arguing they are doing plenty for their country without wearing a soldier’s uniform.

Earlier this week, BTS faced a barrage of criticism in China after the band’s lead member made remarks about the 1950-53 Korean War pitting the United States and South Korea against China and North Korea. BTS-related social media posts relating to big-name brands, including Samsung, FILA, and Hyundair, subsequently disappeared from Chinese e-commerce platforms.

Thursday’s float made the band members instant multimillionaires, with each granted shares worth 18.5 billion won ($16 million) at the debut price, but BTS’ official Twitter account did not reference the listing, focusing instead on the group’s win at the coinciding US Billboard Music Awards for Top Social Artist.

NEW ARTISTS?
Analysts said BTS’ successful online concerts have partly made up for performances canceled due to COVID-19. Additionally, Big Hit’s unprecedented level of control over its revenue streams via its Weverse fandom platform that distributes BTS content and sells merchandise, differentiate the label.

“Although offline concerts are impossible for the time being, Big Hit’s results in the first half of this year show that the content and merchandise made profits; it was hardly affected on-year,” said KTB Investment & Securities analyst Nam Hyo-ji.

Big Hit founder and co-CEO Bang Si-hyuk said the company planned to create “new value chains.”

“We will continue to research, challenge, discover innovative business models, and apply them to continue to grow in the global market,” he said at the listing ceremony.

The listing added to heightened IPO activity in South Korea, with volumes rising 51% to $2.9 billion so far this year, compared with the same period last year, according to Refinitiv data.

The pipeline looks solid after government stimulus to boost the economy amid the coronavirus pandemic flooded markets with cash, analysts said. Online game developer Krafton, and chat app operator Kakao’s mobile banking unit KakaoBank have both begun preliminary processes for listing. — Joyce Lee/Reuters

US Treasury chief urges IMF, World Bank to be prudent fighting pandemic

WASHINGTON — US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Wednesday urged the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank to work judiciously within their existing resources to fight the coronavirus pandemic and urged G20 countries to endorse a proposed debt restructuring framework.

In a statement to the two institutions’ steering committees, Mr. Mnuchin said they needed to continue to provide financing, advice, and capacity development to aid countries hurt by the COVID-19 pandemic. But as they disburse billions of dollars in emergency funds, they need to plan for transitions to normal financing arrangements, he added.

“It is critical that the World Bank manage financial resources judiciously and transparently, with clear justifications for allocations to countries with robust access to other financing sources, so as not to burden shareholders with premature calls for new financing,” Mr. Mnuchin said.

Mr. Mnuchin’s statement, which comes as the IMF and World Bank hold annual meetings this week, made no mention of calls from other countries for the Fund to issue a new allocation of Special Drawing Rights. The Treasury opposed that move, which is akin to a central bank creating hundreds of billions of dollars in new currency reserves for IMF countries.

The World Bank, which raised $13 billion in new capital from members in 2018, should target its resources where needs are highest and no additional shareholding adjustments are needed, Mr. Mnuchin said.

The Treasury chief, who oversees the dominant US shareholdings in both institutions, said the IMF should fully use its existing financing tools but it may need to be more flexible in conditions it imposes on borrowing countries, including for those that need to restructure external debts.

He urged IMF leaders to keep the board updated on the adequacy of the Fund’s $1 trillion in lending capacity and to execute an expansion of its crisis lending fund.

Mr. Mnuchin said that the IMF should encourage countries with particularly difficult circumstances to move from emergency financing to traditional IMF financing programs that require structural reforms to boost growth.

“Even as the IMF deploys its resources towards crisis response, it must also remain focused on delivering on its core mandate of global economic and financial stability. In this context, we look forward to the prompt resumption of bilateral surveillance to provide much-needed policy advice,” Mr. Mnuchin said

Mr. Mnuchin also said that a new debt framework that would help low-income countries restructure debts, should be quickly endorsed by G20 countries. He said the plan, agreed in principle by G20 finance leaders, would “provide debt relief on common parameters, with equitable burden sharing that covers all private and official bilateral creditors.” — Andrea Shalal and David Lawder/Reuters

‘Long COVID’ may affect multiple parts of body and mind, doctors say

LONDON — Ongoing illness after infection with COVID-19, sometimes called “long COVID,” may not be one syndrome but possibly up to four causing a rollercoaster of symptoms affecting all parts of the body and mind, doctors said on Thursday.

In an initial report about long-term COVID-19, Britain’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) said one common theme among ongoing COVID patients—some of whom are seven months or more into their illness—is that symptoms appear in one physiological area, such as the heart or lungs, only to abate and then arise again in a different area.

“This review highlights the detrimental physical and psychological impact that ongoing COVID is having on many people’s lives,” said Dr. Elaine Maxwell, who led the report.

Many thousands of people worldwide have linked up on social media platforms and online forums to share their experiences of ongoing COVID-19 symptoms. Some call themselves “long haulers” while others have named their condition “long COVID.”

According to UK-based patient group LongCovidSOS, data from a King’s College London-devised symptom tracker app shows that 10% of COVID-19 patients remain unwell after three weeks, and up to 5% may continue to be sick for months.

Ms. Maxwell, who presented the findings of the “Living with COVID” report in an online media briefing, said health services are already struggling “to manage these new and fluctuating patterns of symptoms and problems.”

She and her co-authors urged patients and doctors to log and track symptoms so that health researchers can learn more about the condition and how to ease it as swiftly as possible.

“Despite the uncertainties, people need help now,” she said. “We need to collect more data.”

For this initial report, Ms. Maxwell’s team held a focus group with 14 members of a Facebook group called Long COVID.

Their testimony suggested ongoing COVID can be cyclical, Ms. Maxwell said, with symptoms fluctuating in severity and moving around the body including around the respiratory system, the brain, cardiovascular system and heart, the kidneys, the gut, the liver and the skin.

“There are powerful stories that ongoing COVID symptoms are experienced by people of all ages, and people from all backgrounds,” the report said.

Ms. Maxwell said an urgent priority is to establish a working diagnosis recognized by healthcare services, employers and government agencies to help patients get support.

“While this is a new disease and we are learning more about its impact…, services will need to be better equipped to support people with ongoing COVID, as emerging evidence is showing there are significant psychological and social impacts that will have long-term consequences,” the report said. — Kate Kelland/Reuters

1...7,4897,4907,491...12,784Page 7,490 of 12,784
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube