FDI Inflows Don't Include Money That Filipino Women Get From Dating (or Even Marrying) Male Foreigners
I have nothing against Filipinas dating foreign men if it's done out of love. However, I can't help but notice the crude jokes that are written against FDI. Some economically ignorant people even call it foreign direct insertion. It means Filipinas have sexual relations with foreign men. Since when did foreign investment ever include Filipinas having sexual relationships with foreign men? It's already bad enough that some people think FDI equals foreign loans (read here). If the likes of the IBON Foundation and Migrante International are counting Marcos Sr.'s loans as FDI--they really fail at basic concepts of economics!
Foreign investment involves capital flows from one country to another, granting the foreign investors extensive ownership stakes in domestic companies and assets. Foreign investment denotes that foreigners have an active role in management as a part of their investment or an equity stake large enough to enable the foreign investor to influence business strategy. A modern trend leans toward globalization, where multinational firms have investments in a variety of countries.
Since when did Filipinas having sexual relations with foreigners ever become a capital inflow for the Philippines? Not at all! FDI means that foreigners invest in a country that's not theirs. With how it works, I don't see any examples of Filipinas dating foreigners as a means to do FDI:
How Foreign Investment Works
Foreign investment is largely seen as a catalyst for economic growth in the future. Foreign investments can be made by individuals, but are most often endeavors pursued by companies and corporations with substantial assets looking to expand their reach.
As globalization increases, more and more companies have branches in countries around the world. For some multinational corporations, opening new manufacturing and production plants in a different country is attractive because of the opportunities for cheaper production and labor costs.
Additionally, these large corporations frequently look to do business with those countries where they will pay the least amount of taxes. They may do this by relocating their home office or parts of their business to a country that is a tax haven or has favorable tax laws aimed at attracting foreign investors.
Male foreigners having any kind of sexual relations (moral or immoral) doesn't fit into the picture of foreign investment. Investment and insertion (sorry in advance to readers offended by the language here) are two different activities. Even the meanings greatly differ from a basic dictionary to a business dictionary. Foreigners who invest aren't necessarily looking for a Filipina girlfriend or wife. A foreigner dating or marrying a Filipina isn't investing in the Philippines. A Filipina who's into a sexual relationship with a foreigner, moral or immoral, doesn't contribute to the FDI inflow. That's unless if that Filipina was married to one of the people running an MNC, and therefore that counts!
The economic ignorance of those crude jokes is there. Besides, I blame the Filipino First Policy as to why more Filipinas desire foreigners than their own men. The Filipino First Policy caused the Philippines to fail in so many ways. Joblessness happens because of the desire that Filipinos should be the majority of economic participants. Never mind that Marina Bay Sands in Singapore was built mostly on FDI. Filipinas who are decent may be better off marrying foreign partners. Maybe, any decent Mainland Chinese guy is better off marrying a Filipina (of Malay descent) and moving to either Singapore or Malaysia, or even any of the Nordic countries.
This Valentine's Day, it's more than time to send this message. I'm afraid economic literacy in the Philippines hasn't been built well in schools. Even worse, some Filipino economists still believe in the same nonsense given by the economists of the late Lee Kuan Yew's day. One can always make a claim but not back it up. Results speak louder than words. Singapore's great people not only spoke but showed the results. All the 1987 Constitution framers can do is talk and talk without much evidence to back their words up.