The urge to find some thing in the election outcomes to analyze extends to the financial realm as well.

The urge to find some thing in the election outcomes to analyze extends to the financial realm as well. On Thursday, London-primarily based consultancy Capital Economics and Fitch Ratings each presented their judgments of the outcome of the elections. Their conclusions had been ambiguous, which is possibly the quality any analysis of this political machine can muster.

Capital Economics said that given the near-shutout executed with the aid of allies of President Rodrigo Duterte within the Senate races, prospects are excellent for continuation of tremendous economic reforms, inclusive of passage of the next packages of the Comprehensive Tax Reform Program. On the opposite hand, giving a more potent mandate to an autocratic president with a dim regard for political establishments and an unhealthy consciousness on attacking combatants may backfire and pressure away foreign investors, the firm concluded. Capital Economics additionally expressed reservations about Durterte’s push to decentralize the authorities, “a move we assume might motive inequality across the united states to widen even further.”

Fitch Ratings’ evaluation become a bit more high quality, however likewise did not forget about the alternative side of the coin, although in less express phrases. Fitch also noticed the presumed consequences of the Senate elections as an advantage for “coverage continuity,” however suggested in an offhand manner that it’d now not exchange Fitch’s score mission for the Philippines, which it has not modified due to the fact that December 2017. Fitch said that it might retain to watch key factors which includes the u . S .’s boom outlook, progress on tax reforms, and monetary rules, that is as a good deal to say it does now not sense the Philippines have to accept any more interest than it has been for the past year and a half. “Policy continuity” appears to mean that situations which include “a weaker commercial enterprise environment and decrease requirements of governance compared with its rankings class friends” can even hold in Fitch’s view.

The mistake that Capital Economics, Fitch Ratings, and just about every different political and monetary analyst each outside and inside the Philippines make is in misidentifying this political gadget as an actual democracy. It isn’t. It is basically an oligarchy, however “company country” may even be a higher definition. A slim magnificence of politicians trade offices amongst themselves, and govern according to extensive strategies dictated via a fair narrower elegance of commercial enterprise conglomerates. Voters are given the pretense of preference, but policy differences are nonexistent; the choice is usually among “the ones presently in strength” and “the opposition,” and primarily based on persona attraction. Duterte is not truly any greater or less effective than any of his predecessors, nor would any of the failed “competition” candidates for Senate have significantly challenged the main components of modern policy had they received the election. Personality-pushed troubles inclusive of the rhetorical function at the South China Sea dispute, perceptions of press freedom (or lack thereof), and law-and-order rhetoric may were affected, however now not the center economic regulations that really drive the country.