Widespread hunger in a supposed land of plenty

OVER the past several days, my rusty pick-up truck and I have been scouring the open fields near where I live, looking for either of two things: fresh hay that I could gather from newly harvested rice farms or pockets of green from where I would reap feeder grass for my cattle and goats. I start at the break of dawn because of the extreme heat. I bring a jug of cold water and canned goods from balikbayan boxes sent by generous next of kin based in the US.

I don’t eat canned goods for health reasons, but I bring the canned stuff (Spam, sausages in small tin cans and the like) with me for a precise reason.

Widespread hunger in a supposed land of plenty

You see, the open fields where I gather hay and reap grass are currently major convergence points for those with cattle, goats and carabaos to feed. (Not a single grazing area in our farming community has survived the long drought, and the animals we raise either for work or for the slaughterhouse have been starving.) And in these convergence points for the animal feeds gatherer, the ordinaries who gather there often tell stories about their humdrum, little lives during the short respites from reaping and hay gathering. “We tell ourselves stories in order to live,” wrote Joan Didion. How true.

Mostly, the stories are about a particular state of material deprivation. In some cases, we hear the truly heartbreaking story of a farmhand father about his kids occasionally missing meals, eating twice instead of three times a day, mostly a diet of cheap rice and instant noodles. Or cheap rice and eggs. Or cheap rice and the cheapest dried fish.

We retire early because of the heat. And that’s where the canned goods come in.

Before we go our separate ways, I often hand over the canned goods to the most distressed farmhand father. I am often embarrassed by the expression of deep gratitude. I tell the recipient of the canned goods that there is no loss on my part. What would I do with canned goods that I am not allowed to eat but that my US-based relatives keep on sending?

Those stories about missed meals, hunger and general deprivation have been translated into data by the latest survey on hunger done in early March by the Social Weather Stations (SWS). The SWS latest hunger survey said that 14.2 percent of Filipinos have been suffering from involuntary hunger, which simply means people are missing meals because there is nothing to eat and there is no money to buy food. Of the 14.2 percent, there is a small portion that regularly suffers from severe hunger. It is poverty that binds the members of the 14.2 percent. And hunger, as noted by the survey, is a fact of life across the country’s regions.

Such a level of involuntary hunger was last recorded in 2021, the impact of the pandemic, according to the SWS.

It is then relevant to ask this question? What are the factors driving such inhumane levels of involuntary hunger? We are a “rising economic tiger,” according to our political overlords. We are the “fastest-growing economy” in the Asean region, according to state propaganda. We are supposed to be a society on the cusp of greatness, and every boat is supposed to be lifted by Bagong Pilipinas.

What, then, would account for so much hunger in a supposed land of plenty? A country where the constant claim of government is that it is putting in place an “inclusive society” with “broadly shared prosperity.” How do you explain the great disconnect between the “fastest-growing economy” in this part of Asia and the massive hunger of its citizens?

The same figure — 14 percent — explains the great disconnect.

According to the World Bank, the Philippines has to do more on the pre-redistribution side — access to good education and economic equalizing policies, among others — because only 14 percent of the yearly income gains go to the bottom 50 percent of the population. In contrast, the Top 1 percent vacuums up 17 percent of the yearly income gains. The Top 0.1 percent of the Top 1 percent have been consistently the biggest winners in the income distribution sweepstakes. Without good education and other pre-redistribution policies, said the World Bank, those at the bottom will most likely remain at the bottom for generations.

There is no serious economic study on the total wealth held by the 50 richest Filipinos but it would not be surprising if the findings would state that their total wealth is more than the wealth of those at the bottom 50 percent. The super-rich exercise extraordinary influence over the shaping of critical national policies, including policies that would protect the interests of the super-rich. The richest family, this has to be pointed out, is represented by two senators and a representative in the lower chamber.

The tight grip of the superrich over resources and critical policy formulation, indeed, will ensure that there would be no intergenerational mobility. There will be no serious investment and focus on education and the other requirements to developing the human capital. The super-rich will be super-rich for generations. The poor will remain stuck in intractable poverty.

And if the SWS will remain a polling institution through the next century, it will still have the unfortunate task of tracking the number of poor and hungry Filipinos. And the unchanging story of intergenerational hunger and poverty.