A Man In The Philippines A Tiger Of

Asia

Honorable Teachers and fellow Students,

Why is the Philippines called the tiger of Asia?

A tiger of asia  is the economy of a country which undergoes rapid economic growth, usually
accompanied by an increase in the standard of living. The term was originally used for the Four
Asian Tigers (South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore) as tigers are important in Asian
symbolism, which also inspired the Tiger Cub
Economies (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam and the Philippines). The Asian Tigers also
inspired other economies later on; the Anatolian Tigers (certain cities in Turkey) in the 1980s,
the Gulf Tiger (Dubai) in the 1990s, the Celtic Tiger (Republic of Ireland) in 1995–2000, the Baltic
tigers (Baltic states) in 2000–2007, and the Tatra Tiger (Slovakia) in 2007- 2008.

In the 1960s, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Myanmar were considered as the Tiger of Asia"

Economies as all three countries were experiencing high growth. Internal issues however led to the
economies of all three countries to falter. ] Israel's rapid economic growth in the 1990s, and again in
the 2000s and 2010s following a brief recession, earned it a reputation as a tiger economy, and one
newspaper dubbed it the "Hebrew tiger. Bangladesh has been described as an emerging "Asian
tiger" in recent years due to its high economic growth and industrialization which bear many
similarities to the way the Four Asian Tigers industrialized between the 1960s and 1990s
.
Another tiger economy is that of Armenia. Because of the remarkable, often two-digit economic
growth that Armenia showed until the 2007–08 financial crisis, it emerged as the Caucasian Tiger.
During this period, sustained economic growth allowed for economic stability, moderate fiscal deficits
and external debt, as well as declining poverty rates
.
Marcos bared plans for the country's economic development, including an aggressive
infrastructure program encompassing a nationwide network of roads and bridges, dams
and power plants, hospitals and institutions, among others - infrastructure that still stand
today.

Marcos, who thereafter ruled by decree, curtailed press freedom and other civil liberties,
abolished Congress, controlled media establishments, and ordered the arrest of
opposition leaders and militant activists, including his staunchest critics Senators.
 THE TIGER OF ASIA

Why Philippines called tiger of asia?

Intent on eradicating corruption, the Aquino administration opted for the risky decision
to take o  one of the most powerful elements in the country, including leading senators
in the Philippine legislature. So far, however, the government is yet to convict any major
political figure on charges of corruption and abuse of public trust. And the ongoing
investigations – increasingly scattered and unfocused – have snowballed into
corruption-related allegations against Aquino’s leading allies. In short, the government
is grappling with a political quagmire.

There are other ways to explain the Philippines’ recent economic boom. As far back as
the mid-2000s, the Arroyo administration (2001-2010) undertooka series of
macroeconomic reforms to stabilise state finances, moderate interest rates, and tame
inflation. The reforms were partly a result of increasing pressure from external actors,
particularly Washington, which were worried about the Philippines’ fragile economic
conditions. Given the Arroyo administration’s lack of political legitimacy, which inspired
growing protests by opposition forces and ordinary citizens, Washington feared the
prospect of a political meltdown in the Philippines – a key Western ally in the (then)
intensifying global “war on terror”.

The 2007-08 recession, however, undermined the Philippines’ ability to sustain above-
average growth rates. Thanks to the steady influx of hard-earned remittances by
millions of Filipino workers abroad and Business Process Outsourcing (BPO)
investments, the Philippines was able to withstand external economic shocks better than
most of its neighbours. And this created a virtuous cycle of robust domestic
consumption, which allowed for the sustained expansion of the services sector. The
Aquino administration’s sincere and relatively steady leadership progressively enhanced
business confidence in the country.

Then, an upsurge of Quantitative Easing (QE) in the West encouraged a massive inflow

of foreign capital into emerging markets such as the Philippines, which offered
increasingly attractive prospects amid the slowdown among leading developing
countries such as India, Brazil, and Russia. In short, the Philippines’ economic boom
was a product of a synergistic dynamic among varying domestic and external factor

The problem, however, is that the Philippines’ economic boom is far from inclusive. The
newfound wealth in the country is hardly trickling down to those, who need it the most.
This is by no means unique to the Philippines, since most emerging markets have been
suffering from a similar dynamic.