The New Year also ushers in new things. One of these is the new budget or, more technically, the General Appropriations Act. And no, it's not named that way because when you read it, you will certainly burst into the favorite exclamation of Dennis the Menace's long-suffering neighbor, Mr. Wilson, "GAAAA!!"

The new GAA is not much different from the old. It still contains all the provisions favorable to members of the House, and removes those which they thought would make their enemies popular, such as confidential funds. And most consistently, it is still inscrutable and devoid of that quality that all men desire in women's underwear: Transparency.

What is "new" — in the sense of enhanced, like the mammaries of certain actresses — is the appropriation for ayuda. That word, which is Spanish for "help," comes with many faces, just like many politicians. Social Amelioration Program, Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program, Assistance to Individuals in Crisis, etc., it is actually a
dole-out of cash to those considered to be poor. Oh well, a rose by any other name is just as sweet, so says Shakespeare.

Meant to be a stop-gap measure during critical times, such as the Global Financial Crisis of 2007 (when the country was under the Arroyo administration), it was expanded after her term to include more recipients. From a system where recipients were required either to work or go to school as "payback" for the grant, it degenerated into an out-and-out cash gift under Aquino. Now it appears to have been super-institutionalized with Marcos Jr. at the helm of government, with an unprecedented 500 billion pesos allotted to it.

We should be alarmed at this trend towards a welfare state in the Philippines. The most successful welfare programs are in Europe, where the countries are wealthy (consistently in the top economies of the world), the tax base is wide, and the bureaucracy is mature when it comes to monitoring recipients.

This is because welfare is basically giving government money away to so-called "underprivileged citizens." And, as I have always told my kids, there is that shop-worn aphorism that money does not grow on trees. Some may not realize that widespread
cash-giving requires, well, cash. And the money that government will distribute comes from its coffers, from the taxes collected from the people. Hence another cliché that taxes are the lifeblood of government.

It's all's well that's welfare if there is a lot of cash going around. But in a developing country, it's always in short supply. And the proclivity of many of our countrymen to cheat or outrightly not pay their taxes is legendary. From the biggest business moguls to the smallest online seller, if they can evade taxes, they will. Most irritating are vloggers and influencers who earn millions out of nothing yet will not pay anything to government. Where will government get the money to sustain the ever-increasing dole-outs? Surely, we can't keep printing money, lest hyperinflation ensue. And I'm not talking about the hyperinflated egos of many media personalities.

Five hundred billion pesos in outright cash gifts is 500 billion pesos less for infrastructure, defense, education and food security. Plus, a sense of entitlement will foster a culture of unwillingness to work for a living as, after all, the unemployed can always count on the ayuda. With our information technology capabilities at the grassroots at Stone Age levels, "kapitan" can always be counted on to list ALL his relatives, including the daughter of his son's cousin's girlfriend's
father-in-law, as one of the recipients. And politicians will be quick to claim the credit for the
dole-out faster than you can spell "epal."

While the State should always be parens patriae to its citizens, a welfare setup at this level, at this time, is reckless. We should thus say farewell to welfare if we are to fare well as a nation.