Those who see the social cost versus those who grasp the economic benefit of Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGOs) compose a small fraction of the population. Weighing the public values that these stakeholders are fighting for is like comparing apples with oranges.

It hardly makes sense to compare cost in terms of social parameters and benefit in terms of economic benchmarks. Sociology and economics are separate disciplines in the social sciences domain — they’re disciplinary lenses different from one another.

Those who feverishly militate against the social cost are deprived of the disciplinary insight of the economist and vice versa. Before this argument sounds like a mere theoretical frame, let’s scope given cases where POGOs reflect social cost as its bane and economic benefit as its boon.

Let’s shove aside misconceptions peddled to incentivize the cry for a total ban at this critical juncture, which explains how other sectors of society outside of this tiny intelligentsia overreact in skewed ways to the POGO debate.

There’s one overarching challenge for social rallyists, who want POGOs to close shop and fold their tent. Consider that a POGO isn’t just a puny little store, the size of a Bayad Center or money changer kiosk.

The minimum requirements alone to build a hub are, viz.: 10 hectares of real estate, P6-billion worth of infrastructure, an architectural-engineering marvel or an urban masterplan, a business model attractive to foreign direct investment, a respectable “core-to-periphery growth concept.”

The economic activists defending the continued existence of POGOs believe a total ban would cause a severe fiscal drought (i.e., real estate collapse) for a country said to be recovering from the “worst economic contraction since World War II.”

It begs highlighting the calculations of Leechiu Property Consultants of the economic losses of a total ban, viz.: P952 million per day based on P4,000 spending average per person in the industry; P11.4 billion annually in meals at their commissaries; P54.3 billion in income taxes with the departure of the foreign workers; P52.5 billion in “fit-out” costs (technology, fixtures, furniture); P5.8 billion in government taxes; P5.25 billion in revenue for PAGCOR; P28.6 billion in rentals for residential space; and P18.9 billion in annual office rentals.

In the overall business configuration, what the government, the economy, and POGO-dependent sectors stand to lose is a whopping P200 billion annually. What social ills are the clueless social militants talking about if there would result unemployment, underemployment, underpayment of workers for the 347,000 employed, both Filipinos and foreigners?

To a fate that is certain, a return to poverty translates to one meal a day instead of three, money for a college education is lost — a situation short of a local version of an “economic crash” would ensue like a fiscal tsunami. No one can miss the devil in the details if and when POGOs are totally banned.

In solving the riddle, prudence demands that we place all the information and data issued by the Philippine National Police under a microscope. The narrative that foreign criminal syndicates have established or have “cloned” local criminal syndicates in furtherance of all sorts of illegal activities stinks of regulatory capture and, not the least, is self-deprecating.

There’s no way a total POGO ban can be triggered by a single conviction out of 31 cases clogging the courts — screaming for truth and justice. Neither must a single reported death linked to POGOs cause its final demise.

Per PNP data, only 55 percent of the 31 kidnapping incidents, or a mere 17 cases, were POGO-related. Zero cases both in 2017 and 2018 was a notable milestone.

Yet, a crime theory contends that “there are more crimes in more population.” In a universe of 138,000 POGO employees (as of 2019) where only one court case led to a conviction and one case led to death, such couldn’t raise alarms necessitating a total POGO ban.

Worse, with only 17 kidnappings clogging the courts and 35 other cases pending — deemed mathematically low per a crime-to-population ratio — what social costs are we talking about?

Walk me through it!