The Society of Honor by Joe America

By Karl Garcia

The World Bank recently said that “most countries would dream of having the kind of debt-to-GDP ratios” the Philippines has. On the surface, that sounds like praise — a global institution patting the country on the back for not being reckless.
But for many Filipinos, the statement was not reassuring. It was insulting.
Not because the Philippines is in a debt crisis. Not because the World Bank is wrong about ratios. But because the comment shows a profound disconnect between technical macro-economics and ordinary Filipino realities.
Debt Is Not a Number — It’s a Story
Debt-to-GDP ratio is a useful tool for economists. It tells you whether a country’s economy is big enough to carry its liabilities.
But the ratio is only a part of the story.
A country can have a “healthy” debt ratio and still be economically fragile — especially if debt is:
spent on non-productive projects,
used to fund wasteful programs,
accumulated without clear returns,
or relied on to support a government that can’t deliver basic services.
The World Bank’s comment ignores what Filipinos feel daily:
rising prices, underfunded schools, over-crowded hospitals, poor roads, and an economy where many people still work hard but don’t move forward.
If debt was truly “dream-worthy,” then why do many Filipinos feel like they are living in a country that borrowed too much for too little?
A Debt Ratio Doesn’t Pay for Tuition
Here’s the blunt truth:
Most Filipinos don’t experience debt as a ratio. They experience it as:
the interest payments that reduce budgets for education and healthcare,
the higher taxes and fees,
the slow or delayed government services,
the projects that look impressive in ribbon-cutting photos but do not improve lives.
The World Bank can talk about sustainability. But a debt is only sustainable if it is useful.
And in the Philippines, too much borrowing has been used to sustain political optics, not economic progress.
The “Dream” is Not the Debt — It’s the Growth
The Philippines’ debt may be manageable now because the economy is still growing. But growth alone is not a victory.
What matters is whether growth is inclusive, whether it reaches the poor, and whether it creates real opportunity.
If the country continues to borrow to fund consumption, subsidies, and politically-motivated projects, the debt will grow faster than the economy can handle.
And then the ratio — that same ratio the World Bank says other countries would “dream of” — will become the reason Filipinos lose their future.
The World Bank Doesn’t Live Here
This is the biggest disconnect.
The World Bank speaks in numbers and global benchmarks. Filipinos live in a reality of delays and inefficiencies — where the state’s promise is always “soon,” and the citizen’s experience is always “not enough.”
If the World Bank wants to praise the Philippines, it should not praise the debt.
It should praise:
the efficiency of spending,
the quality of public services,
the transparency of budgets,
the speed of project completion,
the measurable impact on poverty and inequality.
Until those are present, “dream-worthy” debt is a phrase that sounds like a luxury foreign perspective, not a Filipino truth.
Debt Is a Tool, Not a Trophy
Debt is not inherently bad. Many countries borrow to build infrastructure and stimulate growth.
But the Philippines must stop treating debt like a trophy.
A “manageable” debt is not a badge of honor. It is a warning that we are still depending on borrowing to stay afloat.
The question is not whether the debt is sustainable.
The question is whether the Filipino people are benefiting from it.
Because if they aren’t, then the “dream” the World Bank is talking about is not the Philippines’ debt.
It’s the dream of a country that finally uses borrowed money for real progress — not for debt itself.