As an economist Benigno Aquino III could do well to be more discerning about what bean counters and wordsmiths whisper in his ear or draft for teleprompters. In a recent speech Aquino proudly declared that lives are discernibly better since the presidential limousine and all that went with it were turned over to him by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

He was later presented with the dividends of government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCC) amid flowery speeches of a new “spring and bloom” in these institutions. In the midst of pomp and pageantry, factotums spoke of the birth of a tradition – “a tradition of regular, sustainable and, hopefully, (sic) increasing share of the national government in GOCC profits.” Never mind that the dividends were the fruits of past labor long since earned. What, in reality, had sprung and bloomed, sprung and bloomed nearly half a decade before.

As for the presidential limo, that has since been replaced by a Porsche. Aquino realized the car didn’t work, giving credence to the truism that what looks good isn’t necessarily so. As in financial data and economic indices cavalierly quoted, it is always better to kick the tires and check under the hood.

Another case in point are allusions to the record-high 7.3% growth of gross domestic product (GDP) for 2010, and that as a virtual springboard towards higher GDP growth as infrastructure under the Public-Private Partnership program catalyzes an expansion in employment.

Aquino correctly focused on the importance of employment when he recently declared in Filipino, “Paulit-ulit po natin ididiin: Trabaho ang pangunahin agenda ng ating administrasyon.”

Unfortunately, when we array a soundbite concern for employment with the economic data, plus the current exponential expansion of aggregate prices and the crime wave in the streets in recent weeks, the picture that emerges is not one of discernibly better lives. It is not even one of a government that gives a damn.

Note data disparities on the official unemployment statistics recorded in the same year GDP grew by 7.3%.

Conventional wisdom dictates that if GDP grows, so should employment. High output is associated with a reduction in unemployment and vice versa. That did not happen. Unemployment fell by only 0.4% - a virtual stagnation in absolute terms.

The underlying reason for the deviation is a macroeconomic tendency described by economist Arthur Okun. In the relationship between unemployment and GDP growth, he determined that for every 1.0% increase in unemployment over its normal levels there will be a GDP gap of from 2% to 4% from its potential. The actual ratio derived is 1:2.5 where the latter represents a GDP fall.

Should we spin the arithmetic on its head, we might say that for unemployment to decrease, GDP must at least grow by 2.5%. Any growth less than that and unemployment remains.

If GDP grew by 7.3% then employment should have grown noticeably. Because it did not shows us not only the weaknesses of GDP as a measure but also the foolishness of quoting an aberrant index that tells us nothing about our well-being.

The arithmetic that comprises GDP counts pesos either produced or consumed. It does not count volume. It does not count quality of expenditure. It does not count costs. It does not even count involuntary hunger that spiked 15.9% during Aquino’s first quarter of governance.

Rising prices is one of the distorting factors that render GDP an irrelevant measure. When aggregate prices rise, the economy is slow to recover and tends to linger closer to recession despite the illusion created by GDP.

Note that little is being done to control the exponential bloating of fuel, power, transportation and food costs under Aquino. At the end of the year, we might post higher GDP growth, but actually be worse off.

Worse, his economic mangers are applying iron fists on the informal economy that the despondent rely upon as poverty-alleviating economic measures to compensate for an unresponsive government.

Complicate this with systemic corruption where these add to the cost of goods, services and infrastructure, warping values along the way.

Add the detrimental impact of taxes that tends to further alter values as the expanded value-added tax does, given embarrassing failures in tax collection.

To account for the negative impact of such costs, Okun proposed a Misery Index that netted out unemployment and inflation from GDP growth. Applying this to 2010, the resulting index rationalizes the stagnancy in employment.

Further applying this to Aquino’s prospective 7.3% to 7.8% GDP growth range for 2011, unemployment will either stagnate at best or increase at worst, given the uncontrollable increases in aggregate input costs and multiplier prices under his crop of economic managers. Unfortunately, this establishes the Misery Index as more appropriately descriptive of Aquino’s economic governance than the irrelevant GDP.