IN A WORLD characterised by many as becoming increasingly more globalised, led by rapid advancements and diffusions of technology, do our economic policy advisers and policymakers believe they are still capable of “pulling the wool over people’s eyes”? Are these officials not aware that their every action is being monitored, even by those who they believe are not paying attention? Further, do the powers that be still think they can make ordinary folks believe that the economy is on a sound footing when all the available statistical evidence suggests otherwise?
If the answers to these critical questions turn out to be in the affirmative, then, clearly, something is drastically wrong with the approach to economic policymaking within our domestic economic space.
But is anyone actually taking note? Are there individuals who monitor closely the kinds of economic advice that economists and other similar experts give to our policymakers that eventually make their way into national debate and subsequent implementation?
Apparently, there is at least one person who does that sort of scrutinising. Consequently, this week’s contribution is based on an eye-opening article by David Rothkopf, entitled Requiem For The Macrosaurus: The Beginning Of The End Of The Jurassic Period Of Economics. In his own unique style, Rothkopf says: “This summer’s biggest movie is Jurassic World. Apparently, people have an endless appetite for dinosaurs, which could also explain much about the popularity of Flintstones vitamins or, for that matter, Vladimir Putin. Fortunately for these people, there remain dinosaurs among us who are producing mayhem on a scale unimagined by even Hollywood’s CGI wizards. We call them economists.
“The term may initially evoke visions of kindly bespectacled wonks droning on about arcane theories or perhaps government big shots mumbling unintelligibly before Congress: These are powerful women and men. They have made giant policy decisions that have affected the lives of billions, often while working behind closed doors with data and on strategies that few understand and fewer still believe in.”
Tell me, can any one be clearer in this categorisation of the action of some economic policy advisers in the real world? Given what you have experienced here in Barbados and other Caribbean countries over the past decade, is Rothkopf misguided? Do you still maintain confidence in the policy advice given to governments in the region from within as well as outside of our economic space? Have your lives been significantly affected by the policy decisions of your governments over the past decades?
Clearly, if you answer these questions in the same way I would, you would have to not only endorse Rothkopf’s sentiments but also demand change in the manner in which economic policies are derived in our countries. After all, those in the kitchen are the ones who feel the heat. And heat is exactly what we all have had to cope with over the past few years every time our governments announced new economic measures.
In Barbados, for example, the decisions by the Government in relation to the payment of tuition fees at the University of the West Indies and the implementation of several tax measures including raising the marginal tax rate on the value added tax from 15 per cent to 17.5 per cent represent bad economic policy advice. To be effective, such policies ought to be consistent with the reality on the ground as reflected in official economic statistics.
Given all that has transpired in recent weeks on the industrial front in Barbados, I hope as a people we have now reached the point of accepting that enough, therefore, is enough!
