Submitted by Sylvan Greenidge … a former BLP Press Secretary
There can be no social tranquillity without economic stability and democracy.
If there is one thing upon which all Barbadians can agree it is that the Moyne Commission, set up to investigate the social rebellion of 1937, had established that when people are economically marginalized, social unrest becomes the order of the day.
It is therefore against this background that I find the Democratic Labour Party’s comment that they are “building a society and not an economy” outrageous to say the least. How can a political party that boasts of having a student of history of the calibre of Freundel Stuart be so ill-informed of the country’s history and hence in danger of repeating the experiences of 1937. There are still persons alive today with vivid memories of that dark and oppressive period for working class blacks.
The structure of the current DLP Government, like the one of the early 1990’s, severely lacks the competence and guidance of an economist that can help formulate and direct their economic policies. The emergence of Clyde Mascoll in the DLP at the time he did, though short it was, should really have been their economic investment for the party’s political future. But Thompson’s political dream of becoming Prime Minister became an obsession and that obsession led to a vicious political blood sport that became the driving force of the Party’s existence and so Clyde Mascoll had to be removed come what may.
Mr. Thompson’s was seen as the person capable of winning the election for the DLP and so his ability to secure the support of big business and their big bucks was deemed more important than the acquisition of the prerequisite skills necessary for the Party to effectively govern and administer the affairs of our country and its people. Our country’s political future was sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. Mr. Mascoll was sacrificed for Mr. Thompson. On reflection it is clear to see that the political soul of the DLP was sold for a mess of pottage.
With the obvious absence of economic competence in the Cabinet, the DLP continues to stumble from one political low to another. Whenever you think the DLP has reached its lowest the party reaches into its reserves and pulls out another low. How else can you describe sending Jepter Ince and Darcy Boyce on national radio and television to address Barbadians on the perilous state of our economy? Men of such limited economic ability would never have seen the light of day far less more to be spoke-persons on economics under an Owen Arthur administration or that of the late Errol Barrow or Tom Adams. Nobody in Barbados today seriously thinks that Mr. Ince or Mr. Boyce can deliver this country out of its current economic state. Why then were they sent on the airwaves of Barbados to deal with such a serious matter?
This nonsense about building a society and not an economy has got to be the political lowest the DLP can go. I simply cannot see how they can get any lower.
It is easier for the People’s Democratic Congress (PDC) to win the next election in Barbados on their promise of a no-tax policy than it is for the DLP to execute their hair-brain scheme of building a society without building the economy.
How could former University of the West Indies (UWI) students, privy to all the empirical data emerging out of the Moyne Commission, sit down to a brain-storming session and come up with such folly? I humbly submit that it was not a brainstorming session but rather a stormy session without the brains. How else can one explain this flawed political construct that has now submerged to the top of DLP rhetoric?
Wherever you go in recent times, DLP spokesmen are spouting this new political idiom that suggest that the world has it wrong and only the DLP has it right. So that while the countries affected by the recession are spending millions to fix their economic structures, with measured success and the social entitlements as required by their people are slowly but surely returning, the DLP is doing the complete opposite in Barbados with devastating consequences.
To reinforce my point let me highlight a few examples of what President Obama has been doing in the USA and I am compelled to use Mr. Obama simply because the Political Advisor to Prime Minister Thompson often speaks of the similarities between President Obama and PM Thompson. Nothing can be further from the truth. I am already on record as having said that if there is a world leader that has any similarities to PM Thompson it is the former Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr. Gordon Brown. They have both squandered golden opportunities for their respective countries to play a pivotal role in the reshaping of the new world economy.
In the USA, President Obama rolled out a multi billion-dollar stimulus package that halted the rise in unemployment, arrested the slide in the economy and stimulated growth. A capital programme was introduced that saw the construction of bridges, homes, schools and a number of wind turbines as part of his Green Economy initiative. Billions were spent to bailout banks and insurance companies while a slew of tax concessions were granted across the board.
As a reward for Mr. Obama’s efforts over two million jobs were created and GDP growth of about 3% was recorded so far for 2010. The noted economic success of the policies introduced by the President has enabled him to introduce his social programme of extended unemployment benefits and to offer affordable health care for the most vulnerable in the USA.
In the case of Barbados, the complete opposite has occurred. The Barbados economy continues to languish in perpetuity as the DLP enforces a strict rule of governance by serendipity. They continue to sit around and wait to see what is happening in the rest of the world. A first for Barbados.
With the exception of the introduction of Constituency Councils, free bus fare for school children and state-funded summer camps, the DLP has done absolutely nothing that constitutes the building of a society nor have they done anything to address the crisis level to which the Barbados economy has fallen.
It is easier for the People’s Democratic Congress (PDC) to win the next election in Barbados on their promise of a no-tax policy than it is for the DLP to execute their hair-brain scheme of building a society without building the economy.
How could former University of the West Indies (UWI) students, privy to all the empirical data emerging out of the Moyne Commission, sit down to a brain-storming session and come up with such folly? I humbly submit that it was not a brainstorming session but rather a stormy session without the brains. How else can one explain this flawed political construct that has now submerged to the top of DLP rhetoric?
Wherever you go in recent times, DLP spokesmen are spouting this new political idiom that suggest that the world has it wrong and only the DLP has it right. So that while the countries affected by the recession are spending millions to fix their economic structures, with measured success and the social entitlements as required by their people are slowly but surely returning, the DLP is doing the complete opposite in Barbados with devastating consequences.
To reinforce my point let me highlight a few examples of what President Obama has been doing in the USA and I am compelled to use Mr. Obama simply because the Political Advisor to Prime Minister Thompson often speaks of the similarities between President Obama and PM Thompson. Nothing can be further from the truth. I am already on record as having said that if there is a world leader that has any similarities to PM Thompson it is the former Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr. Gordon Brown. They have both squandered golden opportunities for their respective countries to play a pivotal role in the reshaping of the new world economy.
In the USA, President Obama rolled out a multi billion-dollar stimulus package that halted the rise in unemployment, arrested the slide in the economy and stimulated growth. A capital programme was introduced that saw the construction of bridges, homes, schools and a number of wind turbines as part of his Green Economy initiative. Billions were spent to bailout banks and insurance companies while a slew of tax concessions were granted across the board.
As a reward for Mr. Obama’s efforts over two million jobs were created and GDP growth of about 3% was recorded so far for 2010. The noted economic success of the policies introduced by the President has enabled him to introduce his social programme of extended unemployment benefits and to offer affordable health care for the most vulnerable in the USA.
In the case of Barbados, the complete opposite has occurred. The Barbados economy continues to languish in perpetuity as the DLP enforces a strict rule of governance by serendipity. They continue to sit around and wait to see what is happening in the rest of the world. A first for Barbados.
With the exception of the introduction of Constituency Councils, free bus fare for school children and state-funded summer camps, the DLP has done absolutely nothing that constitutes the building of a society nor have they done anything to address the crisis level to which the Barbados economy has fallen.
Part II will be posted after the weekend – David
32 responses to “The Myth Of Building A Society Without The Economy – Part 1”
The removal of the word just from the statement allows you to make an argument.
The statement should read. We are just not building an economy but a society.
Prime Minister David Thompson argues that the BLP seems to just concentrate on the economy but forgets that Barbados is also a society.True or False, make your conclusion.
Yet again we read about the importance of the economist.
Can we question therefore what is the purpose of the cadre of economists who sit in the Tom Adams Building?
Isn’t the full knowledgbase of that group of economist available to government?
Dear David,
They are available to the Government, but will the Government listen? Does it chose not to?
Last year PM Thompson set up our first national council of economic something with the likes of Frank Alleyne, Don Marshall, Avinash Persaud and Michael Howard, but I am told that since no Government minister ever turns up or no notice taken they hardly ever meet.
Perhaps it was simply a politically masterful move at limiting these guys from being too critical because they are part of the Government advisory team.
But no fear. Apparently, we dont need budgets and economists or announced stimulus packages, when we have Senator Boyce, ably supported by Senator Ince. Dipper will be turning in his grave.
@Conrad
Is this not where leadership of the Central Bank would come in?
The political saying that people deserve the government they choose is indeed prophetic.Barbados prosper immensly for 13 years under the BLP only to see the the people decided they need a change and so the DLP was voted into office.over two years in office and you have to wonder if the DLP is still on their honeymoon. The people voted for “change” and “change” did they get. We deserve the government we choose. And remeber the majority is not always right.
Mr. Peter Boos most pertinently asks a certain bunch of questions in his piece in the Barbados Business Authority of August 2, 2010.
Well, for the sake of those fellow BU commenters or visitors to BU who may not have read and analysed his article, we reproduce those particular questions in numerical order :
1) Why is getting Town and Country Planning approval so difficult?
2) Why is registering a professional practice so tiresome?
3) Why is getting a driver’s license so inconvenient?
4) Why is getting a work permit so traumatic?
5) Why is repairing Joe’s’River bridge so inefficient and costly ?
6) Why aren’t current audited financial statements for the National Insurance Scheme available?
7) Why has no decision been made to address the CLICO situation?
Indeed however other people choose to answer those questions, it is their business, but the PDC will simply respond to them (NOT by providing any possible amswers to answer them) but by arguing that the fundamental sources of those problems that Mr. Boos seeks – by way of those said questions – to zero in on, lie with the totally bizarre, totally senseless continuation with the piss poor DLP/BLP governance of this country, and with the totally disgusting, totally unfounded continuation with the big unwieldiness, and rampant inefficience and bureaucratism of government in Barbados.
We have said it already!!!
Still, Boos, for the most part, wrote an amazing extraordinary telling piece!!!
Pity our best political talkers (some say talking heads), seem to be very good also at shying away from contesting national political office.
But Boos seems to have many theoretical answers to many of the deep seated problems confronting Barbados and many of its private and public sectors, such that, in this contribution – which he seemed to have fairly well meticulously put together, he has suggested that strategic decisions be made on agriculture; has put forward that all loss-making Government-run enterprises be disposed of; has suggested the privatising of many government services; and has propositioned the determination of priorities and the cutting of what is non-essential in Government budgets.
However, a serious analysis of most of the theoretical solutions he has put forward in this piece, shows that they are pulling in so many different and illogical directions, that they undermine the central thrust of his arguments, and which on top of that has seen the making of a bad situation worse, by his not seeking to conceptually resolve many of those ideational tensions that are helped caused by this pulling, by distilling the correct formulations.
Por examplo, by his saying that there should be the privatising of many government services – which is something that – as a matter of principle – we in the PDC agree with, but with his paradoxically saying too that “we must cut the cost of doing business in Barbados” and that “there must be less bureaucracy across the board” – meaning through out the private and public sectors – which we somehow disagree with ( since our greater concern really is with how specializing, how rational the different roles and functions comprising it would be; how efficient it would be; in whose class interests it mainly serves, the private sector bureaucracy is more acceptable than state bureaucracy), it must mean still that – where his piece is concerned, there would be no substitute for government “price” subsidization of many hitherto existing government supplied services in the face of the privatising of many government services and in the face of increasing private sector costs and private sector costs of profit, and that there would be NO shortages of bureaucratic constraints inadequacies posed – NOT enough bureaucracy to absorb the greater amount of foreign direct investment, the greater number of foreign entrepreneurs, the greater foreign exchange inflows, the bigger capital inflows, the technologies, the services, their families, etc, that he wishes altogether to come to this country – in stark contrast with this really false notion of less bureaucracy across the board!!!
Also, with his saying that there should be the disposing of all loss-making government-run entities – which is something that we would only so much agree with – and by his shockingly stating that the protection of the poor should be a priority area for government, do show again that there is a vast difference between unstudied rethoric and unadorned reality. Imagine shutting down the Transport Board, or the Barbados Water Authority, the National Housing Corporation, etc, and at the very least not replacing them with newer, better more efficient government run entities, and then thinking about how in some regards social stability in Barbados will be maintained!!??
Finally, we wish to make clear that rather than Mr Boos standing from a far off and lobbing his verbal shells at the government of this country, whereby to some it would appear that he would be simply firing duds eventually, he should instead think about forming his own party along with some other like minded people and yes – whether or not he is already a member of the DLP or BLP – the forming of such a political organization, with the express purpose of winning the government and implementing some of his ideas.
And therefore as some people would say then his having to put up in a meaningful way, or his having to shut to hell up in a rather circumspect way.
For, there is called for in Barbados greater social political action and less social political talk.
PDC
The other question Conrad. The economists who comprise this economic council (Persaud, Marshall, Howard, Alleyne) why can’t they come public and let Barbadians know about the blockers of the Council?
Nice try at referring to us, Mr. Slyvan Greenidge.
Come again, bowl another innocous googly, Bro!!!
We seeing it big too, as big as a breadfruit, Sir.
Anyhow, Down with the Damned DLP and the Blasted BLP!!!
PDC
@PDC
The more that I attempt to read your postings and interventions, the more I am turned off by the obvious incompetence of the writer(s). I welcome free speech and the expression of ideas and opinions, but it appears that even given the light of day for a ‘special column’ on Thursdays, you find it difficult to connect with the readers. Why is this? I surmise that your sole purpose for purporting to provide an alternative to the status quo is more about seeking self-aggrandisement. Your writings are lengthy diatribes that meander more than the rivers in this universe. Unfortunately they lead to source of your vacuum-like thinking — a body with a head but little between the ears. Don’t you get it? One does not write for self, but for readers. Less is more, when will you see this as guiding you or is it that you will not be guided at all by anyone or any circumstance. Would you please take on a cause that merits your reading rather than writing. Piss poor!
Ah PDC
We make friendly with serious people. You no serious people, you very big mouth. You speak less..no? Maybe then you become popular and maybe then we listen ..no?
Dear David,
You raise some important questions about the role of the central bank in the economic debate and vision for the country.
The Central Bank believes that its primary concern, so primary that all else pales into the background is protecting the exchange rate link to the dollar. Indeed, we do not have much monetary policy other than living within the tight bounds of this commitment. Consequently, the central bank believes that its purpose is to be publicly confident, and to recommend actions that support external balance in the economy (sustainable current account) even if it is to the detriment of internal balance (growth and employment).
These are rightly the main concerns for the central bank. They are legitimate and to be expected, but they are narrow and can only be one element of a wider economic strategy and vision that underpins the still wider social vision. These narrow priorities mean the central bank is less bothered about the fundamental efficiencies of the public sector than have been discussed on this blog and we have heard from Marshall and Persaud and I am sure others that I may have missed, or what we should do at the strategic level to grow our international exports: boosting cultural industry exports, growing the international financial sector, uprating the tourism product, blowing through the obstacles to tourism investment, etc, etc.
I am sure these are areas of interest to the Governor, and his Deputies, but they are considered a distraction from the central issue that the collapse of FDI as a result of the international environment and a loss of confidence in the local economy, means we have a serious current account (foreign currency) funding gap. An organisation that sees its role as emanating confidence and “alls well” to the extent of trying to switich public focus onto gross reserves and not net of borrowing reserves, cannot easily turn around and say, “look we need to take action now or else”. And Barbados is too small and leaky a place for them also to be saying one thing to the public and aggressively pursuing another route with the Government.
From the Central Bank’s website:
Mission Statement
The Mission of the Central Bank of Barbados is to foster a sound economic and financial environment which promotes the development of its stakeholders and encourages a culture of excellence and leadership.
What are the Functions of the Bank?
To carry out successfully its policy and to fulfill the objectives, the Central Bank performs the following functions:
* Regulates the issue, supply and availability of money
* Acts as banker to Government and commercial banks
* Advises Government on monetary and fiscal matters
* Manages the island’s foreign exchange reserves
* Provides accurate and timely statistical data to Government and to the Public
* Manages the Public Debt
* Supervises the operations of all financial institutions, especially the commercial banks.
From the Governor’s address of July 28, 2010 to the Central Bank of Barbados’ Research Review Seminar:
“Many years ago Muriel Saunders and I did a detailed study of the provision of government services, and the budgetary cost of providing services. Sadly, it is the only study of its kind that I know of in the Caribbean. Updates and similar studies are urgently needed; they are of practical importance, and can serve to inform priorities in the allocation of government expenditure, especially important in these difficult times. We have rich troves of data on household and company credit, including maturities and interest rates, broken down by activity; detailed information on the ownership of deposits; information on the holders of government paper; information on tax yields, import breakdowns, agricultural yields, etc, etc. We should mine this data for practical insights about how our economy works.”
Extract from the Governor’s Address to the Chamber of Commerce on Nov 25, 2009:
“Let me summarise the argument: the government of a small open economy
like Barbados can do little to compensate for a decline in output which
results from falling demand in the foreign exchange sector. Government
needs to temper its expenditure in order to avoid an erosion of foreign
exchange reserves, focussing on measures to maintain the competitiveness
of tourism and to protect those most vulnerable to the effects of the
downturn. Government and the private sector should continue to address
the priorities for the medium term growth of the economy: improving the
pace of project implementation and pursuing strategies of diversification
within tourism, further development of international business services, and
new initiatives in energy and environmental services.”
Is there really an issue of the Central Bank reporting gross reserves instead of net (of borrowing)? My understanding of Clyde Mascoll’s argument is that the CB reported net reserves but did not net off $200M of short-term debt. So far we have only heard his side of the argument though.
@Brutus
Thought it might be useful to post the members of the Board. The Board has some fiduciary duty in this matter doesn’t it Conrad? In other words if the Governor goes on his bully pulpit as you are suggesting what is the role of the Board? Do they not become complicit? Are you saying that the integrity of our Central Bank is now to be questioned based on your last comment?
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Dr. R. DeLisle Worrell. Ph. D, Chairman
Grantley W. Smith, Esq., B.A. (Hons.), D.P.A., B. C. H.
Mr. Cecil McCarthy LL. B, (UWI) L.E.C.
Ms. Onika Stewart LL. B (UWI) LL. M (Lond) L.E.C.
Justin Robinson Ph. D, (Manc) Msc, Bsc (UWI)
Mr. Ashley Toppin FCCA, JP
Mr. Harold Hoyte, G.C.M.
Mr. Elson A. Gaskin, LLB. (UWI) L.E.C. Legal Counsel / Secretary to the Board
@Brutus
Clyde Mascoll further made the point that Governor Worrell departed from a decades old norm when he reported the gross number.
@David – what I am saying is that don’t think the CB reported the gross number, I think there was a difference in opinion (or an error) in the treatment of a $200M short term loan, in one period.
@Brutus
If it was an error don’t you think that the CBB would have hastened to clarify by now?
Some interesting articles posted on the Barbados Economic Society blog
Amazing amount of letter behind name of directors these days..LL.M, Ph. D, So.D … and most effective member on board this year and two years ago had nothing on show… Harold Hoyte, Keffin Simpson.. How these gentlemen handle conversation with big up letter men…?
Intelligent agent still not sure why FTC making survey on retail Bank operation on island.. maybe Central Bank not doing work properly or maybe FTC not have work to keep busy ..no? Maybe FTC should ask my Embassy, we have survey on everything on Island.. We know how much US spend on Maxi McClean oversea adventures, how much US spend on Billy Miller oversea adventures, how much excrement Rich Seally talk to date, how much excrement Barn Lynch talk to date (..much much paper required..no?), where Davey Estwick keep gun, where Davey Estwick keep next gun, where Davey Estwick keep cannon and so on…
Actions speak so much louder than words. Priorities of Dems – free busfares, free camps, now duty free cars, promises in elections – interest free mortgages, VAt-free electricity, duty free cars for civil servants,VAT free construction. Not quite mateiralised. We can be treated nightly to a steady diet of constituency councils, constituency reports, disapora meetings, youth forum business meetings etc. We cannot hear a blast about budgets, truth about how the strategy working; any word on CLICO yet; update on Thompson’s diagnosis;not a damn word on how you spend 1500m in 2 years with nothing to show for it; corrective actions on how we will make continuous adjustments to weather the crisis and build a foundation for recovery. Darcy Boyce came reluctantly to speak, because nary a word about the economy in Senate. Stuart ain’t speaking on it, Estwick not speaking on it. Dems not taking care of the economy, destroying it more like, say they are building a society. Now Jones saying we are a bunch of hypocrites, buying bingo tickets and would not let casinos in. They could talk about that all day in parliament and no economic statement from the P.M. acting. I wonder if they will investigate possible corruption at Housing or respond to Marilyn Rice-Bowen?
Not building an economy, and stranding out society in two directions -mendicancy supreme and now high level gambling and crime. Barrow must be raging in his grave.
Dear Brutus,
Most of us on this blog must hold your considered views in high regard, but you would undermine that regard by suggesting that the Central Bank reporting gross and not net, was simply a mistake or a difference of opinion. I side with David on this.
The effect of switching to the gross figure is to give a false sense of our international position. We can boost our gross reserves by borrowing heavily, but this would not indicate am improved fundamental position, which is why the traditional focus is on the net number (reserves net of borrowing) with both being reported. This is not a matter of opinion but a basic fact.
The Government knows the reality of the position, but appears to be trying to project that it is all quiet on the western front by these and other initiatives or lack of initiatives. Senator Boyce hinted that we would be with the IMF next year and tried to suggest that it would not be a measure of fiscal weakness, but simply a requirement of the World Bank before it could give us certain loans. If the World Bank or any other multilateral gives us conditional budget support the IMF would be involved in setting those conditions. Some, perhaps many of those conditions may be sensible, but having our finances dictated by external and unelected officials is a sad defeat for our economic independence. Every Bajan can see that. Senator Boyce is only undermining is own respectable position in presenting that particular charade.
@Conrad,
Are you basing your statements on what has been alleged by Mr. Mascoll or have you independently arrived at this conclusion? I do not think you are correct in stating that the net figure is net of borrowing – it is net of short-term borrowing (and IMF credit) only if I understand correctly. The dispute appears to surround only the treatment of the $200M of short-term borrowing, hence Mascoll was stating that the decline in NIR was actually $268M and not $68M as reported.
This is what Mascoll is reported as saying:
“When the Central Bank received the $200 million from Deutsche Bank in June and paid it to Credit Suisse in June, the gross international reserves were not affected. However, the net international reserves would have fallen by $200 million, given the definitions above.”
I personally have one major reservation about what Mascoll is saying (given that the loan was used to retire debt) but I will hold judgment for now. Note however that in Mascoll’s words the GROSS international reserves were not affected by the transaction.
Re the World Bank and IMF, my understanding of what Senator Boyce said at the press conference is that World Bank financing was offered but Barbados would need to be in an IMF programme to access it, and the govt does not intend to go this route. Interesting that you should have come to a different interpretation, or maybe you heard this on some other occasion (that we would be with the IMF next year).
@Brutus
This is our understanding as well.
Dear David and Brutus,
Unless foreign direct investment recovers – which looks unlikely – or our import bill collapses because the economy contracts sharply, we are going to have a steady decline in our international reserve position that, by undermining our credit rating, will be increasingly hard to sustain. Consequently, we are likely to be with the IMF or in some equivalent position in around 12-18 months. I think Senator Boyce can see this and is looking for a way to pave the ground for this.
I came across a third business man today who told me that his bank had been told by the central bank to request that they convert all of their US dollar balances – even if legitimately held against foreign exchange transactions – into Barbados as soon as possible.
I think the IMF is painted as more of a bogey man that is fair, but going to some sort of external or IMF program in 12 to 18 months is unfortunate timing politically for the current Government. I believe this potentially adverse predicament is why some argued in 2008 that if the Government was able to raise funds relatively easily they should “overfund” the deficit (fund more than is required to meet current needs) so that they have funds available when the funding position inevitably got worse. But either our Government thought that was not necessary, or that “overfunding” would have been hard to manage or they were too distracted by other things they considered more important. Pity as the cost of funds in 2008 would have been lower than today.
Senator Boyce talked about taking sufficient time to approve the Four Seasons project, but I wonder if a quicker timetable would have allowed it to help flatter the balance of payments earlier – projects take a few months to start up. I understand that the Beachlands and Hole Town former Cheffette site development, LIme Grove etc are banking on an early restart of Four Seasons.
Let us pray that this and other tourism-related projects rebound shortly and so there is no need for a draconian domestic or externally driven fiscal program.
In a July 22, 2010, 9:44 am post the PDC had the following to say ( minus a few edits)
—————————————————————————-
“Dr. Winston Moore,
It is a pleasure to see your participation on this BU blog.
However, there are a few little bones we would like to pick with you – so to speak – in regard of two things:
First, with regard to your point as stated in that contribution in the Monday, May 31, 2010 edition of the Barbados Business Authority, that “Given the recovery projected for the US and world economy in 2010, some recovery in economic activity is therefore likely for Barbados by the fourth quarter of 2010 and/or early 2011,” based on the assumption ( based on your research) that “for every one per cent rise in US economic output, real GDP in Barbados rises by around 0.5 of a percentage point”, and on the assumption that “it can take up to about two quarters to see the full effect.”
Now, Dr. Moore aside from US Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s recent comments that the outlook for growth in the US economy remains “unusually uncertain” because financial conditions have become less supportive of growth in recent months, there are at present a few divergent indicators that clearly do NOT wholeheartedly support your arguments.
a) The US economy grew an annualized rate of 2.7% ( revised downwards from 3.0%) in the first quarter, according the Bureau of Economic Analysis, whereas the Barbados economy contracted by a further 0.1 % in the first quarter, according to the Central Bank of Barbados.
b) The US economy grew at an annualized rate of 2.6 % in the second quarter, according to Bloomberg.com – ( recently another further 2.4 % down revision, according to cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/08/08/fed.outlook.down.ft/index.html?section=cnn_latest), whereas the Barbados economy contracted by a further 1.0 percent in the second quarter, according to the Central Bank of Barbados.
c) The US economy came out of recession in the third quarter of 2009, according to Guardian.co.uk. But, here is it that, almost a year (way past six months ) since the US came out of recession, the Barbados economy is still mired in depression.
How are you really going to explain such divergences??
And, secondly, on the Barbados Economy Society blog – which we have not been able to access very recently, because we are having some difficulties posting on it – something about the security certificate presented by this website has errors – there is mention being made – under the thread – Commentary on the Central Bank of Barbados’ Press Release by the Barbados Economic Society (BES) – of words to the effect that “after a decline of almost 8 percent for the first six months of last year, and having been in recession since 2008, the economy seems to be making a slow but steady exist from the recession.”
Thus, Dr. Moore – as head of the BES – it would be most welcome if you take into consideration that at this stage there are still some serious disequilibria taking place in the so-called economy of Barbados, even while, at this same time, there has been AS YET NO PUBLIC EXPLANATION COMING FROM ANY ECONOMISTS IN BARBADOS AS TO WHY – HAVING MADE SUCH A DRASTIC DECLINE IN 2009 – THERE IS NO EVIDENCE PHYSICALLY ON ANY SCALE TO SHOW THAT THE BARBADOS ECONOMY HAS, IN FACT, OVER COME THAT 2009 – 5.5 % STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE OF THE BARBADOS ECONOMY ( we see too that that percentage figure has again been revised by the Central Bank, this time upwards – Table 1 – main economic indicators as contained in the written data of the 2010 Central Bank review of the first half performance of the Barbados economy ).
And, finally, while it is true that you did also in this said piece in the Barbados Business Authority make mention of “fiscal imbalances in the US and Europe playing a significant role in the recovery of the local economy”, it is still clear, according to your analysis, when put in reverse, that there are some fundamental, deep rooted, local factors/variables, which in their dismal awful performances, can be used by any serious thinkers/researchers to help explain why the so-called Barbados economy will continue performing so disastrously unsatisfactorily for a very long time to come.”
—————————————————————————-
Dr. Winston R Moore, we are still awaiting a response from you to our 22 July 2010 9:44 am post. For, it is clear that things so-called economically are far from getting any better overall in this country but are getting worse, and esp. since the Federal Reserve in the US is, according to cnn.com, set “to downgrade its assessment of US economic prospects when it meets on Tuesday to discuss ways to reboot the flagging recovery”.
.
PDC
Statistics Canada said the economy shed a stunning 139,000 full-time jobs in July and unemployment rose for the first time in nearly a year.
U.S. non-farm payrolls fell by 131,000 last month, the U.S. Labor Department said, more than twice economists’ projections.
The department also revised its June data downward to 221,000 job losses, from the previously reported 125,000 loss.
The North American economic recovery is stalling and Barbados will continue to be affected negatively.
I am not an economist so I could be wrong.
May I suggest, although it may seem unacceptable at the first reading, we ought to be considering leasing retirement homes,for life, to foreigners, possibly in their own complexes.
The benefits being:
A continuing foreign revenue stream.
An improved geriatric medical provision
Zero crime input
Increased visitation by relatives
When they do die, the unit reverts to the state to re-lease.
Just a thought, but we need those dollars and pounds coming in to pay for our Toyotas, Mercs and designer clothes, not to mention Trini Oil.
My question is simply this; could the Barbados economy be likened to a House of Cards collapsing under the perfect storm of North American and European Recession, declining tourism numbers and the cessation of direct foreign investment into the island?
I think that the portents were there but we didn’t know how to recognize them or we were happy to provide our own interpretation. E.g. why did the Gov’t sell the Barbados National Bank? Was any rational reason provided? Were the funds used to reduce indebtedness or finance another project? I think that the Gov’t realized that ownership of the asset was important but they had to get the money to work for them either reducing debt or financing projects which provided employment.
Why did Gov’ts past and present not enact laws about foreign ownership of land? I think that they couldn’t do this because all the foreign money coming in to purchase luxury homes or construct other developments was helping to prop up the B’dos economy and you can’t afford to kill the goose who is laying the golden egg.
There is another story currently occupying much space on this blog which points to Gov’t insatiable appetite for direct foreign investment and I will provide my thoughts on that another time.
Please continue your comments on Part II of this submission HERE.