NO WAY Barbadians Should Vote For Economists In The Next General Election

Submitted by The People’s Progressive Congress

The PDC made a promise in the last PDC article, on here, that it will be fulfilling in this particular edition of the PDC column.

We had – after completing this present article a couple weeks ago, and were on the verge of submitting it to BU for publication as the week before last’s article – declined to submit it for reasons that the eventual article ( the week before last’s ) that we had submitted was far more important and timely at any time than the deferred one, given the subject matter of the eventual one – the galloping rate at which Barbados is wholly moving towards becoming a second rate Third World developing country.

Well, this eventual article also looked at the fact that for long time running these monstrous BLP/DLP Governments have grossly failed to make sure that the country significantly benefits materially, financially, politically, etc.,  from the extant shifting in the balance of power from west to east, in so far as international relations and global politics are concerned.

It also touched on the fact that these same ossie moore governments have over the years substantially failed to capitalize on a great number of political financial material opportunities that have come with a very significant part of Western Imperialism – this being TAXATION – collapsing.

And, of course, it also dealt with the OECD’s so-called Harmful Tax Initiative and some of its historic and current issues, to primarily give support to those two above contentions.

However, having said those things, we now take the opportunity to finally put across the central theme of this week’s article, which is, to say, our party’s urging a very strong “NO WAY” TO citizens voting for economists running as candidates in any of the next constituency elections in this country.

Right way any good reader reading this article would realize that this article also connects with the last one from the point of view that local economists – out of all academicians – are playing a very destructive role in Barbados’ moving to a second rate Third World developing country within the next 10 – 15 years.

Why we are directing voters in those particular constituencies in which economists are seeking to get into (again) the House of Assembly of Barbados – to vote against these economists at all costs, is as a natural consequence of our very strong and unshakeable opposition towards economics as a so-called academic discipline, and is as a logical result of our recognition that economics is a demeaning, deceitful unscientific form of Caucasianist political ideology, philosophy and psychology.

We are convinced that most economists – bar a few – are primarily about their own contrived false statuses, as some set of people whose desire for some other people to look up to them as a set of so-called gurus – or worse – as intellectual magicians – who have it within them in so far as they can readily resolve many of the political economic financial problems of Barbados, with the mixing up of and the application of previously unknown formulae to those problems ( A TOTAL MYTH, however).

See how the Nation Newspaper  in one of its recent news publication perfunctorily would have got an image of Opposition Leader in the Parliament of Barbados, Mr. Owen Arthur, professional economist, surrounded by a number of attentive looking people after the conclusion of his address to a BCCI gathering. What trash!!!

So, while many local economists in Barbados are caught up in the adulation of self, and in the semi-worship which comes from some others who do not know any better, most if not all of them have cultivated the habit of not coming down from their tacky outdated labs and listening and learning from the harsh and brutal experiences of an increasingly alienated despairing broad masses and middle classes of people of this country.

Too, whilst they falsely cheer and champion the rise of statistics and maths over philosophy and reason within the discipline, they – with the possible exception of the Governor of the Central Bank of Barbados and Dr. Winston Moore, continue to undermine and disregard the importance  of even carrying out a people-focused, public critical assessment and evaluation of this thing called economics – the discipline and its political legal practice – which they study and help to shape and get remunerations from, for what significant nonsense that it is worth, essentially.

Yet, with all economists demonstrating that they are so manifestly lacking in imagination, intelligence, and critical thinking skills, and with some of them notwithstanding these fundamental shortcomings and defects wanting to run/again in the next constituency elections, where if they succeed in getting in the House of Assembly, they can continue – from higher – to foist some very useless destructive doctrines, ideologies, philosophies and psychologies on the broad masses and middle classes of people of this country, it must mean that it must be left to anti-Economics people in Barbados to provide the leadership in stopping these unscrupulous people from continuing to do much wrong and evil to the people of this country.

Anyhow, here are just a few of the significant absurdities and nonsenses that local economists trot out on a daily basis in this country – and for which we provide little critiques of them.

  1. Demand and Supply of Goods and Services determine price. This is absolute rubbish, as that not only are economists flying into the face of the laws of balance ( for every sale there must be a purchase ) the accountants have it correctly – but also because price is a psychological digitized subjective value that is connected with ALL  persons who have the ability to buy or sell goods and services – NOT JUST owners and sellers of commercial goods and services. As a matter of fact it is the exchanges ( the transaction of a good or service between a buyer or seller ) that are the PRICES. A car that is bought for BDS $ 10 000 is the price to the person that is selling it for that amount of money. For the person who is losing  the BDS $ 10 000, the BDS $ 10 000 is the price for the car.
  2. Opportunity/Alternative Costs. Economist talk about the opportunity/alternative costs of, say, a person planting some corn for BDS $ 100 a day, or a person driving a bus for BDS $ 500 a week, as being whatever else those persons could have been doing to earn incomes at the same time. But there is absolutely no way of knowing such. Such defies logic and reason, and is unscientific, as that nobody could ever know the cost of doing some things that they are not doing
  3. The Marginal Utility Theory – Economist write and speak about the amount in satisfaction that a person derives from using a particular good, by they seeking to uselessly foolishly quantify such satisfaction. They irrationally theorize that when a buyer of a particular good buys more of a good ( holding for the same income/price, etc) they make the assumption that the person will derive an amount of greater satisfaction, or that if they buy less of a particular good the assumption is made by them that the person will be deriving less satisfaction from buying the good. Again there is no way in which satisfaction levels can be quantitatively measured.
  4. Inflation. Economists talk about Inflation too. They tell people that it exists. But when it comes to defining what it is there are many definitional differences among them. Some for instance, say that it the rate at which there is an increase in the general price level ( whatever that is) in a country over a period of time. Some say it is a situation whereby too much money is chasing after too few goods. What is more ludicrous is tat they claim that it can be measured statistically. The fact, though, is that inflation does not exist, since thee are really no increases in prices. As that every transaction has it own “prices”; has it own costs, materially, financially, etc of  exchanging one good for another (amounts of money too). So, the real prices are the transaction exchanges. There is no way any person or persons could ever know the number of changes (+/_) in the number of transactions done at any time in a country, when contrasted with another time period.

How could voters in constituencies seek to elect these persons who are so ludicrous in the way how they think and act, sufficient that they will if they are elected to the House of Assembly do significant damage to the country and to its people on the basis of their learning and practicing this thing called economics??

Surely, those particular VOTERS IN THOSE CONSTITUENCIES MUST IN THE NEXT ELECTIONS REJECT THOSE ECONOMISTS THAT WILL RUN IN THEIR RESPECTIVE CONSTITUENCIES.

Finally, one only has to look at the history of national governments in this country since independence and one will see a correspondence between the rise of economics ( as a so-called academic discipline, and as a form of politics, and Western Finance too ) in Barbados, the growth and evolution of Cabinet Government, and the growth and evolution of public and private bureaucracies in the country, in order to understand that there is indeed a great degree of correlationship between the rise of economics, and the long term downward fall in the material and financial fortunes of the country.

One does not even have to look at the situation where economics is taught in the schools, college, university, in any attempt to deeper analyze the contribution of this thing to the destruction and degradation of many affairs of this country.

Anyhow, from Errol Barrow, to Tom Adams, To Erskine Sandiford, To Owen Arthur, Barbados have had political leaders who have either been economists, or have read and believed in economics significantly, or who have themselves been advised by economists, and who have failed at different times over the years to protect or advance the country and the broad masses and middle classes of people from the worst of political economics, or from locally, regionally and internationally.

23 thoughts on “NO WAY Barbadians Should Vote For Economists In The Next General Election


  1. Perhaps Arthur attracted attention because he is a former PM with some experience managing the economy.

    “See how the Nation Newspaper in one of its recent news publication perfunctorily would have got an image of Opposition Leader in the Parliament of Barbados, Mr. Owen Arthur, professional economist, surrounded by a number of attentive looking people after the conclusion of his address to a BCCI gathering. What trash!!!”


  2. WHICH world are you living in PDC ???
    WHY dont PDC deal with reality and stop fooling itself ??
    HOW do you PDC expect to come to power ???
    ARENT your ambitions a bit OUTLANDISH ?

    I AM
    JUST ASKING


  3. HOW do you expect to pull this economy from the hole into which the DLP has dragged it ???
    DONT you know that nobody in the DLP has the wherewithal to rescue the economy ??
    DONT you know that this economy is in dangerous , dangerous , dangerous , dangerous waters.??
    DONT yu know that the DLP needs to call elEctions NOW ???


  4. i am not an ecoconomist but as a consumer , i find the when a new product is on the market and one that the consumer has a high ndemand for the product commands a high price , until the demand falls the price falls as well. there is also competitive pricing which also plays a role in market pricing.


  5. @ac

    It is not unusual for ‘groups’ to orchestrate price in a market, it is why fair trade commissions have to be legislated to protect consumers. Often times despite these commissions consumers are held to ransom by interest groups. You need to go beyond the textbooks.


  6. David good assessment! However in a capitalist and democratic country free market rules and fair trade commission always buckle under the pressure of lobbyist out of fear


  7. T David:
    Your obvious bias, like mine is to Mia Mottley your good friend, to Mr Arthur is showing. The man whether you or any one here likes it or not is an accomplished economist. He is respected beyond this region, so attack his propensity to drink, his outside children but don’t go knocking his strength that shall not work. I know this shall irk all DLP supporters, but is one of our finest Prime Ministers. Whether we like it or not he did a good job. He did a bunch of non sense too, but give the man his due not only his see thru; Miller would love that last piece.


  8. To david:
    Now on the topic. The European central bank went back and got an Italian economist who was trained at MIT; the Italians went and got an economist. In each instant countries have been getting their best economic minds looking at what needs to be done to soften the economic burden to be faced. Are we so backward as a people who have persons with the prerequisite training but refuse to utilize them just because we got up yesterday morning and do not like them. Are we so stupid to continue in a fiasco of having short shirt white men from international agencies construct recovery plans for us when we have the talent. Remember every day that crowd used to be on the BBC and the International media singing the same song about poor governments inability to run things, but europe with their help is in a big big financial mess.


  9. @lemmie

    Hold no brief for Mottley or Arthur for that matter, just calling it as it went down. BU’s assessment of Barbados’ economy is the fact that in years of plenty under Arthur’s rein the comfortable model of building out a service based economy did not require any peculiar brain/acumen by Arthur.


  10. @lemmuel

    You are correct that BU ‘was’ sympathetic to the late David Thompson’s message of implementing transparency legislation and being more open in dealing with the people. We have a different captain on deck who appears to have departed from the original road map.


  11. @ lemuel | December 9, 2011 at 8:58 AM |

    I agree with you about given the man his due.
    CCC will soon come out with his artillery to cut down the stature of his nemesis the “seethru” man. But at least he is supporting local and rum ‘ain’t’ kill him yet to send him to an early grave in St. Peter’s acre. The man has done brilliantly in managing for 14 years this fickle and fragile economy to help maintain one of the highest standards of material living in the World and tops among the developing countries.
    It is good to wax lyrically about the good old days and reminisce about the joys of having a car per person, graduates in every household and the benefits of FDI to change the landscape of Bim. But the question is this: Can this model of economic management be deemed as wholly relevant to deal with the economic challenges facing us? Is the guru of yore up to it both mentally and physically having served unstintingly and sacrificially for so long a time rarely seen in political circles unless in dictatorial or authoritarian regimes where opposition is futile and exceedingly dangerous.


  12. The goverment can only do so in the area of pricing .the the consumer and need goes along way on how much the product would be sold for.


  13. To miller:
    what people are not taking into account is that Owen spent at least three years at cave Hill doing research and retooling himself. I believe that he does have the mental capacity to meet the challenges for this economic period. When Owen was castigating David Thompson and mocking him about not becoming a prime Minister, most people knew that it was just politicking. I also believe that Mascoll shall be an asset too, but I do not see the need to have him in the House. Let Mascoll do what he does best as a technocrat. The DLP made a bad move to run Mascoll, and now they need his services badly. Up until the beginning of this year I too felt that the DLP could retain the government, but their politics have made that more and more difficult each passing day. And let me tell the DLP brigade this; the BLP brigade was also singing the praises and the hope and joy of winning in 2008 too, but lost they did.


  14. @l emuel | December 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM |

    So if you were a political advisor to Freundel- given your solid strategic skills and wide experience- when would you recommend that he calls elections? Which period (window) of time would present a favourable opportunity for his party to be re-elected and he as PM given a clear mandate to carry out some serious house cleansing and cabinet repositioning to neutralise his potential rivals?


  15. Can anyone guess the profession of the person who made the following statement recently?

    “Akin to Pharaoh’s dream for Egypt, the global economy could well be in the midst of seven lean years, as the debt-financed bounty of the prior expansion left a growth famine in its wake,”…


  16. @ PDC
    Your general argument and definition of economic theories are flawed and inaccurate respectively. This can be attributed to the fact that you do not fully understand economic concepts. The law of marginal utility is quite simple to understand.
    1. In a mixed economy such as Barbados, demand and supply is determined by the market. As the price of a good rises, the quantity demanded for that good decreases, ceteris paribas. On the other hand, as the price of a good rises, its quantity supplied will rise as well, and vice versa. Producers produce more when prices rise because they seek to maximize profits and cover marginal production costs. In your example, the price of the car is determined by the market. For example, if the car is a Mazda Lantis (year 2000), and the current market price is $10,000; if the seller decides to sell the car for $12,000, obviously those persons seeking to buy that car will fall. Price is derived by the interaction of supply and demand. The resultant market price is dependent upon both of these fundamental components of a market. An exchange of goods or services will occur whenever buyers and sellers can agree on a price. When an exchange occurs, the agreed upon price is called the “equilibrium price”, or a “market clearing price”.
    2. Every society is faced with the problem of scarcity because resources are insufficient to supply the goods and services that are required to satisfy all human wants. Hence, that society must make choices of what to produce, how to produce, and for whom to produce. Opportunity measures the value of benefit of something that must be given up to acquire or achieve something else. Since a society’s resources can be put to alternative uses, every action or decision has an associated opportunity cost.
    3. The law of marginal utility describes a fundamental tendency of human behavior, in that as an individual consumes more of a particular good, the satisfaction he derives from additional consumption diminishes. In other words, if an individual had a bag of apples, he may attain a level of satisfaction after eating 5, but as he eats more, his level of satisfaction decreases. This is a fact of human nature. Although utility is not directly measurable, it can be inferred from the decisions that people make.


  17. where does china fit into bob plan. he is talking about years and years of corruption. these financial institutions are all over the world. they are like cockroaches lay there eggs and becomes immune to insecticide .i wonder where bob is going to borrow the money from to open this new banking system.. sorry but the same financial institutions whom he thinks is so easy to get rid of.


  18. David | December 9, 2011 at 9:18 AM | @lemmie

    Hold no brief for Mottley or Arthur for that matter, just calling it as it went down. BU’s assessment of Barbados’ economy is the fact that in years of plenty under Arthur’s rein the comfortable model of building out a service based economy did not require any peculiar brain/acumen by Arthur
    ————————-
    WHY cant people just give other people their due ?
    Mummy asks DIDN’T they say the came thing about cricket and Clive Lloyd as captain ?

Leave a comment, join the discussion.