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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
Leave a Reply to DavidCancel reply