20 ways how to F—k up an economy!
No. 16 - Total inability to understand economics
By our Local NT Government. (witnessed and written about by me, a lowly peasant, oops I mean citizen, but I don't want to steal their limelight, they did all the work... proudly.)
Don’t get me wrong, continuously I’ve discussed economic factors and events with several sitting politicians and pundits from both sides of the isle. To say Holes and Homes is their main concern would be an understatement, but forgiving the lack of economic and financial intelligence by both the local bureaucracy and the half-wits presented for us to vote on what we have seen is that they can’t even get the Mining and Housing sector right, so we didn’t stand much of a chance for anything else.
For those blaming either side for the problems, I say, they have both been as bad as each other, but given that we currently have a government with a massive, albeit, unstoppable majority of 18 members and an opposition of 2, this current government could really make some changes to fix things, but lets reflect first on both sides F-ups.
I’m releasing one of these one at a time, then I’ll provide 20 ways they might make some positive changes, so in the new year we might be able to re-invigorate our currently sitting government to get back to work and maybe represent the people again, as most who know me can attest, I have a critical mind, with a positive outlook.
16. Total inability to understand economics by politicians.
Now this is a broad statement to many. But I have discussed economics with many local representatives over the years and they seem to have ideology and economics entirely interconnected. If I could ever think of a more dangerous form of economic ignorance, it would probably have me join one of the current political parties.
Ideology is an instrument of power. It is a defense mechanism against information, an excuse for evading the moral constraints of doing or approving evil with a clean conscience. It is a way of ignoring the experience of time, and avoiding the pragmatism required to determine success and failure. ( a rough translation from Jean-Francois Revel, a French Journalist)
Economics is more than just seeing patterns or unraveling anomalies. Its fundamental concern is the material standard of living of society as a whole, and how it is affected by the decisions made by individuals and institutions (Government).
One of the ways of doing this is through observation of the economic policies and incentives created, as well as the goals pursued. This means that the consequences matter more than the intentions. Not just the consequences in the short term, but also the longer term repercussions of decisions, policies and institutions.
However, Political ideology and economics seldom share the same space. For instance, weighing benefits against costs is the way most people make decisions, this is the way businesses make decisions, if they want to stay in business. Only in government is any benefit, however small, considered to be worth any cost, however large.
A common way a government detailing its relevance to its people is by evidencing lists of non-government institutions or communities, whose inability to cope with problems (normally associated with crimes by people not held accountable by the judiciary) then requiring “government intervention”.
The government then dictates it is not acting on its own “political incentives or constraints”, but because it is compelled to do so for the “public interest”. It must “intervene” when “so much is at stake”. This form of “emergency action” satisfies the “social justice warrior” and their ilk for a time.
However, such actions simply ignore the fact that there are “political incentives” for the production and distribution of “emergencies” to justify their expansion of enduring governmental departments, power and influence.
As time and time again, the evidence has suggested, government intervention provide no evidence of benefit, however, the contrary is continually proven.
The rhetoric in defence of these actions is “if you don’t believe in their particular political solution, then you don’t care about the people they claim to want to help.” However, there is constant avoidance and a failure for accountability when these policies, decisions and institutions fail.
The ideology that we need more “programs” and “policies” to “help” the people, may warm the hearts of the gullible, but, in my observation it is little more than putting more power into the hands of bureaucrats.
The first lesson of economics is scarcity. “There is never enough to fully satisfy all who want it”.
The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.
(Thomas Sowell, Economist)