ECONOMIC EGOCENTRISM?

In the March 6 edition of The Economist, there appeared an article “Economic focus: A modest undertaking” (p. 68), that showed that, alas, the magazine is just that, an economist at heart. They present, with grandeur and the implication, that the exercise to be undertaken by “some of the world’s leading economic thinkers” will produce a viable model for overseas aid and relief investments.

The topics up for analysis and election are: climate change; communicable diseases; armed conflicts; education; financial instability; governance and corruption; malnutrition and hunger; population and migration; sanitation and water; and, subsidies and trade barriers.

Please join me in applauding this mass exercise in mental masturbation. If you would like to have it in your face, so to speak, they say they will post all related material on www.economist.com/copenhagen-consensus, or more directly, www.copenhagenconsensus.com

My objection to this is their effort to single out any one issue without considering the interrelationships and synergies that have been apparent to all since time began. I, as well as everyone else, have an opinion on this and, of course, everyone is entitled to my opinion. Education and communication are the basis of harmonious growth and development. Unfortunately, people without access to basic necessities like clean water, healthcare, and the right to conduct productive activities (thus generating access to food), have very immediate concerns. It’s hard for a malnourished child, for example, to pay close attention in school. And in order to fulfill those needs, certain social relations are developed that may or may not be positive for the society at large, such as armed gangs as opposed to a rice producers’ association.

So, I hope that these “leading economic thinkers” will at least present their analyses that led up to their final choice. They will carry much more weight and importance than their conclusion, which should be treated as a passing fancy, at best, or maybe a lunatic opinion.