… don’t really mean to… but when we talk about “the economy” and how it is being run there are always, by necessity, opposing schools of thought. To most, my views are well-known, I am not shy. So, comments most welcome and all opinions respected…
Coming from :
You might be interested in the writings of John de Graaf. Recently heard him give a presentation. His message is that the standard GDP measure of success for economies is all messed up, and that our happiness as individuals and as cultures is better measured by other indicators.
Michael, Thanks, I am interested. And I could not agree more. This is one of those huge conversations that has been around, and incomplete, for ages. It’s like IQ testing… what constitutes a fair test?
Economically, if we measure only the cross-section of the population that is merrily productive and financially secure, then consistent use of certain measuring devices (GDP ?) may make sense and indeed apply. But what about those on the fringe or completely off the grid?
I think the business-in-trade of economists is either predicting what has happened or creating new models they understandably itch to test out. My reading of the economic philosophies of past and present leaves me more confused than not.
Also, as a tax paying LDC bizzyness person I see most “ideas” being imported by the world bank, the IMF and other such orgs as being either new theory looking to be tested or old theory being reworked after pervious failure.
Woe be unto the world if a project is even marginally successful… it’ll be packaged and distributed double ASAP.
The following comments come to me following today’s discussion and though the Pacific Festival of Arts is an important matter it is contentious. The use of hard to find cash and other resources in the development of almost anything in life, requires, nay, demands a prioritization… 200M SBD (30 M USD) could have certainly been put, I do believe, to better use.
Email from Mr. X…
There was some discussion about whether the improving economy had an impact on the very poor. It was intimated that the answer was no and that the more affluent were the ones reaping the benefits.
Land was also touched on as was many things. I think that at the end of the day SIG will continue the Tourism rhetoric and in fact do little to address or even attempt to change things. A case in point is the money being spent on the 2 week Arts Festival. I hear some big numbers and the usual corruption talk but my basic question is we will spend well over $200M, that was the budget I believe and at the end of the day what will be left once the leaf huts are removed. The new footpaths for one and some improved water supply in the Ranadi area but precious little else. What would $200M in targeted programs to address the issues have resulted in or changed at least some lives. The cynic in me says unless there is an incorruptible person involved very little than someone making money and having little long term effect.
There has been the usual knocking down of some squatter type housing in many areas in preparation for the Arts Festival but there is still many more issues to consider. The Chinese still dump their rubbish outside their shops with impunity. Yes the Arts festival may leave behind some improvements but I should take up carving and leaf hut making as there are hundreds involved in this.
I feel SI still has a long way to go in many regards.