should growth be as central to international economic policies as it is? The presumption of a growth-oriented approach is that if the economy grows, a variety of practical problems will be solved or resolved, Are there other ways that we ought to be running economic policy, and other goals that we ought to be pursuing? Why, or why not?
Due to the dual faceted nature of this question, I will try
to break this bad boy into two pieces. I will address the question of growth first
and discuss the economic policy question second. Before I start rambling, I
would like to make it apparent that I am indeed not a “numbers guy,” so forgive
me if my ideas are more conceptual than statistically feasible.
I believe that economic growth is essential to the continued
success of any country. Countries are rapidly developing and growing at unprecedented
rates. Economic growth is necessary to keep up with the increased demands of
rapid development. Using this as my central point here, I believe that growth
should be the goal of any economic policy, however short-term and long-term
growth are two different things. Governments are run by people, and people are
short-sided. We tend to look at what benefits us now rather than later. If sacrificing
short-term growth could increase the prospects of long-term growth, that is
something that our international system should take a hard look at.
Linking this short-term and long-term idea to the climate
crisis, both situations are entirely different in nature (no pun intended),
however, I believe that the thinking process remains somewhat related. Connecting
economic growth to the climate crisis… I know I may sound like a loon but hear
me out. What is one of the key reasons that the climate crisis exists? HUMANITY
IS SHORT SIDED! We care more about our present comfort than the future. If saving
the environment means that we must inconvenience ourselves, we will let our
planet die… Hopefully, this example somewhat clears up what I am trying to get
at here. Sometimes it takes a short-term exchange for a long-term advantage.
Tackling the second question now, I am not going to refer to
a specific economic ideology. Instead, I am going to list 2 key goals that our
economic policy should emphasize more as core elements.
1)
Income Inequality
It is crucial we focus more on this, even
if it means sacrificing short-term growth. I agree with Robert McNamara’s assessment
that a lot of poverty is a biological and social structure problem, but that
does not mean we can allow it to continue. I believe it is entirely possible to
decrease income inequality.
2)
Don’t let private corporations and banks get
ahead of themselves
Hey, I am all for capitalism, but we can’t let
these companies and banks run around like lawless hounds. They find ways to
prey on lower-class citizens, furthering the previous issue of income inequality….
(2008 financial crisis is a pretty good example of this)
Why should we pursue these goals? Tying this into my central
theme here, short-term growth, as tantalizing as it may seem, is not the move (for
my older audiences – “is not the path we should take”). If focusing on these
two ideas stumps short-term growth, so be it. We will be better off in the long
run. As for the math, I will leave that to the number guys.
A slight nod to Good Will Hunting and Matt Damon. Maybe he can
help do some of this math.
Comments
Post a Comment