The recent IMF report on the Guyanese economy is an object lesson on why the expression “lies, damned lies and statistics” is used so ruefully but with increasing frequency in economics. Economics has, for the longest while, marketed itself as the “queen of the social sciences” because of its use of statistical data that was supposed to undergird its “scientific” approach. But, as has been exposed in so many instances, the manner in which the data is presented can lead to assertions that are far removed from the lives of people. What does it mean, for instance, to tell Guyanese that the economy is “growing”?But, rather inadvertently, even statistics can reveal the underlying reality that their presentations sometimes seek to mask — as was the case with the IMF report, which echoed the claims that the PNC-led APNU/AFC coalition government had been trumpeting. An interesting picture is formed if one places the performance of gold — which is doing so spectacularly on the backs of two foreign producers — in the centre of a graph that has the performances of the other contributors to the economy (say, President Granger’s ‘six sisters’) on either side of it. The gold statistic looks like the centre-post of a carnival tent that has collapsed around it. The question that is graphically posed is whether a tent is a tent when only the centre-post is left standing.And this is the question the Government is dodging as it insists on contradicting the Guyanese people in general and the business community in particular – those who are experiencing the effects of the collapsed “economic tent”. By the Government’s insistent refusal to accept the collapse of the economy, there is exposed its cluelessness on policies it should actually be proposing and implementing to secure a more balanced and robust performance in sectors other than gold.But what makes the Government’s lassitude and inertia in the economic field even more bewildering is that officials in change of this area are closing their eyes to the efforts other countries have made to confront analogous collapses in what, after all, has been a global problem since 2008. What they would discover is that the tenets of the neoliberal order that we bought hook, line and sinker in 1989 are, at the barest minimum, being questioned and, in many instances, being replaced. The assumption, of course, is that if one keeps repeating the actions that brought about the collapse, one is simply guaranteeing the continuation of that collapse.What were those tenets that must be questioned and possibly jettisoned? The first one, of course, was “market fundamentalism”: that the market should be allowed to make decisions on the allocation and distribution of resources in a country. The corollary was the demand that the state become a “night watchman” who simply sits around to ostensibly “protect” the economy. If the state were to intervene in any way — through production of goods or regulation of the private sector in any way — it would introduce “distortions” in the smooth running of the economy.Another tenet was that individuals and firms operated on the basis of what was called “rational expectations”. These tendencies are particularly noticeable in finance.It was not that the neoliberals did not think crises, which appeared to be inherent in the economy, would disappear, but they assumed that the market and rational expectations’ approach would successfully deal with them. In the decade since the 2008 crash, they have not, in most of the developed economies that were hardest hit. But yet, Guyana was able to buck the trend until this PNC-led APNU/AFC coalition government took office. What happened?If we examine the programmes of the PPP governments — especially those under Bharrat Jagdeo — we would see that the state played a much more interventionist role, just as even the US did when it pumped billions into private enterprise firms such as General Motors. Whether those roles were “Neo-Keynesian” or pragmatic can be interrogated, but it does not excuse the “don’t intervene” attitude of the Guyana Government.
AD Quality Auto 360p 720p 1080p Top articles1/5READ MOREWhy these photogenic dumplings are popping up in Los Angeles160Want local news?Sign up for the Localist and stay informed Something went wrong. Please try again.subscribeCongratulations! You’re all set! PASADENA, Calif. (AP) _ Ben Olson threw for 318 yards and three touchdowns in his first college start, leading UCLA to a 31-10 victory over Utah in both teams’ opener Saturday. The 6-foot-5, 227-pound redhead hadn’t started a game since his senior year in high school nearly five years ago _ when he was the nation’s No. 1 recruit. He transferred from Brigham Young in January 2005, after redshirting his freshman year and spending two years on a Mormon church mission in Calgary, Alberta. Last season, Olson played sparingly as the backup to Drew Olson after missing the first three games with a broken left throwing hand. This Saturday was all his. Olson showed the poise of his 23 years, completing 25 of 33 passes for 318 yards and no interceptions in a game that began in 96-degree heat at the Rose Bowl. It was the most yardage by a debuting Bruins quarterback since Tommy Maddox had 253 against Michigan in 1990. Olson was perfect on his first seven passes, hitting seven different receivers, all for first downs. The Utes had won their last four games against Pac-10 opponents, but they didn’t mount a serious challenge in the second half. Utah was 0-for-11 on third down, and managed 285 yards of total offense to UCLA’s 418. Olson was clearly superior to Utah senior quarterback Brett Ratliff, who came in 2-0 as a starter after leading the Utes to season-ending victories over BYU and Georgia Tech in the Emerald Bowl. Ratliff was 13-of-31 for 162 yards, with one touchdown and one interception. UCLA extended its lead to 21-10 on Olson’s 19-yard pass to Matt Willis that completed a six-play, 72-yard drive in the third quarter. Justin Medlock kicked a 25-yard field goal that kept UCLA ahead 24-10 in the fourth quarter. Olson’s third touchdown made it 31-10 on a 9-yard pass to Marcus Everett. Olson had the announced crowd of 59,709 cheering early when he connected with Ryan Moya over the middle for a 16-yard touchdown pass on UCLA’s opening drive. The Bruins then stopped Utah on its 44-yard line before being penalized for too many players on the field, keeping the Utes’ drive alive. But Ratliff’s 30-yard pass to Marquis Wilson was called offsides and the Utes were forced to punt. Olson’s first incompletion occurred as Logan Paulsen ran into the end zone. A few plays later, a 46-yard field goal attempt by Medlock went wide left. The Utes tied the game at 7 on a 26-yard pass from Ratliff to Brent Casteel in the second quarter, giving their sizable section of red-clad fans reason to cheer. The drive’s big play came on fourth-and-1 at Utah’s 41-yard line, when defensive back Eric Weddle carried 5 yards for a first down. The Utes then notched consecutive first downs, leading to Ratliff’s scoring pass. The Utes pulled Ratliff on their next possession, replacing him with Oklahoma transfer Tommy Grady, whose second pass of the drive was picked off by Alterraun Verner _ UCLA’s first interception return for a touchdown by a freshman since 1989. Stepping in front of Casteel, Verner snagged the ball and ran 34 yards up UCLA’s sideline for a 14-7 lead. Verner had an 18-yard fumble recovery in the closing minutes, too. Louie Sakoda kicked a 44-yard field goal that left Utah trailing 14-10 at halftime.