Jamaica’s Élite Flawed Argument For JEEP:

A quick obser­va­tion of an expan­sive Article in the Sunday Gleaner of January 29th 2012 authored by vet­er­an Journalist Ian Boyne titled :JEEP: NO LAUGHING MATTER. (jamaica​glean​er​.com)

Ian Boyne has long car­ried the stig­ma of hav­ing sym­pa­thy for the Jamaica Labor Party, of course it is cer­tain­ly with­in Mr Boyne’s right to artic­u­late a point of view irre­spec­tive of the opin­ions of those who dis­agree with him. However read­ing the text and com­ing to grips with the tone of his rather lengthy the­sis, one won­ders if this piece was not an attempt by Boyne to get back to left of cen­ter or in sim­ple lan­guage an attempt to cur­ry favor with the rul­ing party.

Ian Boyne
In his Article Boyne said quote:The ILO’s par­tic­u­lar con­cern is that despite large stim­u­lus pack­ages, these mea­sures have not man­aged to roll back the 27-mil­lion increase in unem­ployed since the ini­tial impact of the cri­sis. Clearly, the pol­i­cy mea­sures have not been well tar­get­ed. Indeed, esti­mates for advanced economies regard­ing dif­fer­ent labour-mar­ket instru­ments show that both active and pas­sive labour-mar­ket poli­cies have proven very effec­tive in stim­u­lat­ing job cre­ation and sup­port­ing incomes.
Where does this 27 mil­lion num­ber come from? Boyne despite his lengthy epis­tle failed to strike a coher­ent line that the aver­age read­er can attach him­self to, is this a world-wide num­ber? And if it is, how does the International labor Organization come up with this fig­ure, when there are actu­al­ly 10’s of mil­lions of peo­ple all over the world whom are unem­ployed, under­em­ployed and in some cas­es unem­ploy­able? That aside though, Boyne went on to talk about peo­ple who argue for a mar­ket dri­ven econ­o­my in dis­parag­ing terms using slangs like ” neolib­er­al” to describe the Jamaica Labor Party plat­form of a mar­ket dri­ven, mar­ket nec­es­sary, eco­nom­ic mod­el that must be at the cen­ter of growth and devel­ope­ment. Accusing a con­ser­v­a­tive par­ty like the JLP of hav­ing what he char­ac­ter­izes as neolib­er­al sug­gests that Boyne just acquired that ter­mi­nol­o­gy into his vocab­u­lary and is not yet sure what it mean, it is actu­al­ly an oxy­moron .

It does not take this entire bor­ing the­sis to say so very lit­tle . What are you doing talk­ing about neolib­er­al per­spec­tive in the same sen­tence with the JLP? The JLP has nev­er been a lib­er­al par­ty and still isn’t, what coun­try are you liv­ing in? And while we are on that sub­ject, the poli­cies Boyne are espous­ing and laud­ing, giv­ing cred­it to the PNP, was recent­ly revealed to be the brain-child of the JLP.

Austerity as we have seen in coun­tries like Greece Italy and oth­ers is exact­ly the wrong way to go . when­ev­er Government pulls back on expen­di­ture so does the econ­o­my , if the econ­o­my con­stricts there are less job cre­ation that is eco­nom­ics one-o- one. I am unaware of the ori­gins of these voodoo eco­nom­ic argu­ments , of course the mar­ket place is exact­ly the cor­rect cre­ator of jobs and not gov­ern­ment, how are gov­ern­ment jobs sus­tain­able if they are not backed by a sol­id and vibrant pri­vate sec­tor which is the real engine of income gen­er­a­tion? Market econ­o­my requires dis­ci­pline and ded­i­ca­tion ‚it will not hap­pen overnight, but when it does it does launch dis­ci­plined coun­tries like Malaysia, Indonesia and oth­ers to include Brazil into pros­per­i­ty. Many nations like China and oth­ers are now shift­ing away from the failed social­ist big gov­ern­ment poli­cies that have kept their pop­u­la­tions impov­er­ished for gen­er­a­tions. Yet his doc­tor­al the­sis seem to be sug­gest­ing that cheap gov­ern­ment hand­outs cam­ou­flaged as jobs, which by the way are going to be paid for with bor­rowed mon­ey, is some­how a net pos­i­tive for Jamaica. I am sor­ry but if that is the gen­er­al mind­set, and it might be, based on the results of the last elections,then God help Jamaica. I can­not believe any­one would quote bod­ies like the ILO as cred­i­ble orga­ni­za­tions on job cre­ation and sus­tain­able growth . Boyne’s arti­cle is about three decades late .

Boyne seem to believe that the eco­nom­ic boom that China and Brazil has expe­ri­enced was as a result of rigid Governmental con­trol and admin­is­tra­tion over their economies. The oppo­site is true, relin­quish­ing Government death-grip on eco­nom­ic activ­i­ty was exact­ly what large pop­u­la­tions like the afore­men­tioned two had to do to start see­ing eco­nom­ic growth and yes an explo­sion in employ­ment through globalization.

For the record ‚there is no evi­dence that these economies are flour­ish­ing because of gov­ern­ment, in fact there is fac­tu­al evi­dence that because com­pa­nies can do busi­ness with these coun­tries, tak­ing advan­tage of cheap­er labor and less bureau­cra­cy, their economies have been sig­nif­i­cant­ly helped.

The need to put idle hands to work can­not be over-empha­sized, it is rather impor­tant that we find work for our youths. People must have hope, young peo­ple grad­u­at­ing from schools must have some­thing to look for­ward to, I am in agree­ment with Boyne on that, but Boyne is wrong in believ­ing that the coun­try can afford to throw bor­rowed mon­ey away on work that bear no fruits and offers no pos­i­tive return. Boyne had this to say :

FDR cre­at­ed the Civil Works Administration (CWA) in November 1933 as the US head­ed into its fifth depres­sion win­ter. CWA did not offer tax breaks. Unemployed peo­ple were put to work. In a fas­ci­nat­ing arti­cle in the December issue of Harper’s mag­a­zine (‘More gov­ern­ment, please!’), Thomas Frank says CWA “did not wait for grand projects to be fleshed out: It sim­ply sent peo­ple into the nation’s pub­lic spaces to rake leaves, shov­el snow, fix roads, dig ditch­es and so on. The pro­gram­me’s admin­is­tra­tor, Roosevelt con­fi­dant Harry Hopkins, had famous­ly spent more than US$5 mil­lion in his first two hours as a fed­er­al offi­cial. At the CWA, he found jobs for four mil­lion peo­ple in two months.”

News Flash Mister Boyne, America did not bor­row that mon­ey it paid out to its peo­ple, sec­ond­ly America is one of a few coun­tries which can print mon­ey and to some degree hold infla­tion down because of its abil­i­ty to cre­ate goods and ser­vices for oth­ers to con­sume. Secondly monies spent by Franklin Delano Roosevelt was spent on main­tain­ing exist­ing infra­struc­ture and build­ing oth­ers. What JEEP pro­pos­es to do is to siphon off bor­rowed mon­ey des­ig­nat­ed for infra­struc­tur­al devel­ope­ment to unsus­tain­able crash-pro­gramme hand­outs by politicians.

Havent we been down this road before? Haven’t we seen these poli­cies before? Have they made Jamaica bet­ter? Yet in the next sen­tence Boyne turned right around and said this:

It is true that emer­gency pub­lic works pro­grammes are just that — emer­gency, unsus­tain­able work. But no one can accu­rate­ly esti­mate the ben­e­fits of find­ing work, for even a short peri­od, for some idle hands — for whom the Devil can find lots of work.

Clearly Boyne miss­es his own point, on the one hand he seem to under­stand the sim­ple con­cept, that crash-pro­gramme work is unsus­tain­able, and cost­ly , yet on the oth­er he espous­es it argu­ing the neg­a­tive, that no one can accu­rate­ly esti­mate the ben­e­fits of find­ing work for idle hand if only for a short time, whilst in the same breath mak­ing the case for what he him­self said, quote: (“no one can accu­rate­ly esti­mate”).

These are the same tired old argu­ments which have been used time and again by elit­ist lazy social­ists who want noth­ing but scraps to fall from the table of the rich to the floor so that the under­class may fight over them. They con­tin­ue to argue for the most labor inten­sive of employ­ment even as the indus­tri­al age has passed and we are in a com­plete­ly immersed in a dig­i­tal age. So Boyne and the pro­po­nents of crash pro­gramme argues for tem­po­rary de-bush­ing of gul­lies while the peo­ple who do the work floss with their iPhone’s. The pro­po­nents of crash pro­gramme work fail to come to terms with the stark facts in our coun­try. Jamaicans have more cell phones and oth­er tech-gis­mos than most peo­ple in indus­tri­al­ized devel­oped coun­tries, where do they get the mon­ey to pur­chase these devices, does any­one seri­ous­ly believe giv­ing bor­rowed mon­ey to polit­i­cal hacks will solve our prob­lems,? If they want to make a dif­fer­ence with bor­rowed mon­ey how about spend­ing it on skills train­ing? That way the coun­try may see some returns on it’s invest­ments. Jamaicans con­tin­ue to pre­tend that our coun­try is march­ing toward first world sta­tus when the reverse is true, we are try­ing to build a 21st cen­tu­ry coun­try on a 20th cen­tu­ry econ­o­my. The Soviets tried build­ing a 20th cen­tu­ry mil­i­tary on a 19th cen­tu­ry infra­struc­ture, his­to­ry is replete with instances like these . The def­i­n­i­tion of a fool is some­one who does the same thing and expects a dif­fer­ent result.

Sorry Ian Boyne you do make sense on occa­sion, this is not one of those occasions.

Those who sup­port (JEEP) are sim­ply try­ing to relieve their con­ciences of the guilt they feel at see­ing the poor­est of our peo­ple strug­gle to sur­vive, unable to pro­vide for their fam­i­lies through the dig­ni­ty of work. That is a tragedy, I’m just not sure if reliev­ing one’s con­science will be enough to com­pen­sate for the cries of the poor this time around.

%d