Letters

President Higgins and economics

The measure of all things?

Wed May 03 2023 - 00:14

Sir, – “Senior Government figures declined to comment, even off the record”, so writes Pat Leahy after summarising the views of President Michael D Higgins (“Higgins condemns ‘obsession’ with economic growth”, News, April 29th). And that is understandable. After all, our two main governing parties are wedded to the economic strategy of growth and the best way to avoid drawing attention to Michael D Higgins’s searching ideas is to hope they are not noticed. I assume Pat Leahy also tried to obtain comments from the Green Party Ministers. Surely this is gist to their mill, how the obsession with growth is wrecking the planet. Or maybe they too are wedded to their Government jobs. – Yours, etc,

TOM O’CONNOR,

Dublin 4.

Sir, – The recent debate in these columns, surrounding the desirability or otherwise of economic growth, sparked by Presidents Higgins, is as old as economics itself. For example, Archbishop Whately, who established the eponymous Chair of Political Economy in Trinity College in 1832, was concerned with whether economic growth would impact on moral behaviour or not.

READ MORE

He believed that economic growth in fact would lead to moral improvement, which in turn would lead to as much happiness as one can reasonably expect in life. – Yours, etc,

JOHN O’HAGAN,

Department of Economics,

Trinity College Dublin,

Dublin 2.

A chara, – If our President had even briefly spent some time working in the private sector during his career, he might more easily appreciate the importance of economic growth to improving the lives of the citizens he represents. – Yours, etc,

JOHN BALFE,

Chapelizod,

Dublin 20.

Sir, – Whether economists (I happen to be one of them) like the ideas of President Higgins or not, they should not be dismissed too glibly. His recent critique of economic growth as measured by GDP, GNP or variants of them was entirely reasonable and widely accepted. Unfortunately, these inadequate measures continue to be used uncritically as measures of progress.

And can the President be reasonably faulted for suggesting that all economists might venture outside their own discipline rather more to encompass the key social, environmental and ecological concerns of our time? Some of course do. Surely all of us, as economists, must also question whether our discipline pays much, if any, attention to the ethical and human rights issues raised consistently by the President.

It seems clear that, whether we like it or not, President Higgins, in his address to Tasc’s 21st celebration, reflected the views of those present and the large numbers who elected him on two occasions. Few economists could aspire to that. – Yours, etc,

PJ DRUDY,

Trinity College Dublin,

Dublin 2.

Sir, – If we consider how wrong the majority of the President’s detractors were before, during and after the financial meltdown of 2008, it is company I would be deeply embarrassed to keep.

That said, the reality in Ireland is we measure everything except what really matters.

We manage what we measure, and we have wedded ourselves to a narrow set of metrics that fails to account for all the things that makes life worth living. We are one of wealthiest countries in world, yet too many of our own people feel impoverished – not just economically, but spiritually and culturally.

Economists like to view society as board game, with a set of pre-defined rules, players and strategies to win. Yet rarely if ever do they question if the game itself is worth playing.

These economists may know everything inside the box, but they can never see outside the box and most importantly whether the box itself can hold the weight. This is lacking in our economic teachings and is a conversation I thank our President for kickstarting. – Yours, etc,

PADDY COLE,

Chairman,

Labour Trade Unionists,

Dublin 16.