Most of the problems we have in society can be solved by economics – people just may not like the policies to get there.
This apparently was the take home message from NAB’s chief economist, Rob Henderson to 70 HSC students from three of Armidale’s secondary schools in a lecture recently.
Mr Henderson believes that mining should be allowed on farming land, provided adequate compensation is payable. Presumably he takes this view because mining will out-perform farming financially, and so should be allowed to supplant farming. He chooses to ignore the fact that primary production is our nation’s only true sustainable industry, whilst mining is undeniably finite. How does he put a monetary value on this difference, and does he put any value on society’s view that they may wish to retain our ability to produce our own food and fibre?
Mr Henderson also supports a Carbon Tax as the means of choice to reduce our carbon emissions. He says “An economist would say that by putting a price on it will affect our use of it”. Well it may, but not if the heavy emitters are given compensation and access to overseas carbon credits as our government is allowing. After all, few smokers quit as a result of the cigarette tax, it was the gradual effect of the health message and the smoking bans that changed their behaviour.
As a respected economist Mr Henderson should know that a tax should be used to raise revenue, not as a ‘blunt instrument’ to change behaviour.
My take home message for Mr Henderson and his audience is that economics is a very useful tool for society, but if the day comes that economists dominate our lives to the exclusion of other, more human considerations, our society will have degenerated into a mere economy. After all, who wants to live in a country like South Korea for instance, where slavish pursuit of economic solutions and intense competition has resulted in a suicide rate higher than any other OECD country.
I sincerely trust that our schools are ensuring that their pupils receive lectures which provide adequate balance to the sort of ‘brainwashing’ to which these students were exposed.
R J. Gordon, Guyra
