economics

"it's the economy, stupid" - one of former us president bill clinton's slogans in his successful 1992 presidential campaign

"the economy is not everything but economics is important. if you were starving, you would put it as item number one on your list. but because your stomach is full, so you can afford to think." - pm lee hsien loong, dialogue session with nus students on 21 sep 07

first things first

the principle of placing first things first is a noble one. after all, where else could you place the first thing, except for first?

however, the nature of economics (which - by the way - is not necessarily the first thing) is that while you can't ignore it, you can't exactly live (and die) by it either. (that would be marxism.) if you think about it, economics insulates itself from a purely economic approach to issues.

limited resources. unlimited wants. economics identifies the central problem of scarcity, then leaves the rest to the policymakers. in fact, the propensity of economists to hedge their bets when making policy recommendations (on one hand... but on the other hand) led harry s. truman, another former us president, to frustratedly demand a one-armed economist on his council of economic advisers.

the trinity (with a small t) of philosophy, politics and economics

so economics doesn't exist in a vacuum. it couldn't, even if it wanted to. for example, raising erp rates to reduce road traffic congestion merely treats the symptoms; it doesn't heal the cause. what is the root of the problem, anyway?

what is philosophy? what is politics? what is economics? it's intriguing to study philosophy, politics and economics together because they challenge you to think like a philosopher, a political scientist (not a politician!) and an economist individually, then as all three at one go. but at the end of the day, they're just man-made academic concepts which build on each other and gesture at the truth from different angles.

to arrive at the right answer, you have to address the real need.