Our obsession with the economy is destroying democracy – Catriona Watson | In my opinion

Economy | Information | History | Online | Facts | World | Global | Money

1. But wait ... I thought the British public has had enough of experts. It is a post-truth world, after all.
2. Brilliant. Best minute and forty seconds I've spent this year. Thanks.
3. I agree people care too much about esoteric crap about economics and laymen are being pandered to
4. The way politicians, economists and other 'experts' talk about the economy in the media is sometimes known as 'econobabble.' This is done by using incomprehensible economic jargon to mislead or misrepresent the truth - especially if that truth is unfair or unjust, or not in the self interest of the so called experts.
5. The monetary system is outdated, obsolete, & needs to be replaced with a resources based economy.
6. I like greed.
7. a) Who said the economy should be left to experts? and b) even if it was said, since there is such a massive availability of free information, anybody can find out about the economy; gain an understanding and indeed 'become an expert.' The only thing stopping the genuine attainment of knowledge is the individual not economic censorship.
8. I don't see the problem with factoring in the wider economics benefits or otherwise into a decision. Whilst the main motivation for fathers reading to their children is a strengthening of the maternal bond and improving the child's education, i don't see an issue with pointing out that it will also improve GDP; when making a decision, no 'stone should be left unturned.'
9. Hold on, she's saying we're too obsessed with the economy, so we should 'actually understand what meets [out] needs and preferences' (i.e. know more about the economy). Isn't that completely paradoxical? If you think obsession over economics is a problem wouldn't it make more sense to remove the experts who control the economy, rather than moving the control over to us. What she wan't wouldn't reduce obsession, it would merely transfer it from one entity to another.
10. Yet criticise immigration and the Guardian would be first in line to argue the "economic" benefits...
    
    What's good for the economy isn't necessarily good for the people. Increased competition for housing, school and nursery places, hospital appointments, employment etc. is not good for people. Yet it's never a conversation the Guardian wants to have.
11. I would say people are too obsessed with democracy but not enough with economy. Democracy is a way to govern, and gradually showing its problems. Economy is the foundation, and with a solid foundation, you can choose the way to govern.
12. 'The words ‘the economy’ weren’t mentioned in a winning British election manifesto before 1950.' That's odd because the first manifesto used in a British General Election was in 1945. This is misleading, the fact may be true but it implies our 'obsession' with the economy only started then.
    
    Of course, people should worry about the economy, we need money to do things. We have one money-raising department in the UK, the treasury, and 10's of spending departments. We probably should care about the economy MORE than we do now.
13. Even worse, our obsession with economy is destroying... employment. It is also reducing the size of the middle class. And said obsession with economy in politics comes from the obsession of profit and corporate rubbish, combined to the corruption of politicians that goes along it. And that, in each and every other country over the world. Nice. Oh, and this is not coming from a communist. I have always been conservative. Maybe is it time to change, who knows.
14. Lol the guardian don't give a shit about poor people earning close to nothing because the economy is bad
15. Well done.
16. I would disagree. I'd say that what is destroying democracy is the idea that people are too stupid to know what's good for them. The belief that the average voter does not fully understand what they are voting for. And needs to be saved from making a big mistake.
    
    We heard this argument during the EU referendum. Where those who wanted to remain asked questions like ''Do you really trust this government to run the country properly?'' It was a strange question. As the idea that we need a higher level of bureaucrats above those who we elect to protect ourselves from ourselves is simply one of many arguments against democratic accountability. And the fact that it came from people who believed themselves to be 'progressive' does not say much about the future.
17. Interesting take.
18. The prosperity of a business is directly proportional to the speed of flow of its particles.
19. it boils down to "we are disenfranchised" + "money isn't everything". fair enough, it seems as if more and more people all over the industrialized/developed world feel this way. but what then? certainly we should reexamine our values and goals as societies, but that is not necessarily an "expert" field, or at least not scientific or empirical.
    
    saying holding those "experts" accountable is a hollow statement. is it the claim that they (scientists? academics?) are misleading on purpose and act dishonestly?
    assuming people are honest - when it comes to it, who would we prefer makes the decisions, people who have studied and researched a certain field, are informed and yet could be wrong, or a person who knows nothing about it and is just guessing? both might be wrong and cause damage. but the informed person would be right more often.
20. the only way would be teaching very well economy in high school, because it's a very complicated subject to understand, I agree with the video, the problem is to find a right solution which seems complicated, yet economy is one of the most important subject within politics and we don't really understand its whole.