This
is an absolutely valid concern, but sits awkwardly with the OECD’s unwavering
devotion to growth and to increasing aggregate demand – the OECD wants more
people, more workers, more consumption, more everything! The thing is,
increasing population undermines political participation and political
engagement. It is RATIONAL to disengage if you are in reality powerless, which
you certainly are in large population countries like India and China. The late
Professor Albert Bartlett noted that the population of his home city, Boulder,
Colorado, had increased tenfold during his lifetime, leaving him with one tenth
the say in the running of it that he had initially.
If
citizens disengage, the “agency problem” identified by Race Mathews and others
kicks in. The people who are paid to run the place (including public servants)
have much more at stake than any given ordinary citizen, who has little to gain
individually from trying to catch them out or stop them. The risk of corruption
at the top by and large is greater for large population countries than it is
for small population countries.
The
OECD would have more success in maintaining or increasing public trust in
politicians and governments if it stopped supporting the “bigger is better”
model and worked to slow growth down.
Hear Hear, agree with you 100% Mr Thomson
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering if you had an opportunity to express your very sensible views at the OECD forum
ReplyDelete