Dear Editor,
SN’s Cost of Living series often expose a critical aspect of the life struggles of Guyanese that gets bundled within the general discussion on poverty. That aspect is economic insecurity. It is a measure of how vulnerable we are as individuals or households to sudden financial loss or expense, such as death of a breadwinner, job loss, retirement, cost of medical emergencies, funeral expenses, losses due to flood, fire, accidents, and theft; the arrival of a newborn, and the new responsibility for caring an elderly family member. Such events are collectively referred to as shocks.
A few of these shock events are highlighted in the small sample of cases in SN’s editorial on 1st January, titled “View from the bottom”. One respondent is quoted as saying: “My brother used to support me, but he died.” Another stated: “The rising cost of living is affecting me very bad since recently I had a surgery done…” And a third person touched on another aspect of economic insecurity when she said: “you’re not getting to save anything.”
Economic insecurity is therefore a broader concept than straight poverty. Many individuals and households living above the poverty line could suddenly slip into a money crunch or poverty should they experience a shock – and are unable or slow to recover from it. In the case of pensioners, many become impoverished because they are unable to recover from the abrupt loss of income on retirement unless they have deep savings or a retirement plan.
So, even as a government tackles poverty, it should also implement measures to reduce the financial vulnerability of families existing not too far above the poverty line. In particular, a government must ensure that those who recently escaped poverty do not easily re-pauperize.
All of this requires a government with a different mindset, a bigger heart, and a wider visioning, than what is on display in Guyana today. As I have asked in this space before: what impulse or feeling in the PPP government does SN hope to trigger with its weekly Cost of Living series? A serious government’s moral obligation to ensure the welfare of its citizens? Its desire to honour the constitutional rights of citizens to a high quality of life? Or its understanding that ending poverty and generally investing in people can spur further economic growth and development?
In the PPP, there is no such impulse or feeling at the required scale to make a real difference in the lives of citizens. To tackle poverty and economic insecurity (and the flood of other issues), we need a government that can re-imagine living in Guyana.
Sincerely,
Sherwood Lowe
