By Mabel Doge Luhan for Mabel’s Table, Kandit News & Views
Oh, goodness! Another well-meaning call, this time from a tax law firm, for “out of the box solutions” and “fresh thinking” for the CNMI’s economy.
How about encouraging more mainland US lawyers to legally “live” here (wink wink) for the tax benefits? I joke! (And to be clear: This quip has nothing to do with the tax law firm sponsoring this scholarship, and everything to do with a lot of other mainland US lawyers who do “live” here.)
It’s nice to give out $500 scholarships. Why, that will pay for several days of college! Maybe even a textbook! My real bugaboo, however, is with the call for “fresh thinking” and “out of the box solutions” for our economic development.
Because “fresh thinking” and “out of the box solutions” are exactly what got us here.
Economic development is a solved problem. Asking for “fresh thinking” about how to foster economic development is like asking for “fresh thinking” on the square root of 144, “fresh thinking” on the air distance from Saipan to Guam, or for the Marianas Variety newsroom, “fresh thinking” on treating laryngeal chlamydia.
Those problems have already been solved. Undergraduate textbooks on any of those topics will give you the answer. (Though for the chlamydia, maybe just cut back on sucking c*** in the first place — I know I have, in the name of good health!)
Seeking “fresh thinking” on those kinds of problems is exactly what’s happening now in Washington: where health policy goes against a century of established epidemiology, climate policy goes against a century of established earth science, tariff policy goes against a century of established economics, and presidential fantasy goes against the most ancient incest taboo. And look, indeed, where that “fresh thinking is” taking us.
But you don’t need to look to Washington. Because the way just about everything in the CNMI has been run since ever since goes against all accepted wisdom. And all the policies and solutions have been very much out of the box: nothing done here accords with any established theory of economic development or democratic rule. It’s all “fresh ideas,” charitably speaking. And again, look where it’s gotten us.
Why? Because our leaders are such original thinkers? Or because they’re stupid?
No and no. They’re neither particularly original nor particularly stupid. But they are, and have been, very self-interested, and very much more interested in helping relatives than helping the general public. So in their hearts of hearts, those goals held up by the development economists, such as equal distribution of income, high median income and purchasing power, high average life expectancy, and so on, have never been very important to them, at least not for the general public.
Moreover, following the established advice requires work and sacrifice. It’s never enough to do what our “leaders” are so great at doing: make proclamations about cultural heritage, passing a law pre-written by a croney, and chowing down on some lechon. That is not on anyone’s economic development how-to list. Even worse, most economic development how-to lists preach for a highly limited, sparsely staffed government, staffed by technical experts, not good old boys (and quite a few bois).
So why in the world would any of our leaders, except perhaps the most selfless and dedicated, have followed the conventional advice for economic development? It would not have been to their benefit. So they replaced it with “fresh thinking.”
For example, the idea that air service drives travel demand, and not the other way around: that is a laugh-out-loud idea in any room of undergraduates. Yet it was the driver of our economic development policy for decades.
Or the idea that the main purpose of government is providing voters with do-nothing “jobs.” Most Americans wouldn’t believe this is happening in the 21st century, much less right here under the US flag. Yet it’s been pervasive policy in the CNMI since ever since.
Or that unpopulated islands with no current nor planned future residents, businesses, or development should have fully staffed government offices.
Or that the CNMI, which has zero casinos, should have three casino commissions and I’ve lost count of how many casino commissioners.
These are all totally out-of-the-box ideas, if you are looking for ways to develop the whole of a place in an equitable way. Economists, policy experts, and legal scholars don’t agree on much, but they’d very likely all agree on the ridiculousness of almost all existing CNMI policy and especially practice. Out of the box thinking, indeed.
It’s not out-of-the-box thinking we lack. It’s in-the-box thinking we need. We need plans that conform to general, accepted, widely known principles of economic development. Not what some politician saw on Facebook (captive insurance, anyone?), not in what creates bribes and fake jobs (too many examples to name here; I’m 146 years old so please give me a break sometimes!), not in what emotionally placates angry low-information voters in the villages (secede from the US and we’ll all be rich, amirite?).
The in-the-box advice is really, really simple:
Have the government enforce the laws, equitably and predictably. Close down all the bribe-collecting government offices that prey on businesses. Cut back the government workforce to only what is needed to provide vital public services, not who wants a job. Limit public assistance to those truly and involuntarily in need. Do everything possible to open up the movement of goods, capital, people, and ideas in and out and within our Commonwealth.
That’s it. That’s what it would take for us to give ourselves the best shot of a real first-world economy in a matter of some years. Yes, it takes work, and there’s no certain payoff, especially not for government insiders. That’s why nobody wants to pursue this in-the-box advice. But there it is. Sure is a lot more difficult than passing a stablecoin bill or inviting a movie producer or whatever cockamamie no-work-required plan is supposed to make us rich next. In-the-box solutions are seldom easy, because if they were easy, those problems wouldn’t exist in the world. (Conversely, if launching a stablecoin makes a place rich, why hasn’t every other jurisdiction in the world done it?)
Maybe it’s in-the-box thinking we should offer scholarships for. After all, many of our government officials already receive “scholarships” for their out-of-the-box policies.
Oh, it’s all so much to think about! I need to go back to my chambers and call for Rupert to play with my box!
_____
Mabel Doge Luhan is a woman of loose morals. She resides in Kagman V, where she pursues her passions of crocheting, beatboxing, and falconry.
