This second cycle of total quarantines has hit me harder than the others. I've become more pessimistic, I've been more tired, I've found no motivation to train and my training equipment seems to be crying behind the layer of dust that non-use has covered over it.

During the week, I read an interesting interview in the New York Times with Neil deGrasse Tyson (you can read it here here) in which he examines the decline of people's trust in science, giving way to the proliferation of fake newsand antivaccine movements and even denialists of the current pandemic. Among the causes, he identifies the loss of people's curiosity, the a priori biases of the few who remain curious (they only investigate to confirm their prejudices) and the lack of delivery that science has had with the population (we should be driving around in flying cars by now, right?).

We economists have also failed. Personally, I believe that the free market is the best system for the distribution of resources, which is also supported by macro and microeconomic data. What do I mean by "best"? Easy, it is a matter of going to one of the definitions of Economics (which does not refer to GDP, nor to unemployment, nor even to money), in which the discipline is basically understood as "the search for welfare, with what we have available". The free market has done more for health, poverty reduction, technological progress, leisure, etc., than any other economic system in the history of mankind (Sala-i-Marti, 2002). However, it has not done many of the things it promised it would do, due to a lack of market or market failures, which the system itself is not capable of resolving on its own. Environmental damage, inequality, concentration, abuse of dominant positions, corruption, among others, are challenges for which, by action or omission, economists are responsible and there is still much to be done. 

It is true that we are not the only ones to blame (nor the biggest), but it is undoubtedly part of our moral responsibility to improve the living conditions of those who live in our neighborhoods, our cities, our country, etc. The search for solutions to the problems that we have not been able to solve has led us today to see populist and short-term policies, an absence of vision for the future, a constant erosion of institutions, the appearance of charlatans and an almost sporting disregard by certain groups towards those of us who practice the profession. At this juncture, the challenge of convincing our society that we must perfect the free market and not put an end to it is an uphill struggle.

Faced with this diagnosis, what to do? For scientific re-enchantment, deGrasse proposes something: to take a manned mission to Mars in 2035. The team members should not be over 30 years old, so all future astronauts would be in school today, what better incentive to get involved in science! Today's test, next week's group work, that task you avoid doing, everything now will have a meaning, a purpose. 

Not to be outdone, as far as we are concerned, I also propose something: to make Chile reach a GDP per capita of US$40 thousand dollars PPP and reduce the Gini coefficient, after transfers and taxes, to 0.40, within 15 years. Difficult? Yes. Yes. Impossible? No, Ireland, after a deep post-subprime crisis recession, did it.

To motivate myself again, I also set a goal: to finish the Ironman Pucon 70.3 2022 (yes, I'm an optimist) in less than 5.5 hours. Difficult? Yes. Challenging? Undoubtedly. Achievable? With hard work, of course. 

Nathan Pincheira 

Chief Economist, FYNSA