ILIYASU GADU'S SUBSIDY AS ECONOMIC AND SPIRITUAL NECESSITY

In his article, Iliyasu Gadu quoted Wikipedia definition, after a thorough perusal of all other definitions available concerning the term subsidy, to arrive at premiss for the justification of the conclusion canvassed.

Let us take it for granted that the definition provided is a given. However, to say that we have been made to believe that subsidy is negative or pejorative by some pseudo economist and government officials would be tantamount to hasty generalisation, an unrepresentative conclusion about the diversity of opinions on this subject matter within the purview of socio-economic analysis in Nigeria.

There was never a consensus on the issue of subsidy removal in Nigeria amongst socio-economic public analysts, and the few who advocated removal have disparate methodology and timelines.

I understand that subsidy is a social good, and necessary at some point to advance the greatest value of goods for the greatest number of people, but the way and manner of aggregation are of the essence, if it is going to promote the long term economic stability, or help government to achieve policy objectives during recession, coupled with the imaginary unforeseen socio-economic shocks, Iliyasu, referred to in his article.

Yes, there is no universe of geographical, socio-economic, activities within human polity without subsidy in one formula or another, but the juxtapositioning of Subsidy regimes in America, UK, with what obtain in Nigeria is not doing justice to the subject matter.

America and UK, are  productive economies and most of the companies mentioned in Iliyasu's article are productive centres of excellence for the American and UK economies, inclusive their hegemonic posturing worldwide. The multiplier effects of subsidy granted to these companies are felt directly and indirectly in the positive sense by the tax payers. 

Similar story could be written in respect of the European Union subsidy regimes. 

Subsidy is granted to organisations with productive antecedent, these are institutions of vital economic significance to the existence of the union, and have proven track records as productive centres of excellence. 

Can we in honesty say that in our clime, that subsidy granted has had the same or similar impact on the economy and tax payers?  Obviously the answer is negative. 

Is subsidy application in America, UK, and the European Union, same or similar to the regime, palaver, in Nigeria, where subsidy application is a fraudulent scam engineered to enrich the pockets of pseudo capitalist, and rent seeking, influence peddling, cash and carry businesses.

The answers to these questions are self evidently known to watchers of Nigeria's subsidisation conundrum. 

Iliyasu's, adventure into the spiritual realm to find justification for the need to provide subsidy no matter what, leaves me speechless. Air, Water, and Land, are commodities within the universe of human economic system, and they have been significantly monetised. 

As important factors of production, price modulation and various elements of economic theory, and philosophy have been applied to them to the extent that their spiritual ontology is insignificant. 

It is common knowledge, that people don't have to be schooled in environmental science nowadays, for them to understand that spiritual subsidy on the above mentioned elements has been converted to commercial goods to be paid for.  

Iliyasu, you are living within a materialist, capitalist, economic philosophy, signposted by profit motives. Therefore, the idea of incurring the imaginary anger of God would be irrelevant within the sphere of intellectual discourse you are positioning.  Let us leave that realm to Pope, Imam, Prophet, Sheik, and the likes. 

It is important to mention here, that in the western world, sometimes subsidisation for certain items are withdrawn, if and when it is noted that the circumstance, purpose, for which it was established doesn't exist anymore.

It is therefore, fallacious to jump to the conclusion that in the western world subsidy removal is an aberration. 

There might be racism linked development. Leaders are however, not forced with AK47 position on their forehead to implement counterproductive policies. Subsidy removal, is a question of existential reality. It is opportunity cost, a question of choices to be made amongst competing values, elements, which are essential for living and achieving an egalitarian society.  

We all make these choices daily, and every choice we make there is a corresponding consequence attached to it. 

Please, don't blame western world for decision made by your political leaders. We were at the other end of subsidy sustenance before, and we all knew the consequences before reverting to subsidy removal.  

Iliyasu, we cannot eat our cake and have it at the same time. We need to cut the unsustainable umbilical cord for us to survive into the future.  

What has nomenclature got to do with policy and economic decision making, Iliyasu, I need your attention concerning this psychological postulate ?

Please, call it what you want, those discerning citizenry, understand what it is, when the impacts are felt. We should not be bothered about system of naming, as camouflage tool to deflect impact or consequences of policy. 

It is mere political correctness. This is an unsustainable argument from the "pit of hell"  using Iliyasu's spiritual wisdom as compass. I wouldn't want to expel much energy on it. 

It is noteworthy, to state here that subsidy removal exercise is worldwide. Citizens in America, and UK are feeling the same, similar, impact of subsidy removal.  Ours is not peculiar given our failure to do the needful previously. 

Let me conclude by saying that we need to jettison this kind of grotesque comparison, unbridled support for subsidy regime continuation in the name of God. 

We all know it is not achieving the intended goal of providing socio-economic goods for the citizenry, rather we ended up with the enrichment of pseudo capitalist.  

We should at this point enjoin the government to reinvest gains from the removal of subsidy in social goods for the citizenry.  We are all on the journey of no pain no gain.