Dear Editor,
Prime Minister Andrew Holness recently announced that Jamaica’s poverty rate has been cut in half, now reportedly standing at 8.2%. While this headline grabs attention, it warrants deeper scrutiny — not celebration. Especially during an election cycle, where optimism can be weaponized, and statistics, selectively interpreted.
As a Jamaican scholar and author of Neoliberalism (written while studying at the University of Pennsylvania), I have long studied the metrics and myths that surround poverty reporting in postcolonial economies. Jamaica is no stranger to fluctuations in poverty — we’ve had moments of apparent prosperity before, only for them to unravel quickly due to geopolitical shifts, natural disasters, external debt obligations, IMF structural adjustments, and internal governance issues.
The real question is this: What methodology underpins this 8.2% figure?
Are we still measuring poverty solely by average income per day — a narrow and outdated standard? Or are we accounting for productive capacity, sustainable employment, access to social goods, and resilience against economic shocks?
Poverty is more than a number; it’s about whether Jamaicans can not only survive but thrive. And that requires policies rooted in long-term vision, not short-term optics.
I urge fellow Jamaicans, academics, policymakers, and journalists not to take this statistic at face value. Ask hard questions. Investigate the data. Demand transparency.
This is not cynicism — it’s responsibility.
We cannot afford to count eggs before they’re laid — especially if there may be no eggs at all.
Sincerely,
Renaldo C. McKenzie
Author, Neoliberalism
President, The Neoliberal Corporation
Doctoral Candidate, Temple University
www.theneoliberal.com
This article has been submitted to the Jamaican Gleaner for publication in their newspapers.
Read the Book:
https://shop.ingramspark.com/b/084?params=63KgyNK5lXctb5ySudh5FFtuQ63V0WvEJVeHDvOhN4M
