The few university economics course units I took two or three months ago don’t qualify me to preach about the economy, but, considering the global economic downturn, the economy is a serious concern for any man (Are we still allowed to say just "man” in this politically correct age) above the age of consent, but don’t consider yourself "in” if you’re still in high school.

I realize that the "high school” proviso lets a lot of "adults” off the economy, but for the rest of you, listen up! I have a solution. But first, a little background.

One of the things I found disturbing about my economics course units was that economists tend to base their hypotheses on assumptions that are noticeably false.

For example, many economics "verses” start by saying, "assuming rational behaviour...” Have these economists ever taken one minute to look at the world around them?

Get real! Rational behavior? We live in a world where many people won’t cross the path of a black cat because they fear that doing so will bring them bad luck.

Other people will, after a woman being the first person they bump into on their way to work, look for the next shortest route back home for a spontaneous leave off work that day.

Why they think that women met while going to work in the morning is a bad omen is beyond me. And, I hear, there are some supposedly intelligent apartment builders (mostly in Europe) who pretend that the number 13 doesn’t exist when labelling the floors of their buildings. I suppose they think that bad luck can count.

I won’t talk about horoscopes here because they are a far too easy and obvious a target.  And economists want to build their hypotheses on an assumption of rational behaviour?  Bad idea. Very bad idea!

Another common economics assumption is that businesses and individuals can operate under constant factors and this they shrewdly call ceteris paribus. Nonsense!

If economists would spend a few minutes a day reading the blaring headlines of the many not so nice events that are literally shaking the different parts of the world every other week, they too would understand that it’s not a very "constant factors” world we are leaving in.

Seeing as though economists seem to have failed to have done that basic reading, I suggest that economists climb down from their air-conditioned offices, find an Internet-connected computer and Google "disasters”, "earth quakes”, "wars” and other search terms in that regard, no need to mention Haiti, am quite sure it was the first thing that crossed your mind.

These economists would most certainly find out that the world in fact doesn’t operate under constant conditions/factors, and perhaps, won’t be doing so, anytime soon, if ever.

You and I know there are no parables in Economics, so when "constant factors” are talked about, it is constant factors we are precisely talking about, nothing should be treated to your parabolic discretion.

Considering the willingness and eagerness of economists to underpin their theories with the flimsiest of assumptions, why people still pay attention to economists is beyond me, but they do.

Now, many people want to know when the current downturn will end. The answer to that question is so blindingly obvious that I’m surprised that all economists around the world have not figured it out yet. They haven’t.

In fact, as best I can tell, none of them have come up with the right answer so far, except of course the usual assumptions and theories.

Knowing this, the solution (yes, I promised you a solution) to our current economic crisis is clear and it lies in answering a simple "when will the current economic downturn end?” question.

The correct response to the question, "when will the current economic downturn end,” is "I don’t know.”  And I hold a personal opinion that no one does.

easywilber@yahoo.com