William Watson: The economy would do better driverless

Skip to Content News Archives Economy Energy Oil & Gas Renewables Electric Vehicles Mining Commodities Agriculture Real Estate Mortgages Mortgage Rates Finance Banking Insurance Fintech Cryptocurrency Work Wealth Smart Money Wealth Management Investor Personal Finance Family Finance Retirement Taxes High Net Worth FP Comment Executive Women Puzzmo Newsletters Financial Times Business Essentials More Innovation Information Technology FP500 Podcasts Small Business Lives Told Tails Told Shopping Financial Post Store Obituaries Place a Notice Advertising Advertising With Us Advertising Solutions Postmedia Ad Manager Sponsorship Requests Classifieds Place a Classifieds ad Working Profile Settings My Subscriptions My Offers Newsletters Customer Service FAQ News Economy Energy Mining Real Estate Finance Work Wealth Investor FP Comment Executive Women Puzzmo Newsletters Financial Times Business Essentials This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.HomeFP CommentWilliam Watson: The economy would do better driverlessThe economy supplies what people demand, which seems effectively unlimited, which means governments don't have to back economic 'drivers'Last updated 15 minutes ago Jeremy Hansen, the Canadian astronaut who took part in the Artemis II mission, spoke at the Global Business Forum in Banff, west of Calgary, on Thursday, Sept. 24, 2026. Photo by Brent Calver /PostmediaI’m a space fan. Always have been. I understand it’s a mainly male thing, possibly having to do with the boldly upright profile of a rocket on a launch pad. But as a kid I watched all the U.S. launches in the 1960s, from Mercury through Apollo, in the days when live TV coverage began before the astronauts had suited up and went on for hours through this or that launch delay and then entire Earth orbits. It was a thrilling accompaniment to growing up.THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLYSubscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.Exclusive articles from Barbara Shecter, Joe O'Connor, Gabriel Friedman, and others.Daily content from Financial Times, the world's leading global business publication.Unlimited online access to read articles from Financial Post, National Post and 15 news sites across Canada with one account.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword.SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLESSubscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.Exclusive articles from Barbara Shecter, Joe O'Connor, Gabriel Friedman and others.Daily content from Financial Times, the world's leading global business publication.Unlimited online access to read articles from Financial Post, National Post and 15 news sites across Canada with one account.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword.REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLESCreate an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one account.Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.Enjoy additional articles per month.Get email updates from your favourite authors.THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one accountShare your thoughts and join the conversation in the commentsEnjoy additional articles per monthGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountThis advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.Along with new generations of viewers, I followed Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen and his U.S. colleagues on their retro trip around the moon last April in the Artemis II program, the younger sibling of Apollo. We Earthlings’ breath was even more bated than in the late 1960s as systems that hadn’t been used since then were asked to work perfectly with humans on board.Get the latest headlines, breaking news and columns.By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.The next issue of Top Stories will soon be in your inbox.We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try againGeneral interest in space and particular admiration for people who sit atop 32-storey rockets — basically buildings filled with high explosives — is what led me to read last week’s story about now-retired astronaut Jeremy Hansen mapping “Canada’s future in space” at a business conference in Banff.According to Steven Wilhelm’s report, Hansen’s remarks were what you’d expect: there are opportunities in space, critical minerals are, well, critical, and it would be good to see Canada continue to be involved in space exploration and discovery. But then he added, as advocates for individual industries always do, that we should support space because: “It’ll drive our … economy, drive jobs.”No shade on Hansen: he’s not an economist. And he reflects a very common perspective. Does any business or industry association ever make a presentation on any subject without mentioning how much GDP and employment it provides? Most people also buy into the argument that “the economy” needs “drivers.” Thus the nodding approval given Ottawa’s major projects push. (Or is it just that a “minor projects” strategy — “minor projects and lots of em” would be insufficiently grandiose for today’s politics? As unsexy, say, as un-manned space exploration?)This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.To these arguments, economics responds “meh.” You produce jobs and GDP? Well, good for you and thank you very much. But if you didn’t exist, somebody else would have used the resources you temporarily had control of to do something else with them that would also produce GDP and jobs. You think you’re a driver of the economy? Not really, you’re responding to demand. You’re selling stuff to people who want it, which means they’re the ultimate drivers of “the economy.”But since we’re all demanders, we all drive the economy. And when you think about it, an economy everyone drives is an economy no one drives — even if people like Industry Minister Mélanie Joly and Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne like to give the impression they are at the wheel, though let’s hope they’re not gullible enough to believe their own rhetoric.Without “drivers” would the economy end up in the ditch? All those boastful GDP- and job-creators, whether public-sector or private, would certainly have you believe so. But the true driving force is people’s demand for stuff and, despite dogged lobbying by hair-shirt anti-consumptionists, there really doesn’t seem to be any limit to that.This advertisement has not loaded yet.This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.What do you get a civilization that has everything? New necessities seem to be invented every day. Amazons of them at a time. And even people who disdain gadgets and gewgaws likely want services: whether health care, financial advice, personal training, travel to interesting places or myriad other possibilities seemingly as numerous as the stars and planets.Given all these demands, both actual and potential, what’s needed is people to supply them. But there doesn’t seem to be any shortage of those, either. Because supplying what other people want is the way you finance your own demands and get ahead in this economy. There’s a lot written these days about “the circular economy.” But the economy has been circular since Day 1.I’m told that in the most avant-garde reaches of academia people are now making “Capitalism acknowledgements” before giving talks or presentations. The gist of these acknowledgements is that the persona you see is not the real me but the one capitalism obliges me to put forward. Well, sure, but what else is new? Adam Smith himself wrote about how in an economy in which people depend on exchanging with each other for their sustenance and enjoyment, they have a very strong incentive to behave civilly toward their peers.This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.I’ll bet the persona capitalism forces you to present is much more industrious and attentive than the real you, who would prefer to be sleeping in, lounging about or doom-scrolling. Now that you mention it, the real you is someone maybe the rest of us don’t want to see so much of.How can we be sure that in our capacity as workers, employers and investors we’ll supply the virtually infinite demands we have in our capacity as consumers? Because if we don’t supply things, we don’t earn income and don’t get to consume.So long as we don’t break the link between consuming and producing by, say, guaranteeing people a living without the necessity of working or investing, the whole thing is going to chug along nicely, with all of us answering each other’s demands.Driverless, that is. With no Houston or Mission Control in charge. And the potential for large gains if we sack all those who believe things only work because they’re at the controls.This advertisement has not loaded yet.Notice for the Postmedia NetworkThis website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.