Forecasts in economic or political matters are becoming increasingly uncertain. A few days ago in the New York Times appeared this very revealing piece, entitled “I was wrong,” and in it he was aware of the opinions of four personalities like Paul Krugman admitting that his vision was wrong. taking into account that inflation will not be as high as it is now not only in the United States but in the world. Part of the explanation assumes that “Most, but not all, of the rise in inflation appears to reflect pandemic-related disruptions.”

“Fear of infection and changes in the way we live are causing a major shift in the spending mix: people are spending less money on services and more on goods, leading to shortages of shipping containers, excess port capacity, and so on. This disruption helps explain why inflation is rising in many countries, not just the United States,” Krugman said.

But in the end he was wrong. On the other hand, David Brooks, another well-known economic analyst, also acknowledges the fragile assumptions of future visions by admitting: “Reality has changed, but my mental schema remains intact. Worse, they prevent me from seeing the changes that are already taking place, which is what experts call conceptual blindness. I try to deal with the problem of a period through the scheme of the previous period”.

He says he sees a lot, but he keeps an eye on it for us because “there are times in life when you have to stick to your worldview and defend it against all criticism. But there are others where the real world is different from before. In those moments, the most important skill is one that no one has taught you: how to rearrange your mind and see with new eyes.” And that is the challenge we face not only in the face of economic realities but also in dealing with politics: without a doubt, assessments of dissonance, anger and mobilization have changed profoundly and social movements are now much faster and flow like fluids. shaken in a container.

In recent years, the electoral process has shown how people read really differently in terms of digital realities and the feelings people have. This has resulted in the emergence of a new leadership that hitherto was deemed unfit.

In another discussion between Harvard’s Jason Furman and James K. Galbraith published on the www.project-syndicate.org site, it is shown how two economists argue for and against the prescription of raising interest rates as a measure to contain inflation.

What these analyzes have in common is, once again, the recognition that reality precedes analytical schemas and facts cannot be explained solely from history, but rather that in reality we live in an era of economic and political change in the world. world.

In Mexico we live a reality that resembles nothing we can explain using known precedent. On the one hand our economy is dependent on these global changes including wars, geopolitical tensions and supply disruptions which at the same time affect the global economy and open up several opportunities for us.

The inflation forecast for the United States is around 10%, in the UK it is announced at 13%, while here we are struggling with sustained gains that are around double digits. Nothing suggests that this will change soon and we have no idea how this reality will affect politics inside and outside Mexico.

What we do know is that it’s time to look with new eyes and put aside the conceptual blindness that David Brooks spoke of, more than ever there is the adage that a recently deceased friend used to say, “What I understand is over”.

To understand the new reality it is necessary to rediscover the vision, setting aside the prejudices and distortions that prevent us from seeing the true scope of changing ways of living and thinking.

luisernestosalomon@gmail.com