José Luis Sampedro decía de sí mismo que era una ‘metaeconomista’. Era
un modo sutil de distanciarse de los economistas que no veían la “montaña del
hambre” pero pretendían adivinar el futuro; aunque casi siempre erraban sus
previsiones, se conformaban con actualizar los datos en lugar de revisar los
modelos utilizados.
La crisis actual aporta muchos ejemplos similares: la economía ortodoxa
resta importancia a los desequilibrios y desigualdades que nos rodean, las
burbujas financieras e inmobiliarias solo interesan cuando estallan, y la función
reguladora de las políticas públicas solo tiene sentido si está al servicio de la
acumulación privada.
Por eso es necesario recuperar la visión de la economía que defendía Sampedro,
y no olvidar la brecha de la desigualdad ni argumentar que hay manos
invisibles que actúan en beneficio de todos. Aunque el neoliberalismo, la codicia
y el uso interesado de la ciencia lo nieguen, el humanismo forma parte
indisociable del análisis económico
José Luis Sampedro self-defined ‘meta-economist’. Maybe because he
knew that many economists and international agencies were wrong in recognizing
the crisis. Although they rectified and predict a longer and serious crisis,
are trustworthy their forecasts? In spite of their cyclical character, crises are
difficult to anticipate and manage. Usually, they are related to the unbalanced
growth, characteristic of Capitalism. Therefore, the present crisis was seen to
come in the measure that, for time, well-known imbalances exist in real estate
and financial sectors. Besides, the financial sector has been placed at the top
of the control of the other activities; and neo-liberal doctrines have reduced
regulatory capacity of public policies. Considering that this crisis may be indicating
the end of a stage, we should not forget Sampedro and his lessons on
the importance of the split of inequalities. He was a humanist. That is a very
import difference with the neo-liberal way of understand our economic and
social systems