Terkper wrong person to turn economy around – Casely-Hayford

Read Article

Comments (93)

This article is closed for comments.

Read Comments Comments (93)

LAST DON 10 years ago

Empty headed man mtcheewwwww

Empty headed man mtcheewwwww
APONKYE 10 years ago

Casely-Haford's mother was a popular prostate in Takoradi. Her clients were mainly white sailors and merchants. She took seed and without knowing who was responsible gave birth to this troublesome social nuisance. He is so an ...
read full comment

Casely-Haford's mother was a popular prostate in Takoradi. Her clients were mainly white sailors and merchants. She took seed and without knowing who was responsible gave birth to this troublesome social nuisance. He is so angry at society that he criticises everything and anything - in short, anti-social.

However, on this occasion, his negativity happens to coincide with reality. Mahama needs only change Terkper, Wampa and the totally clueless Chief of Staff and everything will be HONKY DORY.
GOD SAVE GHANA 10 years ago

Democracy is exchange of ideals and those who lack wisdom and vision restore to insults and intimidation to make their point. Anyway the problem is not only Seth Terkper but those guys in NDC will never allow anybody to stop ...
read full comment

Democracy is exchange of ideals and those who lack wisdom and vision restore to insults and intimidation to make their point. Anyway the problem is not only Seth Terkper but those guys in NDC will never allow anybody to stop them from stealing and make themselfes rich over night.
MODIGLIANI 10 years ago

MTCHEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW. THIS CASELY-HAYFORD GUY IS NO EXPERT. I HAVE LISTENED TO HIM FOR A WHILE, AND DO NOT DEDUCE ANY EXPERTISE IN HIS COMMENTARY. DOESN'T SOUND TO ME LIKE HE DID ANY SUBSTANTIVE WORK INTERNATIONALLY ...
read full comment

MTCHEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW. THIS CASELY-HAYFORD GUY IS NO EXPERT. I HAVE LISTENED TO HIM FOR A WHILE, AND DO NOT DEDUCE ANY EXPERTISE IN HIS COMMENTARY. DOESN'T SOUND TO ME LIKE HE DID ANY SUBSTANTIVE WORK INTERNATIONALLY OR HAS A STRONG TECHNICAL BACKGROUND IN ECONOMICS OR FINANCE, FOR ALL HIS BLUSTER!!! JUST CRITICISM, NO SOLUTIONS, AND NAME CALLING. ANYWAY, IN THE LAND OF THE BLIND, THE ONE-EYED MAN IS KING.
TATA 10 years ago

Terkper is economic wrecker, but the Ewes will let him be there just because he is a trokosi tribalman. He does not know any economics.

Terkper is economic wrecker, but the Ewes will let him be there just because he is a trokosi tribalman. He does not know any economics.
Omanba Pa, Islington-London! 10 years ago

What casely Hayford is saying today is 100% right. Tekper failed from day one since the idiot president mahama and the wicked ever president that Ghana has ever had appointed him as the Finance minister. Ghana is sinking yet ...
read full comment

What casely Hayford is saying today is 100% right. Tekper failed from day one since the idiot president mahama and the wicked ever president that Ghana has ever had appointed him as the Finance minister. Ghana is sinking yet the blind and deaf people cannot see or hear it. Ghana is in trouble.
NII 10 years ago

ANYBODY WHO THINK Seth Terkper or any of the SO CALLED MINISTERS ARE COMPETENT IS ON CRACK. THEY ARE RUNNING THE COUNTRY INTO THE TOILET.

ANYBODY WHO THINK Seth Terkper or any of the SO CALLED MINISTERS ARE COMPETENT IS ON CRACK. THEY ARE RUNNING THE COUNTRY INTO THE TOILET.
NANA SHORTINGO 10 years ago

WHO IS COMPETENT? SIR JOHN - THE COMEDIAN? AFENYO-MARKINS - THE THIEF AND ADB BLACKMAILER WHO DORESN'T CARE ABOUT THE NATION??? ABANKWAH - NPP TREASURER AND SECRET CHECKING ACCOUNTS EXPERT??? KEN OFORI-ATTA - OF SSNIT OBOTAN ...
read full comment

WHO IS COMPETENT? SIR JOHN - THE COMEDIAN? AFENYO-MARKINS - THE THIEF AND ADB BLACKMAILER WHO DORESN'T CARE ABOUT THE NATION??? ABANKWAH - NPP TREASURER AND SECRET CHECKING ACCOUNTS EXPERT??? KEN OFORI-ATTA - OF SSNIT OBOTAN FAME? ATTA AKYEA - CROOKED LAWYER WHO DEFRAUDED HIS LEGAL CLIENT? GABBY OTCHERE-DARKO - RECENT LAW SCHOOL GRADUATE WITH NO WORK EXPERIENCE POTRAYING HIMSELF AS AN OIL ?& GAS AND ECONOMIC EXPERT AND FUTURE CHIEF OF STAFF OR HEAD OF GNPC??? AGYARKO - WITH HIS DUBIOUS CREDENTIALS AS AN ECONOMIC EXPERT AND USUALLY RIDICULOUS AND SOPHOMORIC ANALYSES OF FINANCE AND ECONOMICS ON OMAN FM??? KEN AGYEPONG AND WILLIAM OPPONG-BIO - ECONOMIC EXPERTS AND SPECIALISTS IN NPP POLITICAL CONTRACTING??? KEN AGYEPONG WITH HIS FAKE ATTENDANCE AT FORDHAM (I GUESS BECAUSE FORDHAM IS IN THE BRONX WHERE HE LIVED!, AT LEAST HE WAS WISE NOT TO SAY HE GRADUATED)!! YAW OSAFO MARFO - WHO RUN EVERY PORTFOLIO HE WAS GIVEN FROM A STATE-OWNED BANK, MINISTRIES OF FINANCE AND EDUCATION, ETC UNREMARKABLY, WHOSE VIEWS ON THE COMPOSITION OF GHANA'S GDP ARE TROGLODYTIC??? OBETSEBI-LAMPTEY - GOVERNMENT BUNGALOW THIEF, WHO DOESN'T HAVE EVEN A-LEVELS???? "CHAIRMAN" WONTUMI - GALAMSEY CEDI MILLIONAIRE, ASHANTI NPP CHAIRMAN AND FUTURE NPP MINISTER???? IS THAT THE NPP FIRST CLASS LEADERSHIP?? WHO IS COMPETENT??? KEEP KEEPING ON
William 10 years ago

Is it for Finance Minister to turn the economy around? He should come round to inject you with patriotism and productivity? To stop you from cheap politicking/ To turn people away from pedestrian engagement into constructive ...
read full comment

Is it for Finance Minister to turn the economy around? He should come round to inject you with patriotism and productivity? To stop you from cheap politicking/ To turn people away from pedestrian engagement into constructive engagement for nation-building? Was that one of your Senchi outcomes, Mr. Casely Hayford?
Mate meho Bastard 10 years ago

Your descrition fits your party who use any means to get power. Thugery, voilnce, insults of others, threats to electorate, the EC, demonstrations, arson, traitors, petitions to the UN and other foreign countries, arson, sabo ...
read full comment

Your descrition fits your party who use any means to get power. Thugery, voilnce, insults of others, threats to electorate, the EC, demonstrations, arson, traitors, petitions to the UN and other foreign countries, arson, sabotage, etc. No one is good until he joins your party. Even foreign nations know you like the back of their palm. Things look good if you are in power but hell if you lose elections. God forgive you!
Oscar 10 years ago

That is why your name is aponkye what has his mother done, why don't you comment on the issue but insulting his mother. Why do you people follow so blindly, are you happy how this country called Ghana is now. You need to grow ...
read full comment

That is why your name is aponkye what has his mother done, why don't you comment on the issue but insulting his mother. Why do you people follow so blindly, are you happy how this country called Ghana is now. You need to grow up and mature to criticise constructively, if you in ndc is fine but bold and tell the truth when they destroying the country.
Kofi Adomako.Koforidua 10 years ago

Wheatear the country is bad or good your nana Addo and his Npp will never win 2016 election,so forget it even now that they are struggling see what is happening, (Afenyo Makins )

Wheatear the country is bad or good your nana Addo and his Npp will never win 2016 election,so forget it even now that they are struggling see what is happening, (Afenyo Makins )
Bachar 10 years ago

How is the country now? I am in the hinterland and JAK has not done anything to change our lives. My people remain poor, bad roads and schools in sheds in several communities. Our MPs and DCEs are the same, whether NPP or NDC ...
read full comment

How is the country now? I am in the hinterland and JAK has not done anything to change our lives. My people remain poor, bad roads and schools in sheds in several communities. Our MPs and DCEs are the same, whether NPP or NDC. We don'y know how much they get from Common fund. We also don't know what our money is used for.
Tito 10 years ago

Shame on you for calling someones mother a prostitute. Even if you disagree with his view there is no need for the insults. You would only know someone is a prostitute if you patronize them so go FIGURE!!!!!

Shame on you for calling someones mother a prostitute. Even if you disagree with his view there is no need for the insults. You would only know someone is a prostitute if you patronize them so go FIGURE!!!!!
Badohu ayivor korshi 10 years ago

Charlie, dis 1 der u no fine. Ebi tru say e no de make sense but dis 1 be below belt. E go bi u make u take am off.

Charlie, dis 1 der u no fine. Ebi tru say e no de make sense but dis 1 be below belt. E go bi u make u take am off.
Mensah 10 years ago

Ofui, as long as he is your tribe man, you will support him to destroy the country because of your trokosi herd mentality. The outcome of his incompetence is being felt by Ghanaians, sucker

Ofui, as long as he is your tribe man, you will support him to destroy the country because of your trokosi herd mentality. The outcome of his incompetence is being felt by Ghanaians, sucker
EFO KOKU 10 years ago

Only ndc and their supporters see this economy as a good one. To them nothing this incompetent government is doing is wrong. HIPC doesn't even shake them.

Only ndc and their supporters see this economy as a good one. To them nothing this incompetent government is doing is wrong. HIPC doesn't even shake them.
TULA 10 years ago

Massa Casely Hayford if you think Seth Terpkor is the wrong guy for the job ; do you think Jon Mahama will remove Seth Terpkor -NO CHANCE ; your comments are therefore irrelevant and wind pipe ; Seth Terpkor is an errand boy ...
read full comment

Massa Casely Hayford if you think Seth Terpkor is the wrong guy for the job ; do you think Jon Mahama will remove Seth Terpkor -NO CHANCE ; your comments are therefore irrelevant and wind pipe ; Seth Terpkor is an errand boy for Jon Mahama just as ET Mensah was an errand for JJ Rawlings in the PNDC era ; sEth Terpkor helps Jon Mahama and the NdC to divert funds from these massive loans they secure in the name of Ghanaians ; Ghanaians are always been fulled by this three educated illiterates ;Seth Terpkor; Mona Quartey and At Forson in this NDC government because when did borrowing money and oversubcription of bonds to pay debt recycling venture become a succesful economic tool to stabilise an economy in distress such as Ghana's economy ; Seth Terpkor have not got the skills to create wealth; Ghanaians need people who can THINK BE CREATIVE AND CREATITE WEALTH but the trouble is that Jon Mahama does not himself understand the situation in which the government finds themselves.
JOSEPH 10 years ago

WHY BECAUSE NEVER TRUST GHANA AND AFRICA LEADERS WHEN IT COMES TO MONEY DISBURSMENT OR BORROWING. POLAND WILL PAY BACK EVEN WITHOUT RESOURCES WHILES GHANA AND AFRICA WITH HUGE RESOURCES MISUSED THESE FUNDS EVEN NOT ABLE TO PA ...
read full comment

WHY BECAUSE NEVER TRUST GHANA AND AFRICA LEADERS WHEN IT COMES TO MONEY DISBURSMENT OR BORROWING. POLAND WILL PAY BACK EVEN WITHOUT RESOURCES WHILES GHANA AND AFRICA WITH HUGE RESOURCES MISUSED THESE FUNDS EVEN NOT ABLE TO PAY BACK BECAUSE OF USELESS CORRUPT, GREED LEADERS WHO ONLY THINK OF THEIR SELFISH INTEREST. WHILES THEIR PEOPLE SUFFERS AS A NATION HOOK TO SUCH DEBTS INCLUDING UNBORN GENERATION. BORROWING IS NOT THE ANSWER BUT LOCALLY GENERATED REVENUE IS KEY. SUCH AS TAXES, EXPORT ECONOMY BY ADDING VALUE TO LOCAL RAW MATERIALS FOR EXPORT, PRUDENT IN SPENDING BY GOVERNMENT, LOCAL DCES, GOVERNMENT AGENCIES INTERNALLY GENERATED FUNDS, EVERYONE PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES. WORLD PRIVATELY EQUITY FIRMS DON'T CARE TO GIVE BORROWING MONEY TO THESE NATIONS INCLUDING GHANA BUT AT WHAT COST ARE WE AS A NATION WILL CONTINUE TO BURDEN OUR YOUTH FOR UNANCCOUNTABLE BEHAVIER OF MISUSE OF THESE FUNDS
cool 10 years ago

Ssssshhhhhh

Ssssshhhhhh
The Future Force 10 years ago

Well, at least we are seeing good results over the years. With all your big talks on so many media outlets, what positive contribution have you been able to make towards the improvement of the economic fortunes of the country ...
read full comment

Well, at least we are seeing good results over the years. With all your big talks on so many media outlets, what positive contribution have you been able to make towards the improvement of the economic fortunes of the country? Like your Npp folks, you talk BIG, but have very little strategic ideas. No wonder empty barrels makes the most noise they say. For your information, the politics of telling lies so NPP can come to power has already failed. If in your thinking Mr. Terkper is not the right person, I would like to tell you that, improving economic fortunes does not rest in personalities but in ideas and actions. It is about implementation of good policies and not people in position. It is about strategic thinking and not personality. If you have anything personal against Mr. Terkper, then that is your own problem. But the truth is, he will continue to be there to implement policies even if you hate him.
Joe 10 years ago

Very soon Seth Terkper will sell her mum to pay the Eurobond.

Very soon Seth Terkper will sell her mum to pay the Eurobond.
Baba 10 years ago

Joe, we're sorry Terkper is not a female oooo!!!

Joe, we're sorry Terkper is not a female oooo!!!
akuffo addo retirement party 10 years ago

All these so called experts have expertise in criticizing, but no expert solution rendered.

All these so called experts have expertise in criticizing, but no expert solution rendered.
Azundow Ishmeal 10 years ago

Solutions for who to listen. Are u ok

Solutions for who to listen. Are u ok
PRINCEWILLY@YMAIL.COM 10 years ago

Man walking along a road in the countryside comes across a shepherd and a huge flock of sheep. Tells the shepherd, "I will bet you $100 against one of your sheep that I can tell you the exact number in this flock." The shephe ...
read full comment

Man walking along a road in the countryside comes across a shepherd and a huge flock of sheep. Tells the shepherd, "I will bet you $100 against one of your sheep that I can tell you the exact number in this flock." The shepherd thinks it over; it's a big flock so he takes the bet. "973," says the man. The shepherd is astonished, because that is exactly right. Says "OK, I'm a man of my word, take an animal." Man picks one up and begins to walk away.

"Wait," cries the shepherd, "Let me have a chance to get even. Double or nothing that I can guess your exact occupation." Man says sure. "You are an economist for a government think tank," says the shepherd. "Amazing!" responds the man, "You are exactly right! But tell me, how did you deduce that?"

"Well," says the shepherd, "put down my dog and I will tell you."
Azundow Ishmeal 10 years ago

Terkpers economic management ability has to be questioned judging from the state of affairs of the country's economic indicators. This guy should have been fired long time but u know we a good in promoting inefficiencies.

Terkpers economic management ability has to be questioned judging from the state of affairs of the country's economic indicators. This guy should have been fired long time but u know we a good in promoting inefficiencies.
jnii 10 years ago

Rubbish. State of the nation has very little to do with a finance minister. It is about everybody including you (if you are a Ghanaian).
A Finance minister is just an appointee of the president- would you by any chance know ...
read full comment

Rubbish. State of the nation has very little to do with a finance minister. It is about everybody including you (if you are a Ghanaian).
A Finance minister is just an appointee of the president- would you by any chance know what advise for example he has given the President that the President did not take or could not take because Prez may loose popularity and votes? Is Tekper at fault if government minsters steal from the state coffers- GYEEDA, SADA etc (isnt the President the Man to sit up and sure did did not happen under any situation), is tepkper at fault when for political reasons we went for single spine when we had no money etc etc etc.Is tepker at fault if now that we are called so called middle income country the so called donor money that used to flow during Kufffour's time has stoped and we need to now borrow money at high rate? Our problem in Ghana is wholistic- infact an african solution thing. And until we have leaders brave enough to steer us away from the western dominated and controled system- we africans will never prosper- Nkrumah told us this looooooong time ago- we rather helped the neo-cons to kill him. The Good thing is that Akuffo Addo in one of his speeches arcknowledged that point and it is my hope that come dec 2016 when he comes to power we shall see some strong leadership. Infact i have always thought mahama being an nkrumahist and solialist would have taken some steps to counter the system when he came to power but He Mahama has been such a dull, undecisive leader-VERY DISAPPOINTING FOR ME PERSONALLY as i am strictly nonNPP- But hey! Ghana First. Ghana leader who will take Ghana to the next level i will welcome- no matter the politicl party he/she comes from
Mate meho 10 years ago

You write well but failed to tell us why Akufo addo can do better than he did as team member under Kuffuor? What is his pedigree? Of all people aspiring to rule you saw no intelligent one? You are economical with the truth. C ...
read full comment

You write well but failed to tell us why Akufo addo can do better than he did as team member under Kuffuor? What is his pedigree? Of all people aspiring to rule you saw no intelligent one? You are economical with the truth. Can he manage his small party? All die be die!
Nana Osei Tutu-AkofoAddo Cocain 10 years ago

People talk as if any country is performing far better than Ghana. its only small brains who think like this. Globally, things are not too good hence the world praises Ghana. Ghana's economy has no strong foundation and this ...
read full comment

People talk as if any country is performing far better than Ghana. its only small brains who think like this. Globally, things are not too good hence the world praises Ghana. Ghana's economy has no strong foundation and this is what Tekper inherited. Its cant be fixed over a year or even 5. All of us who inherited bad families, can we admit how we struggled to get out of this? if our individual life is the "micro economy" why do we expect the macro economy to change overnight? a nation wrecked by people like Alan, Anane and Kuffuor etc
Joe 10 years ago

You are rather ignorant. What do you know global about economy?

You are rather ignorant. What do you know global about economy?
men oh men 10 years ago

stupid man where have you been to to make such a bold assumption.. Globally as if we are all the same ...Gyimii

stupid man where have you been to to make such a bold assumption.. Globally as if we are all the same ...Gyimii
mensa 10 years ago

HE IS THE MAN THAT RAISE TAXES AND FEES AND HIGER VATS ON US IN GHANA AT
TIME THAT THE ECONOMY WAS DYING,TERKPER IS ENEMY OF GHANA PEOPLE HAYFORD IS 100% RIGHT ON THISONE

HE IS THE MAN THAT RAISE TAXES AND FEES AND HIGER VATS ON US IN GHANA AT
TIME THAT THE ECONOMY WAS DYING,TERKPER IS ENEMY OF GHANA PEOPLE HAYFORD IS 100% RIGHT ON THISONE
Nana 10 years ago

Woo! Who's the right person, you - Casely-Hayford? Big no! Even NPP will mistake making economic team member.

Woo! Who's the right person, you - Casely-Hayford? Big no! Even NPP will mistake making economic team member.
daladam 10 years ago

tax and spend terkper the loser raise Ghana vat and cost of everything in bad economy that he and mahama govt created

tax and spend terkper the loser raise Ghana vat and cost of everything in bad economy that he and mahama govt created
DEVIL NANA ADDO 10 years ago

AIDS INFESTED CASELY HAYFORD, HAVE YOU SEEN YOUR DOCTOR TODAY?. IDIOT

AIDS INFESTED CASELY HAYFORD, HAVE YOU SEEN YOUR DOCTOR TODAY?. IDIOT
men oh men 10 years ago

Womaame twe wate.Gyimiii

Womaame twe wate.Gyimiii
back door director 10 years ago

Mahama should appoint Mr know it all casely hayford

Mahama should appoint Mr know it all casely hayford
James Aemstrong 10 years ago

Intellectually dishonest Hayford is at it again. Relate this selfless Terkper's performance with others in even the so called BRICS and you will see that Terkper has performed wonders with the little resources at his disposal ...
read full comment

Intellectually dishonest Hayford is at it again. Relate this selfless Terkper's performance with others in even the so called BRICS and you will see that Terkper has performed wonders with the little resources at his disposal, dwindling revenues from oil, cocoa, gold etc., coupled with the electricity problems. Terkper has saved Ghana a lot from his audit of the bloated salary bills from the public sector and the treachery by the TUC. He is selfless because he is not corrupt and all those calling for his head are the corrupt people in the system which he has made life un comfortable for. Terkper Ghanaians are solidly behind you and some of us are really proud of you. More grease to your elbow.
ras 10 years ago

Check the price ofcocoa before you make such statements. The price of cocoa has increased recently.

Check the price ofcocoa before you make such statements. The price of cocoa has increased recently.
Nana Osei Tutu-AkofoAddo Cocain 10 years ago

What a stupid man. how long has Ghana been like this and how soonest do you expect a recent marginal price change in one commodity-cocoa to change the economy of Ghana overnight? Don't expose your low thinking in public like ...
read full comment

What a stupid man. how long has Ghana been like this and how soonest do you expect a recent marginal price change in one commodity-cocoa to change the economy of Ghana overnight? Don't expose your low thinking in public like that
Kofi Ghana 10 years ago

Thank you comrade..

Thank you comrade..
Bone 10 years ago

JAMES YOU ARE REALLY DISGRACING YOURSELF. I HOPE YOU ARE JUST WRITING SOMETHING BECAUSE OTHERS ARE WRITING!!

JAMES YOU ARE REALLY DISGRACING YOURSELF. I HOPE YOU ARE JUST WRITING SOMETHING BECAUSE OTHERS ARE WRITING!!
Joe Turkey 10 years ago

A combination of John Mahama, NDC, Tekper and Wampah is a toxic cocktail for Ghana's ecomini. Tekper is an accountant and knows nothing about financial planning. He is just a jerk who is always looking for money to share with ...
read full comment

A combination of John Mahama, NDC, Tekper and Wampah is a toxic cocktail for Ghana's ecomini. Tekper is an accountant and knows nothing about financial planning. He is just a jerk who is always looking for money to share with John and Ibrahim Mahama.
jop 10 years ago

running an economy is not as easy as going to radio studios and talking-okay. 2016 is just around the corner so ghanaians will decide- therfore leave it to ALL of us to make a decision come dec 2016.

running an economy is not as easy as going to radio studios and talking-okay. 2016 is just around the corner so ghanaians will decide- therfore leave it to ALL of us to make a decision come dec 2016.
Bone 10 years ago

IF YOU CANT DO THE JOB, PLEASE RESIGN, THE COUNTRY DOES NOT BELONG TO YOUR FORKING FATHER!

IF YOU CANT DO THE JOB, PLEASE RESIGN, THE COUNTRY DOES NOT BELONG TO YOUR FORKING FATHER!
jnii 10 years ago

If You can do it because it belongs to your fucking Father go take am. Talk is Cheap

If You can do it because it belongs to your fucking Father go take am. Talk is Cheap
men oh men 10 years ago

if is not easy leave it for more competent beings and why do u say others can't perform as well.why is NDC full of average thinking..think big

if is not easy leave it for more competent beings and why do u say others can't perform as well.why is NDC full of average thinking..think big
indianpowers black magic rituals 10 years ago

There is black magic indian spritualist in ghana call for all help 0244908520

There is black magic indian spritualist in ghana call for all help 0244908520
Bone 10 years ago

so should we wait for your father to come and do the implementation??

so should we wait for your father to come and do the implementation??
Maame Abena 10 years ago

Please Ghana's economy is not the only crisis we have. We have also power crisis.
The biggest problem of Ghana is corruption. The NDC is corrupt and are not thinking of Ghana but how amass wealth. They have taken us from a d ...
read full comment

Please Ghana's economy is not the only crisis we have. We have also power crisis.
The biggest problem of Ghana is corruption. The NDC is corrupt and are not thinking of Ghana but how amass wealth. They have taken us from a debt load of about 10 billion when Kufour left in 2009 to a debt load of 100 billion in just over seven years. Can the NDC account for what they have used the money for?
KTD 10 years ago

Why does these radio stations waste air time for a clueless man called something hayford. This man is full of shit and speaks no sense. I have never heard him say anything reasonable on air but he always get the air time to c ...
read full comment

Why does these radio stations waste air time for a clueless man called something hayford. This man is full of shit and speaks no sense. I have never heard him say anything reasonable on air but he always get the air time to chat rubbish.
R.MD 10 years ago

NDC, Frog party

NDC, Frog party
Nkwantabisa, Italy. 10 years ago

He shd, be getting out ,he can't do the job. There is nothing he can anymore. He is exhausted.

He shd, be getting out ,he can't do the job. There is nothing he can anymore. He is exhausted.
James Aemstrong 10 years ago

Ras & Bone please check the facts and compare the performance of the BRIC nations with far more resources than Ghana. I hope you are aware of the problems of China of recent, not to talk of the problems of Russia, Brazil and ...
read full comment

Ras & Bone please check the facts and compare the performance of the BRIC nations with far more resources than Ghana. I hope you are aware of the problems of China of recent, not to talk of the problems of Russia, Brazil and South Africa, these are countries with huge resources. Compare Nigeria and its inability to pay State and Federal workers for over 10 months. Cocoa price is still down and yet to peak. Terkper is doing well, I still stand on that no matter the insults from people like you and the Arm Chair Critics like Hayford, with the (PHD) Pull Him Down Symdrone.
men oh men 10 years ago

how many Ghanaians live on a dollar per day compare to those in those countries.is not like Ghana deteriorated some few days ago and ever since NDC came to power nothing concrete have been done to sustain the fragile economy. ...
read full comment

how many Ghanaians live on a dollar per day compare to those in those countries.is not like Ghana deteriorated some few days ago and ever since NDC came to power nothing concrete have been done to sustain the fragile economy.. tell me what u have done as a party and stop comparing your average party to foreign government.
Omanba 10 years ago

@ Aponkye, In fact you are the most useless person I've ever come across in life. Have you forgotten the founder of your party? What was wrong about this man's submission, is he not right? Are you trying to say nobody should ...
read full comment

@ Aponkye, In fact you are the most useless person I've ever come across in life. Have you forgotten the founder of your party? What was wrong about this man's submission, is he not right? Are you trying to say nobody should speak the truth in this country? You and your party's lies has brought us to where we are now. You attended school for nothing idiot. This man you called a son of a prostitute is a junior brother of Casely Hayford former CEO of VRA and I don't think you have somebody like him in your entire family.KWASIEA
NII 10 years ago

HE CAN EVEN HANDLE A DOG HOUSE. HE MUST GO.

HE CAN EVEN HANDLE A DOG HOUSE. HE MUST GO.
LULA 10 years ago

THEY ARE ALL THE SAME, STOP MAKING EMTY NOISE, WE KNOW THEM

THEY ARE ALL THE SAME, STOP MAKING EMTY NOISE, WE KNOW THEM
Nana Osei Tutu-AkofoAddo Cocain 10 years ago

Mr Hayford as I know in my life is a frustrated hungry man seeking to capture attention of politicians for job. unfortunately everybody know he is empty when tested. His small one-man consulting firm is a failure. If he canno ...
read full comment

Mr Hayford as I know in my life is a frustrated hungry man seeking to capture attention of politicians for job. unfortunately everybody know he is empty when tested. His small one-man consulting firm is a failure. If he cannot grow his small firm to be big, where then is his big talk and capability of what he can do out of nothing? He has come out with so many old ideas but none works and he cannot be consistent and persistent to actualize those empty theories. he proposed Stock exchange for SMEs, commodity exchange etc all of which are just one of his stupid baseless dreams.
Kwaku Amexo 10 years ago

It is okay to tell the world that Tekper is not fit for the job. It is sad Ghanaians don't trust their experts to lead the country. Kindly suggest who is the right person and how to get the right person there now. Changing pr ...
read full comment

It is okay to tell the world that Tekper is not fit for the job. It is sad Ghanaians don't trust their experts to lead the country. Kindly suggest who is the right person and how to get the right person there now. Changing president now is out of the question. What can be done to help Tekper to get through his term if we cannot get a substitute now?
Maxwell 10 years ago

Casley Hayford. U talk too much. What contribution are u also bringing? Is time we stop the blame game

Casley Hayford. U talk too much. What contribution are u also bringing? Is time we stop the blame game
Omanba Kwame 10 years ago

Seth has been unfaithful & truthful to his countrymen.
His feet-drag g in paying the humble workers of Ghana are signs of wickedness and unpatriotic.
He's been a great deficit to our economy and wicked to our citizens.
...
read full comment

Seth has been unfaithful & truthful to his countrymen.
His feet-drag g in paying the humble workers of Ghana are signs of wickedness and unpatriotic.
He's been a great deficit to our economy and wicked to our citizens.
He must go!
But,the reason he is still there is because there are some covering up going on with his peers in the govt.
Shame shall catch up with them sooner or later.
THERE'S GOD FOR ALL THE POOR IN GHANA!!!!
Humble 10 years ago

terkper is not economics he is an accountant so they should sack him for his poor performance like Betty mould they are two useless people Ghana hd hired including mahama tiboncoso Ghana abr33

terkper is not economics he is an accountant so they should sack him for his poor performance like Betty mould they are two useless people Ghana hd hired including mahama tiboncoso Ghana abr33
YAHAYA MUSA ABEIKU 10 years ago

paaaa u are speaking the truth but,mahama can't fuck him up to bring another person there

paaaa u are speaking the truth but,mahama can't fuck him up to bring another person there
Andy k 10 years ago

Really what Casely-Hayford is saying is the Gospel truth Former Prez Rawlings is the true source of the present indiscipline and woes of the Nation because 1.When he came to power he said he is using chairs from old plane in ...
read full comment

Really what Casely-Hayford is saying is the Gospel truth Former Prez Rawlings is the true source of the present indiscipline and woes of the Nation because 1.When he came to power he said he is using chairs from old plane in his room
2. he also told the whole nation the only lunch he could afford was kokoo ne nkatee( Kwaku broke man)
3 his statements encouraged people to send family heads even chiefs to court for accountability which was a taboo for a young man to demand such
4 he was the one who removed Religious studies from the curriculum of education to spoil the moral training of the youth.
Pls good people of Ghana let is call a spade a spade and call our former Prez to accept these facts for all that he said were bad he could not correct even 1\100 . He ended up building mansions Educating his children abroad and so on
YA - USA 10 years ago

Always complaining but not providing alternatives. You guys talk too much. I am beginning to fall out with npp.

Always complaining but not providing alternatives. You guys talk too much. I am beginning to fall out with npp.
Joe 10 years ago

The point is that you are not ready to accept the truth, will you then be in position to take any suggustion? Since when did NDC start accepting decisions from non members?

The point is that you are not ready to accept the truth, will you then be in position to take any suggustion? Since when did NDC start accepting decisions from non members?
king 10 years ago

Casely Heyford should know that managing economy is not like managing your wife and children. shits he talked ......

Casely Heyford should know that managing economy is not like managing your wife and children. shits he talked ......
Akans Prophecies 10 years ago

It is only Desperation that keeps NDC strong. Rawlings sacrifition of human beings created a platform for thieves armed robbers who camouflages in political colors . No polilicies from them will yeild anything better. It is ...
read full comment

It is only Desperation that keeps NDC strong. Rawlings sacrifition of human beings created a platform for thieves armed robbers who camouflages in political colors . No polilicies from them will yeild anything better. It is always back to where they started. They are cursed from glory. Rawlings was hidding behind foolish technocrats for redemption . For 20years he had no better results for any developement.Infact, he led this country to a Fiasco. Turning to IMF for help. A total failure. Useless Mahama is hiding behind Terkper for economic salvation . But the guy is so poor in policy making . He has destroy every management that could succeed our ecomony. We knew from the onset that Terkper is Zero and Mahama fake. Their exploitations are ridiculous. Higher inflation, deficits, Stupid Bonds, IMF and now HIPC .In any develope country, this fake government would have resigned (like Greece) for a better competent government. But in Ghana people are so ignorant to send out this foolish fake administrators. It is rather unfortunate. So long as the instituitions of this country are bought and controlled by the NDC, Ghana is doomed for decades.
Professional Stunt-men and women are. 10 years ago

Real enemy of progress. Will always oppose for opposing sakes.

Real enemy of progress. Will always oppose for opposing sakes.
Fuzzy 10 years ago

In fact Big shout out to my only remodel Sidney - Casley Hayford. I always used to admire his opinion on any platform when analyzing issues relating to our financial issues in the economy. Big ups to him once again. I wish he ...
read full comment

In fact Big shout out to my only remodel Sidney - Casley Hayford. I always used to admire his opinion on any platform when analyzing issues relating to our financial issues in the economy. Big ups to him once again. I wish he is in charge of our ministry of Finance.
CHE 10 years ago

You call yourself an analyst and yet you talk like the average person on the street about an economy. What is meant by an economy that was not "too bad'. Talk metrics like GDP growth, budget deficit etc. then you can join the ...
read full comment

You call yourself an analyst and yet you talk like the average person on the street about an economy. What is meant by an economy that was not "too bad'. Talk metrics like GDP growth, budget deficit etc. then you can join the league of the civilised.
Jones 10 years ago

Senseless man. After spewing your stupidity you come back telling us that the ec should give you the green light to occupy poling stations.

Senseless man. After spewing your stupidity you come back telling us that the ec should give you the green light to occupy poling stations.
danny 10 years ago

aaaa,why Ghanaians are too insolence like that...right...democracy is about saying ones thought about an issue...not insulting...after all the man didn't rain insults on the finance Minster....soo why insulting him...please s ...
read full comment

aaaa,why Ghanaians are too insolence like that...right...democracy is about saying ones thought about an issue...not insulting...after all the man didn't rain insults on the finance Minster....soo why insulting him...please some of you should be matured when sharing their mind on this public platform...
Kakeman 10 years ago

I feel uncomfortable when people can't feel let alone see the economic path is treading. Some of us saw the 60's right through to this this time. We are able to compare a few performances by individuals and governments. We ha ...
read full comment

I feel uncomfortable when people can't feel let alone see the economic path is treading. Some of us saw the 60's right through to this this time. We are able to compare a few performances by individuals and governments. We have have also global economic fluctuations and how the country as a whole performed. I think we should call spade by its true name. We should look at issues as Ghanaians and not on party or tribal lines after all we all shop from the same market. We pay the same rate of tarrifs. We are all experiencing the erractic power supply. So we must be objective and this will help people sleeping on the job to wake up.
Jojo 10 years ago

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, PEOPLE WHO CLAIM TO BE EDUCATED IN ECONOMICS, BUSINESS MANAGEMENT,BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE AND DO NOT STILL UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY DID STUDY AT THE UNIVERSITY CLASSROOMS.

WE ARE NOT MANUFACTUR ...
read full comment

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, PEOPLE WHO CLAIM TO BE EDUCATED IN ECONOMICS, BUSINESS MANAGEMENT,BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE AND DO NOT STILL UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY DID STUDY AT THE UNIVERSITY CLASSROOMS.

WE ARE NOT MANUFACTURING AND PRODUCING ANYTGING FOR TGHE WORLD MARKET EXCEPT COCOA AND RAW MINERAL RESOURCES, HOW DO YOU EXPECT TERKPER TO TURN THE ECONOMY AROUND.

WITH SUCH NOISY AND EMPTY MINDS, THE NATION GHANA WILL CONTINUE TO REAMAIN ECONOMIC BACKWARD, UNDERDEVELÖPED AND EXTREME POOR FOR THE NEXT HUNDRED YEARS.

IT'S SAD INDEED HAVING THESE EMPTY HEADS ONLY PREACHING IN THE COUNTRY.

VERY SHAMEFUL INDEED.
NPP'S NIGHTMARE 10 years ago

So Casely-Hayford,will u be able to turn the economy around or who?U talk loosely too much.Anytime u open your mouth u foul the air.Remember nothing good comes easy,moron.

So Casely-Hayford,will u be able to turn the economy around or who?U talk loosely too much.Anytime u open your mouth u foul the air.Remember nothing good comes easy,moron.
Andani A A sigli 10 years ago

what do u knw in economy?ghana is cheap dat is why people like heyford had platform to expose his ignorance.cheat propaganda just to please his pay master nana addo n useless,confuse,baffoon npp.mediocrecy to the hightest in ...
read full comment

what do u knw in economy?ghana is cheap dat is why people like heyford had platform to expose his ignorance.cheat propaganda just to please his pay master nana addo n useless,confuse,baffoon npp.mediocrecy to the hightest in ghana.
Poker 10 years ago

Casely kasa- by-heart is at it again doing what he does best, talking for talking sake without offering alternative

Casely kasa- by-heart is at it again doing what he does best, talking for talking sake without offering alternative
BOY KOFI 10 years ago

I am not a fan of Terkper,I have my own observations.The truth of the matter is that NPP recorded 4 to 5% GDP and inflation rate of 18% in 2009.NDC moved the growth much higher in 2012 to 13% GDP because of the oil production ...
read full comment

I am not a fan of Terkper,I have my own observations.The truth of the matter is that NPP recorded 4 to 5% GDP and inflation rate of 18% in 2009.NDC moved the growth much higher in 2012 to 13% GDP because of the oil production and brought inflation down to 9.8% in 2012 during Prof.Mills and Dr Duffour as the Finance Minister.The sad story about this economic growth also suffered huge judgement debts and other forms of corruptions.As we speak,the economic growth has dwindled to about 5% GDP and inflation rate up again to 16%.The only good side of Terpker is that the payment of judgement debt has reduced drastically and institutions are finding it difficult to chop state money.I will give him 50% and recommend that other economic actors help him to reach his optimal apacity.Thank you.
BOY KOFI 10 years ago

optimal capacity is what I wanted to say.Thank you.

optimal capacity is what I wanted to say.Thank you.
kp 10 years ago

Evaluating Arguments—Distinguishing between
reasonable and fallacious tactics
Being able to distinguish between good and bad arguments is vital to being able to
successfully incorporate research into your own work.
...
read full comment

Evaluating Arguments—Distinguishing between
reasonable and fallacious tactics
Being able to distinguish between good and bad arguments is vital to being able to
successfully incorporate research into your own work.
Most good (or reasonable) arguments use strategies such as using inductive and
deductive reasoning, drawing analogies, tracing causes and effects, weighing options,
and making assumptions.
Sometimes bad (or fallacious) arguments are difficult to recognize because they are
incorrect applications of these reasonable strategies. This section will provide examples
of each type of reasonable argument and an example of how each strategy can be
twisted into a fallacious one.
Inductive Reasoning
Inductive reasoning involves using a small sample to draw conclusions about a larger
concept.  Inductive reasoning can be thought of more simply as generalizing.  People
make generalizations all the time, but inductive reasoning deals in probability—not
certainty. Because of the lack of certainty in inductive arguments, they must be based on
adequate and relevant evidence.
An experiment that determines the effects of a new drug by testing it on 100 people and applying
those results to the larger population incorporates inductive reasoning. Similarly, if you stay at a
hotel three times and each stay is a pleasurable one, you will likely use that hotel in the future
because you believe it will continue to be satisfactory.
• An argument that misuses inductive reasoning is called a hasty
generalization. Hasty generalizations are conclusions based on insufficient or
misleading evidence:
People who have had their appendixes removed commit suicide less often than those
who haven’t. Therefore, appendixes cause depression and, subsequently, suicide.
• Stereotypes are an example of overgeneralizations. Stereotypes are hasty
generalizations about a specific group of people:
Asian students are good at math.
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is the opposite of inductive reasoning. Whereas inductive
reasoning using specific examples to make generalizations, deductive reasoning uses
general principles to determine the circumstances of a specific instance. Deductive
reasoning, however, is slightly more complicated that inductive reasoning and requires
several steps, known as 1) the major premise, 2) the minor premise, and 3) the
conclusion.
Children of parents who both have type O blood must have type O blood themselves (major
premise). David’s parents have type O blood (minor premise). Therefore, David has type O blood
(conclusion).
• Fallacious deductive reasoning occurs when one of the premises is untrue or
if the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises:
The color red incites anger in people (faulty premise). Elijah is in a room with red
walls. Therefore, Elijah is angry.
All of Robert’s children have brown hair and green eyes. Abigail has brown hair and
green eyes. Therefore, Abigail is Robert’s child (conclusion does not follow premises).
Drawing analogies
Analogies are comparisons that are drawn between things that are otherwise different.
When China was recovering from an earthquake, the US provided the nation with food and
supplies. Now that Italy is in need, the US should provide aid to Italian citizens as well.
• False analogies when the writer attempts to draw similarities that do not
exist:

Emergency vehicles are allowed to park in fire lanes to save time, so I should be able
to park in fire lanes if I am in a hurry.
Tracing Causes and Effects
Identifying the cause of a particular effect (or the effect of a particular cause) is tricky
business because any number of variables can affect the relationship between an event
and its consequences. An example of a success trace of cause and effect would be:
Callie has taken the SAT three times. She got eight hours of sleep the night before the first time
she took it and made a 1200. The next time, she got eight hours of sleep and made a 1275. The
third time, however, she only got four hours of sleep and made a 1050. Therefore, insufficient
sleep causes Callie’s SAT scores to suffer.
• Because of the complexities of cause?and?effect reasoning, many writers
oversimplify their arguments. This type of fallacy is known as post hoc:
Suzanne has taken the SAT twice. She got six hours of sleep the night before the first
time she took it and made a 1000. The second time, she got seven hours of sleep and
made an 1150. Therefore, the more sleep Suzanne gets before taking the SAT, the
better she scores on it.
This argument is fallacious for two reasons. First, it fails to consider the fact
that most students’ grades on the SAT improve each time they take it—
regardless of how much sleep they got the night before. Secondly, it is
dangerous to assume “the more sleep, the better.” What if Suzanne slept for
fifteen hours the night before? Would that benefit her more than eight or ten
hours would? There is almost certainly a point in which sleep stops being
beneficial for SAT scores.
Weighing Options
Many writers present the reader with alternative options in order to prove that their
solution is the best one:
Barack Obama is a better candidate for the Democratic presidential candidate than Hillary
Clinton because he has better solutions to our nation’s problems, and he has the ability to inspire
and unite the American public.
• In the previous example, Obama and Clinton are the two Democratic
candidates for whom the American public can vote. In some cases, however,
there are more options than the writer presents. Such arguments are called
either…or fallacies. In the following example, there are clearly more sides to
the immigration debate than are provided:
The US should either open its borders to everyone or deport all illegal immigrants.
Making Assumptions
Assumptions are claims that are believed to be true—without proof.  Assumptions
occur in writing all the time because writers do not always have the time or space to
prove every individual claim they make. For example, an argument about how to best
preserve the world’s natural resources is based on the assumption that preserving resources is
something worth doing.  For most audiences, a defense of this assumption is unnecessary.
• Fallacious arguments involving assumptions fall into one of two categories:
arguments with a missing claim or non?sequiturs. Arguments with a missing
claim assume a connection between their claim and conclusion that many
audiences may not.
There are more fatal accidents on roadways now than there were four years ago.
Therefore, the speed limit should be lowered in an effort to prevent more accidents
from happening.
The above argument assumes that speeding is the cause of most of those fatal
accidents, when most people would probably agree than driving under the
influence caused most of them.
• Non?sequiturs occur when a missing claim results in a conclusion that “does
not follow” from the claim:

Max is tall. Therefore, he will be an excellent basketball player.
Paa Joe 10 years ago

CASELY HAYFORD,

AS A SO CALLED EDUCATED PERSON WANTING TO PROVE TO THE IGNORANT IN THE COUNTRY, PLEASE, DO REASON BEFORE SUCH AN IRRATIONAL ARTICLE IN ANY NEWSPAPER IN THE COUNTRY.

SUCH AN ARTICLE, CLEARLY DISQUALIFIES ...
read full comment

CASELY HAYFORD,

AS A SO CALLED EDUCATED PERSON WANTING TO PROVE TO THE IGNORANT IN THE COUNTRY, PLEASE, DO REASON BEFORE SUCH AN IRRATIONAL ARTICLE IN ANY NEWSPAPER IN THE COUNTRY.

SUCH AN ARTICLE, CLEARLY DISQUALIFIES YOU AS AN EDUCATED PERSON.

NOTHING BETTER CAN GHANAIANS LEARN FROM YOU,

ARE GHANAIAN EDUCATECD TO BE FED BY THE GOVERNMENT:
sir Tony 10 years ago

U are a chaff...blockheaded

U are a chaff...blockheaded
Koopong 10 years ago

You don't have to agree with Sidney Casely-Hayford.
If you think he made a valid point support that with facts on the flip side if you disagree with him use reasonable facts and respect.
I'm saddened by the fact that some ...
read full comment

You don't have to agree with Sidney Casely-Hayford.
If you think he made a valid point support that with facts on the flip side if you disagree with him use reasonable facts and respect.
I'm saddened by the fact that some Ghanaians can't make sound arguments but rather resort to insults to make their points.
Please copy this and learn. No offense.

How to Think

© Copyright 1999, Charles King
The single most important skill you should take away from your college years is how to think and think well—how to look at an argument, evaluate it, decide on how reasonable it is, and make one of your own. Of course, college is certainly about learning new facts about the world, storing up names, dates, events, formulas, and texts, all of which make you a well-informed individual. But being educated is not the same as being well-informed. College is not just about learning things. It is also about learning to evaluate things—deciding whether Person A or Person B is right about something, figuring out what makes the most sense among several competing versions of events, in short, making up your mind about what is true (or most nearly true) and what isn’t.
All of this, though, might strike you as strange, since most of us have been brought up to be supremely tolerant of the viewpoints of others. How many times have you heard—or even said—“One person’s opinion is just as good as another’s”? Or “It’s all just a matter of opinion”? Well, the fact of the matter is that it isn’t. Some opinions are well-formed and intelligently reasoned; others are off-the-cuff and ignorant. Some are the products of considered thought and debate; others are no more than slogans spouted by folks who insist on using their mouths more than their heads. Tolerance means being willing to listen to others; it does not mean you have to agree with them or, after hearing their viewpoint, even take them seriously.

But how do you know what is more and less reasonable? What kinds of skills do you need in order to figure all this out? Here are some hints on using your natural talent for thinking and reasoning, and for honing the skills you already possess into razor-sharp instruments of analysis.

Why arguing a point comes naturally

We naturally learn to make arguments very early in life. We continue to make them every day, with our parents, with friends and partners, with bosses. “I should be allowed to stay up late because . . . .” “I couldn’t have wrecked the car because . . . .” “I deserve a higher salary because . . . .” We are all supremely rational thinkers and brilliant rhetoricians when it comes to our own self-interest. We can think of hundreds of good reasons why someone should believe what we want him to believe or why our version of events is the most reasonable one.
It gets harder, though, when we try to apply these natural skills to events that do not concern us directly, such as interpreting a particular event in the past or deciding which among several alternative actions will lead to a particular result in the future. In other words, how do you apply the skills of reasoning and argumentation you use in everyday life to things in which you don’t have a direct interest—the big questions that you come up against in courses in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences: What is right? What is the truth? What is best? Is this thing or that thing to be preferred? And why?

Keep in mind, of course, that all this goes beyond what it takes to do well in a college course. Think about your future careers and the kinds of questions you will be expected to answer. Is this client innocent or guilty? Which public policy is best? Will people buy this product? Are these test results credible? And why? Knowing how to critique someone else’s argument and make a solid one of your own is a vital part not only of being a successful college student, but also of becoming a successful practitioner in any profession—law, business, medicine, research, journalism, and many others.

But what is an argument?

Let’s start with a basic definition: An argument is any statement that attempts to link causes and consequences, or to show that one thing must reasonably follow from another. Think of the classic questions that cub reporters are taught to ask: Who, What, Where, When, and How. Let’s also add one more that journalists less frequently ask: Why. The first four questions are not really arguments, they are (to use a term from the philosopher J. L. Austin) “locutionary acts.” They are more or less straightforward statements of fact. The last two—How and Why—are “perlocutionary,” that is, they are meant to convince or persuade a listener that some state of affairs is true and that another is false. They are, in short, matters of interpretation and inference, things that individuals can disagree about. Why did X happen? How did X happen? Now, of course, people might disagree about the Who, What, Where, and When of a situation as well. For example, it was Bob, not Pete, who broke the window, or the train arrives at 5:30, not at 6:30, or it rained on Thursday, not on Friday. All of these statements seem to be simple statements of fact, but even in these instances, they have embedded within them statements that concern Why or How questions: I think that it was Bob who broke the window. Why? Because his fingerprints were on the baseball that landed in the living room. Or I think it rained on Thursday? How do you know? Because there were puddles in the street on Thursday but none on Friday.
So, arguments are ways of tying an initial state of affairs—a cause or set of reasons—to a second state of affairs—a consequence, action or belief that logically follows from the first state of affairs. Arguments usually answer questions that begin with How or Why, or at least have embedded within them clear How or Why questions.

Making arguments

Now that we know what an argument is, how do we tell if one is good or not? Let’s look at what a master of argumentation, Aristotle, had to say about the matter. In the Rhetoric, one of the great treatises on the art of persuasion, Aristotle wrote that “A statement is persuasive and credible either because it is directly self-evident or because it appears to be proved from other statements that are so” (Rhetoric, I:2). That makes sense. Any statement is believable if it is either (1) self-evidently true (“The blue ball is not red” is self-evidently true because we take being “not red” to be part of the definition of what it means for the ball to be “blue”), or (2) proven from other statements.
It is in this second part—proving one statement by referring to other statements—that the art of argumentation comes into play. Making an argument means finding some way to link the thing we want to prove with another set of statements that seem to prove it. In Book II of the Rhetoric, Aristotle lists twenty-eight separate lines of argument that can be used for proving particular propositions. We won’t list and explain them all here, but let’s go over just a few of the more useful ones with some modern-day examples. Not all these techniques can work in every instance, but they will at least provide a basic grab-bag of tools that you can use in sketching out your own position on an issue. For a full discussion of logical argumentation, see the excellent webpage, www.logicalfallacies.info.

Induction

Arguments from induction—or inductive arguments—are those in which you derive a broad principle from the observation of particular events or instances. It means reasoning from the specific to the general.
For example, say you want to know what the relationship is between raising the minimum wage and unemployment (notice the How question here: “How does increasing the minimum wage affect unemployment?”). To reason inductively, you would examine a number of instances in which the minimum wage has been raised and see what the effect on unemployment has been. Suppose you find that in all instances in which the minimum wage has been raised, there has been a noticeable increase in unemployment the following year. You might then conclude that raising the minimum wage leads to higher unemployment. You have just reasoned from the specific (individual cases of raising the minimum wage) to the general (a broad statement that, in principle, raising the minimum wage produces unemployment). People make inductive arguments all the time, and they can be very persuasive. But watch out for some of the pitfalls, especially the problem of choosing examples, which we take up in the section on critiquing arguments below.

Deduction

Arguments from deduction—or deductive arguments—proceed in exactly the opposite direction, from the general to the specific. You begin with a known general principle and then explain an individual event by reference to the principle.
This is the technique used by Sherlock Holmes, whom Dr. Watson frequently praised with exclamations such as “A brilliant deduction, Holmes!” Look at the following example, from Arthur Conan Doyle’s story “The Red-Headed League.” A Mr. Jabez Wilson has come to visit Holmes in his lodgings. Watson observes the visitor, but notices nothing unusual about the man; he seems “a commonplace British tradesman.” Holmes, though, notices rather more, as he explains:

“Beyond the obvious facts that he has at some time done manual labor, that he takes snuff, that he is a Freemason, that he has been in China, and that he has done a considerable amount of writing lately, I can deduce nothing else.”
Both Watson and the visitor are astonished, and Mr. Wilson questions Holmes about how he could possibly know all these facts.
“How, in the name of good fortune, did you know all that, Mr. Holmes?” he asked. “How did you know, for example, that I did manual labor? It’s as true as gospel, for I began as a ship’s carpenter.”
“Your hands, my dear sir. Your right hand is quite a size larger than your left. You have worked with it and the muscles are more developed.”

“Well, the snuff, then, and the Freemasonry?”

“I won’t insult your intelligence by telling you how I read that, especially as, rather against the strict rules of your order, you use an arc and compass breastpin.”

"Ah, of course, I forgot that. But the writing?”

“What else can be indicated by that right cuff so very shiny for five inches, and the left one with the smooth patch near the elbow where you rest it upon the desk.”

“Well, but China?”

“The fish which you have tattooed immediately above your wrist could only have been done in China. I have made a small study of tattoo marks, and have even contributed to the literature of the subject. That trick of staining the fishes’ scales of a delicate pink is quite peculiar to China. When, in addition, I see a Chinese coin hanging from your watch-chain, the matter becomes even more simple.”

That is how deduction works. Holmes had a number of general rules already in his head: that manual laborers may have one hand larger than the other (because they favor either their right or their left hand, thus building up the muscles more in one); that only members of the Masonic Order normally wear jewelry featuring the arc-and-compass symbol; that a man’s shirt cuff may become shiny from the back-and-forth motion of writing; and that a particular form of tattoo art is unique to China. Holmes was able to connect each of these general rules, probabilities, and regularities to the particular instance of Mr. Jabez Wilson, thereby deducing a whole host of particular conclusions from broad principles.
Consider again the minimum-wage example above. Reasoning inductively, we concluded that raising the minimum wage was likely to produce unemployment, since we had observed a number of instances in which unemployment did in fact rise when the minimum wage was increased. We could also reason deductively. If we know that, as a rule, a higher minimum wage is related to higher unemployment, we could conclude that a particular instance of raising the minimum wage would also be likely to increase unemployment. Induction and deduction both require one to make an argument, and both contain How or Why questions at their heart. But the reasoning moves in opposite directions. Inductively, we might ask “How is unemployment in general related to the minimum wage?” Deductively, we might ask, “How will unemployment in Chicago be affected if the minimum wage is raised?”

Induction and deduction are the two most general techniques for making arguments. All of us use them, whether we realize it or not, every day. But there are also several more specific techniques that are worth considering, especially when trying to craft sophisticated arguments within broad inductive or deductive frameworks.

A fortiori

An argument a fortiori is one in which someone argues that if a quality does not exist where it is more likely to exist, it certainly cannot exist where it is less likely. We are all familiar with this sort of argument. If my father wouldn’t let me drive an hour to Wichita to see my boyfriend, he certainly won’t let me go with my boyfriend over Spring Break to the Bahamas. If my boss wouldn’t approve a $10,000 budget for a new computer system, he certainly won’t approve a $50,000 budget for new carpeting. It can also work in reverse: If a quality exists where you least expect it, it will probably also exist where you most expect it.
Several years ago, the political scientist Robert Putnam wrote a now-famous essay called “Bowling Alone.” In the essay, he pointed out that, in general, Americans today seem to participate in far fewer civic associations—bowling leagues, Rotary Clubs, PTA, and other voluntary groups—than they did decades ago. He supported this observation with statistics on membership in such groups over time. That fact on its own was not terribly interesting, of course, but the broader point Putnam was trying to make was essentially an a fortiori argument. He held that if Americans did not participate in community-based associations (groups which clearly affected their daily lives and could potentially make their local communities better places to live), then they were certainly not likely to participate at the national level where events did not affect them directly—such as voting in national elections or having strong views on national politics or foreign policy. That is an argument a fortiori.

Appeal to consequences

You can also make an argument, or more normally a counter-argument against someone else’s point of view, by appealing to consequences. These kinds of arguments normally have two different forms. You can appeal to the consequent conclusions to which someone is committed in making his argument, or you can appeal to undesirable consequences that flow from the course of action advocated by someone else. If you can show that the consequences of someone else’s position are either false or inconsistent, you have made a strong counter-argument of your own.
Here is how both kinds of argument work. Suppose you are discussing with someone when the United States should intervene militarily abroad. Suppose also that your companion is arguing that the United States had a moral obligation to intervene in Bosnia and Kosovo because of the humanitarian disasters taking place there. You might make a counter-argument by appealing to consequences: If you believe that countries have moral obligations to intervene abroad, then the United States—and most other countries, based on their own moral precepts—would be in a state of near-continual war, invading this or that country based on a supposed moral obligation. That is an argument from consequences. If the consequences of your argument commit you to conclusions that you do not hold, the argument cannot be totally sound.

The argument might also work in a slightly different way. Take the same example as above, with someone arguing that military intervention based on humanitarian precepts is desirable. You might make the counter-argument that such a policy would be self-defeating: The goal of intervention is to create some sort of peace and order, but countries’ invading each other for their own moral purposes would hardly create a peaceful and orderly world. That is an argument from consequences, but in a rather different sense. Here, you are not arguing that the consequences of the person’s argument are simply undesirable or inconsistent, but that the consequences produced by the argument would undermine the very goal that the person is trying to achieve.

It’s-not-what-you-think!

Another form of argumentation, probably the simplest, is an appeal to the facts of the case. This form is very common. You know the scene from films. Leading woman opens door, finds leading man in intimate embrace with supporting actress, leading woman accuses leading man of being a cad, leading man and supporting actress protest that they were merely learning a new dance step. In other words, the facts of the matter are not as they appear. Such arguments can work well, particularly if your command of the facts is demonstrably better than someone else’s. But they can also quickly descend into a fruitless disagreement over the basic facts of the case, not about the quality of logical reasoning. In such instances, consulting some authority—an authoritative book, expert or other resource—is preferable to quibbling over whether someone has got a date, name, place, statistic or other fact straight.
If you don't have an argument, make a list

These are all, of course, just a few examples about how to make arguments. There are many more techniques and styles than these. But the key point is that you should strive to give clear, focused, and logically sound reasons for thinking what you think. Even if you don’t have a fully polished argument worked out on a particular subject, just make a list of reasons for why you think one thing is true and another thing false. A list of reasons is the place to start in crafting a well-formed argument. It is only in this way that individuals can engage in real intellectual debate; otherwise, disagreements become merely a question of who can yell the loudest, not who is the best thinker.
Critiquing arguments

Now that we know some of the tools that we can use to make arguments, how do we go about evaluating someone else’s—or making sure that our own is sound? It is often said that it is easier to demolish someone else’s argument than to build one of your own, but this is not strictly true. If launching well-reasoned critiques were such an easy enterprise, people would discuss things more and shout less. The fact is that providing a sharp, honest, and reasoned critique of an argument can be just as hard as making an argument yourself.
Here are some strategies you can use for assessing the reasonableness of any argument that you encounter. You won’t need to use all of them all the time. Some argument are so flimsy that they will crumple when you ask any one of the following questions about them. Others, though, may take more work to demolish, or you may find that the argument is so well constructed that you yourself come to agree with it. That is fine, of course, so long as you have first tried to critique it and have found that it meets your own high standards.

Is the argument self-evidently false?

Going back to Aristotle’s dictum, arguments are persuasive and credible if they are self-evident or are proved by other statements. So, turning that dictum around, an argument is unsound if it is self-evidently false. Such statements are not really arguments, in fact, but simply assertions, interjections, shouts or murmurs. They range from the comical to the disgustingly dangerous. For example, “The United States has stopped sending men to the moon because the moon is made of bleu cheese” is self-evidently false; the moon, as you know, is not made of bleu cheese, and a false statement cannot be given as a reason to believe that another statement is true. Or consider a more insidious variety: “The crime rate has increased because more blacks have moved into the neighborhood.” This, too, is self-evidently false. The color of a person’s skin is not an indicator of criminal intent, so claiming that crime rates increase only because African-Americans move into a community is simply false.
Does the argument use only selective examples?

Anyone can probably find an example to demonstrate that a particular contention is credible. But stronger arguments are those that rely on many different kinds of examples, not ones that are selectively chosen simply because they support a particular case. Look out for arguments that fail to consider counter-examples that would undermine the central claims. For more on this point, see the section on advanced arguments and variables below.
Are the assumptions sound?

Ask yourself what you need to assume in order to follow the main line of argument. Are there hidden assumptions that are not credible? Does the argument simply assume things that themselves need to be demonstrated? Are there questionable sub-arguments buried inside the overall claim? Rooting out these assumptions and supporting contentions is crucial to launching an effective critique of a position.
Is there a clear connection between the various parts of the argument?

Beware of arguments that use the vagaries of language—rather than clear, logical reasoning—to try to prove a point. Focus on the nodal points of the argument, the places where someone uses “therefore” or “thus” to move from one claim to another claim that supposedly follows from the first. Are the two claims connected by these words really logically connected? Has the person demonstrated a clear relationship between the two claims, or are these connector words merely used to disguise the fact that there is not much of a logical progression there at all?
Special notes for the advanced

The discussion above provides some helpful starting points for making and evaluating arguments. But if you are really serious about making strong arguments and bringing devastating critiques to bear on the arguments of others--especially in the social sciences--there are a few other questions you should ask.
Is the argument tautological?

A tautological argument is otherwise known as a circular argument, that is, one that begins by assuming the very thing that is meant to be proven by the argument itself. Tautological arguments are not really arguments at all; they appear to be, but they are really no more than a long drive that brings you right back to where you started. There may be lots of “therefores” and “thuses,” but they are only there to cover up the cracks in the reasoning. Look at this example:
Why do welfare programs not work? Welfare programs simply produce continued dependence on the state, rather than encouraging individuals to take responsibility for their own lives. Entire generations of welfare-sponsored families have lived on federal hand-outs, producing communities that have forgotten how to encourage the kind of civic responsibility crucial to a vibrant democracy. Hence, areas with large numbers of welfare recipient are a continual drain on government resources and encourage a pattern of continued dependence. Therefore, welfare programs clearly do not work.
This appears to be a legitimate argument, but if we take it apart, there is not much substance there. The first question—“Why do welfare programs not work?”—simply assumes that they do not, rather than asking “Do welfare programs work, and if not, why not?” Then, the author continues by simply restating, using different wording, the assertion contained within the question, that is, that welfare programs simply do not work. Notwithstanding the use of “hence” and “therefore,” this form of argument is no argument at all—it simply says that a state of affairs is the way it is because it is the way it is. Not a recipe for building a strong argument.
Is the argument parsimonious?

Parsimony is not a strict goal in making arguments, but it is a highly desirable quality for arguments to have. A parsimonious argument is one in which the listener is asked to make as few assumptions as possible in order for the argument to be credible. We would like not to make assumptions at all, but some are of course inevitable. We normally assume that an argument is made in good faith (that is, that the person making it is not deliberately trying to deceive us), that the person has a reasonable command of the facts, and so forth. But within the substance of the argument itself, the fewer things that you ask your listeners to take for granted in order to find your position credible, the better. By extension, a good rule of thumb is that, when presented with two competing arguments that both look credible, choose the more parsimonious one.
Parsimony does not, however, mean “simplicity.” There are many very simple arguments that are not parsimonious. For example, “John F. Kennedy was shot because of a CIA conspiracy” is a very simple argument, but it is hardly parsimonious. In order to find it credible, you have to assume that the CIA is capable of launching such a conspiracy; that the CIA had a reason to kill the president; that the CIA was capable of covering up the conspiracy; that members of Congress, the vice-president, major news networks, journalists, and historians were all involved in covering it up; and a host of other highly questionable and complex assumptions.

Does the argument mistake correlation for causation?

Just because one event happens after another does not mean that the first event caused the second. To link the two events, you would have to make an argument that establishes some causal relationship between them. The French revolution happened after the American revolution, but that does not mean that the latter was caused by the former. You might argue that the success of the American revolution, by demonstrating to French intellectuals that a people could successfully throw off tyrannical government, gave impetus to the demands for similar changes in France. But that argument depends on logical reasoning, not simply on when particular events occurred in time.
Likewise, just because two qualities are correlated does not imply a clear causal connection. Let’s go back to the minimum wage example above. Suppose you find, after conducting some research, that unemployment has increased when new federal regulations have increased the minimum wage. It would not be appropriate, though, to conclude from this simple observation that wage increases caused unemployment. The two qualities may co-exist without one having caused another. You might be able to construct a reasonable argument to show that a causal relationship does in fact exist—such as by arguing that increases in the minimum wage heighten the cost of labor, which in turn forces business to lay off workers. But that is a logical argument based on reasoning, not on simple correlation.

Are the examples selected appropriately?

Recall the discussion of inductive reasoning above. We wanted to know what the relationship was between an increase in the minimum wage and unemployment. To make our argument, we examined several instances in which the minimum wage had been raised and found that in each of them unemployment increased. We concluded that raising the minimum wage may cause unemployment.
You know from the discussion in the last section that this was jumping the gun a bit. We could say perhaps that unemployment and the minimum wage were correlated—that is, where you found one you tended also to find the other—but we would need to make a more detailed argument for why we thought one caused the other. Correlation is not causation.

But our method was reasonably sound otherwise. Had we gone about things in reverse, though, the method would have been deeply flawed. Recall that we wanted to know whether a minimum wage increase caused unemployment. Some folks would immediately begin by looking for a number of cases of serious unemployment increases and then looking to see whether a minimum wage raise had been initiated recently. This method, though, really tells us very little, for it might be the case that a whole variety of other factors—shifting demographics, plant closings due to technological changes, other market forces—were more likely causes of unemployment than the minimum wage increase.

It is surprising, though, the degree to which this faulty technique is used among people who ought to know better. A famous book in political science, Theda Skocpol’s States and Social Revolutions, contains precisely this error of reasoning. Skocpol wanted to know what caused social revolutions, such as those in France, Russia, and China. So, she examined several historical cases in which a social revolution had occurred, then worked her way back to examine what preconditions existed in each of these countries before the revolution took place.

This method of argumentation, though, is faulty. All of the preconditions she identified might be present in other instances in which a social revolution did not occur, a possibility she did not seriously consider. A more appropriate method would have been to select a number of cases in which social revolutions did and did not occur, and then examine what preconditions were present in the revolutionary cases but not in the non-revolutionary ones. That would have made the argument far stronger.

This is all part of what social scientists, especially those who do research based on examining a number of different cases of social phenomena, call “dependent variables” and “independent variables.” These terms are academic jargon for a very simple concept: The dependent variable is the thing you want to explain; the independent variable is the thing that does the explaining. Or in other words, the dependent variable is the effect, the independent variable the cause. When you are making an argument based on cases or examples, choose your examples based on the independent variable—the thing that you think is causing something else—not on the dependent variable.

Is the argument falsifiable?

Another concept that social scientists use in their work is called the concept of “falsiability.” A falsifiable argument is one that could potentially be shown to be wrong. Falsifiable arguments are always superior to unfalsifiable ones; there is no point in taking issue with an unfalsifiable argument, since its creator has made it impossible to attack—not because it is logically defensible, but because the premises of the argument simply cannot be shown to be either true or false. Any conspiracy theory, for example, is essentially unfalsifiable. People who believe in conspiracies normally see any evidence that you might present to counter the idea of the existence of a conspiracy as simply further proof of the conspirators' talent for covering their tracks. It is an argument that can never been proved wrong.
To decide whether an argument is falsifiable or not, simply ask yourself “How would I know if it were false?” Well-constructed arguments always offer the caveat that they could be wrong, with a clear indication of what it would take to prove them wrong—some clear, contrary evidence that would counter the main premises or conclusions of the argument. We might argue that raising the minimum wage causes unemployment, but we take it for granted that we might be wrong. We also have a pretty clear idea of what it would take to prove us wrong: several clear cases in which the minimum wage was raised and unemployment either stayed constant or fell.

Unfalsifiable claims, though, have none of this. They are therefore not really worth discussing in terms of logical reasoning. Of course, we all make unfalsifiable claims every day, and that in itself is not a bad thing. Any talk about God, for example, is completely unfalsifiable, since it is impossible to know what it would take to prove that God does not exist. This does not mean that it is not worth talking about the divine—or, indeed, about beauty, love, art or other concepts that are essentially about expressing our individual desires, intimate thoughts, and emotions. Rather, we just need to distinguish between those things that make the world such a wonderfully diverse and awe-inspiring place to live, and what it takes to craft a solid, reasonable, and logical argument about the way the world works.
Badohu ayivor korshi 10 years ago

Ah! This does not make sense but he is alway on air. Why?

Ah! This does not make sense but he is alway on air. Why?
Oldboyy 10 years ago

You would be worse

You would be worse
kutsii. 10 years ago

Because of whisky and meat, see how Sydney Casely Hayford's face has become?He looks like an autism patient. Alcohol has occupied his face to the extent that he looks like an 80 year old man. A case full of hay. Nonsense

Because of whisky and meat, see how Sydney Casely Hayford's face has become?He looks like an autism patient. Alcohol has occupied his face to the extent that he looks like an 80 year old man. A case full of hay. Nonsense
Songer 10 years ago

You know about (94%)of Ghanian no that casely is a crazy man so no wonder

You know about (94%)of Ghanian no that casely is a crazy man so no wonder
Mr Vitalis 10 years ago

I have been saying this, our current finance minister won't help us at all

I have been saying this, our current finance minister won't help us at all
JH. New York 10 years ago

I personally do not agree with the baseless/weak analogy of some of these so called Experts.
If I may use Casely-Hayford's own comment against Mr Terkper as a Test Case,What does Casely-Hayford meant by "when Terkper took ov ...
read full comment

I personally do not agree with the baseless/weak analogy of some of these so called Experts.
If I may use Casely-Hayford's own comment against Mr Terkper as a Test Case,What does Casely-Hayford meant by "when Terkper took over things were better "Any person on the Street without the least Economic and Financial Management background could say that.So where is Casely's Economic and Financial expertise or
experience in the Subject.What would he had done differently to move Ghana forward !. Was the erratic Energy - Crisis,unemployment,etc in the Country,caused by Terkper?.
Looking back,we heard Ghana attained a Middle Income Status,about 4 years ago.When the Ghana Media drummed all over the place"Ghana is becoming a middle income nation". "Ghana is a Middle Income Country" What they didn't know was that, attached to the rating of a Middle Income Status is the Responsibility of a bitter "Self Finance"(local/internal generation of Funding).In short,a Middle Income Status means,(your hands are long enough to reach your back. Therefore you do not need the help of donors,or development partners to Scratch your back for you), which requires a well planned Long Term Investment; eg. Fiscal policy, balance of payment, etc.after Economic Growth.It's wrong to blame Terkper.Casely-Hayford and the likes,please give us and Mr Terkper in particular, a break!.
Woyome,Sada,Gyeeda,Akonfem,BettyMould, African Automobile,CP,Isofon,
etc, etc,etc. Remember !.
Bros 10 years ago

He has never given any intellectual analysis on the finances of Ghana.What you are good at is making pedestrian blanket statement without any prove,and in tv end he expect people to regard him as a financial analyst.Which ins ...
read full comment

He has never given any intellectual analysis on the finances of Ghana.What you are good at is making pedestrian blanket statement without any prove,and in tv end he expect people to regard him as a financial analyst.Which institution has this guy ever worked as an analyst.God save Ghana

Welcome,

SIGN IN

Welcome,

RESET PASSWORD

Hello,

Terms and conditions

REGISTER

News

Terkper wrong person to turn economy around – Casely-Hayford

Read Comments .st0{display:none;fill:#14BDD3;} .st1{display:none;} .st2{display:inline;fill:#FC0F0F;} .st3{display:inline;fill:#FFFFFF;} .st4{display:inline;fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:6;stroke-miterlimit:10;} Comments (93)

Read Comments Comments (93)