By: Nicholas D. Nimley, Writer, Journalist, BA, MA, MID, PGCrt.
In societies where public debate often favors talking over thinking, distraction can easily overshadow substance even in the face of measurable economic and developmental gains. Liberia is no exception.
As national conversations intensify following President Joseph Nyuma Boakai’s third State of the Nation Address (SONA), a familiar but misleading narrative has resurfaced: the so-called “bread and butter” argument.
While political debate is healthy and dissent essential to democracy, this particular framing is increasingly unrealistic and diverts attention from the structural economic progress underway.
The SONA is constitutionally designed to highlight both achievements and challenges of governance. It offers an opportunity for sober reflection on national priorities, economic direction, and policy trade-offs.
Yet, rather than engaging the substance of the administration’s development agenda, some critics have chosen to reduce the conversation to short-term consumption versus long-term investment, a false choice that misrepresents how economies actually grow.
This argument was most recently advanced by opposition politician Alexander B. Cummings, who questioned the government’s emphasis on infrastructure development over what he termed immediate “bread-and-butter” concerns.
His popular phrase, “Da cotal we will eat,” implies that investing in roads, energy, and other foundational infrastructure somehow ignores the daily struggles of ordinary Liberians. While rhetorically appealing, this framing collapses under basic economic scrutiny.
Finance and Development Planning Minister Augustine Kpehe Ngafuan was therefore correct to push back forcefully against this narrative. His response was not political deflection but economic logic.
As a seasoned policymaker and chief architect of Liberia’s fiscal strategy, Ngafuan articulated a reality that serious development practitioners understand: infrastructure is not a luxury; it is the backbone of sustainable livelihoods.
Surprisingly, this argument comes from Mr. Cummings, a renowned corporate executive with extensive experience in international business. Anyone familiar with corporate investment or national development knows that no economy can expand meaningfully without reliable infrastructure.
Roads, electricity, ports, and telecommunications are prerequisites for productivity, trade, and job creation. To suggest otherwise is either disingenuous or deeply disconnected from economic reality.
Take the case of road connectivity to southeastern Liberia, long regarded as the most underdeveloped region of the country. For decades, isolation has been a central driver of poverty in counties such as Grand Gedeh, River Gee, Sinoe, Maryland, and Grand Kru. Poor road conditions meant that farmers could not get produce to markets, traders faced prohibitive transportation costs, and entire communities were cut off from economic opportunity.
The government’s investment in road infrastructure has begun to reverse this historical neglect. Where travel once took weeks, journeys now take hours. Transportation costs have declined, market access has expanded, and agricultural produce can now reach urban centers while still fresh.
These changes are not abstract policy achievements; they translate directly into lower food prices, increased incomes for farmers, and improved food availability for consumers.
Minister Ngafuan captured this connection succinctly when he stated, “When farmers can bring their produce to market faster, prices fall. That directly affects inflation and puts more food on the table for ordinary Liberians.”
This is not theory; it is basic economics. Reduced transaction costs increase supply efficiency, stabilize prices, and improve purchasing power. In other words, infrastructure development directly addresses “bread and butter” concerns.
The same logic applies beyond agriculture. Improved roads enable hunters to sell fresh meat the same day, traders to expand their customer base, and small businesses to operate profitably. Roadside commerce flourishes, mobility increases, and cash circulate within rural economies.
If this is not addressing daily livelihood needs, one must ask what definition of “bread and butter” is being used.
Moreover, infrastructure development is inseparable from job creation. Construction projects generate direct employment, while improved infrastructure attracts private investment, creating long-term jobs.
As Minister Ngafuan has emphasized, employment generation remains central to the Boakai administration’s agenda, and infrastructure investment is a key enabler of economic opportunity. Without roads and power, no serious investor, ‘domestic or foreign’, can operate efficiently or profitably.
It is also worth recalling that during national consultations for Liberia’s development agenda, citizens consistently ranked roads, energy, education, and health as top priorities.
These are not elite preferences imposed from above; they reflect the lived experiences of ordinary Liberians who understand that sustainable improvements in living standards require structural solutions, not short-term fixes.
As you may be aware, none of this is to deny the reality of economic hardship. Inflation, unemployment, and poverty remain pressing challenges. But constructive criticism of government policy is both legitimate and necessary.
However, criticism must be grounded in honesty and evidence. Framing infrastructure investment as a distraction from livelihood concerns misleads the public and undermines informed debate.
Politics may often involve deception, but development cannot be built on it. When tangible progress is visible, when roads are built, travel time is reduced, markets are expanded, and prices are stabilized, it is counterproductive to dismiss these gains for the sake of populist rhetoric.
Because doing so risks keeping the country trapped in a cycle of short-term thinking that has historically hindered progress.
Minister Ngafuan’s reassurance that the administration welcomes constructive debate while remaining confident in its strategy is a mature stance. His assertion bears repeating: infrastructure investments are not in competition with bread-and-butter issues; they are the foundation for lasting solutions to those issues.
As he rightly noted, “If we want major investors to operate profitably in Liberia, we must fix our power and road challenges.”
Liberia’s development journey requires patience, clarity, and honest conversation.
The real question is not whether people should eat today or build for tomorrow. The real question is whether the nation is willing to pursue policies that ensure both now and in the future. On that measure, the “bread and butter” argument is less a solution than a distraction from the hard but necessary work of national development.
