By Akin Samuel KAYODE.
What happens to a society when people who once aspired to build businesses, acquire homes, educate their children and secure their future are increasingly forced to depend on relatives, friends, loans and political assistance simply to get through the month? What happens when a hardworking citizen begins to see survival as an achievement and dependence as the only available safety net? These are not merely personal problems. They are signs of an economy that is failing to convert the energy of its people into economic independence.
Nigeria’s greatest economic tragedy is not simply that many people are poor. It is that millions of capable Nigerians possess the willingness to work but operate in an environment that makes independence increasingly difficult. The trader struggles to replenish stock, the artisan struggles with operating costs, the graduate struggles to establish a career, the farmer struggles with production costs, and the small business owner struggles to keep the doors open.
A productive economy should gradually reduce dependence. As people acquire skills, find opportunities, earn incomes and build assets, they should become more capable of providing for themselves and contributing to others. But when the cost of living rises faster than incomes, businesses struggle and opportunities shrink, that progression is reversed. People begin consuming their savings, selling assets, borrowing to survive and depending on others for basic needs.
This is why the economic consequences of the Tinubu administration’s policies must be examined beyond official statistics. An economy may record improvements in selected indicators while households experience a completely different reality. If citizens increasingly need assistance to meet ordinary expenses, government must confront the deeper question of whether its policies are strengthening or weakening the productive capacity of the people.
There is, of course, a legitimate place for social protection. The elderly, persons with disabilities, vulnerable households and citizens facing temporary shocks should not be abandoned. But social protection should serve as a bridge through hardship, not a permanent substitute for economic opportunity. The problem is not that Nigerians sometimes need assistance; the deeper problem is when economic conditions make productive citizens increasingly unable to escape dependence.
Dependence also has a hidden economic cost. A person who spends all available income on immediate survival has little capacity to save or invest. A business owner who uses working capital to pay household bills cannot expand. A parent who struggles to pay school fees cannot invest adequately in a child’s future. A young professional who spends every earning on basic necessities cannot accumulate the capital required to become an entrepreneur or homeowner.
The result is a vicious cycle. Low purchasing power limits savings. Low savings limit investment. Limited investment restricts business expansion. Weak business expansion limits opportunities. Fewer opportunities increase dependence. And increased dependence further reduces the ability of individuals and families to build economic security.
Nigeria must break that cycle by building an economy that rewards production. Government should focus on the conditions that allow people to earn rather than creating a permanent culture of waiting for assistance. Relief may be necessary during difficult periods, but lasting prosperity comes when people have the opportunity to generate sustainable incomes through work, enterprise and investment.
This requires serious support for small and medium sized enterprises. A young Nigerian with a viable business idea should not have to spend more energy navigating multiple barriers than developing the business itself. Affordable credit, reliable power, efficient transport, reasonable taxation, access to markets and predictable regulations can transform small enterprises from survival ventures into engines of household prosperity.
Agriculture can play an equally important role. Nigeria possesses enormous productive potential, yet farmers and agricultural businesses still face significant challenges in production, storage, processing and distribution. Building stronger agricultural value chains would enable more Nigerians to earn from production while reducing dependence on expensive and vulnerable supply chains.
The same principle applies to manufacturing. When Nigeria produces more of what it consumes, opportunities are created at several levels, from raw materials and factory employment to transportation, packaging, distribution and retail. Production creates income, income creates purchasing power, and purchasing power sustains further production. That is how an economy builds a virtuous cycle instead of a dependency cycle.
Human capital must also be treated as an economic investment. Education should not merely prepare Nigerians to search endlessly for scarce opportunities. It should equip them with skills that allow them to create value, compete globally and participate meaningfully in the modern economy. A skilled population is an economic asset when the environment allows those skills to become productive.
This is where Atiku Abubakar’s economic alternative deserves serious consideration. His approach should be framed around an economy where government creates the enabling environment and Nigerians are empowered to become producers, investors, entrepreneurs and skilled professionals. The objective is not to make citizens permanent beneficiaries of government programmes, but active participants in economic growth.
Atiku’s economic vision should therefore be about restoring economic agency to Nigerians. The farmer should have the opportunity to become commercially successful. The trader should be able to expand. The artisan should be able to acquire modern equipment. The graduate should be able to build a career. The entrepreneur should be able to access capital. The worker should be able to save and invest.
This is also why infrastructure, energy, taxation, security and access to finance matter so much. They are not abstract policy issues. They determine whether Nigerians can turn effort into income and income into assets. When the cost of doing business falls, productivity rises. When productivity rises, incomes can improve. When incomes improve, dependence begins to decline.
The 2027 conversation should therefore ask a fundamental question: Do we want a Nigeria where citizens continually wait for government or benefactors to rescue them, or a Nigeria where government creates the conditions for citizens to build their own economic security through productive work and enterprise?
The answer should be obvious. Government cannot permanently carry the economic weight of an entire population. What it can do is create an environment in which millions of Nigerians can carry themselves, support their families, employ others and contribute more strongly to the national economy.
Nigeria does not need a culture of dependence. It needs a culture of productivity, enterprise and dignity. Nigerians are not asking for permanent handouts. They are asking for an economy in which their effort has a fair chance of producing results.
The measure of good economic governance is therefore not how many people government can assist, but how many people it can help become economically independent.
That is the challenge before Nigeria in 2027, and that is why Atiku Abubakar’s economic alternative must be about more than managing hardship. It must be about rebuilding the productive capacity of Nigerians so that dependence gives way to dignity, assistance gives way to opportunity, and survival gives way to self reliance.
Akin Samuel KAYODE.
Member, The Narrative Force.
@all
