I didn’t pick economics to sound clever. I picked it to decode why a ₹20 price change could decide what’s for dinner. But somewhere between the graphs and the jargon, I got lost. Not because the world is too complex - but because we made it a performance.

 

One Tuesday morning, the slide said: “Endogenous growth.” My brain said: “Bro, we’re just broke.”

They say, “fiscal contraction.” I hear: “People are getting laid off.”

They say, “price elasticity.” I hear: “We can’t afford onions again.”

They say, “aggregate demand.” I hear: “Can we pay rent this month or just pray?”

 

The more I study, the clearer it becomes: The bigger the words, the further they are from the people they describe. If you can’t explain a concept to the person it affects most, maybe you don’t get it either.

 

I don’t want to be the economist who hides behind jargon and graphs. I want to be the one who explains what’s happening - before people are forced to feel it. Because maybe the biggest failure isn’t what we get wrong. It’s how we say it. And who gets left out of the room.

 

Honestly, if economics had subtitles? Half of us would finally get the plot.

The other half? Still spiralling over “marginal utility” and Maggie prices.