Imagine this: your dairy cows are sick and the roof over your tiny farm office is leaking. You have limited resources. What do you do? Buy a new office for comfort, or save the cows that actually make you money?

I would patch the roof just enough to make it usable, manage in the cramped space, and invest the bulk of the resources in treating the cows. They are the real cash producers.

That is exactly how I see the new office building for the Ministry of Finance. Meanwhile, struggling sectors like tourism and agriculture need only a few tens of millions to generate billions in revenue and thousands of jobs. Yet we ignore them and build fancy offices instead. That is not economics. That is bad priorities.

The new Bank of Ghana building is another example. And if we combine the costs of these grandiose projects across the Finance Ministry, the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Communications, we are talking about close to a billion dollars, an amount that could easily transform multiple struggling sectors into direct billion-dollar earners.

When you point this out, people tell you, “Why do you think you are the only smart one?” Fine. Maybe I am not. But even if I am not, the current approach is neither smart nor beneficial to society. Brutally speaking, as far as we know, the typical Ghanaian politician will choose a Toyota Land Cruiser over any technology or investment that could boost productivity. The priorities are grotesque and the consequences are paid for by ordinary citizens.

Look at Ghana’s biggest businesses in mining, oil, and gas. They operate from modest offices while generating billions. They focus on production, not prestige. Why can’t public institutions funded by taxpayers do the same?

When resources are limited, priorities should be obvious. Patch the roof enough to function, but invest in the cows that produce the milk. Anything else is a waste. And in this case, society is paying the price.