I feel that suffixes are bandied around a bit too freely these days. Not every idea is worthy of a special suffix all of its own. Take the suffix ‘-nomics’, derived from the word ‘economics’. All well and good when used in relation to former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzõ Abe’s longstanding programme of economic policies––Abenomics; even okay when discussing Steven Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner’s book––Freakonomics; not so deserving when attached to British Prime Minster Liz Truss’s short-term embarrassment of an economic strategy––Trussonomics.
In the case of Trussonomics the ‘–nomics’ suffix attempts to add credibility to a policy, which is undeserving of the appendage. It suggests a measure of thinking and planning, which appears entirely absent. It implies a clear and considered direction; not something that is likely to be revised, scrapped, and dished up as something completely different within a matter of days.
More than anything else the suffix ‘-nomics’ suggests a committed ideology, not a see-which-way-the-wind-blows, Brexit/Remain, Liberal/Conservative, flip-flop opportunism.
Trussonomics is a course of action, which is not worthy of the suffix.
However, there is one particular suffix, which I think might be better appended to Truss.
© Beery Sue
Beery Sue rages against the Trussocracy.