I've wondered to what extent this vibe is shaped by politicians telling the public how difficult things are (invariably due to their predecessor). If you are told we can't afford anything because Liz Truss Crashed The Economy you might reasonably assume this means you must be worse off
In return they should at least publish a piece from Dante Disparte's arch nemesis @rohangrey.bsky.social
People would probably pay good money for a round 2 of their clash at Consensus 2022 fortune.com/2022/06/09/d...
Perhaps one for @alphaville.ft.com ?
Disappointing to see @financialtimes.com publish this PR from the stablecoin industry as an opinion piece rather than sponsored content - they could have at least got some money from it!
www.ft.com/content/69cd...
🚀 NEW report launch
💷 'Taking all the credit' explores how we can safeguard monetary & financial stability against the challenges of the 21st century *and* boost investment in the real economy.
[1/7]
🏦 In the UK…
The world energy shock is coming — it will deepen inequality in ways we've seen before. Our new
@newstatesman1913.bsky.social piece argues that without urgent government action, the Strait of Hormuz crisis will ripple through our economies and rip apart our societies. Here's why. 1/
Bit of a brass neck on Reeves here in her Mais lecture. Don't recall her or Labour shouting about the priceless opportunity to invest in the early 2010s - quite the opposite
in which, I argue that the digital euro should be seen as primarily an expression of institutional mojo, which is why people don't understand it backofmind.substack.com/p/why-this-w...
"It is very worrying that banks feel able to use their influence to try and dictate elected government policy."
Peter Mandelson was not an outlier - Government ministers continue to put the interests of banks above ours.
Our Head of Policy and Advocacy, Simon Youel, on Sky News today 👇
I explained here why Stogia is wrong: there's no magic money tree which means finance is more available to the private than public sector, & the constraint on investing is real resources, not the public finances: chrisdillow.substack.com/p/no-magic-m...
Good that Alistair Darling didn't fall for this, but sad that Rachel Reeves did
In any other context, requiring a high-productivity sector to offshore the production of its highest value-added exports would be seen as the economic illiteracy it so obviously is...
www.ft.com/content/a23c...
www.ft.com/content/1995...
This is absent. Despite all the talk of the return of industrial policy, we have a bunch of mealy mouthed missions with toothless policy supoort. No clear direction and institutional capacity being massively underutilised. It is a government bathing in the tepid bath of managed decline, to quote KS
As well as the question of what taxes and what spending, there is also the matter of broader strategy. You would expect a robust left economic programme to use all of the levers of state, inc fiscal, industrial and credit policy, plus public financial institutions, to support clear missions
Perhaps it is also that the scope of left-wing economics isn't confined to simply higher taxes and higher spending
What do you mean by this? If the government introduces a contractionary budget why would we not expect unemployment to continue to rise?
I think the problem is the government didn't even need to be good in opposition - indeed some of their problems now stem from choices made prior to governing, e.g certain manifesto pledges
Even that seems to be wishful thinking. What makes people so sure that if they raise income tax at a level aimed at filling the Black Hole that lower growth, lower tax revenue, higher unemployment and higher welfare spending won't result in the Black Hole growing again?
Running a surplus when unemployment is already at 5%? Eh?
I would assume the FT knows this, but ROTE is the preferred measure for banking profitability, for good reason. That is of course less convenient for the author's intent to paint those questioning whether banks can afford to shoulder a higher burden as naive socialists, though.
If this is the case, then publishing this piece is a poor editorial decision to say the least. We should, at a minimum, expect stated financial statistics to be broadly accurate in the Financial Times.
Anyway, I am still none the wiser to what the last sentence of that paragraph is supposed to mean. There are already 70 stations in zone 5 so therefore increasing network capacity and decreasing travel times to Birmingham is a waste of time?
I assumed it was common knowledge that the real benefit of HS2 was increasing capacity across the network, not just making it quicker to get from B'ham to London. I also hoped it was common knowledge since Keynes/Robinson that investment creates savings and thus isn't crowded out by the deficit
Come on Chris, you can do better than this!
False hope about what? That things could possibly get better? Labour telling on themselves here
NEW: UK taxpayers are losing £22 billion every year from losses at the Bank of England - the same as the entire Home Office annual budget. This is the result of a flawed implementation of the BoE's quantitative easing programme. We propose two steps to fix this leak. (1/4)
“High interest rates are a form of economic rent and should be kept as low as possible."
Our @youellog.bsky.social pushes back on the misguided suggestion that the Bank of England should be setting interest rates well above inflation in @thetimes.com via @georgenixon97.bsky.social
bit.ly/3IITWen
