NSOris Johnson’s latest wheezing is classical economics.Faced with petrol shortages, empty supermarket shelves, and soaring petrol price turmoil, Johnson Bold response this week: This was all part of the plan. Britain, he explained, Was just migrating From a broken economic “model” based on low wages and high immigration to a new model based on high productivity and high wage job creation.
The speech at his meeting will soon Criticized by rights, It is based on the fact that celebrating the tight labor market seemed to be actively inviting inflation. But at the basic gut level that Johnson has only spoken about, he seems to have overcome it.Britain’s most frustrating economic policy mystery in recent decades – its Slow productivity growth – He announced that he was simply going to be magical.
Whether or not the Adam Smith Institute’s speech agrees to be “economically illiterate,” Johnson’s new interest in economic “models” is how this strange new Conservative Party operates. It will tell you something about what is being done.Equally important Keir Starmer – In contrast to his two Predecessor – I’ve largely avoided discussing the state of British capitalism. It seems that the conditions of political debate have been reversed.
Johnson, to some extent, cultivated the familiar conservative ditch. On the contrary, the claim that obvious financial failure is simply a sign that the drug is starting to work has been a turbulent response in the years following Margaret Thatcher’s inauguration. In 1981, Thatcher was famously criticized by 364 economists, who were far more prominent than the Adam Smith Institute. Letter to the Times Condemns her attempt to tackle inflation through punitive high interest rates.
Thatcher disguised himself as a strict nurse and painfully separated the patient from his dependence on inflation. In contrast, Johnson suggests that Britain now needs to kick its reliance on foreign labor. Britain’s public life, which, contrary to all economic logic and indicators, gives its leaders the right to talk about the nature and direction of capitalism, no matter what obvious damage the Conservatives do to business or GDP. There is something about its position in.
Thatcher, of course, was fatally serious and was a living embodiment of the work ethic she advocated. Johnson is neither. Thatcher was about to pay a hefty political price for her ruthlessness, but it’s hard to imagine Johnson endangering his position just for ideology. For Johnson, it is no exaggeration to say that this is more intense than “working” to the extent that he allows him to spin good yarns. The theory of capitalism is now part of the ancient Greek mythology and rugby metaphor. All of these are the simple methods Johnson chose to navigate the interview.
Starmer clearly sees Johnson’s recklessness as an opportunity to position Labor as a business party. “Good business and good government are partners” He told the labor conference one week before.His speech was naturally hostile to the conservative economic policies he accused of low wages, but did not contain anything dramatic enough to change the whole thing. model Of the British economy. In the New Labor tradition, it was primarily sticking to praising the benefits of being able to do a (good) business.
A strange turning point was reached when the character of British capitalism was now questioned by entertainers like Johnson for completely opportunistic purposes. But this happens when more honest politicians ask difficult questions about the workings of capitalism. Or you will be punished for questions from the media. This is exactly what happened in the last 30 years.
Political economists became more interested in “capitalist diversity” in the 1990s, and at the same time liberal democracy abandoned the question of “capitalism or socialism.”Agree with the question about Which type Of capitalism.Before gaining power, New Labor was seduced by Germanic vision of “stakeholder capitalism.” Proposed by WilhattonHowever, Gordon Brown came to the conclusion that Britain’s flexible labor market is too valuable as an asset, especially given the stubbornly high unemployment rate on the continent at the time.
Economist David Soskice, whose 2001 book Varieties of Capitalism (edited by Peter Hall) is still a handbook for this mode of analysis, is better off rationalizing the existing flexible “model” of the UK than trying to impose a set. It seems to have convinced Brown that he was far better. Constraints on the labor market looking for new ones. Eventually, the whole problem of the “model” of the economy was at a loss. Meanwhile, Brown has developed a tax credit system that masks the social impact of the low-wage economy.
Such questions did not come back until 2011, when capitalism was at stake and book lover Ed Miliband was heading the Labor Party.Instead of New Labor Milliband is the usual bland compliment to “business” with the economy “Predator” and “Producer” – A realization of the truth that British capitalism has become a playground for asset strippers, speculators and monopolies. Shot down in the media as evidence of “Red Ed” Dangerous Marxism.
From 2015 to 2019, Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell developed left-wing populism and raised the ante, blaming the ultra-rich who “rigging” the economy.With their enthusiasm To stand on the side of the majority of workers, they participated in the 2019 general election, Target only 150 “millionaires”: Not as a failed economic “model” as a small parasitic creek.
By returning to the new one Labor Starmer abandoned such criticism with the tactic of praising “business” and generally promising “economic prosperity.” For example, the diverse differences between private equity funds that squeeze wages to profit from care facilities and family-owned machine tool exporters are once again ambiguous. Starmer had to avoid making serious economic distinctions in order to look financially serious. In a public culture that rewards Mendacity, liars like Johnson are more to raise such topics as long as he does not do so with serious intent and the workers are silent about them. You will get a license for.
Of course, economic reality cannot be expected to be completely separated by vibrancy and humor. But some of Westminster’s dysfunction is the fact that economic outcomes can ultimately be determined by two policy areas that are no longer the subject of democratic debate: Brexit and monetary policy. .. Johnson can bluff as much as he wants about productivity and immigration, but both he and Starmer stand up in public to highlight the clear link between Britain’s chosen Brexit deal and logistics turmoil. It is not.
And while he can troll the Confederation of British Industry as he pleases by celebrating rising wages, if inflation exceeds 2% for long enough, the independent Bank of England will respond by raising interest rates. You have a duty to do it. The impact of this on the already inflated housing market can cause far greater political problems than wage inflation, which is how the UK economic model works. If he really wants to change it by design, and not just enjoy the current turmoil, he gets his work cut out.
Liars like Johnson rush in when others are silent about British capitalist illness | William Davis
Source link Liars like Johnson rush in when others are silent about British capitalist illness | William Davis
The post Liars like Johnson rush in when others are silent about British capitalist illness | William Davis appeared first on Eminetra.