This is just too good not to share. It's by the BBC's Paul Mason, today:
There's a parallel universe I always go back to when we get big GDP figures, as we have with today's announcement that Britain is in a double-dip recession.
In that parallel universe, the British economy recovers rapidly on the back of a shrinking state, booming exports and a rapid switchover to high-tech manufacturing.
Stay with me for a tour of this alternative reality: The economy is now recovering rapidly, at 2.6% per year, following a very decent 2.1% last year. Exports are booming - the positive trade balance contributing a third of the growth, even as government spending and investment slumps. Oh, and CPI inflation is 1.9%.
Now, that parallel universe is based on something very real and tangible. It is the original projection of the Office for Budget Responsibility in November 2010, which George Osborne used to justify the biggest fiscal austerity programme Britain has seen in 60 years.
Almost every aspect of the OBR's vision has been proved wrong.
The rest is also really good.
But the point is that this data shows by just how much Osborne got his economics wrong.
His belief that cutting would create growth was the whole basis for his austerity programme. In fact, he did not think there would would be austerity at all. But that's what he has delivered. And that's the measure of his failure.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
But these figures are coming from the (nominally independent) OBR, not Osborne. While they’re not responsible for policy, their forecasting is not helping. So my question is: “What the hell is going on in the OBR?”
Making the November 2010 forecast just as the Labour stimulus was expiring (being axed in May), it seems to have failed to understand the impact of Government stimulus, mistaking it for Magic Pixie Private Sector Fairy Dust. And shown similar lack of comprehension of the effect of pan-European austerity.
Is Robert Chote the Dead Hand of the IFS/IMF, curling round the throat of our economy?
Nominally independent is right
You’re right on Chote too
Unless he did this on purpose. Implementing austerity as we know creates further division between the rich and the poor. He could be said to be reinforcing the privilege that’s made no-nothings like him and Cameron into the holders of high office. It’s as well to remember potential future competitors to little Osbornes or Camerons won’t ever realise that potential if they’re stacking shelves in Poundland or Tesco just to get their benefits. He’s reinforcing his rich chums’ positions and protecting their bloodlines against future competition.
Also, and more immediately, he’s protecting the banks. It’s the banks behind all this. They’ve used their little-known privilege of money creation a little too much, they’ve gone to the well too many times. They’re in the public eye now and remember, this is the information age. There’s never been anything comparable. If the public understood how they’re robbed by the banks, and I’m not talking about bonuses or fees here, I’m talking about their little-known powers of outright money creation, there’d be blood on the moon. The immediate and overwhelming demands put on the population by austerity act as an effective distraction. That’s another very sound reason for introducing it and maintaining it.
I would think all this is far beyond the hapless stooge Osborne. No doubt it’s well understood by his controllers though.
The name Office for Budget Responsibility appears to be very Orwellian – it brings to mind the perpetual wars of Ministry of Peace and the propaganda and lies perpetuated by the Ministry of Truth. The economically disasterous OBR would fit right in there
Is it suprising that a bunch of PR men who happen to be running our country have gone for the 1984 double-speak approach
On another Orwell note from Animal Farm – how about
“We are all in this together, but some of us are more in it than others”
or perhaps
“We are all in this together, but some of us are more in on it than others”
Perhaps an amended version of an image like this would be fitting…
[Just in case you are not familiar – the original quote was “All animals are all equal, but some animals are more equal than others”]
I’m with Billl on this. What they are actually doing is not what they say they are doing, and it is naive to analyse it as if it is.
And I agree that there must be forces behind Osborne working this out for him. I’ve personally witnessed top bankers giving orders to govt officials.
What ‘cuts’ are producing is insecure employment (downward pressure on workers) and privatised and liberalised public services – our public services becoming investment opportunities for transnational investors.
It is also producing a situation whereby onshore outsourcing with cheap migrant labour becomes the ‘money-saver’ for every budget-pressured manager, reagrdless of the effect on UK resident workers or indeed on the economy. Behind the scenes, the government is currently ensuring that the means for this to happen are in place.
Unfortunately, Paul Mason’s analysis never goes this far as he doesn’t want to upset his misguided faux-left following.
Isn’t there some guy called Harrison (or whatever) who is supposed to run Osborne, a young guy around 32ish? I’ve seen a picture and he doesn’t seem seasoned enough, shall we say, to be whispering diabolics into the Osborne shell-likes. He doesn’t seem a likely member of some ancient conspiracy either, nor even a comparitively new one. I wonder what he actually does…maybe he’s just there to fool people like us who don’t believe Osborne can think so he’s offered up as being the stooge behind the stooge, if you will, and controlling him in some opaque fashion are the real decision-makers.
Linda what do you mean by the faux (false) left following?
What you are describing is the supply side economics, keep down wage costs, privatize and put profit above the public interest. It is only convinces by focusing on a few factors.
Richard says elsewhere today about ‘objectivity’ in economics. That tends to be what ‘objective’ people do in education, health and most other public services.
But this is right wing.
By faux left I mean those who want to look like ‘nice’ leftie people on every front, while avoiding grasping the nettle of what is really going on in neoliberal strategy.
Alongside moving work to cheap areas of the world, labour liberalisation as in moving cheaper labour across borders to undermine workers in higher pay aeas is now a major capitalist strategy. It not only produces profit from supply and from use of cheap brought-in labour, but irrevocably destroys labour power in the process.
Real left acknowledges, analyses and fights this: faux left refuses to acknowledge that this is what is going on.
For Ian’s benefit – I’ve yet to find anyone who can agree with Linda on this definitional issue – and those who try to are repelled by always being described as faux whatever they do – and so she’s in a campaign of one
Some sensible words from Vicky Pryce, the former joint head of the Government Economic Service.
“Ms Pryce said the Government should focus on smaller, deliverable projects like homes, schools and local roads than flagship ones such as HS2. The CBI wants road tolling to lever in private finance, but Ms Pryce claimed it would be cheaper over the longer term to raise the finance by borrowing at ultra-low rates”. Someone talking sense finally?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/9229697/UK-double-dip-recession-fuels-argument-for-more-QE-says-MPCs-Martin-Weale.html
Shame she might be in prison soon
May make her a hard authority to cite