I had been discussing he economy with a friend on the phone last night, so I then pretty much decided to repeat what I said into my computer. This was the outcome, in which I discuss why George Osborne and the Office for Budget Responsibility can be held accountable for the mess the economy is now in:
I am well aware there is no finesse to the recording. That's not what it was about.
I'd be curious to know if you think this medium works.
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!
If commenting, I’d prefer to do it on text as it can be referred to a great deal easier than the spoken word can.
I will not be giving up the written word
Medium was excellent. It means I can get on with other things. More please
OK….
Very good. Very simply put and clear. Not too long for me. Maybe introduce yourself at the beginning briefly to put your piece in context..it becomes clear towards the end.. Some names not annunciated clearly. This matters. Most words we are able to guess but not names. Thanks for explaining this. I already have some idea about it but this gives me the lines of accountability.
Noted
I found this format excellent. Thanks
Haven’t watched it yet but video is definitely a way of reaching a broader audience on social media, especially if it is subtitled.
I haven’t time to subtitle
I didn’t even add a title and probably should…
Regrettably I am fast losing my hearing so would need a transcript which rather defeats the object. Looking good but tired!
I am knackered
Too much travel in recent weeks
Christine, the video has subtitles automatically generated by YouTube. Click on the CC button to see them. If you can’t see the button then open the video through YouTube itself rather than the embedded video.
Richard, i’ve emailed you about this and may be able to help if anything is unclear.
Got it!
I will do next time
Good man, Benz0.
All these bloody wheels out there and most of us have no idea how to use them.
I think I probably use less of the capacity of my computer than I do of my brain. 🙂
Equally 🙂
Great stuff!
I’ve just seen there’s more Richard Murphy on YouTube so it’s not new. Why did you stop before?
Either way, it’s all good. Watch out though, it looks like the bookshelf is sneaking up on you from before!
Time…..
It’s a lot easier now
The problem is that George has a nice packet with Evening Standard and the rest.
OBR continue to spend Tax payers money as the watch dog.
Where is the re payment.
I think it works well. Perhaps a little introduction of who you are (e.g. Professor, etc.) at the beginning might make it more useful for spreading on social media to people who haven’t heard of you.
Good point
But you’re an expert. Tories hate experts.
Professor Murphy. That is very clear. I, as a non financial expert, understood it and it had the great merit of not exceeding my attention span in length! More of these would be much appreciated.
Thanks
I had been discussing he economy with a friend on the phone last night,…
You just live for pleasure, don’t you Richard? 🙂
Yep
That’s how I get by…
Good. The knack is to be able to explain the situation to the ordinary person in the street without being condescending, which I think this achieves. My only quibble is that the message is a tad depressing, but that is the reality if the mess we’re in. I wonder when peoples’ depression at the direction of the country turn to anger.
Thanks Richard, I for one like your video comments, but wish they were not so depressing. Of course the “balancing the bank account” approach from Osborne was cover for small state ideology…hopefully people are now appreciating that this is no way to run an economy.
Sorry!
How does the medium work? It’s good. You can say a lot more more more quickly than you can write it. And some people learn better from listening than reading. (‘Doing’ is better for some, but I don’t know how to suggest you could incorporate experiential learning into your strategy)
Technical note: I need a bit more volume . I can turn down but my volume settings don’t go to 11.
You fell in to the trap of saying spending (on investment) instead of simply saying investing. Suckered into the tax and spend narrative that has been so destructive. This is the advantage of writing – you can’t easily edit what you say, but script editing is relatively easy.
Hammond (and presumably the OBR aswell) are underestimating the shortfall in productivity figures because to be realistic the result of laying off workforce to improve productivity should be including the negative productivity of the redundant staff in the calculation.
The Tory mythology tells us that poor people are poor because they can’t manage their money. This is nonsense and churned out by people who have plenty of money and therefore have no idea how to deal with shortage. The clever money managers are the unemployed single mothers who somehow feed and clothe their children. The Osborne rationale for austerity assumes that when times are hard you can tighten your belt because if you have financial latitude you can do that. He and his ilk have no idea how you get out of the problem of not being able to cut expenditure.
So they draw entirely false conclusions. In their own personal dealings what they would do is borrow if they had a temporary cash flow difficulty. They then deny that obvious solution when applying it to the national finances.
You keep saying ‘fifteen years’. I’m not sure where the fifteen comes from. The neoliberal consensus is from about 1980 (continued relentlessly by New labour) and the period of Osborne’s direct influence is really only from 2010 isn’t it?
I hope those are useful comments, I’m not wishing to register negative response to what I think is a good and useful posting in a different style and medium of which I approve.
Ideally you would provide a script version verbatim, but I’ve no idea how you do that without creating considerable extra workload. Some of the financial/investment sites do that so you can follow the content as subtitles in effect. If it gets long-winded and or repetitive as American promotions are won’t to do there is the option of switching to text only and continue skimming.
15 years is what I now anticipate 2007 until near enough end of Tory rule to be…
And I have no time to do two versions….blogging really does have to fit into the rest of life and there’s a mighty lot else to do
I understand your limitations. Only one pair of hands, only 24 hours in the day and all the other constraints that beset the human condition.
It’s the old old story. The establishment has all the resources it needs, the opposition has to make do. The financial barriers to effective democracy are built in.
You need a technical PA. God knows how we finance that. I’d like to screw it out of the financial markets. Easy pickings, but can’t be done without capital to start. Perhaps I’d better start buying lottery tickets, but I’ve always regarded that as a strategy of despair.
I’ve given up despair, it’s not compatible with mental wellbeing.
Andy, producing a transcript would be minimal work in principle as you can extract the auto subtitled text from YouTube as a file. I’ve not tried it personally but know it’s doable. Would then need to proof read and tidy up the file extracted. Richard, I could probably help with that process in future and on certain technical things as suggested above.
Thanks
Noted!
Hi Richard, this works fine as a medium.
Keep it short, snappy and occasional, and it makes a refreshing change from the written word.
The drawback is that it’s harder to quote from, and requires a linear process to consume – plus a pair of earbuds if you’re on the train!
My preference (from around 2’05”) would be to refer to vast numbers of people willing to “save with the Government” rather than “lend the Government money”. It’s the same thing, of course, but it feeds the anti-borrowing narrative too easily.
Lastly,. if Osborne (and the OBR, which of course he set up in his own image) hadn’t carried on the way he did, and had enacted all the policies you advocate, well.., he wouldn’t be a Tory, would he?
This comment yesterday by Pilgrim Slight Return: http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/11/23/the-economy-is-tanking-mark-carney-should-take-note/#comment-793157 really hit home for me:
“I’m utterly convinced that the rich — and the party of the Rich (The Tories) just want to ‘nudge’ the population away — never mind into work. They don’t want to have policies that create wealth for others or provide training and jobs for our children and grand children. They are just not interested in us anymore.”
That last chilling phrase – *they are just not interested in us anymore* – sums it up perfectly.
Thanks
*they are just not interested in us anymore* is my perception too. That’s why they don’t care about the negative consequences of climate change. They can always move to higher ground.
Enjoyed watching and listening and very informative
Hi Richard,
I like it – the spoken word has more (or at least a different) impact to the written one.
I think I remember that you did some analysis on the multiplier in a previous post, based on the impact of George Osbourne’s cuts – the multiplier was more than 1 but I can’t remember what you concluded it was.
As a thought experiment (maybe that is too grandiose a term!) I considered what would have happened if the austerity approach had been used continuously up until now in response to the high levels of government debt after WWII. I concluded that we would probably still have food rationing (and a truly enormous debt to GDP ratio)!
The only way that I can really make sense of what has been done, is that the conservatives were not really interested in cutting the deficit quickly. In fact its existence was a convenient excuse to cut social programs that they didn’t like. In short I think mendacity rather than stupidity is the reason.
Hi Richard,
The post on multipliers that I mentioned above was bugging me – so I found it -http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/07/25/why-multipliers-matter/
Not actually yours as I suggested, but by Geoff Tily. Skim reading it again, it suggests that based on the result of withdrawing government spending in the early years of Osborne’s experiment, the multiplier was about 1.5. A lot of this was for departmental business as usual spending, so one could expect the investment spending that you are discussing in the video to possibly yield a higher ROI. Somewhere else in the article it quotes a range for the multiplier of between 1.3 and 1.9.
Many thanks for a very interesting video.
Neil
I should never rely on my memory – the actual quote on multipliers from an IMF document looking at the effect of cuts since the 2008 recession was:
“Our results indicate that multipliers have actually been in the 0.9 to 1.7 range since the Great Recession.”
Geoff is a master of this stuff
Search Richard’s blog in its entirety using the search at the top. It found 85 posts with ‘multiplier’ to look into. One benefit of text searches, but Google or someone may come up with / has already come up with an audio search technique.
Otherwise another Like for this media exposition.
Richard
As much as I love your written work (because you explain your thinking so lucidly) , in this medium you come across as a perfectly reasonable person making some really well observed points that need to be made known.
You can only get better at it really the more you have the opportunity to do it. And please – I’m not telling you to do more.
In writing on the blog you can come across sometimes as a bit gruff but I have learnt to appreciate that with your prodigious output in terms of campaigning and hosting the blog it is very often brevity that causes the occasional perceived ‘shortness’ with people. Oh – and the fact that you have been and still are hounded by trolls with vested interests.
Reflecting on how you come across in person in interviews and clips like this, I can fully understand why you are not only able to talk to those with opposing views but also be an effective campaigner. The clip above does you credit.
And I and others can certainly take you as an inspiration and guide as to how we may do the same and play our part towards making a fairer world.
Me? Gruff? How dare you!
Thanks 🙂
Excellent video summary and you speak very fluently and eloquently.
You mention the adverse effects of the Double Whammy of Austerity and Brexit but I think there’s really an adverse Quadruple Whammy taking place in economic thinking in the UK although it’s possible to subsume two of the four under Brexit.
The other two are firstly that analysis of the Leave vote reveals stronger correlation with the issue of “globalisation shock without compensation”:-
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2870313
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2904105
Secondly, there is the failure of the majority of UK citizens to understand the main point of Keynes’s “General Theory” book of 1936 that there always exists a high level of risk in private sector investment because of future uncertainty and consequently, with the exception of rare boom periods, the private sector never comes near to optimising the economy in terms of employment and therefore demand:-
http://forskning.ruc.dk/site/files/32845977/Jespersen_General_Theory_becoming_75_years.pdf
Thanks and a lot to agree with
Nice as a variation, I like the written word though. One advantage – others around start looking and listening in. Whilst making breakfast, with the laptop balanced on the microwave, my wife started listening in, and we chatted over some points.
That’s slightly scary!
I always work in the assumption no one listens even when on Radio 2
Richard Murphy says:
November 24 2017 at 3:18 pm
“That’s slightly scary!
I always work in the assumption no one listens even when on Radio 2”
Terry Wogan said that he always broadcast on the assumption, not that no one was listening, but that he had ONE listener.
You could try assuming that you are speaking to one specific person when you do this recorded voice blog again (which I hope you will).
Part of the power of your presentation is that even when you say things which many people will find radical and challenging (because they are so far off the orthodox scale) you clearly do not have two heads and are not fulminating and foaming at the mouth. Personally I don’t think much of what you say is particularly ‘radical’, it’s just that we have been gradually ushered down a path of expecting to hear a load of nonsense and come to believe that it represents some sort of arcane understanding of what politics and economics is about. Much too counter-intuitive, and complicated for ordinary mortals to comprehend.
It’s high time political and economic debate was dragged back into the realms of plain English.
The one listener is the Edson I am speaking to
I simply try to explain to them as best I can
I have an offer to do some of these in a studio – I might take it up
Absolutely you should take this offer up. I was put in the studio by Phonogram in my twenties and I learned stuff I had no idea was there to be learned. Recommended.
I have been in studios many times
It will aid quality, no doubt
A good complement to the written pieces and reminds people that there is a real person behind all this. Maybe every 2 weeks…?
Mike Galsworthy for ScientistsforEU does good short pieces to camera, mostly about Brexit. Check him out at @mikegalsworthy on Twitter
Will do
Excellent: concise, lucid and sensible. If you don’t mind, I’ll pass the link to friends and colleagues as it doesn’t require a deep technical knowledge of economics to understand the reality of your message.
You attach the blame to Osborne and OBR, but the roots of the problem go back to the “Big Bang” of 1986 and the failure, by successive Tory and Labour governments, to regulate financial markets adequately. That, coupled with the irresponsible behaviour of the banks and the finance industry, as well as the neo-liberals’/Tories’ wilful distortion of Adam Smith’s thinking on the benefits of the market (he was pretty clear about the dangers of no, or inadequate, market regulation), set the scene for the crash of 2007-8.
Osborne’s subsequent inept management of the economy and the OBR in its role as his economic adviser, coupled with the insane mess of Brexit, have brought us to the current situation. So why did they think austerity was the answer? Economic ignorance, blind adherence to flawed Tory dogma, or wilful social engineering (i.e. class warfare via economic deprivation)? I fear it’s a mix of all three, but the OBR, if its role truly was to advise the Chancellor on economic policy in GB’s best interests, should surely have advised against the dangers of all three? I’m not excusing Osborne from his share of the blame, but is the OBR so indoctrinated in neo-liberal thinking that it is no longer fit to have any advisory role?
I note the interest in pitchforks on this site. Can I just add that I’m thinking of setting up as a supplier of materials for barricades, as I see a potential market for which there is currently no Regulator or Ombudsman!
The OBR was always a sham
And far too close to the deeply neoliberal IFS
Hi Ken,
I agree that a lot of these problems start in the 80s, but I think that the conservatives since 2010 have been on a far worse (or maybe just different) path of destruction. I don’t remember for instance that the Major government’s response to the recession in the early 90s was as inept as the one that has been followed since 2010. Admittedly that recession was not as deep as the one in 2008.
I was very young in 1979 and being brought up in a true-blue household, so my recollections may be flawed. It seems to me on looking back that private industry was on the receiving end of the tory wrecking ball on that occasion whereas the sorry lot that we have now are more intent on dismantling the public realm.
2008 was a time when we needed statesmen (and women) with a cool head and fair instincts (e.g. Attlee). What providence gave us instead in 2010 were a crop of spoiled, spiteful and immature nobodies. To discover this blog and learn in detail why the pain and misery endured by many since 2010 have been utterly pointless (and indeed counterproductive) only increases my anger with and contempt for the conservatives.
Like the video format. As long as audio quality is consistent (as this was) it makes longer posts more engaging.
I am surprised how good feedback has been
You’re a good speaker, able to think quickly and articulate your thoughts in an accessible way, so it’s a good medium for you.
Finesse: as someone used to watching Steve Keen’s lectures on YouTube, I have no complaints whatsoever!
An occasional video can help reach a wider audience and actually attract more people to your blog – it was a video of Jeremy Corbyn talking about you and PQE that brought me here a couple of years ago.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks
Appreciated
We are living through the crisis of Capitalism . It is a melancholy experience. Nobody knows when or how it will end , but be assured it will end just like Communism did, and just remember – if you are old enough – how quickly Communism collapsed ; a system that only a matter of months before it collapsed appeared so strong that it might continue for generations. But common to both systems is money – a human invention – the reductionist glue thought capable of holding a society together, but it is a very weak glue and just as it came apart with Communism so it is coming apart with Capitalism and, because we are conscious beings it makes it so difficult to live at such a time.
Where’s the wall so I can give it a kick?
Part of the reason that Communism in Eastern Europe collapsed was that people could see a far more attractive option, just over the ‘wall’ as it were. Lets not forget, it was a far more attractive option than what they lived under, as time spent in those countries will confirm
What we don’t have is a clear alternative to the decayed version of neo-liberal capitalism which dominates the US and UK. But perhaps we do – I’d argue that Scandinavia has some very attractive alternatives.
It’s here. You kick it everyday with this blog.
Just one minor point have a bit more direct eye contact with the camera.
Very good in all other respects.
I always forget that the camera is at the top of the screen
Thank you for that chat, I am not an economist but I do appreciate the effort and insight you present is such simple and understandable terms.
If I may ask a question, do the Labour Party plans for the economy broadly follow the advice given in this talk?
As an impartial economist could you critique then in a future talk?
Let me think about doing that
I have a book chapter to write on this theme
Works for me.
I liked this, Murphy TV is born.
@ Max Wolfe,
“I liked this, Murphy TV is born.”
Not quite…. ; )
https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8613/16450012122_22f197c256_m.jpg
Oh well…
The video presentation was excellent and the odd verbal slip just makes it seem more natural. Length was just right, especially as you have a good pleasant voice with nice tonal variation.
What about a singing a song to finish? Abba’s “Money, Money, Money” perhaps.
There are limits
I can sing
I can play the clarinet
I promis you I am not doing either
You play the clarinet!!?
Now that IS showing off Richard!!
I wouldn’t say well….
But I do pick it up quite often
Clarinet. Yes I was impressed too Pilgrim.
I bet it’s full of dust though.
I’m not much into music so I’ve bought myself a banjo. 🙂
No, seriously I’ve just bought a banjo. I’ve wanted one since I was about four. I want to make a noise like Finbar Furey, but I don’t think I’ll ever get the voice (either).
Last played on Friday – doing the sax solo from Dire Straits ‘Your latest trick’
It’ll be the clarinet that keeps you sane perhaps? I was wrong about the dust then.
That, other hobbies, and having to be dad to two sons
Hi Richard,
The video format is great and can mean your message goes further. The concepts are simple to grasp the trick would be keeping it brief (as you have) and showing your passion for the alternative. Keep it up. And then post it direct to twitter so that people can share and comment on the video there too?
Tired of the way the economy re investment versus ‘balancing the family ‘ budget are conflated. This needs to be tackled head on as many people who vote believe the crash was caused by investment.
Eventually, making a video will feel as easy as having a phone call. But it gets the message out to so many more people..
Thanks
Will develop the first idea
It will need some structure
The OBR was devised to give political cover to Osborne. I am all for an independent, arms lengths body that offer commentary on government policy and its consequences, like the CBO in America.
But it has to be independent and that means giving it an endowment
Has a government ever (ever) set up anything independent?
Hi Richard,
I think the video was very helpful to lay people like myself.
It is easier to understand economics when they are explained as simply as you did on the video without using too many esoteric terms.
This will help get your message out to the public.
Once enough people understand the Tory’s are lying and all the deaths caused by austerity were unnecessary, they will be finished.
Keep up the good work.
Ron
I like the video – can listen to what emphasis you put which doesn’t come over in pure text per se.
In a past life I was a union negotiator. When persuading management to change mind on something it happened in one of two ways; either a change of personnel so cold blame previous lot for intransigence or some way of saving face which could be new evidence, legislation etc.
What would it take for this government to save face? Is it possible?
As my blog on Ireland suggests, I cannot see face saving possibilities at present because that requires wise people in negotiations who know they need to engineer exit routes that LOet the save face. I have had to do this countless times in life. Why we have polirticoans who seem wholly unaware of that need is baffling, but a fact. It’s also the cause of the crisis we face.
Hi. Coming late to this topic but here’s my 2 cents’ worth.
I agree with most of the above comments and thought your presentation very good, especially since you did it on the spur of the moment, hence not over-produced.
As others have mentioned, I think it would be very useful in reaching a wider audience if you could perhaps record one a week or fortnight – as sort of lay person’s Economics 101 – explaining some topic that has featured in the news.
There could perhaps be 2 general themes. One explaining ‘what’s wrong’ and the other ‘what’s right’. That is to say, demolishing policies/ideas endemic to neoliberal ideology; and alternate presentations explaining how elements of progressive economic thinking would achieve better outcomes.
You have a natural, easy going style that won’t scare off those who might otherwise be intimidated by ‘serious stuff’. I routinely watch Richard Wolff’s weekly ‘Economic Updates’ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2GobJu16-o) and anything from the likes of Steve Keen, Mark Blyth, Michael Hudson, et al. And I’m not saying this just to boost your ego (lol) but you could reach out to a much wider public than they do. (Wolff is probably easier to watch than most but he’s primarily talking to a US audience).
As far as I know there is no academic with your credentials and experience who is challenging the mainstream narrative via regular ‘YouTubes’ in a language that can be readily understood by non-professionals. Ofc, there’s no shortage of polemic material which simply reinforces the viewer’s ‘confirmation bias’ and which puts off those who might be persuaded to change their minds via rational explanation in an unsensational yet authoritative way.
Apologies for the longer-than-intended comment, but I believe you have initiated a really useful strategy for reaching out beyond hard-core activists and arm-chair critics such as myself. Hope it makes some sort of sense and adds positively to the encouragement expressed above by others. Go for it!
I’m getting a message from you and others that I might need to take this idea seriously
Not too seriously maybe, but enough to do more
I will do that
You should if you can find the time.
Honestly Richard – you come across as a perfectly sane and reasonable human being who very quickly gets to the root of the problem in clear terms.
You put your heterodoxy to good use. And if you start doing this regularly you can only get better at it.
Ok
On my agensa
Good summary John D – the message and ‘education’ needs to get out well beyond the already converted and no doubt videos would help to complement the written pieces. Combined with reTweeting and posting it far and wide
A thought that I don’t think has been mentioned; might want to keep them brief (3-4 mins?) recognising peoples finite attention spans. Or mix short ones in with longer ones. On the Brexit front, Mike Galsworthy does pithy videos of about that length on Periscope and Twitter that seem long enough to make a salient point.
But overall message, yes please go for it
I think a go at short ones would be good
Although it’s not my style…
Very good. Nice and clear (I thought), and the video medium will reach a whole new set of people who don’t/won’t read.
I recommend you do this again!
A quick after-thought. Have you ever considered funding via Patreon, as Richard Wolff does – https://www.patreon.com/economicupdate? Seems to work for him.
I admit it’s never appealed
But if it was the way to produce better results and wider dissemination I would consider it
2nd quick after-thought! How about a joint-venture with ‘Progressive Pulse’ – to spread the load?
Happy Sunday. Over and out 🙂
Good idea
Great can be doing my end of year accounts.
You have a nice spoken voice anyway quite relaxing in fact.
Also, haven’t seen you on TV for a while you’ve lost weight. Nice.
The TR Podcast bring it on.
I gave up buns…..
I don’t miss them now
Lost 15kg
According to my GP it was my only risk factor so I decided to do something about it
I must have eaten a lot of buns….
Very pleased to hear that, Richard. I’ve lost 10kg and feel so much better for it. It’s enabled me to justify my nagging some male colleagues because I want to see them well and contributing for many years to come.
I can avoid that then!
Fifteen (bloody) kilograms of buns!!
Jeee-sus. Eat your heart out Winnie the Pooh!
Over many years….
I found the broadcast very interesting.
Have you thought of turning these talks into podcasts? I have two hours of driving every day and am trying to understand a little economics and podcasts like this would help to pass the time and develop my understanding.
I’ll think about