Erm, Polly?

Yesterday George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, laid out an economic policy that looks to any Keynesian like the perfect recipe for turning recession into deepest depression. It\’s Margaret Thatcher in 1980 all over again – cutting, sacking and reducing debt just when the state should expand. Here\’s his programme: cut corporation tax and stamp duty on shares; abolish tax on savings;

Cutting taxes would, of course, to any Keyensian, look like a bit of fiscal expansion. That is, precisely what is needed to stop a recession turning into the deepest depression.

True, Keynesians of various stripes would argue over whether tax cuts are as good as spending increases in doing so, but all would recognise that tax cuts are fiscally expansionary.

The rest of the piece is that Labour\’s going to lose the next election so obviously we have to change the rules.

7 comments on “Erm, Polly?

  1. When Polly asks us to “..vote vote vote for Labour” is that a suggestion to use the postal voting system?
    If so, it seems a little conservative to limit the votes to three. Should be possible to complete a couple of dozen voting papers at least.

  2. ……. It’s Margaret Thatcher in 1980 all over again……..

    Well following Jim Callaghan all over again does somewhat narrow down his options.

    I can’t remember. What was the final result of Mrs Thatcher’s economic policies???? Successful wasn’t it?

  3. Christ, suddenly every pig-ignorant columnist in town is lecturing us about Keynes, as though they’ve been experts all their lives, and it’s all so friggin’ obvious.

    The worst example, though, was Kaletsky, that fool from The Times, who thought “applying Keynes” to solve the problem was merely a technical matter.

  4. “…just when the state should expand.”

    Who’s going to pay for that, Polly? You..?

    And also how ????? If it were a good idea(it isn´t) it is not practical.

  5. Labour have already rigged the system. They can still scrape a majority with something like a 12% deficit in the polls. A priority of an incoming (non-Labour) government should be a scorched-earth reorganisation of constituencies to reverse this.

    And if I genuinely thought the Tories were going to implement swingeing cuts in the size of the State, it might even make me vote for them. But Osborne and Cameron are all mouth and no trousers.

  6. But that’s a feature of a constituency system David. If all constituencies were the same size then still if turnout in Labour constituencies is lower than in Tory then by definition their vote per seat will be lower. In fact it could turn out that Labour only need about 350 votes to get a majority, ie. 0.00001% (or did I miss a 0) of the vote.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.