Must be a whiff of something in the air

Murphy is making his usual two mistakes, of not understanding the economics nor the logic.

On the economics he’s missed that GDP, and thus the size of the economy, is production, or consumption, or income. Each of which will be, by definition, equal (absent people lying about tax of course).We thus don’t need the exact and precise details that he’s mumbling about because we can estimate from a combination of the different methods. As the ONS actually does to reach those GVA (GVA is roughly equivalent for GDP for a sub-national area) numbers at the three NUTS levels.

He’s also wrong in logic of course. He’s the proponent of the Courageous State idea, which is that the government should take a much more heavy handed approach to the management of the economy. Lots of lovely planning and firm state action. And yet here he is insisting that the government really has no clue, not a scoobie, about the state of the economy at anything less than UK level. Something which would make that detailed planning a tad difficult one would think. But then the internal contradictions of his own arguments are not really something that trouble Professor Murphy. Perhaps there’s a whiff of ermine in the air?

10 comments on “Must be a whiff of something in the air

  1. The Forbes quote of the day was a little less than appropriate:

    When people start telling you that you’re crazy, you just might be on to the most important innovation in your life.

    Larry Ellison

    Or might not, in Spud’s case.

  2. “When people start telling you that you’re crazy, you just might be on to the most important innovation in your life.
    Larry Ellison

    Or might not, in Spud’s case.”

    Its truer than you might think – the truly crazy (ie mentally ill) are rarely told to their faces that they’re nuts. Mainly because friends and family either don’t want to upset them or are scared of them kicking off. So they skirt round the issue (I have personal experience of such a person, and no-one ever told him he was nuts, especially when he was). Its often one of the problems – the mentally ill person is never forced to accept their illness. They get treated unusually by society (ie sectioned, medicated etc) but no-one has the balls to tell them why they are being picked on in the manner they are. They almost have to work it out for themselves, which given their mental processes aren’t the most logical some never do.

    So anyone who is called crazy to their face probably isn’t, because the person saying it would be pretty sure the recipient wasn’t really a nutter.

  3. Nice footnote Tim. I remember being confirmed by Bishop Merv one fine evening in Clevedon. I read the psalm as I recall.

  4. Forbes QOTD are always incredibly stupid. They’re more likely to quote some idiot popstar than, say, Horace, and the actual advice is typically on the same level as sex tips from Cosmo.

  5. Why would National Scottishists make him a peer?

    When your only mission is to piss off the English, what downside is there to filling the unelected second chamber with twats?

  6. Bloke in Wales- Well i think either TIm or Richard or both are wrong to think that SNP are going to spunk a nomination on any Englishmen no matter what their views.

  7. He is barking up the wrong tree. The SNP don’t nominate peers as they want to leave it, or if forced to stay, radically reform it no tartan ermine for him.

  8. Spud isn’t interested in honours. McDonnell offered him one but he turned it down. At least that is what he is claiming.

Leave a Reply

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