There’s the usual silliness of course:
The latter are my focus. I concentrate on comments in the Guardian. They note Ben Zaranko, a research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying:
Both parties’ plans would represent a sharp change in policy, and Labour’s plans are especially ambitious. The key challenge for a government seeking to deliver investment on this scale – particularly in a short timeframe – will be finding worthwhile and viable projects in which to invest.
At which point I took a sharp intake of breath. First, that’s because the IFS has said in the past that, quite bizarrely, “they don’t do macro” and it has to be said that is true: they don’t, and it shows. So they are not out there looking for projects. And nor do they understand this issue. But there again, it’s also obvious that whatever macro that they do know is deeply conventional, which is apparent from their next comment…..
Macro would be the effect upon the whole economy – inflation, GDP growth, employment etc – of that increase in govt borrowing and spending. Whether there is actually a project worth spending the cash upon is micro.
But of course there’s also reality that has to be contended with.
The logic, and not the policies, is bankrupt. There is unemployment. There is a Green New Deal to do. And retrofitting double glazing could start any time soon, and is not hard to gear up. Nor is insulation.
But most of the double glazing and insulation has already been done (pages 29 to 31).
And what sodding unemployment?