Quite interesting that they appointed Haldane.... and that he accepted. It would not take a genius to discern from his speeches as a central banker that he doesn't share the government's politics.
But then, what are the government's politics? The 'levelling up' agenda is part of their cosplaying as egalitarians.
Andy Haldane will already understand the issues very well. What levelling up can and can't mean if it is to be coherent. He did not let the BoE's preference for collective communication inhibit him, and I doubt he will be any different in government.
The appointment carries risks for both sides. The government have someone who can see through them and is not inclined to call a spade anything but a spade. Andy associates himself with the worst government of modern times.
I am not optimistic that much substantive will happen. Levelling up [define it for argument's sake as addressing regional inequalities, perhaps without harming the rich areas] won't happen because of a taskforce. And there is not much money to spend.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Devolving spending may help solve regional inequalities. Or it may not.
1. the local income per head problem is a microchosm of the national income per head problem! Highly intractable and not nearly as amenable to policy as some of your swashbuckling dirigiste columnists would have you believe, as though growth miracles were to be had everywhere.
2. finding and driving through policies that work requires a political elite that a) accepts reason and evidence and understands that b) its electorate does reason and evidence too. Why is this magically going to appear at the local level if it is painfully absent nationally?
'Is neoloberalism on its last legs?' is just not an interesting question for someone who has been exhausted by a torrent of dense prose testing the elasticity of that phrase for two decades.
I do find it interesting that clever people with a correspondingly large opportunity cost of time are happy to spend their finite lives doing battle on the topic.
Has covid signed the death knell of neoliberalism? Who cares. What an awful question. Has the great financial crisis discredited neoliberalism? Zzzzzzz.
Wonder if authors of pieces like @iainmartin1's 'no longer the party of business' think that the Tories would be the party of business if they imposed the agreed controls on imports sharpish, or if they'd be the party of business if they perpetually postponed doing so.
If I was at the covid Press Conference on the winter plan, I'd ask this. If we are, as supposed, at an inflexion point, say roughly holding cases constant.... all the things coming are working to push up on cases. Schools. Universities. Returning to work. Seasonal factors..
...seasonality pushing up on NHS demand, shrinking the number of cases we want [because it increases the chance of having to triage and kill more covid patients], waning immunity.
Pushing down, we have booster jabs for old codgers, 1 jab for 12-15s. Is that enough to counter these other things?
Tl;dr: there are hardly any papers on climate economics in the top journals. A lot of the research that is done is rubbish.
Comment: I too have not published any papers on climate change. But the flip side of this is that I also haven't published any rubbish papers on climate change.
Progressive political agendas in Norway are always in the shadow of an enormous sovereign wealth fund got by extracting the stuff that has warmed the planet. [Not wishing to elevate ourselves here. I'm sure we would have exracted more if there was more on our side of the water.'
idk if this is the right way to think of it, but what would be the counterfactual value of that fund if there had been optimal extraction of the oil everywhere, and the ideal carbon tax applied back in the 70s?
Obvs we were not so sure about global warming then, and the oil market has been manipulated strategically by Saudi+OPEC, and US/Russia, on and off. But. I bet it the cf value would be a lot lower.