Thread by @Gilesyb

I too like the idea that "security" is a key policy value that parties should be promoting (see Don Paskini tweet). But the problem is that the evidence is not all that good for insecurity to have risen as much as it feels 1/

https://twitter.com/donpaskini/status/1478818955942940681

ft.com/content/703d8b…

There is a debate to be had: should we want higher growth but with more unsettling dynamism, or better security-for-all? I tend to favour growth, because it gives you the resources to handle the collateral damage of volatility. But ...2/

... there are strong rebuttals. One is to refute the premise. People can have security and flexibility/dynamism - likee Danish flexicurity system. Another: the stability of fewer jobs moves as @resfoundation explore is not the point. Other forms of insecurity *are* worse 3/

My dull view: a wealthy country should be able to provide opportunities for growth and decent security, but it takes a higher overall tax base and broad public acceptance/solidarity a la Scandi countries. Falling between two stools is worst of all worlds. 4/4