The truth about the cuts/deficit debate, part 77
My economists v George Osborne’s economists . . .
By Mehdi Hasan Published 06 October 2010 13:22Since David Cameron is going to do a version of "Labour gave us a crazy deficit, it's worse than we thought, we have to cut, cut, cut and everyone in the world backs us" in his big conference speech this afternoon, I thought I'd do a pre-emptive blog post on the two (yes, two!) sides to the deficit reduction argument.
The Chancellor, George Osborne, in perhaps the most disingenuous and immature section of his speech on Monday, deliberately mischaracterised the two sides when he said:
There are two sides to this argument.
On one side, there is the IMF, the OECD, the credit rating agencies, the bond markets, the European Commission, the Confederation of British Industry, the Institute of Directors, the British Chambers of Commerce, the Governor of the Bank of England, most of British business, two of our great historic political parties, one of the Miliband brothers, Tony Blair and the British people.
On the other side is Ed Miliband and the trade union leaders who put him where he is.
No, George, on the other side are:
* Barack Obama
* Ben Bernanke
* Tim Geithner
* Paul Krugman
* Joseph Stiglitz
* George Soros
* Richard Freeman
* Robert Reich
* Brad DeLong
* David Blanchflower
* Martin Wolf
* Samuel Brittan
* Anatole Kaletsky
* Robert Skidelsky
For a longer list of leading economists (including other Nobel prizewinners and ex-members of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee) who back the Ed Miliband/trade union position on slower, less draconian cuts, see this letter in the Financial Times from February this year.
As for invoking the support of the "British people", a recent Populus poll found that only one in five voters — 22 per cent — agreed with the coalition's plan to deal with the deficit by 2015.
Oh, and on a side note, I must point out that Osborne's "backers" include most of the institutions that failed to foresee the financial crash and the recent recession — the Bank of England, the ratings agencies, the IMF, etc. Typical . . .
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















31 comments
Note Osborne's portrayal, in his "deficit deniers" roll call, of the trade unions - democratically organised employees on low and middle incomes - as "vested interests", as contrasted with his list of those who agree with him.
Yes, in the modest brain of the future Sir Gideon, heir to the wallpaper fortune, "the credit rating agencies, the bond markets, the Confederation of British Industry, the Institute of Directors, the British Chambers of Commerce, [and] most of British business" are not vested interests. Nor are the Lib-Con cabinet, 23 out of 26 of whom are millionaires.
And David Miliband agrees with Gideon now, does he? Is there even any point in trawling up all the quotes from Osborne during the election campaign condemning as deficit denialism the same official Labour policy stance which David Miliband adheres to, and which Osborne now claims as an endorsement of his own position?
The man is a clown
Osborne's slashing of Family allowance/married couples tax break equation shows Osborne up to be a complete and utter imbecile and quite frankly has shocked me.
Government policies aren't entirely about economics, they're also about politics. And if they were solely about economics, then since tame economists can be found to support any view, you may as well quote Mystic Meg as one of your experts.
You're on a loser Mehdi. Until the deficit is eliminated, and that goal is not remotely in sight, government debt will continue to grow. Can you really believe that the huge interest burden is a good thing to carry? Or are your views all about politics, and not really about economics at all?
On the political context, I would guess there is a national majority of the view that there are far too many people living off the taxpayer. If I (and Osborne) are correct in that belief, the Labour party an its apologists such as yourself are dead in the water.
The Old Man wrote, "there are far too many people living off the taxpayer."
I can think of quite a few parasites who've avoided work and I support the measures Labour introduced to make them get back to work.
However, the vast majority of workless want to work but there aren't the vacancies in their area.
The government's own figures estimate that their cuts going to destroy 1.1-1.3 million jobs.
re: Irene / 12.55...
The truth ? from The New Statesman !
Dave C: I was not referring solely to claimants, and agree there is an problem with jobs and their locations. My issue with Mehdi is over government debt, which is actually planned to increase over this parliament. Mehdi and those he supports seem to want an even bigger increase, with all that means for interest payments now and capital repayments for future generations.
This must be a first for Hasan.
A comment not about the mohammedism creed !!
The Old Man: Oh dear, not the old 'the economy is like a household budget' argument. If you sack public servants those people are still paid for by the taxpayer via benefits.
You are right, this governtment's policies are about pure politics though. Gideon uses the deficit scare tactic to kick the poor now knowing, with a viscious right-wing press him, he can get away with it. Then to give the impression of fairness, he cuts child benefit for higher rate tax payers but not for another THREE YEARS! Where's the urgency?
Don't forget the deficit wasn't caused by the public sector but the bloated private financial sector. A sector that due to huge government guarantees and bailout cash is now posting huge profits and paying huge bonuses. Let's have our money back from these thieves first before there's any talk of cutting benefits or services.
all good posts from Lou, David Wearing and David C.
The depressing thing is that seven of the ten major newspapers are parroting this same shit. On the upside those same newspapers failed to get the Tories their expected electoral landslide. It would appear that people get their news from a much wider range of sources these days and that can only be a good thing.
I did wonder one thing about the Child Benefit cut bruhaha - was it announced to take attention away from this story?
http://www.neweconomics.org/press-releases/banks-set-to-demand-fresh-bai...
Note the links to the major media outlets.
Yes that's right the Masters of the Universe need another £750 Billion. We are already liable for £1.2 trillion...
No amount of public sector cuts can pay for this - so why trash a million worker's lives? It's ideological warfare again. It's TINA (There Is No Alternative) part 2.
Can't Osborne see he is being set up by Cameron? Recoiling from the prospect of a politically powerful, economically literate Chancellor in the Gordon Brown mould, DC has chosen the weakest link for his nextdoor neighbour.
Question is who will replace him when the time comes to let blood, as it surely will. Not the First Secretary (wrong party) and Ken Clarke though good in his day is too far to the left. My money's on IDS who's shown himself to be far better as a minister than he ever was as party leader. Outside bet would be Hague but that could make him too powerful if the leadership itself ever came into question.
Thank you Phil and thanks for the link to, a very intersting read.
I can't believe it has slipped through the media net so easily considering the coverage it got with Bloomberg,The Indie et al. You'd have expected NS to have covered it or at least one of the political analysts on our mainstream news channels.
Osborne apparently said, according to Sky who aired all of 28 seconds about this story, "I am not expecting and have had no indication that any British bank needs any further support. The banking system in Britain is much more stable than the one in Ireland."
Funny how Sky's Jeff Randall can do a kowtowing to the tories interview with the President of the World bank and his favourable view on the cuts but a contradictory report gets 28 seconds.
As for the papers, I'd like to think that the public are more discerning and if they are not, well they will have a very rude awakening before much longer.
mantra
mantra
labours debt
labour bankrupted us
counter mantra
piss off who do you think you're kidding you tory dickhead
Hi Lou
The idea that the World Bank and the IMF are some kind of impartial arbiters on economic matters makes me shudder. Are people not aware of the disasterous effects of their 'advice' and 'support' to other countries?
The IMF and World Bank were set up by the Americans at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944. They are tools of US Foreign Policy ergo American Capitalism! That is not conspiracy theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund
Have you seen this, Mehdi?
"This note looks at national accounts information for government expenditure to examine ‘genuine’ ‘consolidations’, episodes when nominal spending actually fell. These are contrasted with fiscal expansions. Spending figures are shown alongside outcomes for public debt, interest rates, unemployment, GDP and prices. Outcomes are seen as running almost entirely contrary to conventional wisdom, or at least contrary to thinking derived from microeconomic considerations: fiscal consolidation increases rather than reduces the level of public debt as a share of GDP and is in general associated with adverse macroeconomic conditions."
http://www.debtonation.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Fiscal-Consolidati...
lol
Oh dear!
The truth! from The New Statesman?
Why does Mehdi Hassan keep banging on about Islam all the time? Give it a rest Mehdi.
@RK
"These are the people who caused it"
* Adam Applegarth
* Fred Goodwin
* Dick Fuld
* Alan Greenspan
* Hank Paulson
Don't forget Adam Posen Mehdi!
On the side of deficit reduction is "Nassim Taleb" ....better than all the gang Mehdi mentioned.
You do not need an army of thinkers to defeat an idea, a thought would do.
On the other hand,
These are the people who caused it
* Ben Bernanke
* Tim Geithner
These are noble junkies
Barack Obama
* Paul Krugman
* Joseph Stiglitz
(The Economic Noble is a fraud by politicians, Peace Noble, well we know about it, dont we?)
-----------------
*George Soros
An interested party. We do not know his games and where he is in invested. It could be just to protect his own investments.
Most people Mehdi cite are the people who caused it, in first place.
I welcome the day when 'Islam' is relegated to the Sports pages.
I think we've all had about as much as we can take.
Give me Fat Tony any day and I will swap full team of economic noble. Economics noble are like astrologers, they cannot make a penny for themselves (in the market) how are they going to make for you and me?
lol any argument supported by Saint Barack must be wrong.
give me fat Karl anyday
Yes...the islamofascist overtones from this short column about economists is very upsetting.
R KO'd
It is time the government turned their attention to the private sector, where two thirds of employers don’t provide a single penny towards their employees’ pensions, forcing taxpayers into picking up a massive long-term benefits bill.”
Pat McDonagh
Good post Mehdi.
What a silly little boy young Giddeon is. This part of his speech, took me back to the playground, when they would say 'my Dads' bigger than yours'. It really was at that level and inaccurate. What's new?
Only time will tell who's right but the least this government can do is not repeat mistakes of the past and that includes cutting public spending without restoring robust growth.
Osborne's mischaracterization on the cuts were poorly thought out, much like his child benefit reveal in the same speech. He's a child playing at grown ups and failing miserably.
David Cameron has just regaled the conference with a quip at Ed Balls for saying academy schools 'create winners' and shouldn't that be the desired outcome. Cue much laughter from Cabinet and audience.
Shame Cameron took only two words from the speech, not even the right ones, as Ed actually said - in response to Toby Young outlining his plans to set up an independent, free school on Newsnight - 'The trouble with that approach is that there will be winners in this' and he meant that the academies win out at the expense of existing schools.
According to Gove Cameron has said what the country has been waiting to hear. He didn't elaborate which country though.