The
UK’s finance minister George Osborne, and leader of the Lib Dems, Nick Clegg,
want a balanced budget.
Next
they’ll take up astrology or tea leaf reading.
Instead
of balancing
the budget, can’t they be persuaded to balance rubber balls on their noses?
That would do less harm.
And
if the performing sea lions who normally balance rubber balls on their noses
could be put in charge of the UK economy, that would be another improvement.
That’s “improvement” as in “a move from total economic illiteracy to run of the
mill sea lion type economic illiteracy”.
Of
course it’s possible Osborne and Clegg are more clued up than they let on. And
who knows: perhaps Ed Balls, the Labour shadow finance minister is more clued
up that he pretends to be – we can always hope. The reason those Westminster
politicians may be more clued up then they seem to be is as follows.
While
balancing the budget is a ridiculous objective, making sure that UK PLC does
not pay too much interest on its national debt is a worthwhile objective.
Personally I’d aim for a rate of interest slightly less than inflation, which means
we pay a negative real rate: i.e. we’d profit at the expense of our creditors.
And
in order to do that (and assuming the rate of interest is currently above the
latter rate), more debt needs to be QEd. But that could be too inflationary, in
which case taxes would need to be raised and the money collected would need to
be “unprinted”. For reasons I’ve spelled out before on this blog, that would
NOT RESULT in a rise in unemployment, though the terms of trade would
deteriorate (i.e. we’d pay more for imports). So living standards would decline
a little. And that’s a justifiable form of “austerity” to use the fashionable
word.
So
if Osborne, Clegg, etc are cutting the deficit so as to reduce the interest we
pay on the debt, that’s OK by me. But the latter sentence lacks sex appeal,
doesn’t it? The average voter won’t get it. So it sounds better to say you’re
aiming to balance the budget.
I
hope Osborne and Clegg are into the latter bit of deception, but I suspect they
aren’t.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Post a comment.