Hunt’s Budget Fantasyland
Debunking Economics - the podcastMarch 13, 2024x
348
44:5961.89 MB

Hunt’s Budget Fantasyland

The UK Chancellor Jeremy Hunt delivered what is almost certainly his last budget, promising the usual stuff – more investment, more jobs, better public services and lower taxes. And, miraculously, all of this will be achieved by lowering government spending. Despite the rubbery figures, Steve Keen argues that the budget ignores the key principle, that you can’t increase GDP if the government is cutting back on money creation by trying to reduce its “deficit”. A get-out clause on that would be if the country was to see a sudden increase in the export/import ratio. That is in the budget figures, without any explanation as to how that’ll happen. So, what does a Steve Keen UK budget look like?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

[00:00:00] Finding your perfect home was hard, but thanks to Burrow, furnishing it has never been easier. Burrow's

[00:00:05] easy to assemble modular sofas and sectionals are made from premium durable materials, including

[00:00:10] stain and scratch resistant fabrics, so they're not just comfortable and stylish, they're built

[00:00:14] to last, plus every single Burrow order ships free right to your door. Right now get 15% off

[00:00:20] your first order at burrow.com slash a cast that's 15% off at burrow.com slash a cast.

[00:00:30] We stick to our plan with a budget for long-term growth, it delivers more investment,

[00:00:36] more jobs, better public services and lower taxes but dynamism in an economy doesn't come from

[00:00:44] ministers in Whitehall, it comes from the grit and determination of people who take risks,

[00:00:50] work hard and innovate, not government policies but people power. It is to unleash people power

[00:00:58] that we today put this country back on the path to lower taxes.

[00:01:03] Is the Debunking Economics podcast with Steve Keen and Phil Dobbie?

[00:01:08] Well it looks like it's back to austerity for the UK because that's worked so well in the past,

[00:01:15] less government spending, less tax for some but actually not enough to compensate for the tax

[00:01:21] rises that already happened and the bracket creep which is still happening, the fiscal drag is

[00:01:26] called the and he is the fiscal drag queen. One BBC journalist who I'll

[00:01:31] imagine is really called Jeremy Hunt, although he sort of puts into mind a picture that just

[00:01:36] won't go away now. So is the UK budget 2024 the same old mistakes and what would a Steve

[00:01:42] Keen plan for the UK look like? Well look at that this week on the Debunking Economics podcast.

[00:01:52] Well a 2% cut in national insurance payments will create the equivalent of 100,000 new

[00:01:57] full-time workers improvements in IT will reduce the NHS waiting list without really costing

[00:02:03] much more Britain's balance of trade will somehow improve the public sector will become 5% more

[00:02:09] efficient, 5% of what I'm not really quite sure. That was a lot of what smiling Jeremy Hunt

[00:02:15] was promising when he delivered the budget speech in the UK to Parliament. All these miracles

[00:02:20] while staying within the fiscal goals that the UK imposes on itself. It used to have to follow

[00:02:26] the EU's fiscal goals and it so loves the EU, it is sticking with precisely those same rules. So

[00:02:32] Steve, on all of that, well this is a fantasy budget clearly. How much can a government spend?

[00:02:40] I mean even if we know that as we talked about last week there's an unending appetite for bonds.

[00:02:46] Is there a formula in your mind about how much a government should borrow or spend over its income?

[00:02:52] Let's not use that term borrowing. Yeah borrowing borrowing is just the wrong term.

[00:02:56] It's like reading through the voucher document. Everything is about reducing the debt. The whole

[00:03:00] thing was if you were a family who's it. What was it? Was it was in Macauber from Dickensons writing

[00:03:07] the income 94 shillings expenditure 93 and 11 bliss income 94 expenditure 24 expenditure 24

[00:03:19] and 5 disaster and that orientation just reads the whole way through the budget so we'll talk

[00:03:26] about that in more detail. Even actually never do actually deliver this surplus that they're

[00:03:31] looking for but how I'm not quite sure we call it we don't call it debt but anyway the difference

[00:03:35] seems spending over income. Is that what I would have and that is fairly straightforward? It's

[00:03:41] it's I'd want the deficit to be roughly equal to the rate of economic growth then again

[00:03:47] that I've got to put this in context of global warming but we'll get back to that later.

[00:03:52] In rate of economic growth divided by the velocity of money because when you look at

[00:03:57] when you look at what the role one of the fundamental roles the government has is to

[00:04:01] provide the money supply. We live in a mixed-fee and credit economy it's called

[00:04:05] Fee It for a reason because the government can create money by Fee It which is what it does

[00:04:11] when it runs a budget deficit and you would want that money to be sufficient to maintain

[00:04:15] the level of economic activity and monetary terms taking place in the economy at the time.

[00:04:20] So if you're going to grow by a hundred billion dollars of GDP and you mean your money supply

[00:04:27] terms are for twice every year that's totally wrong. Which is the cost of one.

[00:04:32] I mean we're this just saying we're creating 50. Let's just say one so yeah.

[00:04:37] Well that that that confuses people because it sort of says in people you just go straight from

[00:04:42] the stock of money to the turnover of money. Okay what does that say? It was two you're going to

[00:04:47] grow by a hundred billion then you got to create 50 billion of credit, Fee It money if all the money

[00:04:53] growth is in the Fee It money and then you might make that smaller if there was credit growth for

[00:04:58] actually sensible things rather than Ponzi schemes and share by arts and nonsense like that.

[00:05:04] But the fundamental thing is the rate of growth divided by the velocity of circulation of money

[00:05:09] that'd be my target for an economy which was in a tranquil stage of growth or

[00:05:15] that's the rule. Okay so you want the target should not be the usual obsession that

[00:05:22] the Tories have and unfortunately Labor has picked up the same disease that your expender

[00:05:28] should equal your income as the government, your expender should be greater than your income

[00:05:32] as the government. And that is what then enables that what creates Fee It money for the rest of

[00:05:37] the economy to function on. If you don't provide that it's like telling a car you know you should drive

[00:05:42] your car further and faster with less petrol. Yeah exactly so if you don't, so if you don't

[00:05:46] pump that money into the economy then you are just ultimately you are just going to slow GDP

[00:05:50] because there's not the money for the people to spend. So and in fact you can actually see

[00:05:55] this data just to pardon me, something in me but the Fred database does a nice job on this front

[00:06:01] and we economists have given up measuring their money supply because they've never understood

[00:06:05] it properly, they've stuffed up and never behaved the way they thought it would. It's because

[00:06:09] they've got a fallacious idea of how money is created from both the private sector side and

[00:06:13] the government side. But if you take a look at M3, and this is a Fred database, the United States

[00:06:20] Fred database makes it very easy to access this information. It's got a very monetary aggregates

[00:06:27] in their components, broad money in components, M3 for the United Kingdom, that's what it's called.

[00:06:32] I don't, I could try reading out the actual abbreviation. MAB, MAB, MMM301, GBM, 18,

[00:06:40] 18, 189, yes that's pretty easy to remember. Just google it, you'll find yourself in the Fred database.

[00:06:46] What you see is that the rate at the level of the rate of growth of the money

[00:06:49] is apart at the moment and the UK is minus 5%. That's the way to go through the money supply.

[00:06:54] So the money supply is going negative. So we go, and I'll, I'll, you know, with the

[00:06:58] bullet, you have to talk over the real versus normal stuff at some point. But fundamentally there's

[00:07:03] no economy has ever grown while it's had a shrinking money supply. Yeah. And what we've got to know

[00:07:07] is a shrinking money supply and the government is talking about reducing its contribution to

[00:07:12] the growth of the money supply and says let's go grow at the same time. So do you know what that

[00:07:16] concept is? You've just described, and you know, we've talked about this in the past and you know,

[00:07:20] you're breaking down to a public conversation to make it easy. You can't grow if there's not enough

[00:07:25] money. You can't spend any more than you earn, you can't earn any more if your company can't

[00:07:30] pay you more. The, you know, the money has to be circulating, it has to come from somewhere.

[00:07:34] And if the government is pulling money out of the economy because it's trying to control

[00:07:39] spending, then that money is not, it's not coming to you. So the economy slows down. So the idea

[00:07:46] that there's a formula that even, you know, institutions like the Institute of Physical Studies,

[00:07:50] if they could see the sense in all of this, as you describe that it's the velocity of money

[00:07:56] multiplied by the, you know, related to the GDP that you currently have, that becomes, you know,

[00:08:02] the fiscal rule that you apply which is, you know, might be three or five percent growth

[00:08:08] depending on your velocity, velocity, money and what the GDP is. But I mean, that sounds like a

[00:08:13] very credible rule. And yet, you know, the government's been obviously is very much

[00:08:18] on getting public sector borrowing down to zero. It rose, and the thing is they never achieve it.

[00:08:24] So I wonder what, you know, what are you describing? Almost happening by default. So rose to 15% of GDP

[00:08:28] during the pandemic, of course. And now it's about 4%, even by 2028-29. It's down to 1%,

[00:08:37] you know, based on their forecast, their fantasy forecast. And maybe they plan to read zero after that.

[00:08:42] I don't know, but you know, we know we'll never get there. But they're not even expecting to get

[00:08:47] that. So here they are. So even though we say it's a false hope, it's the wrong thing to aim for.

[00:08:52] Here they are saying, but that's what we are aiming for. But by the way, we can't even get there

[00:08:57] anyway. And thank God for that because from what you're saying, if they do get there, then they're

[00:09:02] just going to shrink the economy. But can you go the other way then? Can you say, well, okay,

[00:09:06] we want GDP to go on? Simple way. We'll just create more, we'll just put momentum into the economy.

[00:09:11] That's going to find a home. If you do too much of that, if you go too far above that,

[00:09:15] that ratio that you're talking about, and then presumably the repercussion for that would be inflation,

[00:09:20] wouldn't it? Well, it's actually what I'm wearing more about is the implications on the trade

[00:09:24] deficit because again, likely, you know, the government is focusing on its deficit, but it's not

[00:09:30] the only deficit in the economy. You've got the government deficit, you've got the private sector

[00:09:37] deficit, and you have the trade deficit. And the sum of the whole three has to equal zero because

[00:09:45] you know what falls out of one rises in the other. So if you have a government which is trying to

[00:09:51] run a surplus, that means it's the terminology gets confusing, which a trade deficit is different,

[00:09:58] is not the same thing as the government surplus. But the government by trying to reduce its

[00:10:06] deficit has to increase the deficit of the other two sides. And the only compensating one is,

[00:10:12] and this is what it's confusing to a better trade deficit. If you export more than you import,

[00:10:16] much more, then you can counter the government running a type of tight budget. And that's what you can

[00:10:22] see in the performance of the Nordic countries and a fair bit of the European Union.

[00:10:27] You might be well, would have been created by the government, isn't that being created by the imports?

[00:10:30] Exports. Exports. Exports. Exports. Exports. Exports. I mean, it's the Portuguese.

[00:10:34] Yeah. Now what the UK has of course is massive net imports. It's imports are at the order of

[00:10:39] 90 billion, you know, it's quite a substantial fraction of a continuous trade deficit,

[00:10:47] a balance of payments deficit. And that means you've got to be either you know, issuing bonds which

[00:10:53] are paid in a foreign currency or selling local assets to enable that to continue. So the government by

[00:10:59] trying to reduce its deficit is actually putting pressure on the private sector which either has to

[00:11:06] borrow money from the banks or spend less, unless you have a compensating increase in exports

[00:11:13] which is not happening, you're going to have a lower level of GDP. And this inability to think

[00:11:19] in a systemic sense is what just budget reeks of it because it's all the way through just like

[00:11:26] the thing that I expect farmers government to do when it takes over which is treat the government

[00:11:30] like a house. Yeah, no, it's absolutely no difference to us forever. So when we look at countries

[00:11:34] that have got high levels of exports and in all ways a great example isn't it because here's

[00:11:38] a country that you know, it's still got debt but it's old debt from before, you know, it started

[00:11:43] making money from North Sea oil now obviously it's getting a lot of money from hydro and alternative

[00:11:47] energy sources. You know, and they they do still borrow money but actually the main reason that

[00:11:54] they borrow money is they borrow money because they can get it at a good rate and then they can pass

[00:11:59] that on so they can offer lower rates to consumers into businesses so taking advantage of their

[00:12:04] situation and that had taken advantage of the situation that they are basically a net exporter.

[00:12:10] But something said that they're in a favorable position so that's a problem for countries like

[00:12:15] the UK isn't it? Yeah, it's an it's an decision to go into the directives services exports which

[00:12:21] is made by Maggie Thatcher back under her rule and as a regard you know, it services of the growth

[00:12:27] prospect of the future, manufacturing of a line we're going to become a services powerhouse

[00:12:32] it never works because fundamentally what services were is selling debt to other people and not

[00:12:37] government debt here but private debt. So when you take a look at the what happened around that time

[00:12:43] private debt in the UK used to run it about 60% of GDP and from 1980 on it rose from

[00:12:52] about 58% looking at a charter obviously to 184% and over that period of time government debt was

[00:12:59] declining and the government's congratulating itself for it then the turn right occurred and guess

[00:13:04] which year 2007 the beginning of the financial crisis government debt then exploded from

[00:13:10] about 44% of GDP to 140% a lot of the peak being reached during the the pandemic but that the reason

[00:13:20] that the government debt fell was rising private debt again they've got to think in a systemic

[00:13:25] sense and now the reason that though the government debt is rising is private sector debt reached its

[00:13:30] peak and and and you know a Ponzi scheme collapsed fundamentally a global Ponzi scheme and now I've got

[00:13:38] very weak private so private money creation and so the government's forced into the gap whether it

[00:13:44] wants to or not so we have a you know again it's the failure of thinking in a systemic way

[00:13:51] and then imposing non-systemic systems thinking on the system by trying to reduce your

[00:13:57] debt you're reducing your money creation you're forcing the private sector to do more with less

[00:14:02] which sounds rather malice and fails yeah well it's all about doing more with less which obviously

[00:14:09] is a very conservative way isn't it's like yeah let's make all money with their parts of the

[00:14:14] poor for sure absolutely so they want to do more with more when you talk about the rematch so this

[00:14:20] systemic thinking this systematic way of looking at it then if you are a country like the UK where

[00:14:25] you don't have high net exports you know you've got a trade deficit then the only way as you say

[00:14:34] to get extra money pumped into the economy is coming from the government and is there a problem

[00:14:38] with saying that if everyone's saying you know Norway and the UK both say look we'd like 4% growth next

[00:14:43] year Norway says well that's fine because we sell a lot so we're going to we're going to hit that

[00:14:48] target without the government spending very much and the UK says well we don't sell anything overseas

[00:14:54] these days so what we'll do instead is we'll get the government to spend to create that

[00:14:59] extra money into the economy it's the UK disadvantaged in any way from that situation

[00:15:04] it's just a vantage route we're starting from the trade deficit situation I know that this puts

[00:15:08] me completely out of step with an MMT argument here and this is one time I'm happy to be out of

[00:15:12] step with an MMT because they argue that exports for a cost and imports are a benefit

[00:15:18] that's the level one they use so I think that's contradicts their arguments about the creation of

[00:15:22] money overall it's but it emphasizes the physical rather than the monetary side of things

[00:15:31] and when you have a government if you are continuously in a trade deficit and you are not

[00:15:37] the reserve currency for the planet then at some point you're going to be forced into devaluations

[00:15:43] or asset sales and so on so you have to be careful your government money creation doesn't

[00:15:49] supply it doesn't spark a huge level of imports and that's what I see is the constraint

[00:15:56] not the government did it so what it does you're the critical balance you can't control as much

[00:16:01] as you can the others which is the trade no that's the situation so if you've got yeah I tell you

[00:16:05] point so if you're not making anything and the governments as well okay that's easy you will

[00:16:09] compensate for all of that because we'll create all the money that would have come from exports

[00:16:14] people many people's bank accounts they go well we don't make any money we've got to buy

[00:16:17] everything from overseas so the CCC starts buying back yeah so you want to do as much as you

[00:16:22] can to make sure that it's been on domestic goods and again this is one of Keynes' arguments too

[00:16:27] that a major reason for wanting to design the bank or for international trade was to reduce the

[00:16:34] size of trade deficits then we had Milton Friedman's magical money arguments which were totally

[00:16:41] fallacious. Milton Friedman did at least argue you know that we've got to take into account the amount

[00:16:48] of money yeah he understood how money is created completely and that the whole idea helicopter money

[00:16:54] argument effect of he says the central bank creates the money by dropping it into the economy

[00:16:59] the way the government creates money is by spending more than it gets back in taxation it does not

[00:17:04] borrow this is the most frustrating thing about reading this bloody document it doesn't borrow

[00:17:09] it sells bonds yeah equivalent to the deficit is run and the funds that are used to buy those bonds

[00:17:14] by banks in the first instance which is when the bill bonds are first sold that money those

[00:17:19] those funds are the balancing item on the banks the the the ledger of the private banking sector

[00:17:27] the asset side their reserves rise the reserves rise equivalent to the increase in the size of private

[00:17:34] sector bank balances because when the government spends more than it takes back in taxation

[00:17:40] it's injecting money into private deposit accounts that is balanced as said by reserves rising

[00:17:45] reserves didn't use to earn interest and can't be traded when the government offers bonds for sale

[00:17:51] it's actually an asset swap it's not a not a borrowing at all so that the whole that's what drives me

[00:17:57] crazy about reading this and everybody in MMC world as well finds it just ludicrous to see this

[00:18:04] you know in partial analysis which treats the government as if it's a household and it with households

[00:18:10] by definition can't create money unless they're running a counterfeiting scheme the government

[00:18:15] is supposed to do that it's what a fee at currency issue it does well this is yeah and there's a

[00:18:20] tail in here which really demonstrates that table 1.1 changes in borrowing since November 2023

[00:18:27] and it's got the line saying okay this is the change in debt interest spending which was

[00:18:32] since November 23 so it's got the debt interest for this year is minus 11.5 this is in billions of

[00:18:40] pounds for this coming year minus 16.2 billion 2025 to 26 minus 14.7 billion and so on

[00:18:51] so all of that you know it means that there's you know the net position of the government is

[00:18:56] so what do you do well you obviously have to cut spending so welfare spending next year

[00:19:02] to help compensate for that increase in interest spending welfare spending is down by 1.4 billion

[00:19:09] the year after it's 4.6 billion the year after that is 3.3 billion 2.6 billion the year after that

[00:19:15] so you know here we are with the country on his knees national health service you know

[00:19:20] waiting lists huge people you know people going to food banks the response to all of that is because

[00:19:26] we've got all this extra debt interest we've got to spend because you know we're passing money onto

[00:19:31] the next generation we need to cut on that welfare spending and that's just totally wrong because

[00:19:35] it's just saying that debt interest spending is actually an injection of cash into the into the

[00:19:41] economy yeah yeah it's on the balance sheet really it's completely wrong headed thinking so

[00:19:47] that's what's so frustrating about reading it but on the other side in terms of what you

[00:19:52] if you want to impose a limits on government money creation it's it's just the first of all

[00:19:58] avoiding avoiding inflation which is one the element that MMT always acknowledges but well they

[00:20:03] don't acknowledge and this is what my point of reference you don't want the government boosts

[00:20:08] to a cause the increase in imports because that is what ultimately weakens a national economy

[00:20:14] uh yeah and all the arguments in the classical make about comparative advantage and how you

[00:20:20] best to specialise which is what pretty much stood by specialising in services 40 years ago under

[00:20:26] that share is not born up by the empirical data when you look at it when I'm when I when I

[00:20:30] what I what I'd be using as a guide to saying what the industrial policy should be for the UK

[00:20:35] which is something that the budget has some impact on it would be the Atlas of Economic Complexity

[00:20:41] that Harvard University maintains it that's a sheer data analysis unfortunate restricted

[00:20:46] just to imports and exports as the data source rather than total production because they use

[00:20:51] what's called the SITC database of of trade classified by different product groups but you take

[00:20:56] a look at that and and and that fundamentally concludes that the more complex an economy is

[00:21:03] the more that it's capable of producing its needs the more resilient it is the more it grows

[00:21:10] and again I've got to come back and put the caveat on growth with global warming but the

[00:21:14] itself's efficiency that's actually just a growth yeah and you're easier to get that complexity

[00:21:20] if you've got a big population so 65 million people it's easier for the UK to do that than for

[00:21:25] Australia to do it for example yeah and then that's one reason why the UK is up at the you know

[00:21:30] it's in the it was number four in terms of the measure of economic complexity the Atlas puts out

[00:21:34] as now number eight in fell as well as twelve during so but it did strenters you don't want to be

[00:21:40] losing that high position if you have an economy which can produce the vast majority of what it

[00:21:44] needs and that's what gives you the rating of complexity uh and that means a capability to produce

[00:21:50] anything so demand rises you can absorb that domestically rather than demand rising you end up

[00:21:56] importing yeah and cancels either in designing the bank or was to avoid that situation of excessive

[00:22:01] trade deficits and part of Milton Friedman's nonsense was that when we deregulate and uh

[00:22:07] the private financial sector and we float all currencies as well getting away from fixed exchange rates

[00:22:12] price adjustments exchange rates adjustments will take care of all the imbalances and let me

[00:22:17] no trade deficits and no trade surfaces well can I say bullshit on this program yeah we often do

[00:22:23] I do I do what has happened of course we've got countries running you know 10% of GDP's

[00:22:28] surpluses and others running you know five and six percent of GDP deficits um it isn't there's no way

[00:22:35] that price adjustments have taken care of that so you've got the same dilemma can try to address

[00:22:41] and that's one of the dangers so that you don't want uh a boost government spending to cause

[00:22:46] the increase in imports and weaken your economy on the trade on the trade balance balance

[00:22:50] supplements right I've been really just faced a risk with that because this strategy well it's not

[00:22:54] a strategy is it there's no there's no way trying to feed you mentioned the idea of an industrial

[00:22:59] strategy there's absolutely no mention of strategy in this document at all we're a bit late taking a

[00:23:03] break but I want to talk about that when we come back see you deep in your economics podcast

[00:23:06] me and Steve back in a moment

[00:23:11] Botox cosmetic out of botulinum toxin A FDA approved for over 20 years so talk to your

[00:23:17] specialist to see if Botox cosmetic is right for you for full prescribing information including boxed

[00:23:23] warning visit BotoxCotsMedic.com or call 877-351-0300 remember to ask for Botox Cosmetic

[00:23:32] by name to see for yourself and learn more visit BotoxCosmetic.com that's BotoxCosmetic.com

[00:23:41] finding your perfect home was hard but thanks to burrow furnishing it has never been easier

[00:23:46] burrow is easy to assemble modular sofas and sectionals are made from premium durable materials

[00:23:50] including stain and scratch resistant fabrics so they're not just comfortable and stylish

[00:23:55] they're built to last plus every single burrow order ships free right to your door

[00:24:00] right now get 15% off your first order at burrow.com slash a cast that's 15% off at burrow.com slash a cast

[00:24:11] this is the debunking economics podcast with Steve Keane and Phil Dobby

[00:24:22] so we've talked about state high pool in the balance of trade is because this year imports

[00:24:28] by 14.6% exports only up 9% in the UK so the situation is getting worse but next year according to

[00:24:37] the forecasts and miraculously of course this helps the figures in the budget a miraculous turn

[00:24:43] around imports will be down 0.4% will be actually buying less in the UK from overseas and exports

[00:24:51] will be up half a percent and exports just increase after that amazing whilst imports don't

[00:24:58] increase by anywhere near as much so we've got this fantastic turnaround which is great isn't it

[00:25:04] because this is exactly what Britain needs to do you know for the reasons that we've been talking

[00:25:08] about if it can get money coming from overseas it doesn't need to have the government create

[00:25:12] quite so much it's got a it's got a healthier future it's got a growing economy and we can all

[00:25:18] look forward to that are there anything that isn't mentioned obviously is just the small point of

[00:25:23] you know are we going to do that yeah this is table 1.2 for those who are wondering on the document

[00:25:30] and like it's quite crazy when you compare the actual numbers you know 9% increase in exports

[00:25:36] in 2022 and 14.6% imports and then the next year it's minus 0.5 and minus 1.4

[00:25:45] yeah um and then you just say that the one the one the one's happening wonder how he's doing

[00:25:48] they must have a plan he just forgot to mention it and yet this is some Tories I've

[00:25:53] seen they've got a large amounts of money they could probably sell the Tories for a large amount

[00:25:56] on the open market yeah maybe that's it maybe maybe maybe it's going to be so much for the next

[00:26:00] election choice Johnson speaking second that's actually going to be coming economy yeah yeah yeah

[00:26:05] but I mean that's from what you know from what you've been describing this is pretty fundamental

[00:26:08] and yet it's sort of glossed over well it's the thickness of the fantasy figures I mean

[00:26:14] I mean it was a yogi barrier said it's very hard to make predictions especially about the future

[00:26:19] so I have a certain sympathy with this but the numbers you just look at them and think hey what's

[00:26:23] going what's going on here so they've got consumer price inflation 2022 as 9.1% 7.3%

[00:26:31] for 2023 which is pretty much Asian then it's 2.2 1.5 1.6 1.9 2.0 out of 2028

[00:26:38] and this is just the fantasy numbers of a neoclassical economic model turning up because they basically

[00:26:44] see the center of gravity of inflation being 2% so it adjusts towards that and all the other

[00:26:49] numbers most likely are driven by those expectations about inflation which are put into this by

[00:26:55] the economist running the treasury it's a fantasy document which should really be submitting it as a

[00:26:59] script to Hollywood yeah exactly no they wouldn't buy they wouldn't buy they go now we've seen this one

[00:27:04] before but we've still got last year's script and the one before exactly yeah no one believes

[00:27:11] it anymore so but yeah that inflation number is not going to come down from what we've been saying

[00:27:15] so if you don't see that balance of trade improving by that miraculous amount and so the government

[00:27:19] is having to pump in more to try and keep the country afloat then that's not going to help

[00:27:25] bring down inflation at all from what you're saying because it's going to be the one thing it's

[00:27:28] going to do it's going to weaken the pound first time yeah and then again it's the incredibly

[00:27:34] partial view of the system and this is again you know system dynamics as well as modern monetary

[00:27:40] theory says you've got to look at all the various integrated sector components of a system

[00:27:46] and the the rule for you know the position for the monetary system is that some of all

[00:27:52] equities are zero you increase your increase in financial if your financial liability is

[00:27:57] increased and my financial assets increase and they precisely cancel each other out so if the

[00:28:03] government is trying to reduce its financial liabilities it's going to reduce the financial assets

[00:28:10] with the private sector and then it's selling the private sector to spend more which will only happen

[00:28:15] at the private sector things are well I've got to follow the government budget here in fact the

[00:28:21] government they like to just spend less which means your GDP is going to fall not in Chris

[00:28:25] well it can't spend more the money's not there I mean I can't spend yeah yeah I mean if you can

[00:28:29] you can spend you can spend more but but you're going to just spend more rapidly out of the existing

[00:28:34] money supply and when you take a look what's been happening at its own yeah largely I think in

[00:28:38] response to the increase in private debt which has been caused by the succession with reducing

[00:28:43] government debt people are more worried about you know you when you borrow money from a private bank

[00:28:47] you do have to pay it back you can't print your own you do face all the risk constraints that the

[00:28:53] budget mythically thinks the government faces and therefore there's less free money around for you

[00:28:57] which was what effectively government money is because yeah it's money that you know spending

[00:29:02] exceeds taxation in the aggregate people see bank accounts increase with no increase in their liabilities

[00:29:09] so for individuals that actually is like debt free money and if there's less of that you've got

[00:29:13] to take on more debt based money and you get caught in a bloody Ponzi scheme yeah and so again it is

[00:29:20] it is highly unlikely people are going to spend more rapidly when the government's creating less money

[00:29:26] yeah they're more likely to spend more slowly so what I'm just not not spending up a GDP goes down

[00:29:32] because they haven't got the confidence in the economy certainly so with the way of course that

[00:29:36] the government can solve all of this problem although it doesn't make any difference actually

[00:29:40] through you know the system you're describing is that they save money by being more productive

[00:29:45] if they do that of course then the problem is that they are not spending as much so there's not

[00:29:48] as much money in the economy but the public service productivity is currently estimated by the

[00:29:54] office for national statistics to be 5.9% below pre-pandemic levels the OBI is suggesting that raising

[00:30:01] public sector productivity by 5% you'll tell me 5% of what because I'm not quite sure what that is

[00:30:07] that's the percentage would be the equivalent of 20 billion pounds in extra funding I mean

[00:30:14] so two things it's not 20 billion pounds in extra funding because that money doesn't exist

[00:30:20] a suspend you know theoretically save but it's not money that's going into the economy

[00:30:24] so no one wins from that and what is that 5% of this will not experience with the Australian public

[00:30:30] service when I've worked for them very briefly I think in the 1980s it's a long time ago

[00:30:36] but this was a trick that was down to reduce the deficit every order

[00:30:41] it literally reduced the deficit you'd have what they call an efficiency target and you presume

[00:30:45] a 5% increase in efficiency every year which meant effectively a 5% cut in budgets every year

[00:30:52] and what did there's no efficiency rise coming out of that is just people not doing things

[00:30:57] I'll give my favorite example of that but when this is my university Kingston

[00:31:02] I had no secretarial staff that was you know when I look at back at my predecessors 40 years ago

[00:31:08] they had quite a bit of secretarial support no secretarial support I had to go to the

[00:31:12] Deans Office to sign a set of forms though because the Deans staff did all that work

[00:31:16] and then there was a reorganization to move the Deans staff to the to the vice chancellor's staff

[00:31:22] so the Deans lost the staff I'd lost my staff already and I started getting his email saying please

[00:31:28] fill out this the expenditure levels provide the expenditure codes and send this document back

[00:31:37] to us what expenditure codes it turned out one of the bureaucrats and the Deans office used to

[00:31:42] against every every spending item record what that item was in terms of the budget allocations

[00:31:50] and suddenly and then she was probably paid about 30,000 25,000 30,000 pounds you get to do it

[00:31:55] suddenly megan 88,000 pounds a year that became my responsibility I said pigs are us I sent it

[00:32:01] back to them but what the efficiency actually means not doing stuff and then passing the cost

[00:32:07] that under somebody else or providing a poorer service yeah so we can we've been experiencing so we

[00:32:11] can exactly we've had efficiency in the NHS service haven't we but having more people die

[00:32:16] because yeah I'm doing stuff I'll have to say right or turn over they looked after my brother

[00:32:20] this weekend I'm immensely grateful I do you you you can't not the NHS when you see the

[00:32:24] action that's the one thing it might have problems at the edges but when he gets to doing the

[00:32:27] important stuff they're still there but they are going to make the NHS more digitally enabled

[00:32:33] and it's going to become the most productive health care system in the world Jeremy

[00:32:36] hand says so there's a there's a big step up let's just go again no actual apart from they're

[00:32:40] going to use digital technology they're going to use AI artificial intelligence because that's

[00:32:44] the that's the world savior to so many things isn't it so yeah until that one sorted out

[00:32:50] and then the big promise a tax cut for national insurance now people outside the UK

[00:32:57] won't quite understand if you you pay national insurance if you work you pay tax based on your

[00:33:02] income and then if you're working you also pay national insurance on your income as well

[00:33:08] that's being reduced so in an additional 2% reduction they say the OBR the office of budget

[00:33:14] responsibility expect that as a result the total hours worked will increase by the equivalent of

[00:33:21] 100,000 full-time workers by 2028 to 29 of which the majority is a further increase in hours

[00:33:29] worked by those already in work so that implies that the average worker is regulating how much they

[00:33:36] work by how much they're taxed and if you reduce reduce their tax by 2% that's going to make all

[00:33:42] that difference and they're going to great so much work so much extra that is going to be the

[00:33:47] equivalent of 100,000 full-time workers none of that sounds plausible at all does it?

[00:33:51] No that's fantastic I know exactly where that's coming from because I'd recommend people

[00:33:56] to have a look and just see how mad the thinking is behind mainstream economics to search for a paper

[00:34:02] called some observations on the Great Depression by Edward Prescott now it's a paper published by

[00:34:08] a Federal Reserve branch in America and it might not sound important Prescott was one of the winners

[00:34:13] of the Nobel Prize for economics Nobel Prize which is not a Nobel but we're going to go there

[00:34:18] for inventing that the type of modeling economists now do. Here's some observations on the Great Depression

[00:34:24] explain the Great Depression has been a fall in worker hours done to maximize their utility

[00:34:32] everything is driven in their model by the desire of workers to work and if you can increase

[00:34:37] the desire of workers to work they will they will give you more output if you reduce it you get

[00:34:41] less output it all comes down to how hard workers are willing to work that is in its brain

[00:34:47] dead thinking it truly is but that's what's going on there thinking that by reducing the tax

[00:34:52] ocean level you'll increase your encourage more working and then people will increase the number

[00:34:56] of hours that they work as if workers have control over how many hours they work in the first bloody

[00:35:01] place this is the level of fantasy involved in all this theory. And yeah companies are the same

[00:35:06] yeah and get if they're working for the government the government is actually going to say well we

[00:35:10] want you to work less because we've got this 5% efficiency dividend. We're going to work on a

[00:35:14] meat so it doesn't stack up. The budget reads like a bad work of fantasy because it is a bad

[00:35:21] work of fantasy yeah and it's all based on neo classical economic thinking which argues that

[00:35:26] workers control the amount of time they put into labor and they also own the firms and we

[00:35:31] won't go there molder just gets too bloody ridiculous but fundamentally saying workers working

[00:35:37] well will cause the economy to grow as we're going to encourage workers to work more how do we

[00:35:41] do that and say I'm sorry workers don't control how much they work the bosses set how much

[00:35:46] you work it's the profitability of the bosses and the investment the bosses are making

[00:35:51] that is likely to change the level of output in the economy and you're doing bugger all to affect

[00:35:55] that now you're not even looking at the industry sectors that you might wish to grow in the economy

[00:36:00] or you're not looking at the weaknesses of the British economy that you want to plug in case some

[00:36:05] disasters come your way and we've got you know there'll be climate change disasters coming through

[00:36:10] and this is with the major point that I'm thinking that I'd want to see in a budget looking at

[00:36:14] the structural weaknesses of the economy for the challenges that lie ahead. We'll come

[00:36:19] out today in a second so I mean the giveaway on that line was wasn't it saying that you know

[00:36:23] that most of it is going to come from increased workers from those people already in workers as

[00:36:26] you say they've got no control over if they if they try to argue that it would actually be creating

[00:36:31] new jobs we might have another question about how that might happen but that would be more

[00:36:35] beneficial perhaps even more plausible the other thing is so there's a thing in the UK called

[00:36:40] ISA's individual savings accounts we've talked about this in the past where you can put in

[00:36:46] 20,000 pounds if you've got a spare post cash a post tax you've got 20,000 pounds to spare loads of

[00:36:52] people have got that of course then you can put that into an individual savings account which gets

[00:36:57] invested in shares or wherever you want to invest it in and the money that you make back is free

[00:37:02] of capital gains so big incentive for you to put your spare cash into shares now the problem is

[00:37:10] of course they're putting it into shares in the United States because everyone is I mean a big

[00:37:15] problem for the whole of the world is everyone's investing in the US share market and everyone's

[00:37:19] seeing it dwindle so here's some numbers from Reuters in sterling terms over the last 10 years

[00:37:24] the FTSE 150 have gained between 13 and 17% there's been a 260% increase over time in the S&P

[00:37:35] and over 400% increase in the NASDA even do you know the NICI in Japan's up 140% and Eurostocks

[00:37:41] is up 62% whereas we're 16 or 13 or 17% in the UK so to get over that problem then there's going

[00:37:48] to be an increase in the amount that you can invest in these ISA schemes you can add an extra 5,000

[00:37:54] pounds per year so you're like 25,000 in spare cash but that extra 5,000 has to go into UK share

[00:38:00] so that'll fix that problem that'll get UK investment going. Oh the one thing that's obviously been

[00:38:05] suffering for the last 40 years is asset prices yeah exactly so that's going to solve that problem

[00:38:11] so and the economy is going to be so much better because of it. Yeah I mean

[00:38:17] what I would be looking at this is why I say I'd like to look at industrial development and so on

[00:38:22] is that one of the biggest weaknesses the UK has its food imports it imports 40,

[00:38:26] apparently 46% of the food the British people eat is imported now that's fine when you've got a

[00:38:32] functioning global agricultural system but I think the days of a functioning global agricultural

[00:38:37] system are higher than numbered given the impact of climate change and we're seeing like for example

[00:38:44] you know that India last well actually year and a half ago now I think banned the export of all

[00:38:50] rice except as muddy rice from India because of a collapse in the Indian rice crops. We are

[00:38:58] likely to see serious falls in food production capability out of global warming no idea when

[00:39:05] but this way the forecasts of what the climate of Europe will be like with an extra two and a half

[00:39:13] degrees of warming and we're currently 1.7 we're ridiculously close to hitting those sorts of levels

[00:39:20] is that it's climate would be like the Sahara. Now if you get a Sahara you can forget about food

[00:39:27] exports from Europe and therefore you can forget about food in UK now the UK actually ends up

[00:39:32] being better finally enough on the rainfall front in continental Europe so you've got a

[00:39:38] capacity to continue agriculture in the UK you better start doing it soon and this vaguely

[00:39:46] to think about what the future dangers are that's what a budget should be about and all of it is

[00:39:52] just obsessed with reducing the level of government debt. The rate of reducing the level of

[00:39:56] outstanding government bonds which is a better way to put it rather than building up the country

[00:40:03] or you know improving the situation of the poor in the country and where to have been made

[00:40:09] to the exam site worse by the last 15 years of Tory as austerity in austerity fails because

[00:40:17] holy this is the other thing I find quite crazy about it. The actual definition of GDP includes

[00:40:24] net government spending you get into consumption plus investment plus exports minus imports plus

[00:40:29] government spending minus taxation. So GDP is part of GDP if you try to reduce GDP to

[00:40:35] G minus C in GDP to reduce your debt level you're reducing both the numerator and the denominator

[00:40:43] and therefore the ratio can rise if the impact of the the current government spending on GDP is

[00:40:49] greater than its impact on reducing your debt level and that will occur so this obsession is

[00:40:55] just totally counterproductive. Yeah it's funny isn't it the answer is there you only need to understand

[00:40:59] one economic formula the simplest of them which is GDP and see oh yeah government spending's in

[00:41:06] there if we reduce that then maybe we're not going to achieve the GDP targets that we want I mean

[00:41:10] that's because you're reducing you're reducing you're trying to reduce the ratio you know

[00:41:15] and and and he wanted you to why you can grow GDP to reduce the ratio but you're directly

[00:41:20] reducing GDP by this action as well so it's a crapshoot and most of the time the crapshoot is going

[00:41:26] to lose because of the rate of which money turns over and at the level of private debt. So there's

[00:41:31] yeah so there's no strategy in all of this that's I mean that's the take out isn't it so if he came

[00:41:36] and satan he thought and he had that very smug look on his face now you're right Kia Stama

[00:41:42] in the opposition are not going to do anything different they still want to stick by these fiscal

[00:41:46] rules they still want to get borrowing down but sounds I mean that good but at least they have

[00:41:50] said well we know we want to spend money on it on some sort of green strategy which which makes

[00:41:56] sense so what is that kind of entail and food security could well or should well be a big chunk

[00:42:00] of that but also investment in renewables which is all obviously job creation stuff and the money

[00:42:06] to pay for that has to come from them from the government the chunk of it has to come from the

[00:42:10] government and we have to get our exports up as well so we have to be within that deal we have

[00:42:15] to be doing something which Europe wants and so you know that's a strategy isn't it and you can

[00:42:22] so your point is you can fund that strategy so long as you don't get out of kilter with your

[00:42:27] growth in GDP in terms of in terms of what the government spending is because then that's where

[00:42:32] you start again and you're trying to make that worse yeah so you want to make sure that you're

[00:42:36] at the direct very direct way to improve the food production capabilities of the UK and

[00:42:43] and that's I think it's going to be critical at some point if you need to decide not to export

[00:42:47] rice you don't want to mirror current Russia and Ukraine deciding not to export wheat and then

[00:42:52] suddenly whether you get your wheat supplies you know where do you make your buns you don't

[00:42:58] and you don't want to be in that situation but it's quite likely to apply to any country with huge

[00:43:03] vulnerability and the UK has almost top of the list on that sense in terms of the extent to which

[00:43:07] it imports the food that it is rather than producing it domestically right so you keep on talking

[00:43:13] about climate change and I'm glad you do and I keep on talking about Europe the other part of

[00:43:17] the strategy if you're going to have this I mean Europe needs to change but Britain's got to

[00:43:23] get closer ties with Europe as well hasn't it's going to have it has to export more to the people

[00:43:30] just across the English channel rather than on the other side of the world so that needs to be fixed

[00:43:34] up as well with something else which the Labour Party is too scared to talk about

[00:43:39] well yeah so anything else you throw into your into your budget then Steve we've you know

[00:43:43] we know how much can be spent a one one final question on that does this become a point do you

[00:43:48] just assume debt is where it is now so anything else you know if you say well okay from this point on

[00:43:55] and government can spend more than it brings in provided we have this ratio of exports and

[00:44:01] provided with you know it's in relation to GDP growth do you ignore the existing level of debt

[00:44:10] yeah we do they got this is another guy does the existing level of bonds created bonds

[00:44:14] government yeah it's not it's not debt in any sense of the word unless you're borrowing

[00:44:18] and if another currency you're sharing UK sharing bonds in American dollars or euro that

[00:44:23] it that's definitely there because you can't create either of those so yeah it's it is it is

[00:44:29] it's just a ridiculous obsession which is a large part of why the UK has gone backwards for the

[00:44:34] last 25 30 years it's in terms of its competitive power and the general wealth of its population

[00:44:41] and if you know you need someone to decide this just hasn't worked let's change direction

[00:44:47] but need the labor and all liberal a day and all its conservatives seeing capable of doing that

[00:44:51] yeah we need someone else Steve to do it and not quite sure who because there's nobody on the

[00:44:56] political scene in the UK but this is not just a British phenomenon is it happening all over the world

[00:45:01] all right I'm out George Galloway accent yeah no actually don't think we should have George Galloway

[00:45:06] as prime minister I think that might be quite divisive for the world but I mean actually in America

[00:45:09] they are you know when they got the advantage obviously even though they you know their balance of

[00:45:14] trade is it's pretty sick it doesn't really matter too much because the trading the US don't

[00:45:19] is so huge yeah but I mean they are spending obviously a great deal more than they are bringing

[00:45:24] in taxation and it seems to have been working for them the economy has been burning relatively okay

[00:45:29] yeah so this is showing it's not a negative okay yeah and you know the leveling Japan's

[00:45:37] government it's about 300% of GDP all this the huge levels because they haven't addressed

[00:45:42] the level of private debt which is outstanding that's what's actually causing most of the problems

[00:45:46] but nonetheless you can sustain a ridiculous level if you have a trade surplus and the

[00:45:51] American UK can't because it hasn't yeah and Japan is suffering a lot with have some have

[00:45:55] the knots as well and we didn't even talk about that which is obviously a significant part of all

[00:45:59] of this as well is that because obviously you use taxation not for revenue generation use it for

[00:46:07] wealth distribution and no talk about that at all in that budget either really in fact you know

[00:46:14] lots of benefits for the wealthy I mean I think so which of course you know because they

[00:46:19] the very Tory what's left of them all righty we'll catch you again next week thanks Steve

[00:46:25] I can't wait but the debunking economics podcast

[00:46:28] hello listener is it me you're looking for as brands we're always wanting to make a connection

[00:46:40] to find the person you can rely on the one that's there every week month or year and always has

[00:46:45] your back when you need them the most it's a little like matchmaking don't you think

[00:46:50] with acas podcast ads you can filter for your exact dream audience so you can find the ideal

[00:46:55] customer for your business the Romeo to your Juliet the Rachel to your Ross the Bert to your

[00:47:01] Ernie and avoid those red flags and time leasters your ads can communicate with them in the most

[00:47:07] intimate way possible a one-on-one conversation a chance meeting in the gym or a coffee shop so go on

[00:47:14] give it a try with over hundreds of thousands of listens a month your person is probably here

[00:47:19] get closer to your audience make podcasts ads with acast had to go dot acast dot com to get started

[00:47:29] if you've enjoyed listening to debunking economics even if you haven't you might also enjoy

[00:47:34] the Y-curve each week what you're hearing and I talk to a guest about a topic that is very much

[00:47:40] in the news that week it's lively it's fun it's informative one more could you want so search

[00:47:45] the Y-curve in your favorite podcast app or go to Y-curve dot com to listen