We need higher public sector productivity, lower costs of government, and a lower deficit. This can advanced with tax cuts which lower prices, create more supply, and boost incomes and profits to tax at home.
Excessive increases in the money supply have severe and far-reaching economic consequences. Yet neither ministers nor the electorate have any say over this crucial area.
Neither finance ministers nor central bankers should mislead themselves or the public with the promise implied by talk of when interest rates come down.
Jeremy Hunt presents to Parliament the Government’s plan centred on his so-called Four Es: Enterprise, Education, Employment and Everywhere.
As the Government plots a course toward economic stagnation, Labour are positioning themselves as a pro-business party.
Hers is a flimsy proposition that Team Rishi could easily defeat, if only they had something substantial to put in its stead.
There are plenty of areas where wasteful public spending can be trimmed – but a strong dose of the wrong austerity will deepen the recession.
Of course one must not be complacent. I have worked long enough in the markets to know that when they smell blood there can be trouble.
Nobody is talking about a return to the days of politicians setting interest rates, but it must reckon with its mistakes.
We need a supply-side strategy from the whole of government to produce more energy, food, and other goods and services.
As the man himself famously did not say: “When the facts change, I find new reasons to advocate for stimulus packages.”
It allows politicians to squeeze voters whilst lying about being tax-cutters at election time.
He says that road haulage interests are trying to revive the pre-Brexit economy – but that the Government will stand firm for higher wages.
Preventing as much long-term damage to the economy as possible now should be the Chancellor’s priority.
Does the caginess reveal an opportunist leadership, prepared too launch key policies without working out the details? Or is there in fact a detailed programme in place – but they believe it is either too complicated or too contentious to spell it out?