Macron is combining the failed approaches of George Bush and
George Osborne. But he’s so cute! And Le Monde is following behind, ever the
faithful chien de garde. What is the dog’s task? It is to skip the first order
of argument – does a country with a growing population really need to cut its
spending, or increase it?. And in what areas? Just assume that we don’t need this
discussion, and all bien-pensants are agreed we have to cut spending. Then it
is just a matter of going around in a circle, greeting all complaints with the
remark, well, we have to cut spending you know.
For example – a few weeks ago, one of Le Monde’s Macron-archs
was considering the petty complaints of petty people on the cultural front
about cuts to their funding by the gov. He came up with a brilliant
justification – it would be unfair not to cut the funding for the arts when
everything else is being cut! The brilliance of this is that it skips right
over whether the arts need to be cut or need, on the contrary, to be reinvested
in, and makes it a matter of everybody has to take the bitter medicine. Of
course, that excludes the cuts to the taxes of those in the top 10 percent
income bracket, but lets not talk about that now! Let’s pretend that a budget
is not about what the people need the government to do on all fronts, and is
about nameless “waste” and a deficit that will go down magically as the
government withdraws from services to the people.
We will ignore that the public deficit has so far grown in
countries like the UK who have adopted the policy of blind cuts.
But one thing that we can surely assert with confidence, although
only cankish lefty economists will talk
about this, is the opposite of the “crowding out” thesis. You know that latter thesis.
It is that public investment “crowds out” private, so that too much government
spending leads to weak investment in the private sphere, and hence unemployment
and all the rest of it. The inverse of this thesis, then, should be that the
retreat of the state from borrowing leads to the increase of private borrowing.
While the first thesis is probably wrong – see Mariana Mazzucato’s The
Entrepreneurial State for a rebuttal – the second thesis is almost certainly
correct. In every Anglo Saxon country where Macronist style policies have been
put in place, private debt skyrockets. For good reason – the state’s withdrawal
undermines the lifestyles of the middle class, which are then repaired through
use of a “reformed” credit market. Basically, it is jetfuel thrown on the
business cycle. Eventually everything explodes.
However, it is not just the boom and bust cycle of
reactionary economics, ably mapped by Naomi Klein, that I am on about here. It
is the fact that blind cuts by the state lead to a startling but little remarked
form of inflation. These cuts invariably
open up holes in the country’s various infrastructures – physical, educational,
healthcare, etc. These holes have a huge cost to the users of these
infrastructures.
Take, for example, roads. In the U.S., as has become
notorious, the neglect of the highways, byways and bridges has now become a
common fact of everyday life. What this means is not just an increase in commuting
time, as more people are in cars on less cared for roads – it also stresses
every vehicle that uses the road. Just as an improvement in a machine is
functioned into the inflation rate as a negative – bringing down inflation –
so, to, every deterioration in the infrastructure stressing machines can be
figured in as a positive – an inflator. Just because the state and economists
don’t like to follow through on the logic of their principles doesn’t mean this
isn’t so. It is especially so on things like healthcare and education.
The principle that we decide on cuts on high, because we are
principled liberals, and we apply them blindly, is a recipe for disaster.
Macron is a lucky son of a bitch, and I think his disaster of an economic
policy is not going to effect France immediately, given the ongoing upswing in
the business cycle. But the accumulation of austerity driven policies will
strike hard once the cycle goes down again. Which can happen fast.
But don’t look to the chiens de garde for information or
analysis on this topic. They are too
busy howling their appreciation of our new Jupiter.
No comments:
Post a Comment