Visualizzazione post con etichetta Osborne. Mostra tutti i post
Visualizzazione post con etichetta Osborne. Mostra tutti i post
lunedì 8 aprile 2013
sabato 16 febbraio 2013
Lezioni britanniche: il fallimento dell'austerity
Postiamo oggi un articolo dal New Yorker che fa le pulci al governo inglese ed al suo fallimentare piano di austerity. Cose che abbiamo ripetuto in continuazione per oltre 2 anni. Tagli dopo tagli, il deficit non si riduce, e nemmeno il debito. A Londra non paiono averlo capito e l'economia continua a calare. Recessione, dopo recessione, fermata momentaneamente solo dai trucchi contabili usati durante le Olimpiadi. Eppure non si vedono segnali di cambiamento. Errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum!!
Yesterday, I argued that U.S. fiscal policy is heading in the wrong direction, toward the economics of austerity. If you want to know where this path can lead, look across the Atlantic to poor old Blighty. For almost three years now, since the election of a Conservative-Liberal coalition, the British government has been slashing government programs and raising taxes, supposedly to reduce a big budget deficit. As I’ve written previously, the results have been pretty disastrous—both for ordinary Britons and for the public finances.
Just how disastrous was made clear yesterday by a new report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies, a London-based think tank that is widely regarded as independent and nonpartisan. In the “Green Budget,” its lengthy and detailed annual review of the U.K.’s finances, the I.F.S. pointed out that the budget deficit, far from being eliminated, was still so large that next year the Chancellor, George Osborne, will have to borrow about sixty-five billion pounds more than he had anticipated. (That’s about four per cent of the U.K.’s G.D.P.) Indeed, the hole in the public finances is so big, the I.F.S. said, that the government might well be forced to introduce a series of tax hikes following the next general election, which is expected to take place in 2015.
Se ti è piaciuto questo post, clicca sul simbolo della moschina che trovi qui sotto per farlo conoscere alla rete grazie al portale Tze-tze, notizie dalla rete
U.K. Lesson: Austerity Leads to More Debt
Yesterday, I argued that U.S. fiscal policy is heading in the wrong direction, toward the economics of austerity. If you want to know where this path can lead, look across the Atlantic to poor old Blighty. For almost three years now, since the election of a Conservative-Liberal coalition, the British government has been slashing government programs and raising taxes, supposedly to reduce a big budget deficit. As I’ve written previously, the results have been pretty disastrous—both for ordinary Britons and for the public finances.
Just how disastrous was made clear yesterday by a new report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies, a London-based think tank that is widely regarded as independent and nonpartisan. In the “Green Budget,” its lengthy and detailed annual review of the U.K.’s finances, the I.F.S. pointed out that the budget deficit, far from being eliminated, was still so large that next year the Chancellor, George Osborne, will have to borrow about sixty-five billion pounds more than he had anticipated. (That’s about four per cent of the U.K.’s G.D.P.) Indeed, the hole in the public finances is so big, the I.F.S. said, that the government might well be forced to introduce a series of tax hikes following the next general election, which is expected to take place in 2015.
Even some commentators who have supported the austerity program appear
dejected. “This is a truly desperate state of affairs that demands swift
and decisive action,” the Daily Telegraph’s Jeremy Warner wrote in his column
following the release of the report. And he went on: “We seem to have
the worst of all possible worlds, with nil growth, some very obvious
cuts in the quantity and quality of public services, but pretty much
zero progress in getting on top of the country’s debts.”
That’s a pretty accurate synopsis. When Osborne and his boss, David Cameron, took over in May, 2010, and committed to an unprecedented program of austerity measures, the economy was slowly recovering from the Great Recession. By the final quarter of 2011, it had fallen back into a recession, from which it has yet to emerge. In the third quarter of last year, the London Olympics gave the economy a temporary boost, but in the fourth quarter G.D.P. fell again, at an annualized rate of more than one per cent. Whether this should be categorized as a “double dip” or a “triple dip” is a matter for debate, but the fact remains that Osborne promised growth and instead delivered a lengthy slump.
In one thing, the Chancellor has succeeded: he has delivered cuts to programs. By the fiscal year 2014, he will have slashed more than ten per cent from overall spending by U.K. government departments, according to the I.F.S. While some departments—including the National Health Service, overseas aid, and part of the education budget—are protected from the economic measure, others have seen savage budget reductions. But this hasn’t led to the improvement in the government finances that Osborne and his supporters predicted. As a result of the renewed slump, tax revenues are lower than expected and spending on benefits for the unemployed has risen. Overall government spending has continued to rise; the budget deficit has remained stubbornly high. And that’s why Osborne still will need to borrow so much money.
In short, the U.K. experience shows how austerity policies, when applied without regard to the state of the economy, often lead to more government borrowing and debt creation, not less. In the past few years, we’ve seen pretty much the same thing happen in other European countries: Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and now Italy and Spain. Still, though, many proponents of austerity refuse to acknowledge their errors.
Osborne is one of them, which is only to be expected: he’s an unpopular politician, with his career on the line. It might be hoped that international organizations tasked with purveying economic wisdom, such as the International Monetary Fund and the Organization for Economic Coöperation and Development, would be more open to reappraising their views. Not so, apparently. The I.M.F. remains staunchly behind Osborne’s policies, and, in a statement released yesterday, the O.E.C.D. said the U.K.’s “fiscal stance remains appropriate.”
However, there are some signs of glasnost—or weaselling, anyway—on the part of the austerity hawks. “If growth significantly underperforms expectations over the coming months,” the statement from the O.E.C.D. continued, “the flexibility of the fiscal framework should be utilised.” That appears to be code for refraining from further cuts in spending (especially on unemployment benefits and other so-called automatic stabilizers), borrowing more money in the bond market, and allowing the deficit to balloon further. A shorter way to put it: when you are in a hole, stop digging.
That’s a pretty accurate synopsis. When Osborne and his boss, David Cameron, took over in May, 2010, and committed to an unprecedented program of austerity measures, the economy was slowly recovering from the Great Recession. By the final quarter of 2011, it had fallen back into a recession, from which it has yet to emerge. In the third quarter of last year, the London Olympics gave the economy a temporary boost, but in the fourth quarter G.D.P. fell again, at an annualized rate of more than one per cent. Whether this should be categorized as a “double dip” or a “triple dip” is a matter for debate, but the fact remains that Osborne promised growth and instead delivered a lengthy slump.
In one thing, the Chancellor has succeeded: he has delivered cuts to programs. By the fiscal year 2014, he will have slashed more than ten per cent from overall spending by U.K. government departments, according to the I.F.S. While some departments—including the National Health Service, overseas aid, and part of the education budget—are protected from the economic measure, others have seen savage budget reductions. But this hasn’t led to the improvement in the government finances that Osborne and his supporters predicted. As a result of the renewed slump, tax revenues are lower than expected and spending on benefits for the unemployed has risen. Overall government spending has continued to rise; the budget deficit has remained stubbornly high. And that’s why Osborne still will need to borrow so much money.
In short, the U.K. experience shows how austerity policies, when applied without regard to the state of the economy, often lead to more government borrowing and debt creation, not less. In the past few years, we’ve seen pretty much the same thing happen in other European countries: Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and now Italy and Spain. Still, though, many proponents of austerity refuse to acknowledge their errors.
Osborne is one of them, which is only to be expected: he’s an unpopular politician, with his career on the line. It might be hoped that international organizations tasked with purveying economic wisdom, such as the International Monetary Fund and the Organization for Economic Coöperation and Development, would be more open to reappraising their views. Not so, apparently. The I.M.F. remains staunchly behind Osborne’s policies, and, in a statement released yesterday, the O.E.C.D. said the U.K.’s “fiscal stance remains appropriate.”
However, there are some signs of glasnost—or weaselling, anyway—on the part of the austerity hawks. “If growth significantly underperforms expectations over the coming months,” the statement from the O.E.C.D. continued, “the flexibility of the fiscal framework should be utilised.” That appears to be code for refraining from further cuts in spending (especially on unemployment benefits and other so-called automatic stabilizers), borrowing more money in the bond market, and allowing the deficit to balloon further. A shorter way to put it: when you are in a hole, stop digging.
Se ti è piaciuto questo post, clicca sul simbolo della moschina che trovi qui sotto per farlo conoscere alla rete grazie al portale Tze-tze, notizie dalla rete
martedì 29 gennaio 2013
Anche Goldman Sachs contro l'austerity inglese
Dopo la breve ripresa estiva spinta dalle Olimpiadi e da qualche artificio contabile, l'economia inglese è di nuovo in calo, tornado al suo trend solito da quando i Conservatori sono andati al potere. Cameron e Osborne si sono intestarditi in una austerity assurda (a maggior ragione con i tassi bassi che consente l'indipendenza monetaria) che contraddice qualsiasi logica. Un tal furore ideologico da far dubitare addirittura i banchieri di Goldman Sachs, il cui chairman, Jim O'Neal, ha preso parola per criticare i programmi di austerity del governo. Seguendo una logica molto semplice, cioè che se le cose non funzionano, allora sarebbe il caso di provare qualche alternativa.
Common sense, si direbbe a Londra. Ma common sense che sembra mancare al governo di coalizione. Che ora però ha perso anche la sua ultima scusa. Osborne e soci avevano giustificato il ricorso all'austerity come obbligato per non perdere la fiducia dei mercati. Ora i re del mercato, Goldman Sachs, appunto, annunciano di aver perso fiducia non nell'economia inglese, ma nel suo governo e nel suo piano di tagli. Non sarebbe il caso di voltar pagina?
Qui sotto proponiamo l'articolo del Guardian che racconta la storia in questione.
George Osborne should recognise that his deficit-reduction programme is failing and change economic policy to avoid a triple-dip recession, a senior investment banker has warned.
Jim O'Neill, the chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, said the chancellor's continued pursuit of austerity despite signs that the economy was stagnating, including worse-than-expected GDP figures, risked a lost decade for the British economy with low growth and increasing public debt.
Figures unveiled on Friday showed that the British economy shrank in the last quarter of 2012. If the economy shrinks again in the first quarter of 2012, Britain will be in recession for the third time since the economic crash of 2008.
The government insists that its policy of cutting expenditure is the only course available but critics insist that the absence of growth was increasing the deficit rather than cutting it.
O'Neill told the BBC: "Based on my business experience, if what you thought was not delivering what you expect to be the outcome surely you have to change what you thought a little. At a minimum, a repositioning of the stance, if not a full change."
The banker's comments echo criticism of Osborne from within his own party. Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, said government spending could trigger a virtuous cycle of spending by business, which would activate cash held by companies and create economic growth.
Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, accused Osborne of being "asleep at the wheel" and said now was the time for a "plan B" to promote growth through cuts to VAT and spending on infrastructure.
"The longer David Cameron and George Osborne cling on to their failing plan the more long-term damage will be done. They must finally listen and act to kick start this economy," he said.
But Osborne, speaking at the annual
World Economic Forum in the Swiss ski resort of Davos, remained
defiant. "We can either run away from those problems or we can confront
them and I am determined to confront them so that we can go on creating
jobs for the people of this country," he told Sky News. "I am absolutely
clear that we have got the right plan but of course it is not a plan
that was ever going to deliver results overnight. We said from the start
it was a long road, it was a hard road, but it was the only road."Common sense, si direbbe a Londra. Ma common sense che sembra mancare al governo di coalizione. Che ora però ha perso anche la sua ultima scusa. Osborne e soci avevano giustificato il ricorso all'austerity come obbligato per non perdere la fiducia dei mercati. Ora i re del mercato, Goldman Sachs, appunto, annunciano di aver perso fiducia non nell'economia inglese, ma nel suo governo e nel suo piano di tagli. Non sarebbe il caso di voltar pagina?
Qui sotto proponiamo l'articolo del Guardian che racconta la storia in questione.
George Osborne's austerity plan 'risks lost decade' for UK economy
Top Goldman Sachs banker Jim O'Neill joins growing criticism of chancellor's pursuit of deficit reduction in face of stagnation
di Conal Urquhart
da Guardian
George Osborne should recognise that his deficit-reduction programme is failing and change economic policy to avoid a triple-dip recession, a senior investment banker has warned.
Jim O'Neill, the chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, said the chancellor's continued pursuit of austerity despite signs that the economy was stagnating, including worse-than-expected GDP figures, risked a lost decade for the British economy with low growth and increasing public debt.
Figures unveiled on Friday showed that the British economy shrank in the last quarter of 2012. If the economy shrinks again in the first quarter of 2012, Britain will be in recession for the third time since the economic crash of 2008.
The government insists that its policy of cutting expenditure is the only course available but critics insist that the absence of growth was increasing the deficit rather than cutting it.
O'Neill told the BBC: "Based on my business experience, if what you thought was not delivering what you expect to be the outcome surely you have to change what you thought a little. At a minimum, a repositioning of the stance, if not a full change."
The banker's comments echo criticism of Osborne from within his own party. Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, said government spending could trigger a virtuous cycle of spending by business, which would activate cash held by companies and create economic growth.
Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, accused Osborne of being "asleep at the wheel" and said now was the time for a "plan B" to promote growth through cuts to VAT and spending on infrastructure.
"The longer David Cameron and George Osborne cling on to their failing plan the more long-term damage will be done. They must finally listen and act to kick start this economy," he said.
fonte: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jan/26/goldman-sachs-criticism-george-osborne-austerity
Se ti è piaciuto questo post, clicca sul simbolo della moschina che trovi qui sotto per farlo conoscere alla rete grazie al portale Tze-tze, notizie dalla rete
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)