Originally posted by GreenMirror
View Post
So are you saying that the BoE should not be doing stress tests?
And have you read what they actually wrote in the letter to the Times, not the Telegraph interpretation of selected highlights missing out parts that maybe add a bit of sense, but contradict the opinion of the Telegraph?
Their determination was really put to the test, however, when 364 economists signed a letter to The Times stating that there was "no basis in economic theory or supporting evidence" for the policy that the Budget was seeking to implement, that it threatened Britain's "social and political stability", and that an alternative course must be pursued.
Faculty of Economics and Politics, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge
28 March 1981
The following statement on economic policy has been signed by 364 university economists in Britain, whose names are given on the attached list:
‘We, who are all present or retired members of the economics staffs of British universities, are convinced that:
a) there is no basis in economic theory or supporting evidence for the government’s belief that by deflating demand they will bring inflation permanently under control and thereby induce an automatic recovery in output and employment;
b) present policies will deepen the depression, erode the industrial base of our economy and threaten its social and political stability;
c) there are alternative policies; and
d) the time has come to reject monetarist policies and consider urgently which alternative offers the best hope of sustained economic recovery.’
28 March 1981
The following statement on economic policy has been signed by 364 university economists in Britain, whose names are given on the attached list:
‘We, who are all present or retired members of the economics staffs of British universities, are convinced that:
a) there is no basis in economic theory or supporting evidence for the government’s belief that by deflating demand they will bring inflation permanently under control and thereby induce an automatic recovery in output and employment;
b) present policies will deepen the depression, erode the industrial base of our economy and threaten its social and political stability;
c) there are alternative policies; and
d) the time has come to reject monetarist policies and consider urgently which alternative offers the best hope of sustained economic recovery.’
So, based on their actual letter, how wrong were they?
1. Did unemployment in the first 4 years of Thatcher's economic policy go down, or did it double to over 12 million?
2. Did the UK owned industrial base get eroded away, so that most was either closed or sold off?
3. Were there alternative policies?
Comment