Why Labour's UK Industrial Strategy Could Leave Us Poorer | Economy Explained
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 вер 2024
- FOLLOW IEA INSIDER: insider.iea.or...
In this episode of the new IEA series, Economies Explained, Harrison Griffiths, International Programmes Manager, delves into the controversial topic of industrial strategies. As the new UK Labour government embraces the concept of mission-driven government, Griffiths exposes the potential pitfalls and hidden costs of such top-down economic planning. Drawing from historical examples and economic principles, he challenges the notion that government-led industrial strategies are the key to economic growth and prosperity.
Griffiths takes viewers on a global tour, examining industrial strategy experiments in countries like South Korea, Germany, and China. While these nations have seen periods of growth, our host reveals the unseen costs and long-term consequences of state intervention in the economy. From misallocated resources to concentrated economic power, Griffiths argues that even seemingly successful industrial policies often leave countries poorer than they would have been under free market conditions.
As debates around economic policy intensify in the face of global challenges, this video offers a timely and thought-provoking perspective on the limits of government-driven economic planning. Whether you're a policy maker, student, or simply interested in understanding the forces shaping our economic future, this episode of Economy Explained provides valuable insights into why industrial strategies consistently fall short of their lofty goals.
FOLLOW US:
SUBSTACK - insider.iea.or...
TWITTER - / iealondon
INSTAGRAM - /
FACEBOOK - / ieauk
WEBSITE - iea.org.uk/
Didn't you guys support Truss' mini-budget ? How you have the nerve to still be an organisation is beyond me
Don't like Truss, never did. Budget could have worked, problem is - there was not enough support for it. Trying to push it was beyond naive, caused a disaster.
They’re not a serious organisation. Who has even heard of them?
@@AlexGoldring Have you ever considered the fact that the reason it didn’t have support is because it was mind numblingly stupid ?
@@heremyjunt let's say it was or wasn't. That's now why something passes or fails in politics. I wish it was. The reason things fail or pass is based on who's who's friend and who promises what to other politicians. Your criteria of something not being stupid is, sadly, wishful thinking. And yes, I do think that budget could have worked, not that it "would" have worked, but it could. Bank of England was so against it they were prepared to tank the economy, and did. The party didn't support it enough, so they told Truss to walk it back, she was not firm enough so she fired the guy who wrote it.
How dare you doubt the most diverse leadership this country ever had
And not a single word about the structural issue that is causing consumer demand to plummet, and which is affecting the entire world economy regardless of whether it was state suported, industrial, or service-based.
You guys literally brought the economy to its knees with your ideas. What are you doing still trying to pretend you have clout? 😂
Its banker families economic theories. Austrian or anglosaxonian style doesn't differ much in the maligne outcome.
And it works well to destroy the middle class.
A mighty middle class would be the worst nightmare of the upper ones.
Why not change to "german" economics with names like Friedrich List or Richard Werner
and force the banking system into a benign one. OK, would be antisolumitic or anti-elitic. So iea has to burry it in silence.
@@thomasbentele2468 So true. These people start with what their (secret) donors want and fit everything around that. They aren't actually so interested in economics as disguised social control
But mission orientated approach doesn’t try to out perform the free market. What it does do is incentivise free market to go towards a specific goal.
I think you might be interested in hearing the "Broken Window Fallacy". Whatever the government does to affect the free market will always lead to resource misallocation, loss of wealth and distortions in price signals, not to mention the resources all of this will take from the market (and funnily all of this is funded by your money taken away and put wherever the government wants).
Dead right but smarmer is not listening !
So which american billionair, who wants to turn the uk into a mini usa without workers' rights, paid for this tuften street hatchet job?
mission led government scares the heck out of me... governments shouldnt be trying to 'shape' societies'... they work for us ... remember!
Your free market dogma has utterly failed. This country is the most deindustrialised, hyper financialised, over populated country in the West. It's a ticking time bomb!
you dont understand
@@Jabskin please help me to....
What's the alternative to industrial strategy, your ill fated mini budget. The zero strategy and beyond simplistic alternative, that you endorsed??? Also why have so many countries with industrial strategy historically out performed the UK? Germany and Japan grew their economies far more. Also China have done pretty well having an industrial strategy. Basically the UK has had no industrial strategy since 1980, look where that has left us, we literally live in an ever increasing foreign owned privatised hell scape of rent extraction. I fell like I live in a country that was invaded and subjugated by some malign foreign power, sucking all the wealth from the citizens. You guys look like the enemy to me.
I totally agree with this. Add to it the ridiculous short-termism with the only strategy being, “If I can sell something good off or charge extra/a new charge for a worse service whilst ruining the UKs future chances of any growth”
And you're the ones to tell? The Mini Budget Guys?
You are the jokers who support Liz Truss's mini budget. Please stop talking about UK economics. You are clearly clueless
Disclose your funding
The examples you gave are all of incredibly strong economies. If you said we'll end up like South Korea, Germany or China I'd have said great.
South Korea, Germany or China prior to the end of industrial strategy policies*
Well done and well argued! Thank you.
With South Korea, first you gave the theoretical argument, then backed it up with empirical studies.
Now if only IEA could advise Starmer's government, instead of Ms. Mishikata....
They pointed out South Korea wasn't as good as Taiwan which had one of the heaviest industrial strategies through the 20th century.
Thanks
If you don't understand how much energy we as a "civilized" society uses, it's a lot more than people imagine. When people think they have net zero solar on their home roof they get that warm fuzzy smug feeling of job well done. Energy uses is about 100 times as large as the solar panels on your roof, its in the fossil fuels that really powers transport, industry, commercial, residential. Every thing we touch is made of energy, esp in a throwaway society .Increasing efficiency has cancelled out more wasteful energy use and higher lifestyle. energy use. IE big ass cars.
See "Without the hot air" by David MacKay, See Wikipedia "Per Capita Enrgy Use", See "LLNL Energy Flow Graph", find your US state or country, its all there.
Strawman of people with rooftop solar
not very convincing when youre examples of a failed economy is germany, singapore, south korea etc lmao
Sounds Good
One again Mises' ECP strikes again
Yeah a parasitic Austrian aristocrat has so much to teach us
What industrial strategy?
When a government invests or offers subsidies into developing sectors of the economy to help them to compete in local and global markets and eventually develop into a full sector of the economy, like investing in high speed rail or Taiwan investing in it's micro processor industry or American tax credits for electric vehicles, for example.
Here come the right wing think tanks