I am amazed to be the first to tell you that the BoE was founded in 1694 but that’s a small thing. The big thing is the British Economy on which we all depend. I graduated in Economics in 1964 when the data on what was happening in the economy was much more secretive than it is today. I accept that the level of pensions and social security payments today would amaze the chancellor in 1964 but there is much less poverty, there is better healthcare, better housing, etc. The question is how to achieve better growth. I accept that the three bodies involved, Treasury, BoE and the body for Budgetary Responsibility use the same data but none of them reach the conclusions of the other two. I remember that Brown and Balls used to hold war games with them but never published the conclusions. An article in yesterday’s Observer ventured that we, the Brits, were in the top 10 when it came to innovation but most of the Startups were picked off by the Americans before they could become established companies, employing thousands and exporting most of their output. Venture Capital using Pension Funds was suggested as a source of funds for these startups to prevent them going to America. There is a need for public opinion to get behind the British Government in preventing established companies being bought and moved overseas. Boots the Chemist is a prime example. It was bought using untruths about movement of its tax base. Theresa May was hopeless in gaining any assurances about this. We lost £18 billion in tax when the company moved its operations to Switzerland.
Given that SME's are a major, if not the major, part of our economy, it would be helpful if they were understood by the Treasury, B of E and the OBR. Economists are okay when it comes to the macro, broad movements on a large scale. Not so much with the micro, where people actually live. As it is we have a short term economy which also favours the elderly investor with a safe portfolio, while allowing far too much freedom to robber barons. John Woods below has made an excellent point about Boots and the lies told by its American owners. I'd add Cadbury's (US takeover again) which broke every promise made to HMG. And now produces seriously unpleasant chocolate. With that, there is more than a suspicion that senior civil servants, B oF E officials, always have one eye on future, commercial, directorships. They are too cozy with the City by far. As a start, past recommendations and decisions by these two should be made fully public with the reasons given.
I am amazed to be the first to tell you that the BoE was founded in 1694 but that’s a small thing. The big thing is the British Economy on which we all depend. I graduated in Economics in 1964 when the data on what was happening in the economy was much more secretive than it is today. I accept that the level of pensions and social security payments today would amaze the chancellor in 1964 but there is much less poverty, there is better healthcare, better housing, etc. The question is how to achieve better growth. I accept that the three bodies involved, Treasury, BoE and the body for Budgetary Responsibility use the same data but none of them reach the conclusions of the other two. I remember that Brown and Balls used to hold war games with them but never published the conclusions. An article in yesterday’s Observer ventured that we, the Brits, were in the top 10 when it came to innovation but most of the Startups were picked off by the Americans before they could become established companies, employing thousands and exporting most of their output. Venture Capital using Pension Funds was suggested as a source of funds for these startups to prevent them going to America. There is a need for public opinion to get behind the British Government in preventing established companies being bought and moved overseas. Boots the Chemist is a prime example. It was bought using untruths about movement of its tax base. Theresa May was hopeless in gaining any assurances about this. We lost £18 billion in tax when the company moved its operations to Switzerland.
Given that SME's are a major, if not the major, part of our economy, it would be helpful if they were understood by the Treasury, B of E and the OBR. Economists are okay when it comes to the macro, broad movements on a large scale. Not so much with the micro, where people actually live. As it is we have a short term economy which also favours the elderly investor with a safe portfolio, while allowing far too much freedom to robber barons. John Woods below has made an excellent point about Boots and the lies told by its American owners. I'd add Cadbury's (US takeover again) which broke every promise made to HMG. And now produces seriously unpleasant chocolate. With that, there is more than a suspicion that senior civil servants, B oF E officials, always have one eye on future, commercial, directorships. They are too cozy with the City by far. As a start, past recommendations and decisions by these two should be made fully public with the reasons given.