Yvette Cooper and New Labour Ontology

Yvette Cooper warns that the government shouldn’t ‘print money we haven’t got’. This is an interesting ontological claim. You might have thought the printing would solve the problem of the not-having. Should we not paint pictures we haven’t painted? Should we not have children we haven’t had? Well, that’s New Labour for you. Nothing is permitted to exist unless it already exists. Tough on change, tough on the causes of change.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Yvette Cooper and New Labour Ontology

  1. Agog

    It’s easy to pick apart short remarks like that. But Cooper’s point is that inflation is a constraint, that confidence in the currency matters (especially if you are a net importer of energy, I would add).

    Reply
    1. axdouglas Post author

      Her claim still makes no sense. Spending by issuing bonds carries the same inflation risk as spending by creating reserves: http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=31711

      So the ‘printing money’ worry is way off the mark, and the ‘that we haven’t got’ bit is bare nonsense. The remark is a piece of cheap sophistry, and if she’d been asked to elaborate she would have been led into spouting real nonsense.

      Reply
      1. Agog

        It makes no sense if you read it completely literally out of context. If you read it in the sense I’m hinting at above, taking it as an aphorism that assumes readily available concerns about inflation etc it’s not hard to fathom. Give Cooper credit for her postgraduate level training in Economics (which I admit is more than I have).

        It seems pretty clear to me that talking about ‘printing money we haven’t got’ is shorthand for concerns about overheating – cf the idea of ‘wealth capacity’ here.

      2. axdouglas Post author

        The point about ‘wealth capacity’ is that increased spending – higher velocity – drives inflation. The creation of reserves by the central bank (‘printing money’) does not. So, again, Cooper’s ‘printing money … could be dangerously inflationary’ claim is just false – based on the bad mainstream theories she would have been taught in her MSc.

  2. John

    Corbyn missed the opportunity to ram that down her throat. He’s too nice and conciliatory with these rabid dogs.

    What he should of said was: “I entirely agree that in your deluded version of economics that it would be inflationary. In your deluded version of economics, the 2008 crisis was impossible, depressions are impossible, debt-deflation is impossible, PFI is good value for money, interest rates would have reached the moon, the bond vigilantes would have us over a barrel, bank bailouts are necessary while helping people is false hope, and all the other vast neoliberal nonsense dangerous imbeciles like you believe. Remain in your fantasy world, I prefer to live in the real world.”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s