Some Basic Economics from Tim Worstall
Tim Worstall does it again (as he often
does). His comments on the
economics of everyday discourse hit the target once again. He posts (18 October) this in the “Pin
Factory Blog” at the Adam Smith Institute HERE :
“In which we
catch the New Statesman being very silly”
The post leads with a photo of some demonstrators
with a large placard on which the message: “Don’t Cut Tax the Banks”.
The message is that health workers and others like
them produce useful services, while rich bankers are parasitic. Yet most people
employed in the banks are fairly lowly paid (my son is one of them), while
surgeons and top administrators in the NHS are well paid by any standard. Tim goes for the economic nonsense
supporting this attitude.
“Thus the value of banking is that we get to have
a banking system. The value of the NHS is that it (occasionally) cures more
people than it kills.** The value of Google is that we get to Google.
The value or contribution to us all of what people
are doing lies not in the taxes they pay and not even in either the profits
they make or the number of jobs they create. It is in the value to us of
consuming their production. Any other measure of value will inevitably lead to
the sort of nonsense that the New Statesman is peddling here.
Something that Adam Smith pointed out 237 years
ago when arguing that the correct labour theory of value is the one that
measures the value in use of something that has been produced: something we
would rather hope that people would have grasped after all of this time.”
Comment
The basic economics highlighted by Tim are a valuable
antidote to political posturing about some elements of financial trading behaviour
that got out of hand recently and for which the world’s economies are still
paying.
True, governments often spend taxation and
borrowed funds unwisely and State direct managed activities are congenitally
inefficient. I have experience of
both unwise ventures and inefficient activities.
The old Property Services Agency was one such that
was both. It used to be said by
users of the PSA’s services that if you wanted to find the most expensive way
to undertake any project, big or small, then the PSA never let you down, and it always took the longest time to deliver the finished project. A similar view applied to Direct
Labour departments employed in local councils – then they privatized them, often with
the same managements, and while some costs were cut (mainly in the excess labour
they employed) it took a while to change its bad habits. But that led to some corruption and favouritism scandals in
kick-backs from private contractors to some of the council people running them.
However, Tim is right: generally the value-added was still positive,
the more so when action was taken about the inherent defects of taxation and borrowing
misspending.
Adam Smith was
extremely sceptical about public spending being efficient and that was long before
government spending reached undreamt of levels of today.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home