The Problem With Paul Mason’s 21 Point Plan

10
285

Here’s Paul Mason’s 21 point plan for, well, summat. The harbinger of the revolution or some such:

There’s a certain problem in here. 11 is in direct contradiction to 9 and 10. And that idea of “there can be no going back to free market” is equally in direct contradiction to 11.

Because the moment you start talking to professionals about the economy you end up being told that the only effective and efficient way of doing anything is that market.

Well, OK, not anything. But there is indeed a general agreement that there are parts of the world around us that cannot be handled in any other manner.

Take, for example, that Green New Deal thing. Absolutely every professional economist who has studied the problem comes back with OK, either a carbon tax or cap and trade. William Nordhaus got the Nobel for saying so. The Stern Review is quite specific – do not try and do this by central planning. For that is the inefficient manner and people do less of things that are more expensive. Precisely because climate change is so important it must be done in the most efficient manner possible – the one intervention into market prices then leave markets to process through matters – so that we do as much as is necessary to deal with the problem.

Even the IPCC says, in its scenarios for emissions, that markets and capitalism are the way to deal with it. The non-market models give distinctly worse results than those which do things sensibly.

That is, you can listen to professionals, experts, people who have a fucking clue, or you can have the Green New Deal and radical economic and fiscal policy. What you can’t have is both, professional advice guiding your actions and policies of counterproductive stupidity.

But then, you know, Paul Mason and economics…..

10
Leave a Reply

avatar
7 Comment threads
3 Thread replies
7 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
Michael van der RietMr WombyDavid MorrisPcarMrVeryAngry Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mr Womby
Guest
Mr Womby

If he’s serious about No.16 then it’s time I bought me a baseball bat.

Spike
Guest
Spike

Hmm, “has to mobilise to stop fascists attacking minority communities”? Then Paul will be #Antifa? Yes, do buy one, your neighbors will have theirs.

David Morris
Guest
David Morris

& a kimono

Mr Womby
Guest
Mr Womby

With my legs?!

Spike
Guest
Spike

No, it’s still not clear that “climate change is so important” despite economists and Nobelists. The fact that we can finally detect human effects in the atmosphere, and the fact we can’t explain why the weather is so unusual, does not give any degree of causation, and won’t until we find a human-free Earth for comparison. So higher taxes has the EXACT same problem as greater regulation. And, like advocating “fair” taxes on “the rich,” it is an opening for much more of the same, and for greater regulation.

Spike
Guest
Spike

Oooh! “3/ Accepts Brexit will happen and we have to move on…we can’t become the ‘rejoin’ party.” So the next Labour leader must concede to Boris his single biggest campaign issue, and be satisfied nipping at his ankles with a Green New Deal, re-creating locally the annoyances over which Britain voted to leave the EU.

By the way, what exactly is authoritarian about the free market?

literate3
Guest
literate3

When my younger son was born, I took half my annual leave, having briefed my colleagues in advance of the estimated dates. When Personnel did the sums I had nearly all of it owing to me from previous years.

Don’t generalise!

Nautical Nick
Guest
Nautical Nick

I’d have thought that 1) and 4) together a bit of a stretch, as well as 2) and 3).

MrVeryAngry
Guest
MrVeryAngry

‘Free market authoritarian politics’. Hahahhahhaaahhhhhaaa!

Pcar
Guest
Pcar

@Tim W

Precisely because climate change is so not important it must be ignored not exploited

FTFY

EU: Long on lofty rhetoric and short on economic principles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxIg4QA_J5s

But then, you know, Tim Worstall and AGW / AClimate Change….. :facepalm

Michael van der Riet
Guest
Michael van der Riet

There’s a bit of No True Scotsman going on there, Tim. Believe it or not, there are plenty of economists who think that Climate Change is utter codswallop and would never back any proposal that strangles trade.