The Telegraph reports:
The former business secretary Sir Vince Cable is to lead a free online course on politics and economics.
The “Massive Open Online Course” (Mooc) will look at the link between the two subjects, examining the work of major political figures and the economic ideas they adopted.
Among the topics due to be investigated are the impact of the 2008 financial crisis and understanding the methods of economics.
The programme is being run on the social learning platform FutureLearn, in partnership with Nottingham University.
Sir Vince, who is an honorary professor of economics at the university, said: “I have spent around half my adult life as an economist in universities, government and business and the rest in politics.
“As such, I have been fascinated by the links between the two: how politicians use economic ideas and how economists influence policy.
“Most of the big economic ideas we see being applied in the real world are there because politicians adopted, promoted and implemented them; otherwise they would remain in books.”
* Newshound: bringing you the best Lib Dem commentary in print, on air or online.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
No, Leave didn't win the Brexit referendum because of Northern working class voters
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
Geoffrey Payne
Richard Whelan
David Raw
Tom Reeve
10 Comments
I hope he covers the economics of budget deficits, which aren’t necessarily a bad thing, and the exchange rate. There’s a lot of confusion about these. Those in the UK who want a high pound, probably most of us, should also realise that this means imported products are more likely to be cheaper than domestically produced products. Meaning that there will be a deficit in the current account.
Now this deficit has to be supported by government “borrowing” (although that’s not really the right word) or, perhaps temporarily, private sector borrowing.
So to argue for a high pound at the same time as arguing for the government to balance its budget makes no sense at all. We can have one or the other but not both for any length of time. Trying to achieve the impossible, by cutting spending and raising taxes, merely sends the economy into a downward spiral of deeper recession and increasing unemployment.
Peter Martin
Doesn’t it depend on whether your objectives are short term or long term?
Short term pain may be for long term gain.
When the pound was devalued fro $2.80 to $2.40 there was a political crisis in the UK.
When unemployment in the UK rose above the round figure of 1,000,000 there was a change of government policy. When it rose above 2,000,000 there should have been a political crisis, but there was not. When it rose above 3,000,000 the computer centre at Reading needed more equipment, but CCTA (Treasury) was unwilling to pay for it. Eventually a forecast was provided of 1,600,000 peaking to 2,100,000 . A second computer centre was created in Scotland at Livingston. Neither Reading nor Livingston supplied Northern Ireland.
There was a “Buy British” policy which would have caused the purchase of obsolete equipment. Eventually ICL (British at the time) used their latest machines (ICL 2960) to perform in the same was as their obsolete machines (ICT 1900) using micro-coded emulation.
What were then called micro-computers were considered unreliable. Doubling them up was estimated to approximately double the cost.
@David,
It’s important to define objectives, both for the short and long term. It’s also important that those objectives shouldn’t be contradictory. But, they often are. We all seem to want a high pound, low govt and trade deficits, and a healthy economy.
But we can only choose 2 from 3. Up to Brexit we’ve chosen the first one, tried to achieve the second and then wondered why we couldn’t achieve those low deficits without the health of the economy suffering.
It’s the same story in the eurozone. The euro is too strong for most EZ economies. Countries are forced to have low deficits by the rules of the SGP. So their economies end up in the sick bay!
Unfortunately it’s not a case of a temporary sickness. It’s a permanent condition. There’s no trade off between the short and long terms.
@ David Evershed “Short term pain may be for long term gain”.
…………………………………and, short term pain may be for long term pain.
Exactly David Raw….and long term pain leads to extremism and so we have Brexit and Trump.
I’ll check it out! My economic knowledge is way too limited. 🙂
@David Raw,
” …. short term pain may be for long term pain. “
@Huw,
Fair enough. But check it out according to what we see actually happen in real economies rather than what some highly qualified economists at the LSE say should happen.
The ‘Indecent Haste’ is all down to our “Special Relationship’ (whatever that means)..Any UK PM not rushing off to be photographed with an incoming US President would be letting down this ‘SR’…
However, this PM has a ‘Special’ need to do so…Rather like a divorcee calling on an old flame May needs the comfort of the ‘SR’ to bolster her position…Even more, she needs a new relationship, and it doesn’t really matter what sort of relationship it is; she has no-one else to turn to….
I don’t expect details of any trade deal to be announced but Trump was elected because he is a ‘ruthless’ negotiator and his ‘America First and Only’ policy will leave only one winner in any urgent deal…
If you’re looking for further information on the FutureLearn web site, it helps if you know the Start Date – 20th March for this course and the precise title ‘The Politics of Economics and the Economics of Politicians’. Then those interested can view the introductory video and/or read its transcript.