ICYMI Paul Levine and I are organising an anti-pro-Corbynomics letter

In case you missed it, I’m organising, with Paul Levine at Surrey, a letter to express the anti-Corbyn view, to counter the misleading impression given by the ‘letter of 41’ published in the Guardian.  If you are a practising economist and think you might want to sign, contact Paul or I and we will show you a draft.  We have 43 so far.   Notice that Paul already wrote a letter on the topic, pointing out how misleading the letter of 41 was on the matter of Corbyn’s anti-austerity being ‘mainstream’.  The letter was ignored by the Guardian, but I reproduced it in an earlier post.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to ICYMI Paul Levine and I are organising an anti-pro-Corbynomics letter

  1. nottrampis says:

    Tony does this mean Pommy economists are Labouring a point!

  2. Scott says:

    Unfortunately don’t qualify, but best of luck with this!

  3. donald says:

    The letter seems a little unfair. For one, it’s still hard to know exactly where “Corbynomics” is on that scale you mention. Second, the letter you’re responding to was, I think, making a more general point on austerity anti-austerity. This was in the context of a public debate that has to be on simple terms, and where the main argument against Corbyn is along the lines of, “we must cut the deficit now because the economy is like a household”, so it doesn’t seem an unreasonable point to make.

    A fairer letter might say that being “anti-austerity” isn’t crazy economics but that you disagree with what you understand Corbyn’s specific policies to be, although these are not entirely clear yet.

  4. pontus says:

    Tony,

    I’d be happy to participate. It’s really difficult to get in touch with you, so if you can pop me an email it would be appreciated.

    Best

  5. Tony,

    you will probably agree that all these professors would have failed an exam asking to discuss benefits and drawbacks of the Corbyn proposals, set out alternatives, and discuss their potential political acceptability, if your letter is all what they had written.

    Also, if you start entering the debate, please do so professionally.

    That is what we pay you guys for, from the public purse, to be “experts”, So let us have some detailed analysis, which can stand up to scrutiny, based on theories or experience.

    So if you have a view, a DETAILED view, let us hear it. Please write a dissertation each on the subject and publish it.

    If you just want to tell us you do not agree with some policies and you do not consider these policies mainstream, we are not really that interested, as the general public.

    In fact, worse than that, you all come across as a bunch of over-privileged moaning minnies making a minor point what should be a serious debate WITH ACADEMIC RIGOUR about the feasability of some of the ideas discussed by a potential leader of the opposition.

  6. Hugh Stickland says:

    Hi Tony
    Would he interested to see, but would need to sign in a personal capacity – the organisation I work for won’t be taking a public position
    Hugh

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