Anti-Stern

The Stern Review: A Dual Critique

Part I: The Science

Robert M. Carter, C. R. de Freitas, Indur M. Goklany,
David Holland & Richard S. Lindzen

Part II: Economic Aspects

Ian Byatt, Ian Castles, Indur M. Goklany, David Henderson,
Nigel Lawson, Ross McKitrick, Julian Morris, Alan Peacock,
Colin Robinson & Robert Skidelsky

World Economics, Vol. 7, No. 4, October-December 2006.

Pikkupoika suosittelee!

[Update: Eihän tuhannet ilmastotieteilijät voi olla väärässä, eihän? Eihän 364 Britannian johtavaa taloustieteilijääkään voi olla väärässä, eihän?

In 1981, Britain was at an economic crossroads. Policies that the Conservative government, elected in 1979, had been implementing to deal with accelerating inflation and a spiralling national debt were not working. Borrowing was rising. Interest rates were moving ever higher. If things had gone on as they were, credibility in the British economy would have collapsed. Investors, firms and trade unions would not have believed that any future government could have restored fiscal and monetary discipline. Britain could have become like so many South and Central American countries in the 1970s and 1980s.

Instead, Margaret Thatcher and her Chancellor, Sir Geoffrey Howe, changed tack. The 1981 Budget increased taxes by £4 billion - an enormous sum in 1981 prices. This was extremely difficult for a government elected to cut taxes. But by showing a determination to cut borrowing, the government made it easier to control monetary policy, too, as interest rates could be reduced. This helped convince the markets, which were also worried that high borrowing would lead to high inflation, because in the 1970s governments had financed their deficits by printing money.

Mrs Thatcher and Howe faced stiff opposition to this Budget, not just from the Labour and Liberal parties, but also from their own back benches. Their determination was really put to the test, however, when 364 economists signed a letter to The Times stating that there was "no basis in economic theory or supporting evidence" for the policy that the Budget was seeking to implement, that it threatened Britain's "social and political stability", and that an alternative course must be pursued.

Kuinka ollakaan allekirjoittaneiden joukossa oli eräs Warwickin yliopiston professori N.H. Stern. Lisää asiasta täältä.]

[Via ClimateAudit]