In line with our risk management framework, today we published our Q4 2019 performance update.
Is fiscal expansion the key to the recovery?
These really are challenging times in the world of economics and finance; not least of all in this country. Polls in the EU referendum have oscillated dramatically in the last few weeks, which has benefited neither our economy nor the value of the pound. The Eurozone looks to be in significant trouble, the situation in China remains unstable, once-thriving emerging economies such as Brazil are now floundering, and the FTSE 100 has officially tailed off by a dramatic 10 per cent since the General Election last year.
To compound the misery, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has now slashed growth forecasts for the UK in 2016 from 2.1 per cent to just 1.7 per cent – the second such cut in the space of six months. All this at a time where wage growth remains slow, the recovery even slower, and the national deficit stands at more than £40 billion.
Dealing with the deficit
The budget deficit has been the core focus for Chancellor George Osborne since the start of the 2010 parliament, and, as has become the accepted norm in this age of neoliberalism, his method for remedying it has been austerity. Cuts, cuts and more cuts – much to the discontent of sectors of the British public.
So, has he been successful in this endeavour? To a certain extent he has, with the deficit having clambered down by more than 50 per cent from the eye-watering figure of £109 billion in 2010.
The difficulty for Osborne is that there is a whole lot more to managing the economy, and the average person on the street is likely to be more concerned with pounds in their own pocket rather than the health of the UK’s budget. And as sustained recovery from the global financial crisis remains elusive, so the gospel of austerity increasingly comes into question.
The argument for Keynesianism
Not so long ago, the OECD was a proponent of the austere approach to balancing books at fiscal level. However, in a change of tune which mirrors that of the IMF a week ago, Catherine Mann, the OECD’s chief economist, has pointed out that the cycle of low growth has become a self-fulfilling trap. Businesses clearly have less incentive to invest if demand, both at home and abroad, is insufficient, and, coupled with the problems facing the global economy, believes the net result is a series of “negative feedback loops.”
Her proposed solution? Structural reform, and, more importantly, a collectively more expansionary fiscal policy among OECD countries, with investment in infrastructure and public works at the heart of it. To put it simply, the focus should be on spending our way out of low productivity, wage growth and investment into a state of financial health – rather than cutting our way there. It’s a way of balancing the books that would no doubt get a firm nod of approval from John Maynard Keynes.
Further analysis conducted by the organisation suggests that if all the rich OECD countries were to increase Government spending by 0.5 per cent of GDP, world growth would be boosted 0.4 points, with the EU and UK benefiting from a point pick-up to the tune of 0.6. And the kicker which may give Osborne some food for thought is that public debt stock in the UK would fall by 0.3 points.
So, would it actually work?
Certain politicians, economists and sectors of the electorate are in absolutely no doubt that such an approach would pay dividends, and that the increased expenditure at fiscal level would be more than offset by the increase in growth (and therefore tax receipts). The difficulty is that the only way of knowing if such a methodology would work is by actually trying it. And there isn’t much of a clamour for a shakeup among the OECD elite at the moment. In fact, the OECD’s secretary general Ángel Gurría made the observation: “They are talking about it, but they are not doing it.”
The cynic might observe that the only situation which may predicate a change of tack would be if things were to get worse, thus blowing the austerity argument out the water and paving the way for change. There are currently a whole cocktail of threats which could oblige, so perhaps that day isn’t too far away!
Or perhaps, rather than economic disaster, it will just need a brave (and elected) Government to step up to the plate and sell the idea of change.
But they would do so by putting their political lives on the line. Quantitative easing, suppression of interest rates, buying of bonds… these have all been tried and either failed, or loosely maintained the status quo. So is fiscal expansion the missing link which will take us from the state of limbo we currently find ourselves in and towards sustained growth? Or is it a last resort, destined to make things worse?
Who on earth want to be a politician these days.
- Will we live in a country of negative interest rates?
- The EU referendum debate and us
- Corbynomics, Clinton-Greenspan and Lady Luck
Get email updates for future blogs:
Our website offers information about saving, investing, tax and other financial matters, but not personal advice. If you're not sure whether peer-to-peer lending is right for you, please seek independent financial advice, and if you decide to invest with Lending Works, please read our Key Lender Information PDF first.
Since opening our doors back in 2014, we’ve always prided ourselves on living and breathing two key principles at Lending Works: innovation, and putting the customer first in everything we do.
With the retail sector enduring its fair share of challenges, companies are looking at new ways to attract customers, and drive conversion. In an overcrowded, dog-eat-dog marketplace, with behemoths such as Amazon flexing their muscle, it’s easier said than done.
On 4 June 2019, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) released its new regulatory framework for peer-to-peer lending (P2P); a Policy Statement known as PS19/14. As you might imagine, it's a document which, following a three-month consultation, is a hefty read of no fewer than 102 pages.
Wednesday’s Budget speech, coupled with the cut to Bank of England rates, represented a decisive response to the coronavirus. Here we analyse the impact it will have on mitigating disruption from Covid-19, along with the long-term implications of this significant fiscal stimulus.
Rumblings from the Treasury ahead of next week's Budget suggest tax grabs will be needed to fund increased spending, and it appears UK enterprise could be in the firing line. Here we articulate why targeting entrepreneurs and small business is ill advised.
In a difficult climate, customer acquisition and lead generation present stern challenges for UK retailers, and a great deal of marketing spend invariably gets directed towards getting feet through the door.
Over the last decade, there can be little dispute that the reputation of mainstream banks – and particularly the so-called ‘Big Four’ (HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds and RBS) – is at its lowest ebb.
The 2019-20 ISA season has been a damp squib, with banks disinterested in attracting savers’ cash, rates cut, and the stock market in freefall. However, the emergence of the IFISA means alternatives beckon for those seeking a stable middle ground in terms of risk and reward.
In a decade of slow recovery, the rapid rise in asset prices has been the standout. But how sustainable has price growth been, and could we be in the midst of a bubble?
Most people consider income tax to be a given, but in the UK it is barely two centuries old. In this article, we look at how this tax has developed over the years, and also why it is set to remain at the core of our tax system for many decades to come.
Open banking celebrated its second birthday last month, but has the ‘revolution for financial services’ that was promised actually come to pass? In this article, we look at the progress the initiative has made so far, and what the future holds in the face of high levels of scepticism.
On the face of it, a 'broken' energy market needed fixing, and the price caps introduced in early 2019 were heralded as the solution. But, one year later, have they actually helped consumers save?