Buried in the Financial Times today is an interesting piece by Quentin Peel on a row erupting in Germany over the extent and scope of the welfare state. He writes that
“It is a classic debate between liberals, conservatives and social democrats over the right and wrongs of welfare for the long-term unemployed, and about who pays to fund Germany’s generous but over-burdened system.”
Worth a quick read, if you can tear yourself away from the Royal Rumble of letters going on between of the most prominent UK & international economists. Two letters in the FT today (including Skidelsky & Stiglitz as signatories) to rebut one in the Sunday Times – and most remarkably, each shadowing a distinct party line on appropriate timing. So after months of trying to convince the voters of distinct dividing lines, it looks like the economists have done the job for the parties.
I am not an economist (big disclaimer), but after reading Shiller, Taleb etc last year I would be deeply suspicious of the ability of either side to predict with anything with certainty – though that seems to be instinctively closer to today’s position than Sunday’s. Tim Harford has written saying something similar, but (perhaps sensibly) doesn’t take sides. The FT leader, however, was much stronger – read here.
hat tip: Alisdair & Becca
