Leaving aside the question of who we think the Tories are, and what they stand for: If we assume they actually do want to do something about it, the better question is "CAN they?" Taking that question to the next level, can any other party that held power in the last 30 years make the changes needed to address the concerns of the non-urban class that has emerged and made their concerns manifest? Sniping about the Tories being "That's not who they are as people, or as a party." doesn't offer any constructive ideas about how to assure the existing electorate who rejected 90's style neo-liberalism that your desired policy directions will not negatively impact them. If anything, it only reinforces their views.
Antediluvian Atheist - That’s the lie the left always propagate. They constantly reinvent themselves. Where as it’s Labour who seem unable or unwilling to do so to win popular support.
This is kinda blue sky thinking that doesn't address the Tories other big reason for existence. Sure they exist to maintain power but they also exist to transfer wealth upwards to established elites and to maintain this hierarchy. It would indeed be easy for the Tories to lovebomb Northern England with investment and new industry. But that won't transfer money upwards and for all that would guarantee them power for 20 years or more, neglecting their bases desire for an ever bigger slice of the pie is as dangerous to them as no longer pandering to racism. There are half a dozen or more wedge issues that the Tories can continue to exploit and maintain power without even considering spending money outside of London and FPTP makes controlling power through wedge issues pretty damn easy. And to that end, they just don't need to invest in poor parts of the country. So the answer to the $64k question is No. They will not do it because they don't have to, there's lots of other ways they can stay in power and fulfil their other core goals.
Yes, wedge issues can push enough people to vote against their own actual interests. But, firstly, that works both ways and, secondly, it does not provide stability once you've gradually positioned yourself into such an extreme that you'd actually have to put your verbal stance into actively pursued policy and enforce it rigidly. Excellent comment, Alasdair, thank you.
Mark Blyth the Spanish have said on many occasions that they would welcome an independent Scotland into the EU. The only proviso is that they obtain their independence legally.
Who in Spain said this? Certainly, the ruling classes, the Spanish elite and their fans have said this, but you've missed the point of what Mark just said. The elite in Britain said all sorts of things, assumed all sorts of things, then... oops, Brexit.
This is the opinion of someone living with a secure, well paid job in America. Everything he's arguing might be good for Britain is 100% at odds with the current education, health, benefit, housing, training cutting policy of the Tories. He lives in a what if world. The Conservative Government is totally oppossed to everything he says can make Britain better.
Agreed. He's making a lot of postulation based on the UK having a competent, well intentioned government whilst all evidence points to cleptocracy, ineptitude and corruption.
So you are questioning the objectivity of his opinions because he has "a secure, well paid job in America"? Despite being clearly an intelligent man, with a proven track record of understanding the issues (Prof of Economics)?
@@jchanning72 Yes I am. He's not living under the most destructive right wing Tory government Britain has probably ever had. He is assuming that the government would carry out the policies he recommends to make this work. He doesn't have the in depth knowledge of the political situation in the UK. As you correctly say, he is an American economist who left Scotland behind many years sgo.
@@phillheth I think Varoufakis would say economists make lots of predictions that are wrong. He however, and the RUclips Videos from 2016 are easy to find, highlighted the problems with negotiating with the EU and the challenges we faced based on Greece's experience. The EU and globalization is the real problem here and Blyth is consistently right on that.
I don't plan on moving from my home town, but I'd sure be upset if I had the right to do so taken away from me. We should be breaking down borders, not putting them up.
The problem with open boarder is their needs to be a level playing field not huge wealth inequality .if there is inequality the poor will always migrate to the country with free health care and befits and the rich will migrate to the country with the most relaxed tax laws .when the EU started their was a level playing field within reason but the EU expanded Easton Europe the poor from the old USSR joined and undercut the working class driving down wages and increase in population drove up rent and demand for housing - jobs school places - hospital waiting list .the more tax generated by these jobs was not invested in the above - then their was the migrant crisis putting even bigger demand on all the above and you had the EU demanding all members spend less austerity .so that is what is wrong with open boarders .good for business - economy growth where driving down wages is part of the business model bad for people who like the small town they live in or have a vested interest in the local community friends - family and was happy living where they was and didn't want to move to London or take advantage of a business opportunity in Europe !.
So, if the conservative goverment starts investing in the future, everything might get better. I agree. But the party has been in power for ten years and promised much... without ever delivering on it. And claiming the EU stopped them from investing in Technology sounds more than sketchy.
Is it really investing though? Since they had such severe austerity for the past decade, wouldn't it be more an attempt to "balance" things closer to where it was before in an attempt to appease?
According to Blyth of 6 years ago, the current Tory government needs to cut spending and pay off the deficit because the government should make anti-cyclic policy because a new recession is coming and during that recession, the private sector will be cutting and the government should then be ready to spend. Now, Blyth says the opposite. Apparently, because he backed Brexit as a positive thing.
No chance the Tories will change, absolutely no chance. They have not in over 100 years so why will they suddenly change now? More profit more profit more profit. They will not miss this chance of making their backers even more insanely rich.
Great to witness Dan having his opinion shifted, however slightly, by clear, rational, honest reporting - helped by the fact that Mark is a confirmed Remainer with high economics credentials. Dan's willingness to reevaluate on the spot is rare to see on the Left these days (and it's even rarer on the Right).
Let's try it and find out. No matter what the cost and risk, we are going to experiment with the UK and see how Brexit works/doesn't work. These brave UK citizens showing the world how courageous actions can change the world. Good Luck.
Are they going to become the party of public investment? I really doubt it. I think they'll continue with austerity but do a few little concessions here and there and then lecture everyone and say they are being greedy and unrealistic for wanting decent healthcare and affordable education and decent wages and some kind of action to prevent the destruction of the planet.
I was searching for this. It took too long because I couldn't remember Mark Blyth's name, his wonderful accent, his view regarding the EU i.e interview with Yanis Varoufakis I could not forget those aspects.
This guy is so deluded. If the UK wants to have their cake and eat it, the EU 27 will try the same, and the EU is stronger. He really expects BoJo to tackle inequality. It was the UK that pushed the EU to a neoliberal policy, and Brexit got funding because the EU wanted to push back on the banking system.
Lovely Intellectual exercise Mark. You v'e obviously managed to distance yourself from the realities of British daily life (at least someones got out) We live with food banks and real poverty. This austerity is a deliberate attempt to force down wages and conditions. The policy is. "If you think you v'e got it bad just look at your unemployed neighbour. No change in government will end this, they have to feed the billionaires first.
It's one of the great ironies. Many of the working classes voted Brexit, but they will the ones who are hurt the most by it. What's left of British manufacturing in the midlands and North will be hit much harder than the City of London.
We live with austerity because people keep voting for low taxes. The people are just greedy; look at all the pensioners who voted for low taxes in the eighties and nineties when they were working and now expect the state to foot the bill for their dotage. Heaven forbid they might be forced to use the capital they built up during their working.
This video is a waste of time. 5:26 A political consensus where we all were liberal cosmopolitans until 2016, and THAT is to be blamed for the financial crisis?! You must be kidding me: immigration was always an issue, there were financial crisis even before. I mean, the lehman brothers financial crisis? The whole banks that needed to bought out? What does that have to do with this liberal crap that isn't even a consensus? I get that every crisis is an opportunity of change, but I utterly disagree with the starting point of this dialogue. The financial crisis are but a symptom of a system that isn't working. And I also don't get how the EU is preventing a nation to invest in engineering and education. In fact, even if we disregard the funds that they specifically set up for these fields, nothing stops a nation from doing it's own thing. Finland has a very different and quite extensive education system, that is miles away from the UK's private school and kind of "class"-divided system. 11:27 The majority of the British population doesn't benefit from the EU? I really wished there was an economic study, or anything, any numbers to back up such a claim. I mean, it's not like the EU helped Thatcher during the mining crisis or even to this day subsidies Wales with billions, right? And I guess free trade doesn't matter either and tariffs on consumer goods have no impact on a populations purchasing power either, huh. 12:47 The Swedish Democrats are an interesting example. Did you know that they changed their tune about leaving the EU in 2019? I wonder why that is... 14:48 Again, this idea that immigration wasn't a problem before. Where have you been living? More importantly, if Brexit means immigration, which is what this conversation is turning into, do you really think the French will stop the migrants from crossing the channel now? The migration quotas from the EU were propositions, that can be turned down, as many EU countries did. The amalgamation of the terms does a disservice to a constructive dialogue: yes, let's talk about immigration, but what does that have to do with Brexit? 18:37 The EU constitution disables you from spending money for public investment? What are you even talking about? 'cause that's just blatantly not true, unless something else was meant? 19:19 Yeah, you've lost me: to tackle climate change, we need to do it on a national level, learn from one another and then scale it up; that's the point made. Nothing in the EU prevents anyone from doing just that. In fact, some countries go further than the "pacts" referenced. What is missing from the equation to tackle climate change is political appetite, political will. And right, the little bits of consistent political will are at the EU. 22:16 "are the conservative still the party of austerity" is a phrase uttered. It's in the name ... Oh yeah, 'cause when I think conservative, I think welfare and equality. Why wouldn't these elitist etonian educated people stand for that, huh...
Anne - I think you should look at more of Mark Blyth's work. You seem to be taking much of his hard fact cynicism too literally. He is very much on the side of the decent and more generally the left, often he is quite brilliant and he takes nothing for granted. Plus he's fae Dundee - you won't find many old etonian's up there or supporters o' them.
@@terencequinn2682 But that's the thing: it's not "hard fact cynicism", it's misrepresentation. I understand that it might be a sort of shorthand to quickly explain his position or an argument, but that doesn't make it valid by itself. There are a lot of myths and lies spread about the EU, more than enough, and this doesn't help rectify the situation or address the issues of the union. I guess I just can't translate what he means, and really don't how I'm supposed to read between the lines when he repeats this idea, at least three times, of his starting position as a "liberal consensus" that pissed people off, or immigration not been a problem in the past. I mean, if you wanna be really broad about it, I guess what he is saying is that every crisis has the potential to incite change, for the better, be it for the EU or the UK. But that's incredible basic as far as a position go, and, as he states, is depend on the current government, which even I can hear in his voice, he has little faith in. So why even hope for that? Sure, lead has a chance to spontaneously turn itself into gold, but is that likely to happen? I certainly wouldn't have framed this dialogue with the introductory message of it challenging brexit positions or filling its audience with optimism.
Ppl forget there was a left argument for Bexit. Many said Corbyn govt wouldn't have been able to really make the transformations they would ideally want while in the EU. Also, wonder if some of the transitions will be "tamer" for now until the election happens in the U.S.
He strikes me as a nihilist trying to argue opportunistically more than with the heart. Also his analysis of stuff is too simplistic. For example the danish right wing party he talked about is a left wing party with a right wing foreign policy. He acknowledges that the EU will not allow anything that threaten the power of status quo but thinks that Britain having their cake and eating it is a viable strategy. Etc.
He has been saying that for a lot of right wing parties, including Trump. During the primaries Blyth pointed out that Trump was a lifelong democrat promising universal health care. So he made the case that Trump would move to the center after the primaries. Rather than making new very wrong predictions,why doesn't he address why he was wrong about Trump?
well said, pretty much covers it: "Ever since 2016, the professional-managerial class has been flailing around psychologically. A sense of complacency and meritocratic entitlement was rudely disrupted by the events of that year. Suddenly, a class of people raised to believe they were on the right side of history and in charge of the narrative based on their credentials and education had the rug pulled out from underneath them. The response-and especially the desire to believe that they have been stabbed in the back; victims of nefarious conspiracies-has been telling. It’s that sense of entitlement curdling into something ugly. The belief that there simply can’t be any honest or legitimate opposition to their interests out there. That anyone who doesn’t buy their dreary utopia of means-tested liberal individualism and technocratic control is stupid, or a bigot, or under foreign control, or perhaps all three. Meanwhile, they hang out on Twitter and participate in an extreme, cultish, and psychologically damaging culture of competitive victimhood, guilt, and anxiety, one that’s always upping the ante and demanding new postures of abjection and collective responsibility. They socialise only with the like-minded, and can’t see how odd they appear to anyone outside their narrow circles. Every month, it seems to get worse. I genuinely don’t know where we go from here."
Already near the start this is wrong - "the EU sells cars...stuff the UK doesn't make". That's not correct. It's not it's main industry and thanks to Brexit the remaining car factories are diminishing faster, but the UK does make cars. And no, it is democracy to have a 2nd referendum. FFS, the UK was given a further 2 GEs by the Tories until they got the majority they wanted. If you want to hold that a result should be taken to the limit, then May should still be in power and with her slight majority. A 2nd Ref could have still been Brexit, and Remainers would have given up it if it was voted a second time. Brexiters themselves said that if the result was inverse, they would not have stopped, so why all this call for Remainers to do so? The government acted on the Ref result, started the process, the negotiations, and then Brexit was shown to be wholly different to what people had voted on, so it absolutely would have been democratic to have a vote when people knew better what Brexit actually meant and had the detail, especially since there were so many illegal campaign violations and outright lies told at the time of the vote. I don't know any Remainer who thinks everything will collapse after Brexit, of course trade will continue, the problem is at what cost and what sort of racist, navel gazing, lower standards, less rights, tax evading, money laundering, increased gap between rich and poor, country the UK will be after. Flares were sent up about what could go wrong because the Tories showed themselves to be completely incompetent, unaware of reality relating to ports, what the EU is actually about, the high amount of just-in-time deliveries required, drugs, Good Friday Agreement, etc etc. If there are not huge problems with those areas, Brexiters will say that it was all Remoaner scare tactics, but it is precisely because of highlighting these problems that the government, and BoE, was then able to put together plans to alleviate any problems, much like the Y2K bug, although we have yet to see if they have enacted competent plans.
"......the UK does make cars". I think the point that Blyth was making (rather too quickly) is that other than niche brands (Aston Martin, TVR, Morgan etc) none of the car makers producing cars in the UK are British owned. Many are just assembly plants and cannot be relied upon to provide long term employment. I think Johnson may have a battle keeping these plants in the UK.
@@jchanning72 Specific example is him saying that he thinks Johnson has recognized that government spending is needed to develop AI, green&nanotech and that this is why he is saying the things he does. He is literally saying the absurd thing that the EU forced the UK to do austerity. Blyth takes the things he believes in and he thinks are logical, and tries to recognize them om current politics. He still thinks Brexit is a good thing, despite the UK being on the road to have no deal with the EU while currently following all EU rules without having a say in them. And he always said the Democrats are wrong for trying to impeach Trump for being corrupt and that they should just accept Trump but campaign on their own policies. Trump has done irreparable damage to the institutional foundations of democracy. Blyth is projecting his ideas on these incompetent leaders that became popular exactly because they are incompetent. And Blyth sees some master plan behind it, somehow.
@@jackwalters742 At the complete beginning, Blyth actually believed Trump would implement the left wing populist policies Trump mentioned during the GOP primaries. And in this video he still literally says that Trump cares for the people that put him in power. Yet it is clear he doesn't even care for those people closest to him. And many of those people have actually been shafted by Trump.
@@Prometheus4096 true; and though I haven't heard everything Mark has had to say about trump, I've never heard him compliment that idiot in a broad sense and he probably knows by now taking trump at his word is a mistake. It strikes me as odd that anyone checking his bio ever would. Blyth was particularly derogatory in Mark and Carrie this month.
140 UK companies have moved to the Netherlands. What about the "just in time" Car industry imperative? Bye bye Japanese motor industry as it relocates to say Spain
padbrit Don't worry about car production. It will. come to an end in 20- 25 years (max). Who wants to invest billions into a plant that takes 15 years to get the primary investment back
"However, in our current circumstance in which people in power for decades at least have turned a deaf ear to the will of the people, I lean toward agreement that populism, even with its ugly parts intact, is a necessary corrective and as such a vital expression of democracy in our time."
@mididoctors “The Black Obelisk (German: Der schwarze Obelisk) is a novel written in 1956 by the German author Erich Maria Remarque.” www.amazon.com/Black-Obelisk-Erich-Maria-Remarque/dp/0449912442/ref=nodl_
I really am dubious of the Tories making the necessary investments to address inequality, not while there are characters like Priti Patel and Dominic Raab in office. What they're going to do is gerrymander like crazy, it's on page 48 of their manifesto.
5:03 If you want to see the through line, certainly a large background element of a bigger picture if you will, between Brexit, and "Trumpism" and even ScoMo in Australia then you'd really be looking at Murdoch holding a majority stake in their country's media.
@@ireneuszpyc6684 Yep. If it wasn't Murdoch, it would be some other owner of those media outlets. And Murdoch may own the most egregious media outlets but there is plenty of blame to share around amongst others.
Only two or three months or so ago, Blyth was (giving me major consolation for Corbyn's likely election loss by) hyphothesising that Corbyn didn't even want to win because he knew that having to do Brexit would destroy the Tory Party. His thinking seems to have moved on somewhat here.
Yeah, Blyth kept saying that Corbyn wanted to Tories to destroy themselves more than to be PM. And for that, Corbyn needed Johnson to win. I think Blyth cannot accept incompetence and tries to come up with some masterplan. He has been doing the same thing with Trump. And it is really dangerous to believe these things. Corbyn really believed he could win an election, negotiate a socialist paradise Brexit deal with the EU, and leave the EU. People really need to thing carefully about what Blyth is saying, because ever since austerity, he hasn't really been correct on anything.
Mark Blyth is always worth listening to on economic issues, and I wanted to hear his views on Brexit. I became a fan after reading his book on austerity, which explained why it never works. I agree with him on Brexit, Britain will be fine. Most American, as well as many British commentators, don't seem to understand how the UK economy works. They just repeat the groupthink/propaganda they hear in the Western media that Brexit is bad. An insightful talk.
After many hours of research I have found no evidence to even suggest Brexit will be any more that an absolute economic disaster. Remember that the Tories and UK industry owners have over the years sold everything off, the UK own nothing, except roads, education and the NHS not much else. So if you think the UK will be Ok please give me some fact's, no rhetoric just fact's.
"Whenever you hear the words “a country has to be competitive,” it’s not more competition among businesses, it’s that every country has to do whatever it can to make available the closest thing to slave labor as possible. Period. No wishy-washy jargon needed to cover the basic fact"
@@lanceringquist815 You'd think signing NAFTA would be enough to make the Clinton's so toxic they couldn't walk thru the halls of D.C. but no no She even was presenting a new NAFTA that encompassed the pacific rim until that became too toxic of a position to hold publicly. It's all becoming so annoying I'm about ready to help the socialists just so we can set the whole thing on fire and be done with it....
@@grazzitdvram "The Clinton era epitomized the vast difference between appearance and reality, spin and actuality. As the decade drew to a close, Clinton basked in the glow of a lofty stock market, a budget surplus and the passage of this key banking “modernization.” It would be revealed in the 2000s that many corporate profits of the 1990s were based on inflated evaluations, manipulation and fraud. When Clinton left office, the gap between rich and poor was greater than it had been in 1992, and yet the Democrats heralded him as some sort of prosperity hero."
@@lanceringquist815 Don't forget the reason why the stockmarket was booming and the economy in general was looking sharp was because it was the height of the dot.com boom. That was it though, if you look you'll see 200k manufacturing jobs left the country every year after they signed nafta. It was all a bit smoke and mirrors around that presidency which IMO launched the corporate democrats into power. Funny isn't it that literally the second the soviet union dies that the GoP went full neocon and the democrats went full on corporate with hardly a word of resistance. I think even bernie voted for at least one of those wars when they bothered to get approval.
It's a pitty Mark scratched the Perth Vs east cost thing here in Australia. The investment into military percurment is a bumbling topic. Instead of investing in house development of long turm vision, the ellet view is to buy arms off shelf and do maintenance in port, mainly in New South Wales, the fudualcapitalism neoliberial Sydney view. The neoliberial coal power, no cliement change vs labour wind and solar, the grean deal,. The impact of low gas prices grid battries, the fires and floods have turned this all on its head. Wait until the food in the duopoly 80% of the super markets start thinning out because of the virus.
Let me start by saying that I tell everyone who will listen to me that Mark is the smartest man on earth. I honestly do. The only thing I disagree with him on is his stance about what the future of crypto could look like. That said, at 17:35 Mark states that highly complex matters shouldn't be put to referendum. That seriously smells of "Don't let the plebs at these things". His follow up thought of "But at least listen to them when you DO" doesn't negate the feeling that his default position sounds like societies are better run by technocrats that don't hide behind the veneer of democracy. These are the same technocrats he rails at from the Fed and Davos who win Nobel awards in economics and the like and are then proven within a decade to be completely, structurally, wrong about everything. What the AF?
Blyth is right that Boris saying no to another Scottish referendum will stop independence for the time being, but his actions will only serve to bolster SNP numbers and ultimately lead to independence. The more you tell a people they can't have something, the more they'll want it.
Could you translate this one to german Mark. The germans are scratching their heads over the rise of the AFD in its eastern regions. This explains it perfectly. Boston, Lincolnshire exists across a large portion of eastern Germany.
The EU did not shrink voluntarily and really by very little, the UK "lost" 50% of its free trade, in regards to the EU , for EU it is single digits. On the other hand EU's growth numbers will look better not having the UK dragging it down. Not that that matter, what matters are the individual countries numbers. As we say "The UK the first country in the world putting sanctions on itself"
D.R. < so ,brexit has a chance to be the right move and in long term, improve our position ? M/ M. Yeah, we could improve our position , but HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BREXIT , it's all about the global picture ... (keeps going on about US politics ...) D.R.- Conclusion (presented in the intro ) Brexit might be the right choice , says M.B.!!! Right....I usually don't listen to hosts who tell me what I'm going to hear BEFORE hearing it ....but I figured, if he is so well connected to get Mark 's interview ... yeah, I was right the first time.
The problem I see with Mark's description of why Labour's failure as a positive alternative to the abysmal Tory govt. was down to 'Brexit' is that it is kind but inadequate to put it solely down to Brexit, The problem was also hugely the success of the right wing / centre ground broadcast and printed media's packaging of Labour in a negative frame (fabrication, misinformation), and also the well funded propaganda campaign against Corbyn in particular.
Okay, I tried to listen till the end, even if I don't agree on much of his ideas. But "technocratic elitist pandering" is a clear sign this guy is not remotly an objective source that brings new light into the topic.
Would you like to quote an objective source? Maybe you can find a right winger or Trump supporter who has a tiny part of objectivity or even wasn't just out and out corrupt. Go on then name one.
@@terencequinn2682 ??? I haven't found one so far. What has this to do with my comment? I criticized him for not being objective. "Technocratic elitist pandering" is what he said, not my describtion of him,
People would not like to know the actual percentage of working age people working. they are not working because? Some have wealth, some decided. they will live with less and enjoy their life. Some the money they would make would not justify the expence and time spent. The not working are out on the streets driving around everywhere doing errands, clogging the highways. But what is the percentage? Really high using the countries rds and highways as an indicator.
Getting BREXIT right. Brexit is a racist project. It's very right. Leave winning the referendum made racism in politics normative. It's a utter catastrophe that lexiteers can not address with the economic arguments.
Interesting discussion, though I think Mark may need to brush up on his knowledge of Australia there, cause he was just shooting in the dark with that comment lol
Not so sure on that. True, Perth is by no means poor, but there is certainly an attitude there that WA pays more to Canberra then it gets back. GST revenue has been a bit of a sticking point for some time.
@@danielmorse922 That was said a lot during the mining boom, sure. But since that, I've not heard a lot about it. I've not looked up the numbers recently, but I wouldn't be surprised if WA get more in GST now then it produces, given the rough economic situation there. I'm just speculating based on some fuzzy memories here though, so do correct me if I'm wrong, as I haven't searched for the numbers myself.
" one of the main reasons why even sophisticated societies fall into this suicidal spiral is the conflict between the short-term interests of decision-making elites and the long-term interests of society as a whole, especially if the elites are able to insulate themselves from the consequences of their actions. the reason why even sophisticated societies fail is because the elites are never made to pay a price for their follies"
"If money is the transfer of work and time, we’ve decided our kids under free trade will need to work more in the future, and spend less time with their families, so wealthy people can make more money and pay lower taxes today. If that sounds immoral, trust your instincts."
The 64K answer is No! 3 years of trump is all you need to look back on. Mark's totally right about what needs to happen, but it's still bankers and billionaires at this point.
I do think Mark Blyth is being massively over optimistic about the tories. It's a bit like a rabbit thinking that maybe the wolf won't eat him , despite the warren being almost empty.
"when I remember Clinton fought so hard for NAFTA and gutting New Deal protections against the finance sector and Obama working so hard to protect the finance sector and prevent any significant reform, I can’t blame the working class in the US or in the UK for refusing to trust anyone who hasn’t proven that they really stand with the working class."
Like when David Cameron said in 2010 "We'll sort out the economy or you can vote us out" before removing that promise from their website for the 2015 election aaaaaaand... we voted him back in. (edit: the economy was worse)
"free trade economics has a over reliance and repetition of the same thinking over and over again. a over reliance on outdated ideas and theories, outdated mathematics and mathematical models. A over reliance on mathematical models that are devoid of reality. "
"free trade was thought to be the solution. But as we have just learned, or admitted there are limits to every insane thing. We are now at the stage of beating a dead horse. Because there is no place left on earth to reinvest for enough profit to continue to reinvest if we are forced to pay for all our “externalities”.
I reject your framing: If we’ve lifted billions of people in the third world out of extreme poverty how is the global economy not working for people? It’s a depressingly casual and lazy framing of an otherwise interesting discussion.
It's not working for a lot of people with significant voting power in developed democratic nations. Also: We have the resources to get the people at the very bottom out of poverty already, they're just not getting access to them. The global economy is only grudgingly helping them as a measure of last resort in the interest of accumulating even more wealth for the people at the top. So can we please not pretend that the current global economy is doing them a favor. It isn't - it's ruthlessly cutthroat virtueless mercantilism, nothing more.
@James Nicholl The points are orthogonal, of course they lifted themselves out of poverty. The west just took its boot of their necks. The elephant curve shows exactly who we sacrificed to that end... where those jobs and that money came from that let China and India build a middle class, and the rest of the world rise after them. The people who paid that price, whether it was in America or Southern Europe didn't know what they were signing up for with free trade. Which is why we have Trump and Boris. Now imagine what Africa could do if the EU dumped the common agricultural policy.
@James Nicholl No harm. We need to come up with a way to talk about the fact, that even though lots of things are broken and obviously so, we are far, far better off than we were just 100, 50, even 25 years ago on many fronts, and relatively speaking life is not nearly as shitty as we keep being told. The fact is that the economy, globally is working for many more people than it ever has before. Why and who is responsible is another argument all together. I have to say, this is the first time in 5 years (?) that I've heard Mark be optimistic.
Technological change isn't the same as economic policy. Who is "we?" The country who has lifted the most people out of poverty is probably China. Is that the example you want to uphold as the "Global Economy?" That's also lazy framing, in my opinion.
@@frenchtoasty17 Technological change is not the same as economic policy, thats an interesting observation, but I think it's wrong. If you look at them as technologies, then the productive output, as well as outcomes for the citizens appear to be provably better under republican (small 'r' not the US party) capitalism than authoritarian communism (USSR) or authoritarian quasi capitalism (China) or feudalism. Things like fractional reserve banking and central banks and, hell, pay day lenders are technologies developed to deal with specific problems. We're not used to think of those as technologies, but they are just as much as the laptop I'm writing this on. That being said, when I say, we I mean everybody. All the countries, peoples, groups etc. China couldn't do what it did (or for that matter if you want a more palatable and older example, India) with out the ascent of the powers already in charge (in China's case, in the WTO). But at some level it doesn't matter because even though the people on the ground are still serfs they are much better of than they were. Yeah, you're not free, but you're worried about starving quite as much as yesterday. Does this give the Chinese a pass? Hell no. But the people are still better off. You can't try to get your rights if you're starving or dead. To tie these things together, look at North vs South Korea. North Korea - shitty social technology - shitty outcome. South Korea - better social technology, went from mud huts to skyscrapers in 50 years. Even if you go down the list from Singapore to Indonesia to North Korea all dictatorial states more enlightened the dictator (i.e. better social tech) better outcome. Best outcome: India. Better social tech sometimes comes down to, letting your self get colonized. Thats what eastern europe had to do after the berlin wall fell.
"Free Trade is the application of extractivism (a particularly destructive form of anti-environmental capitalism typically personified by the fossil fuel, mining and deforestation industries) to individual human beings, en masse and increasingly globally."
"As for the “cooperative world” working for the benefit of all, great aspiration. Give me 1 historic example of this. its never happened, and this was pointed out by lincoln, lincoln one of americas greatest leaders understood this well, www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/abraham-lincoln-in-depth/abraham-lincoln-and-the-tariff/ “The globe is divided into different communities, each seeking to appropriate to itself all the advantages it can, without reference to the prosperity of others.”
Sorry but Mr Blythe appears to be a Brexiteer in disguise. The stuff he rambles about can be so easily debunked it just makes him look like a more elevated version of Dominic Raab.
@@mididoctors I was more interested in the "the stuff he rambles about can so easily be debunked" part than in you swapping out two made up terms. We'll wait.
"Are the Tories going to do anything about it?" No. That's not who they are as people, or as a party.
Actually, the Tories will re-invent themselves to say in power. If they think that this is what it will take to stay in government they will do it.
the tories are pro recycling, they recycle their manifesto even though they've had 10 yers to enact it :)
@thomas neale Boris will be a like fidesz hopefully but economically a little lefter because we can.
Leaving aside the question of who we think the Tories are, and what they stand for: If we assume they actually do want to do something about it, the better question is "CAN they?"
Taking that question to the next level, can any other party that held power in the last 30 years make the changes needed to address the concerns of the non-urban class that has emerged and made their concerns manifest?
Sniping about the Tories being "That's not who they are as people, or as a party." doesn't offer any constructive ideas about how to assure the existing electorate who rejected 90's style neo-liberalism that your desired policy directions will not negatively impact them. If anything, it only reinforces their views.
Antediluvian Atheist - That’s the lie the left always propagate. They constantly reinvent themselves. Where as it’s Labour who seem unable or unwilling to do so to win popular support.
This is kinda blue sky thinking that doesn't address the Tories other big reason for existence. Sure they exist to maintain power but they also exist to transfer wealth upwards to established elites and to maintain this hierarchy.
It would indeed be easy for the Tories to lovebomb Northern England with investment and new industry. But that won't transfer money upwards and for all that would guarantee them power for 20 years or more, neglecting their bases desire for an ever bigger slice of the pie is as dangerous to them as no longer pandering to racism.
There are half a dozen or more wedge issues that the Tories can continue to exploit and maintain power without even considering spending money outside of London and FPTP makes controlling power through wedge issues pretty damn easy. And to that end, they just don't need to invest in poor parts of the country.
So the answer to the $64k question is No. They will not do it because they don't have to, there's lots of other ways they can stay in power and fulfil their other core goals.
While i would like to believe Mark's more optimistic outlook of the situation, my gut tends to agree with you.
Excellently put Mr Allan
I guess that makes them very clever unlike the labour party
The eulogy of an ideological captive.
Yes, wedge issues can push enough people to vote against their own actual interests. But, firstly, that works both ways and, secondly, it does not provide stability once you've gradually positioned yourself into such an extreme that you'd actually have to put your verbal stance into actively pursued policy and enforce it rigidly.
Excellent comment, Alasdair, thank you.
Mark Blyth the Spanish have said on many occasions that they would welcome an independent Scotland into the EU. The only proviso is that they obtain their independence legally.
Who in Spain said this? Certainly, the ruling classes, the Spanish elite and their fans have said this, but you've missed the point of what Mark just said. The elite in Britain said all sorts of things, assumed all sorts of things, then... oops, Brexit.
This is the opinion of someone living with a secure, well paid job in America. Everything he's arguing might be good for Britain is 100% at odds with the current education, health, benefit, housing, training cutting policy of the Tories. He lives in a what if world. The Conservative Government is totally oppossed to everything he says can make Britain better.
Agreed. He's making a lot of postulation based on the UK having a competent, well intentioned government whilst all evidence points to cleptocracy, ineptitude and corruption.
So you are questioning the objectivity of his opinions because he has "a secure, well paid job in America"? Despite being clearly an intelligent man, with a proven track record of understanding the issues (Prof of Economics)?
@@jchanning72 Yes I am. He's not living under the most destructive right wing Tory government Britain has probably ever had. He is assuming that the government would carry out the policies he recommends to make this work. He doesn't have the in depth knowledge of the political situation in the UK. As you correctly say, he is an American economist who left Scotland behind many years sgo.
@@sandall7398 and as Yanis Varoufakis tell us repeatedly. Economists don't know anything. I may be paraphrasing slightly.
@@phillheth I think Varoufakis would say economists make lots of predictions that are wrong. He however, and the RUclips Videos from 2016 are easy to find, highlighted the problems with negotiating with the EU and the challenges we faced based on Greece's experience. The EU and globalization is the real problem here and Blyth is consistently right on that.
I don't plan on moving from my home town, but I'd sure be upset if I had the right to do so taken away from me. We should be breaking down borders, not putting them up.
what is this even supposed to mean?
@@Greensacks In reference to Mark's comment about freedom of movement in the EU.
@@quartzparchmentshears8368 But you can still move to Europe like Brits and non-Europeans have been doing since before the EU?
@@Greensacks But not even close to how easy it is now.
The problem with open boarder is their needs to be a level playing field not huge wealth inequality .if there is inequality the poor will always migrate to the country with free health care and befits and the rich will migrate to the country with the most relaxed tax laws .when the EU started their was a level playing field within reason but the EU expanded Easton Europe the poor from the old USSR joined and undercut the working class driving down wages and increase in population drove up rent and demand for housing - jobs school places - hospital waiting list .the more tax generated by these jobs was not invested in the above - then their was the migrant crisis putting even bigger demand on all the above and you had the EU demanding all members spend less austerity .so that is what is wrong with open boarders .good for business - economy growth where driving down wages is part of the business model bad for people who like the small town they live in or have a vested interest in the local community friends - family and was happy living where they was and didn't want to move to London or take advantage of a business opportunity in Europe !.
"EAT YOUR CAKE AND HAVE IT" Think about it, THAT'S the irrational expectation!
What's the point of having à piece of cake if you can't eat it?
@@benangel3268 Of course you can eat it. Just don't expect it to be there afterwards.
@@gerardvila4685 but Bojo and his Brexiteer fans will say they are glad it's no longer there
@@benangel3268 The idea is to have the impossible to eat it and still have one.
The Brexiteers want to have their cake and eat ours.
So, if the conservative goverment starts investing in the future, everything might get better. I agree. But the party has been in power for ten years and promised much... without ever delivering on it.
And claiming the EU stopped them from investing in Technology sounds more than sketchy.
Is it really investing though? Since they had such severe austerity for the past decade, wouldn't it be more an attempt to "balance" things closer to where it was before in an attempt to appease?
@@kyledrums Knowing that most of the UK research is funded by the UE in joint programs.
Balance? Doubling UK public debt. Without investing into the country? Where are the money then?
According to Blyth of 6 years ago, the current Tory government needs to cut spending and pay off the deficit because the government should make anti-cyclic policy because a new recession is coming and during that recession, the private sector will be cutting and the government should then be ready to spend. Now, Blyth says the opposite. Apparently, because he backed Brexit as a positive thing.
@@bartekpulkowski9765 In the hands of the rich.
Carrie’s voice is a lot deeper than usual.
No chance the Tories will change, absolutely no chance. They have not in over 100 years so why will they suddenly change now? More profit more profit more profit. They will not miss this chance of making their backers even more insanely rich.
Great to witness Dan having his opinion shifted, however slightly, by clear, rational, honest reporting - helped by the fact that Mark is a confirmed Remainer with high economics credentials. Dan's willingness to reevaluate on the spot is rare to see on the Left these days (and it's even rarer on the Right).
Let's try it and find out. No matter what the cost and risk, we are going to experiment with the UK and see how Brexit works/doesn't work.
These brave UK citizens showing the world how courageous actions can change the world.
Good Luck.
Are they going to become the party of public investment? I really doubt it. I think they'll continue with austerity but do a few little concessions here and there and then lecture everyone and say they are being greedy and unrealistic for wanting decent healthcare and affordable education and decent wages and some kind of action to prevent the destruction of the planet.
Even if they do it will be biased towards private kleptocratic entities
Blyth throws himself off a fifty story building and can be heard muttering so far so good so far so good !
I was searching for this. It took too long because I couldn't remember Mark Blyth's name, his wonderful accent, his view regarding the EU i.e interview with Yanis Varoufakis
I could not forget those aspects.
Great Britain’s last gasp as it breaks up ! England , Europe’s new Disneyland !
Uh, no. People WANT to go to disneyland.
@@antediluvianatheist5262 It would be a lot better than going to the racial conflict zone formerly known as the USA. What a shithole.
This guy is so deluded. If the UK wants to have their cake and eat it, the EU 27 will try the same, and the EU is stronger.
He really expects BoJo to tackle inequality. It was the UK that pushed the EU to a neoliberal policy, and Brexit got funding because the EU wanted to push back on the banking system.
Great talk, always enjoy prof. Blyth!
Europe 5G? Ever heard of Ericsson? Or Nokia?
Come off it, Boris? care about inequality etc, what a joke.
And yet he is paying the working population 80% of wages whilst in lockdown.
Lovely Intellectual exercise Mark. You v'e obviously managed to distance yourself from the realities of British daily life (at least someones got out) We live with food banks and real poverty. This austerity is a deliberate attempt to force down wages and conditions. The policy is. "If you think you v'e got it bad just look at your unemployed neighbour. No change in government will end this, they have to feed the billionaires first.
It's one of the great ironies. Many of the working classes voted Brexit, but they will the ones who are hurt the most by it. What's left of British manufacturing in the midlands and North will be hit much harder than the City of London.
We live with austerity because people keep voting for low taxes. The people are just greedy; look at all the pensioners who voted for low taxes in the eighties and nineties when they were working and now expect the state to foot the bill for their dotage. Heaven forbid they might be forced to use the capital they built up during their working.
This video is a waste of time.
5:26 A political consensus where we all were liberal cosmopolitans until 2016, and THAT is to be blamed for the financial crisis?! You must be kidding me: immigration was always an issue, there were financial crisis even before. I mean, the lehman brothers financial crisis? The whole banks that needed to bought out? What does that have to do with this liberal crap that isn't even a consensus? I get that every crisis is an opportunity of change, but I utterly disagree with the starting point of this dialogue. The financial crisis are but a symptom of a system that isn't working.
And I also don't get how the EU is preventing a nation to invest in engineering and education. In fact, even if we disregard the funds that they specifically set up for these fields, nothing stops a nation from doing it's own thing. Finland has a very different and quite extensive education system, that is miles away from the UK's private school and kind of "class"-divided system.
11:27 The majority of the British population doesn't benefit from the EU? I really wished there was an economic study, or anything, any numbers to back up such a claim. I mean, it's not like the EU helped Thatcher during the mining crisis or even to this day subsidies Wales with billions, right? And I guess free trade doesn't matter either and tariffs on consumer goods have no impact on a populations purchasing power either, huh.
12:47 The Swedish Democrats are an interesting example. Did you know that they changed their tune about leaving the EU in 2019? I wonder why that is...
14:48 Again, this idea that immigration wasn't a problem before. Where have you been living? More importantly, if Brexit means immigration, which is what this conversation is turning into, do you really think the French will stop the migrants from crossing the channel now? The migration quotas from the EU were propositions, that can be turned down, as many EU countries did. The amalgamation of the terms does a disservice to a constructive dialogue: yes, let's talk about immigration, but what does that have to do with Brexit?
18:37 The EU constitution disables you from spending money for public investment? What are you even talking about? 'cause that's just blatantly not true, unless something else was meant?
19:19 Yeah, you've lost me: to tackle climate change, we need to do it on a national level, learn from one another and then scale it up; that's the point made. Nothing in the EU prevents anyone from doing just that. In fact, some countries go further than the "pacts" referenced. What is missing from the equation to tackle climate change is political appetite, political will. And right, the little bits of consistent political will are at the EU.
22:16 "are the conservative still the party of austerity" is a phrase uttered. It's in the name ... Oh yeah, 'cause when I think conservative, I think welfare and equality. Why wouldn't these elitist etonian educated people stand for that, huh...
Anne - I think you should look at more of Mark Blyth's work. You seem to be taking much of his hard fact cynicism too literally. He is very much on the side of the decent and more generally the left, often he is quite brilliant and he takes nothing for granted. Plus he's fae Dundee - you won't find many old etonian's up there or supporters o' them.
@@terencequinn2682 But that's the thing: it's not "hard fact cynicism", it's misrepresentation. I understand that it might be a sort of shorthand to quickly explain his position or an argument, but that doesn't make it valid by itself. There are a lot of myths and lies spread about the EU, more than enough, and this doesn't help rectify the situation or address the issues of the union. I guess I just can't translate what he means, and really don't how I'm supposed to read between the lines when he repeats this idea, at least three times, of his starting position as a "liberal consensus" that pissed people off, or immigration not been a problem in the past.
I mean, if you wanna be really broad about it, I guess what he is saying is that every crisis has the potential to incite change, for the better, be it for the EU or the UK. But that's incredible basic as far as a position go, and, as he states, is depend on the current government, which even I can hear in his voice, he has little faith in. So why even hope for that? Sure, lead has a chance to spontaneously turn itself into gold, but is that likely to happen? I certainly wouldn't have framed this dialogue with the introductory message of it challenging brexit positions or filling its audience with optimism.
@@anneonyme213 - just watch a bit more of what he says, and he may not be right all the time but he is right so much of the time. Watch a bit more .
Well, all of this could happen. It's not gonna happen, but it could...
Mark Blyth, ever the optimist. I think it's time he becomes a realist.
Ppl forget there was a left argument for Bexit. Many said Corbyn govt wouldn't have been able to really make the transformations they would ideally want while in the EU. Also, wonder if some of the transitions will be "tamer" for now until the election happens in the U.S.
He strikes me as a nihilist trying to argue opportunistically more than with the heart. Also his analysis of stuff is too simplistic. For example the danish right wing party he talked about is a left wing party with a right wing foreign policy. He acknowledges that the EU will not allow anything that threaten the power of status quo but thinks that Britain having their cake and eating it is a viable strategy. Etc.
He has been saying that for a lot of right wing parties, including Trump. During the primaries Blyth pointed out that Trump was a lifelong democrat promising universal health care. So he made the case that Trump would move to the center after the primaries. Rather than making new very wrong predictions,why doesn't he address why he was wrong about Trump?
well said, pretty much covers it: "Ever since 2016, the professional-managerial class has been flailing around psychologically. A sense of complacency and meritocratic entitlement was rudely disrupted by the events of that year.
Suddenly, a class of people raised to believe they were on the right side of history and in charge of the narrative based on their credentials and education had the rug pulled out from underneath them.
The response-and especially the desire to believe that they have been stabbed in the back; victims of nefarious conspiracies-has been telling. It’s that sense of entitlement curdling into something ugly.
The belief that there simply can’t be any honest or legitimate opposition to their interests out there. That anyone who doesn’t buy their dreary utopia of means-tested liberal individualism and technocratic control is stupid, or a bigot, or under foreign control, or perhaps all three.
Meanwhile, they hang out on Twitter and participate in an extreme, cultish, and psychologically damaging culture of competitive victimhood, guilt, and anxiety, one that’s always upping the ante and demanding new postures of abjection and collective responsibility.
They socialise only with the like-minded, and can’t see how odd they appear to anyone outside their narrow circles. Every month, it seems to get worse. I genuinely don’t know where we go from here."
Already near the start this is wrong - "the EU sells cars...stuff the UK doesn't make". That's not correct. It's not it's main industry and thanks to Brexit the remaining car factories are diminishing faster, but the UK does make cars.
And no, it is democracy to have a 2nd referendum. FFS, the UK was given a further 2 GEs by the Tories until they got the majority they wanted. If you want to hold that a result should be taken to the limit, then May should still be in power and with her slight majority. A 2nd Ref could have still been Brexit, and Remainers would have given up it if it was voted a second time. Brexiters themselves said that if the result was inverse, they would not have stopped, so why all this call for Remainers to do so? The government acted on the Ref result, started the process, the negotiations, and then Brexit was shown to be wholly different to what people had voted on, so it absolutely would have been democratic to have a vote when people knew better what Brexit actually meant and had the detail, especially since there were so many illegal campaign violations and outright lies told at the time of the vote.
I don't know any Remainer who thinks everything will collapse after Brexit, of course trade will continue, the problem is at what cost and what sort of racist, navel gazing, lower standards, less rights, tax evading, money laundering, increased gap between rich and poor, country the UK will be after.
Flares were sent up about what could go wrong because the Tories showed themselves to be completely incompetent, unaware of reality relating to ports, what the EU is actually about, the high amount of just-in-time deliveries required, drugs, Good Friday Agreement, etc etc. If there are not huge problems with those areas, Brexiters will say that it was all Remoaner scare tactics, but it is precisely because of highlighting these problems that the government, and BoE, was then able to put together plans to alleviate any problems, much like the Y2K bug, although we have yet to see if they have enacted competent plans.
"......the UK does make cars". I think the point that Blyth was making (rather too quickly) is that other than niche brands (Aston Martin, TVR, Morgan etc) none of the car makers producing cars in the UK are British owned. Many are just assembly plants and cannot be relied upon to provide long term employment. I think Johnson may have a battle keeping these plants in the UK.
thank you
I like Blyth, but so far he has been wrong on Brexit and very wrong on Trump.
Specific examples?
Yeah, how so? Certainly not trump's good works (of which there are none).
@@jchanning72 Specific example is him saying that he thinks Johnson has recognized that government spending is needed to develop AI, green&nanotech and that this is why he is saying the things he does. He is literally saying the absurd thing that the EU forced the UK to do austerity. Blyth takes the things he believes in and he thinks are logical, and tries to recognize them om current politics. He still thinks Brexit is a good thing, despite the UK being on the road to have no deal with the EU while currently following all EU rules without having a say in them. And he always said the Democrats are wrong for trying to impeach Trump for being corrupt and that they should just accept Trump but campaign on their own policies. Trump has done irreparable damage to the institutional foundations of democracy. Blyth is projecting his ideas on these incompetent leaders that became popular exactly because they are incompetent. And Blyth sees some master plan behind it, somehow.
@@jackwalters742 At the complete beginning, Blyth actually believed Trump would implement the left wing populist policies Trump mentioned during the GOP primaries. And in this video he still literally says that Trump cares for the people that put him in power. Yet it is clear he doesn't even care for those people closest to him. And many of those people have actually been shafted by Trump.
@@Prometheus4096 true; and though I haven't heard everything Mark has had to say about trump, I've never heard him compliment that idiot in a broad sense and he probably knows by now taking trump at his word is a mistake. It strikes me as odd that anyone checking his bio ever would. Blyth was particularly derogatory in Mark and Carrie this month.
Great talk as usual. Cheers guys.
140 UK companies have moved to the Netherlands. What about the "just in time" Car industry imperative? Bye bye Japanese motor industry as it relocates to say Spain
padbrit Don't worry about car production. It will. come to an end in 20- 25 years (max). Who wants to invest billions into a plant that takes 15 years to get the primary investment back
The word 'Right' never belongs in the same sentence as BREXIT
@glyn matthews
Wrong right but Reich!
If you believe in democracy, it was definitely the right decision.
"However, in our current circumstance in which people in power for decades at least have turned a deaf ear to the will of the people, I lean toward agreement that populism, even with its ugly parts intact, is a necessary corrective and as such a vital expression of democracy in our time."
The Tories can't reverse austerity the economy is going to leave them no room. Wtf is going to buy sterling bonds!!!
@mididoctors
Have you ever read “The Black Obelisk”?
@@thalesnemo2841 sorry no. I have no handles on that reference. Is it the Arthur c Clarke story about the obelix on the moon that inspired 2001?
@mididoctors
“The Black Obelisk (German: Der schwarze Obelisk) is a novel written in 1956 by the German author Erich Maria Remarque.”
www.amazon.com/Black-Obelisk-Erich-Maria-Remarque/dp/0449912442/ref=nodl_
@@thalesnemo2841 good read? I am poorly read but consider myself a bit of a renaissance man .perhaps unworthy thou
I really am dubious of the Tories making the necessary investments to address inequality, not while there are characters like Priti Patel and Dominic Raab in office.
What they're going to do is gerrymander like crazy, it's on page 48 of their manifesto.
5:03 If you want to see the through line, certainly a large background element of a bigger picture if you will, between Brexit, and "Trumpism" and even ScoMo in Australia then you'd really be looking at Murdoch holding a majority stake in their country's media.
it's not Murdoch - it's immigration; Murdoch has to appease the working class, so he's giving them all the demagoguery & nationalism that they want
@@ireneuszpyc6684 Yep. If it wasn't Murdoch, it would be some other owner of those media outlets. And Murdoch may own the most egregious media outlets but there is plenty of blame to share around amongst others.
Can we have a follow up please?
Only two or three months or so ago, Blyth was (giving me major consolation for Corbyn's likely election loss by) hyphothesising that Corbyn didn't even want to win because he knew that having to do Brexit would destroy the Tory Party. His thinking seems to have moved on somewhat here.
Yeah, Blyth kept saying that Corbyn wanted to Tories to destroy themselves more than to be PM. And for that, Corbyn needed Johnson to win. I think Blyth cannot accept incompetence and tries to come up with some masterplan. He has been doing the same thing with Trump. And it is really dangerous to believe these things. Corbyn really believed he could win an election, negotiate a socialist paradise Brexit deal with the EU, and leave the EU. People really need to thing carefully about what Blyth is saying, because ever since austerity, he hasn't really been correct on anything.
Mark Blyth is always worth listening to on economic issues, and I wanted to hear his views on Brexit. I became a fan after reading his book on austerity, which explained why it never works. I agree with him on Brexit, Britain will be fine. Most American, as well as many British commentators, don't seem to understand how the UK economy works. They just repeat the groupthink/propaganda they hear in the Western media that Brexit is bad. An insightful talk.
After many hours of research I have found no evidence to even suggest Brexit will be any more that an absolute economic disaster. Remember that the Tories and UK industry owners have over the years sold everything off, the UK own nothing, except roads, education and the NHS not much else. So if you think the UK will be Ok please give me some fact's, no rhetoric just fact's.
"Whenever you hear the words “a country has to be competitive,” it’s not more competition among businesses, it’s that every country has to do whatever it can to make available the closest thing to slave labor as possible. Period. No wishy-washy jargon needed to cover the basic fact"
Strange how the people not in the centers of commerce are always the non competitive bits isn't it and how they always pay the most noticeable prices.
@@grazzitdvram "the Cliintoons threw the working class under the bus and HRC blames her demise on the Russians. You can't make this stuff up!"
@@lanceringquist815 You'd think signing NAFTA would be enough to make the Clinton's so toxic they couldn't walk thru the halls of D.C. but no no She even was presenting a new NAFTA that encompassed the pacific rim until that became too toxic of a position to hold publicly. It's all becoming so annoying I'm about ready to help the socialists just so we can set the whole thing on fire and be done with it....
@@grazzitdvram "The Clinton era epitomized the vast difference between appearance and reality, spin and actuality. As the decade drew to a close, Clinton basked in the glow of a lofty stock market, a budget surplus and the passage of this key banking “modernization.” It would be revealed in the 2000s that many corporate profits of the 1990s were based on inflated evaluations, manipulation and fraud. When Clinton left office, the gap between rich and poor was greater than it had been in 1992, and yet the Democrats heralded him as some sort of prosperity hero."
@@lanceringquist815 Don't forget the reason why the stockmarket was booming and the economy in general was looking sharp was because it was the height of the dot.com boom. That was it though, if you look you'll see 200k manufacturing jobs left the country every year after they signed nafta.
It was all a bit smoke and mirrors around that presidency which IMO launched the corporate democrats into power. Funny isn't it that literally the second the soviet union dies that the GoP went full neocon and the democrats went full on corporate with hardly a word of resistance. I think even bernie voted for at least one of those wars when they bothered to get approval.
It's a pitty Mark scratched the Perth Vs east cost thing here in Australia.
The investment into military percurment is a bumbling topic. Instead of investing in house development of long turm vision, the ellet view is to buy arms off shelf and do maintenance in port, mainly in New South Wales, the fudualcapitalism neoliberial Sydney view.
The neoliberial coal power, no cliement change vs labour wind and solar, the grean deal,. The impact of low gas prices grid battries, the fires and floods have turned this all on its head.
Wait until the food in the duopoly 80% of the super markets start thinning out because of the virus.
Very good analysis of the the opportunity and risk of Brexit.
I love the way that having modedt but positive growth rates, similar to the UK, means "teetering on the edge of a recession"
In the EU only one worse growth than the UK and that is italy...
Yes they have, what about Jo Cox?
Let me start by saying that I tell everyone who will listen to me that Mark is the smartest man on earth. I honestly do. The only thing I disagree with him on is his stance about what the future of crypto could look like.
That said, at 17:35 Mark states that highly complex matters shouldn't be put to referendum. That seriously smells of "Don't let the plebs at these things". His follow up thought of "But at least listen to them when you DO" doesn't negate the feeling that his default position sounds like societies are better run by technocrats that don't hide behind the veneer of democracy. These are the same technocrats he rails at from the Fed and Davos who win Nobel awards in economics and the like and are then proven within a decade to be completely, structurally, wrong about everything. What the AF?
It is all going pear shape!
Great Brexit analysis
Blyth is right that Boris saying no to another Scottish referendum will stop independence for the time being, but his actions will only serve to bolster SNP numbers and ultimately lead to independence. The more you tell a people they can't have something, the more they'll want it.
Could you translate this one to german Mark. The germans are scratching their heads over the rise of the AFD in its eastern regions. This explains it perfectly.
Boston, Lincolnshire exists across a large portion of eastern Germany.
The UK is like GE...
"Becoming great again be shrinking"
Or like the EU
The EU did not shrink voluntarily and really by very little, the UK "lost" 50% of its free trade, in regards to the EU , for EU it is single digits.
On the other hand EU's growth numbers will look better not having the UK dragging it down.
Not that that matter, what matters are the individual countries numbers.
As we say "The UK the first country in the world putting sanctions on itself"
again a proof that you cannot know the future, this analysis didn't age well
Deluded. As if Britain's economic decline was due to its EU membership. As if the US - where the same happens - is in the EU!
D.R. < so ,brexit has a chance to be the right move and in long term, improve our position ?
M/ M. Yeah, we could improve our position , but HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BREXIT , it's all about the global picture ... (keeps going on about US politics ...)
D.R.- Conclusion (presented in the intro ) Brexit might be the right choice , says M.B.!!!
Right....I usually don't listen to hosts who tell me what I'm going to hear BEFORE hearing it ....but I figured, if he is so well connected to get Mark 's interview ... yeah, I was right the first time.
18:30 One year on, make this talk again, very different outcome!
The problem I see with Mark's description of why Labour's failure as a positive alternative to the abysmal Tory govt. was down to 'Brexit' is that it is kind but inadequate to put it solely down to Brexit, The problem was also hugely the success of the right wing / centre ground broadcast and printed media's packaging of Labour in a negative frame (fabrication, misinformation), and also the well funded propaganda campaign against Corbyn in particular.
Plenty of young people have gone to university and got their degree or whatever , but they ain't earning any money,
excellent. Always get Mark on when you can - he's top notch.
Okay, I tried to listen till the end, even if I don't agree on much of his ideas. But "technocratic elitist pandering" is a clear sign this guy is not remotly an objective source that brings new light into the topic.
Would you like to quote an objective source? Maybe you can find a right winger or Trump supporter who has a tiny part of objectivity or even wasn't just out and out corrupt. Go on then name one.
@@terencequinn2682 ???
I haven't found one so far. What has this to do with my comment?
I criticized him for not being objective. "Technocratic elitist pandering" is what he said, not my describtion of him,
No mention of a United Ireland?
People would not like to know the actual percentage of working age people working. they are not working because? Some have wealth, some decided. they will live with less and enjoy their life. Some the money they would make would not justify the expence and time spent. The not working are out on the streets driving around everywhere doing errands, clogging the highways. But what is the percentage? Really high using the countries rds and highways as an indicator.
Jeez, Mark went full Tucker Carlson here.
Will the tory behave like labour should on economic ... Lol
Thank you Mark always enjoy listening to you. Answer to 64,000 dollar question NO. I accept American Express.
UK will have more freedom... but they will pay more in trade.
Getting BREXIT right. Brexit is a racist project. It's very right. Leave winning the referendum made racism in politics normative. It's a utter catastrophe that lexiteers can not address with the economic arguments.
1/3 of U.K BAME population voted for brexit.
A great talk.
Migration doesn’t just benefit the middle class. Most migrants are working class. Class trumps nation.
Interesting discussion, though I think Mark may need to brush up on his knowledge of Australia there, cause he was just shooting in the dark with that comment lol
Not so sure on that. True, Perth is by no means poor, but there is certainly an attitude there that WA pays more to Canberra then it gets back. GST revenue has been a bit of a sticking point for some time.
@@danielmorse922 That was said a lot during the mining boom, sure. But since that, I've not heard a lot about it. I've not looked up the numbers recently, but I wouldn't be surprised if WA get more in GST now then it produces, given the rough economic situation there. I'm just speculating based on some fuzzy memories here though, so do correct me if I'm wrong, as I haven't searched for the numbers myself.
6:19 Marianna Who? Thanks
Martin Grillo Marianna Mazzuccato
@@benjaminbogliacino7778 Thank you, Sir.
Mark is making similar points to Paul Embrey.
" one of the main reasons why even sophisticated societies fall into this suicidal spiral is the conflict between the short-term interests of decision-making elites and the long-term interests of society as a whole, especially if the elites are able to insulate themselves from the consequences of their actions.
the reason why even sophisticated societies fail is because the elites are never made to pay a price for their follies"
"If money is the transfer of work and time, we’ve decided our kids under free trade will need to work more in the future, and spend less time with their families, so wealthy people can make more money and pay lower taxes today. If that sounds immoral, trust your instincts."
"Western Australia vs the rich city's on the other coast"
western Australia has a per capita income almost twice that of the eastern states
The 64K answer is No! 3 years of trump is all you need to look back on. Mark's totally right about what needs to happen, but it's still bankers and billionaires at this point.
Brexit could be a success if the tory party would do everything different than they have done for the last ten years or more. Good luck with that.
I do think Mark Blyth is being massively over optimistic about the tories. It's a bit like a rabbit thinking that maybe the wolf won't eat him , despite the warren being almost empty.
Eh no tech giants ARM says hello!
"when I remember Clinton fought so hard for NAFTA and gutting New Deal protections against the finance sector and Obama working so hard to protect the finance sector and prevent any significant reform, I can’t blame the working class in the US or in the UK for refusing to trust anyone who hasn’t proven that they really stand with the working class."
7:30 wage inflation and full employment! Go Boris, or we replace you
Like when David Cameron said in 2010 "We'll sort out the economy or you can vote us out" before removing that promise from their website for the 2015 election aaaaaaand... we voted him back in. (edit: the economy was worse)
You _will_ get wage inflation _and_ full employment.
But I doubt you will like it, because there will be _hyperinflation_ of the £ in 2021.
There is No G in Brexit...its BreXit
"free trade economics has a over reliance and repetition of the same thinking over and over again. a over reliance on outdated ideas and theories, outdated mathematics and mathematical models. A over reliance on mathematical models that are devoid of reality. "
"free trade was thought to be the solution. But as we have just learned, or admitted there are limits to every insane thing. We are now at the stage of beating a dead horse.
Because there is no place left on earth to reinvest for enough profit to continue to reinvest if we are forced to pay for all our “externalities”.
I welcome our technocratic pandering future.
It's a Trap!
I reject your framing: If we’ve lifted billions of people in the third world out of extreme poverty how is the global economy not working for people? It’s a depressingly casual and lazy framing of an otherwise interesting discussion.
It's not working for a lot of people with significant voting power in developed democratic nations.
Also: We have the resources to get the people at the very bottom out of poverty already, they're just not getting access to them. The global economy is only grudgingly helping them as a measure of last resort in the interest of accumulating even more wealth for the people at the top. So can we please not pretend that the current global economy is doing them a favor. It isn't - it's ruthlessly cutthroat virtueless mercantilism, nothing more.
@James Nicholl The points are orthogonal, of course they lifted themselves out of poverty. The west just took its boot of their necks. The elephant curve shows exactly who we sacrificed to that end... where those jobs and that money came from that let China and India build a middle class, and the rest of the world rise after them. The people who paid that price, whether it was in America or Southern Europe didn't know what they were signing up for with free trade. Which is why we have Trump and Boris. Now imagine what Africa could do if the EU dumped the common agricultural policy.
@James Nicholl No harm. We need to come up with a way to talk about the fact, that even though lots of things are broken and obviously so, we are far, far better off than we were just 100, 50, even 25 years ago on many fronts, and relatively speaking life is not nearly as shitty as we keep being told. The fact is that the economy, globally is working for many more people than it ever has before. Why and who is responsible is another argument all together.
I have to say, this is the first time in 5 years (?) that I've heard Mark be optimistic.
Technological change isn't the same as economic policy. Who is "we?" The country who has lifted the most people out of poverty is probably China. Is that the example you want to uphold as the "Global Economy?" That's also lazy framing, in my opinion.
@@frenchtoasty17 Technological change is not the same as economic policy, thats an interesting observation, but I think it's wrong. If you look at them as technologies, then the productive output, as well as outcomes for the citizens appear to be provably better under republican (small 'r' not the US party) capitalism than authoritarian communism (USSR) or authoritarian quasi capitalism (China) or feudalism. Things like fractional reserve banking and central banks and, hell, pay day lenders are technologies developed to deal with specific problems. We're not used to think of those as technologies, but they are just as much as the laptop I'm writing this on.
That being said, when I say, we I mean everybody. All the countries, peoples, groups etc. China couldn't do what it did (or for that matter if you want a more palatable and older example, India) with out the ascent of the powers already in charge (in China's case, in the WTO). But at some level it doesn't matter because even though the people on the ground are still serfs they are much better of than they were. Yeah, you're not free, but you're worried about starving quite as much as yesterday. Does this give the Chinese a pass? Hell no. But the people are still better off. You can't try to get your rights if you're starving or dead.
To tie these things together, look at North vs South Korea. North Korea - shitty social technology - shitty outcome. South Korea - better social technology, went from mud huts to skyscrapers in 50 years. Even if you go down the list from Singapore to Indonesia to North Korea all dictatorial states more enlightened the dictator (i.e. better social tech) better outcome. Best outcome: India. Better social tech sometimes comes down to, letting your self get colonized. Thats what eastern europe had to do after the berlin wall fell.
"Free Trade is the application of extractivism (a particularly destructive form of anti-environmental capitalism typically personified by the fossil fuel, mining and deforestation industries) to individual human beings, en masse and increasingly globally."
A lot of hollow words.
"As for the “cooperative world” working for the benefit of all, great aspiration. Give me 1 historic example of this. its never happened, and this was pointed out by lincoln,
lincoln one of americas greatest leaders understood this well,
www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/abraham-lincoln-in-depth/abraham-lincoln-and-the-tariff/
“The globe is divided into different communities, each seeking to appropriate to itself all the advantages it can, without reference to the prosperity of others.”
Irritating gong stopped watching.
Sorry but Mr Blythe appears to be a Brexiteer in disguise. The stuff he rambles about can be so easily debunked it just makes him look like a more elevated version of Dominic Raab.
Okay. You have the floor.
He was a lexiteer .
@@mididoctors I was more interested in the "the stuff he rambles about can so easily be debunked" part than in you swapping out two made up terms.
We'll wait.