Rory Stewart: “We’re Living in a World of Fairy Tales”

 

How to have a meaningful debate about racism?

The conversation is stuck: you’re either ‘playing the race card’ or ‘in denial’. But here’s a way to break through writes Nina Kelly in The Guardian
 

The national conversation on racism seems to be stuck in an endless loop. We all know the routine: a public debate is sparked by a news story that features a case of alleged bigotry. It might be reports that an Asian cricketer was nicknamed “Bomber”; or that a member of the royal family is said to have questioned a baby’s skin colour. Whatever it is, the inciting incident then sets the parameters of all the discussion to follow. An array of loud and angry voices appears on media panel shows or radio phone-ins, suggesting what might or might not have occurred (no one knows for certain), and whether or not any of it is racist (everyone is certain that it either is, or it isn’t).

And so, instead of the nuances of racial inequality being understood, the issue is portrayed as a simple matter of people saying or doing bad things to each other, and we get a tiresome to and fro between those “playing the race card” and others “in denial”. Many of us just tune out, while the overall issue of racism in society – a real problem in need of an urgent solution – remains unaddressed.

That is why, six years ago, the Reframing Race initiative was set up. It is an attempt to fix this broken debate. We have spoken to 20,000 people in England and Scotland, testing more than a dozen ways of talking about racism. With our unprecedented bank of data, we now dare to answer the question: what actually works to change the conversation?

We discovered – plainly – that words make a difference. New ways of talking about racism lead to new ways of listening.

The first problem we found was that people don’t agree on what the basic facts mean. For instance, “black people are stopped and searched at seven times the rate of white people”: some will believe this indicates a racist bias in policing; others will simply say it’s a sign of criminality in the black population. It is therefore important to tell the full story, which is that the over-representation of black people in the criminal justice system does not imply they are more inclined to commit crime. Instead, the data reveals a complex social structure – involving prejudice in the justice system, poverty, school exclusion and insecure housing – that stacks the odds against black people.

‘We found that people don’t agree on what the basic facts mean. For instance, ‘black people are stopped and searched at seven times the rate of white people’.’ Photograph: John Stillwell/PA


This explanation is not as eye-catching as the headline statistic, but we did find one particularly effective way to communicate the problem of racism: namely, a CV investigation that showed recruiters were biased in favour of white applicants. In telling the full story of this study, we were able to rule out any explanations other than race-based discrimination. Choosing to represent structural racism in this way allows a mainstream audience to see it for themselves, and leads the discussion away from the “Is it racist?” ping-pong game.

And where facts don’t work, sometimes metaphors do. We discovered that using the image of a birdcage to represent a racist system that traps some people inside was powerful. Everyone can understand the way in which each bar of a cage combines to deny freedom and opportunities. The birdcage metaphor also appeals to people’s values, rather than their logic. Unlike stop-and- search statistics, the concept of freedom is universally understood and agreed on.

Another thing we found is that showing some intention behind structural racism – even naming a “perpetrator”, such as a government department – leads to a more fluent discussion about how to address it. This approach is also more likely to inspire hope that things can be changed; if something was designed in a way that disadvantaged certain racial groups, it is reasonable to suppose we could redesign it. 

Surprisingly, our research also tells us that it is possible to be bold – even radical – in challenging racism, so long as your ideas are explained well enough. For instance, we found most people agreed with the idea of investing in mental health services so that police did not have to do the job of mental health professionals, and for teaching schoolchildren of all backgrounds their shared history. I doubt the phrases “defund the police” or “decolonise the curriculum” would have generated the same support.

Overall, we found it is not easy for people to feel confident about tackling racism when its finer details are constantly being argued over. But we do know we all have the potential to make a positive change. So if you find yourself trapped in an argument about what is or isn’t racist, consider how you could change that conversation. What could you say differently? None of us has the perfect answer, but we can all choose not to be part of the problem.

A Level Economics: Problems in China's Economy

 

A Level Economics 88: Budget/Fiscal Deficit and National Debt

 Budget/Fiscal Deficit: The budget or fiscal deficit refers to the excess of government spending over government revenues within a specified period, usually a fiscal year. It represents the shortfall between government expenditures (including both operating expenses and capital investments) and government revenues (such as taxes, fees, and other income).

1. National (Public Sector) Debt: The national debt, also known as public sector debt, is the total accumulated borrowing by the government over time to finance budget deficits and cover other financial obligations. It includes all outstanding government debt, including bonds, treasury bills, and other forms of government securities.

Relationship between Budget/Fiscal Deficit and National Debt:

The budget/fiscal deficit and the national debt are closely related. When a government runs a budget deficit, it must borrow funds to finance the shortfall. This borrowing increases the national debt. On the other hand, if the government runs a budget surplus (government revenues exceed expenditures), it can use the surplus to repay part of the national debt, leading to a decrease in the debt.

The relationship between the budget/fiscal deficit and the national debt can be summarized as follows:

• Budget Deficit: A budget deficit increases the national debt. When government spending exceeds revenues, the government must borrow the difference from the public or financial institutions by issuing government bonds. The accumulated deficits over time add to the national debt.

• Budget Surplus: A budget surplus reduces the national debt. When government revenues exceed spending, the government can use the surplus to retire outstanding debt, reducing the total debt burden.

• Balanced Budget: A balanced budget means government spending equals government revenues, resulting in no change to the national debt. However, due to interest payments on existing debt, the national debt can still increase if the government only manages to balance the budget without running a surplus.

Numerical Table:

Let's use a hypothetical example to demonstrate the relationship between the budget deficit and the national debt:

Assuming the national debt at the beginning of the year is $1,000 billion.

Year	Budget/Fiscal Deficit (+) or Surplus (-)	Government Borrowing (+) or Debt Repayment (-)	National Debt
2021	-$200 billion	+$200 billion	$1,200 billion
2022	-$150 billion	+$150 billion	$1,350 billion
2023	+$100 billion	-$100 billion	$1,250 billion
2024	+$50 billion	-$50 billion	$1,200 billion

In this example, the government runs a budget deficit in 2021 and 2022, leading to an increase in the national debt. In 2023 and 2024, the government runs budget surpluses, allowing for debt repayment and reducing the national debt. Over time, the budget deficits and surpluses directly impact the changes in the national debt.

--

Structural and Cyclical Deficits:

1. Structural Deficit: A structural deficit refers to the portion of a government's budget deficit that persists even when the economy is operating at its potential level of output or full employment. It is the result of long-term, fundamental imbalances between government spending and revenue that exist regardless of the current stage of the business cycle.

Characteristics of Structural Deficit:

• Long-Term Nature: Structural deficits are not tied to temporary fluctuations in economic activity but represent an ongoing imbalance in government finances.
• Persistent: Structural deficits persist over time and are not automatically eliminated as the economy moves through different stages of the business cycle.
• Independent of Cyclical Factors: Unlike cyclical deficits, structural deficits do not change with changes in economic activity or the business cycle.
• Rooted in Policy Choices: Structural deficits arise due to factors such as inadequate tax revenues, unsustainable spending commitments, or structural inefficiencies in the economy.

2. Cyclical Deficit: A cyclical deficit is the portion of a government's budget deficit that results from fluctuations in economic activity and business cycles. It occurs as a natural consequence of the economic cycle, where government revenues fall and spending increases during economic downturns, leading to a temporary shortfall in the budget.

Characteristics of Cyclical Deficit:

• Short-Term Nature: Cyclical deficits are temporary and linked to the phase of the business cycle. They tend to appear during economic downturns and recessions when the economy operates below its potential output.
• Directly Linked to Economic Conditions: Cyclical deficits are directly related to changes in economic activity, such as decreases in consumer spending, business investments, and tax revenues during downturns.
• Automatically Adjusted: As the economy recovers and moves through the business cycle, cyclical deficits tend to diminish as economic activity improves, leading to higher tax revenues and reduced government spending on automatic stabilizers like unemployment benefits.

Difference between Structural and Cyclical Deficits:

The main difference between structural and cyclical deficits lies in their underlying causes and persistence:

• Underlying Causes: Structural deficits result from long-term policy choices and fundamental imbalances in government finances, while cyclical deficits arise from changes in economic activity and are tied to the business cycle.
• Persistence: Structural deficits are persistent and not automatically eliminated as the economy recovers, while cyclical deficits are temporary and tend to diminish as economic conditions improve.
• Response to Economic Conditions: Structural deficits are largely unaffected by changes in economic activity, while cyclical deficits are directly linked to economic fluctuations and automatically adjust with the business cycle.

Example: During an economic downturn, a country experiences a decline in tax revenues due to reduced economic activity and rising unemployment. At the same time, government spending on social welfare programs, like unemployment benefits, increases as more people claim assistance. These factors lead to a cyclical deficit.

However, suppose the country also has a structural deficit resulting from long-standing inefficiencies in its tax system, coupled with high spending commitments on entitlement programs. Even in a period of economic growth, this structural deficit would persist, requiring additional borrowing to cover the shortfall between government revenues and expenditures.

In summary, structural and cyclical deficits represent different aspects of a government's budget deficit: structural deficits are long-term imbalances in government finances, while cyclical deficits are temporary shortfalls due to fluctuations in economic activity. Understanding these differences is crucial for policymakers in developing appropriate fiscal strategies to address budget deficits effectively.

---

Example - Structural Deficit:

Let's consider Country A, which has been running budget deficits for many years due to certain structural factors:

1. Inadequate Tax Revenues: Country A has a tax system with numerous loopholes and inefficient tax collection mechanisms. As a result, tax revenues are consistently lower than what is required to finance government spending.

2. Unsustainable Spending Commitments: The government of Country A has made long-term commitments to various social welfare programs and public services. These spending commitments, while essential for the well-being of citizens, exceed the country's revenue-generating capacity.

3. Ageing Population: Country A has an ageing population, leading to increased demand for pension and healthcare services. This demographic challenge places additional strain on government finances, contributing to the structural deficit.

Despite occasional periods of economic growth and increased tax revenues, Country A's budget deficits persist because the underlying structural issues continue to exert pressure on government finances. This structural deficit implies that even in periods of economic prosperity, the government cannot achieve a balanced budget.

Example - Cyclical Deficit:

Let's consider Country B, which experiences a cyclical deficit during an economic downturn:

1. Economic Downturn: Country B faces a severe economic downturn, leading to reduced consumer spending, declining business investments, and lower corporate profits.

2. Rising Unemployment: The economic downturn results in rising unemployment as businesses cut costs and reduce their workforce.

3. Falling Tax Revenues: With lower economic activity and increasing unemployment, tax revenues decrease significantly. People and businesses earn less, leading to lower income and corporate tax collections.

4. Increased Government Spending: During an economic downturn, automatic stabilizers come into play. The government spends more on unemployment benefits, welfare programs, and other social safety nets to support those affected by the recession.

As a result of these economic conditions, Country B experiences a cyclical deficit. It is important to note that this deficit is largely driven by the economic downturn and will likely diminish as the economy recovers and tax revenues increase with the improvement in economic conditions.

Combined Impact - Interplay of Structural and Cyclical Deficits:

In real-world scenarios, countries often experience a combination of both structural and cyclical deficits. During an economic downturn, cyclical factors contribute to deficits, amplifying existing structural imbalances. For example:

Country C has an inefficient tax system (structural issue) that results in inadequate tax revenues during normal economic conditions. However, during an economic downturn (cyclical factor), the tax revenues decline further due to decreased economic activity. At the same time, automatic stabilizers increase government spending on social programs. The combination of structural inadequacies and cyclical downturn leads to a larger budget deficit than in periods of economic growth.

Addressing a country's budget deficits requires policymakers to identify and differentiate between structural and cyclical components. Structural deficits necessitate long-term policy reforms to address inefficiencies in tax systems, control spending, and ensure fiscal sustainability. Cyclical deficits, on the other hand, tend to self-correct as the economy recovers. Appropriate fiscal policies, such as countercyclical measures, can help mitigate the impact of cyclical downturns on deficits and support economic recovery.

---

Deficits Resulting from Discretionary Government Policy:

Discretionary deficits arise due to deliberate policy decisions made by the government to either increase spending, decrease taxes, or a combination of both. These policy choices are usually influenced by the government's economic and fiscal objectives and can impact the budget balance positively or negatively.

Examples:

1. Fiscal Stimulus Packages: During an economic downturn or recession, governments may implement fiscal stimulus packages to boost economic activity. These packages typically involve increased government spending on infrastructure projects, social welfare programs, or tax cuts to encourage consumer spending and business investments. While intended to stimulate the economy, these measures can result in budget deficits as government expenditures exceed revenues.

2. Tax Cuts: Governments may decide to reduce tax rates to incentivize private consumption and investment. For instance, a government may lower corporate tax rates to attract foreign investments and foster business growth. Although tax cuts may stimulate economic activity, they can lead to reduced tax revenues, potentially resulting in budget deficits.

3. Defense Spending Increase: A government may choose to increase defense spending in response to security threats or geopolitical tensions. This additional expenditure can contribute to budget deficits if not matched by corresponding increases in tax revenues or other cost-saving measures.

Deficits Resulting from Automatic Government Policy:

Automatic deficits, also known as cyclical deficits, occur as a result of the economy's natural fluctuations and do not require explicit policy decisions by the government. These deficits are driven by automatic stabilizers, which are built-in mechanisms that automatically increase government expenditures and/or decrease tax revenues during economic downturns.

Examples:

1. Unemployment Benefits: During economic recessions, unemployment rates tend to rise as businesses cut costs and reduce their workforce. As more individuals become unemployed, the government's spending on unemployment benefits increases automatically. The additional expenditure contributes to the budget deficit without requiring specific legislative action.

2. Income Tax Revenues: Economic downturns lead to lower incomes and profits for individuals and businesses, resulting in reduced income tax revenues for the government. This decline in tax collections is an automatic response to the economic cycle and contributes to cyclical deficits.

3. Welfare Programs: Various social welfare programs, such as food assistance and housing subsidies, may experience increased demand during economic downturns when more people require support. As a result, government spending on welfare programs rises automatically during such periods.

Combined Impact: In reality, deficits often result from a combination of discretionary and automatic government policies. For instance, during an economic recession, governments may choose to implement discretionary fiscal stimulus measures (e.g., infrastructure spending) to support the economy. Simultaneously, automatic stabilizers such as increased unemployment benefits and reduced tax revenues due to lower economic activity contribute to the budget deficit.

Balancing discretionary policies with the inherent automatic stabilizers is essential for governments to achieve their economic and fiscal objectives effectively. It is crucial for policymakers to consider the macroeconomic conditions, long-term fiscal sustainability, and the potential impact on the budget balance when making discretionary policy decisions.

---

Concerns about High Levels of Public Sector Debt:

Governments are often concerned about high levels of public sector debt due to the potential negative consequences it can have on the economy and fiscal sustainability. Some of the main concerns include:

1. Opportunity Cost of Interest Payments: High levels of debt require governments to allocate a significant portion of their budget towards servicing the interest on the debt. These interest payments represent an opportunity cost, as the funds could have been used for productive investments or social welfare programs.

2. Risk of Credit Downgrades: Excessive debt levels can erode investor confidence in a country's ability to repay its obligations. Credit rating agencies may downgrade the country's debt rating, leading to higher borrowing costs and reduced access to international capital markets.

3. Confidence Issues Surrounding Refinancing: If investors lose confidence in a country's ability to manage its debt, they may demand higher yields on new debt issuances. This can create challenges in refinancing existing debt at favorable terms, potentially leading to higher interest costs and further exacerbating the debt burden.

4. Risk of Crowding Out: High levels of public debt may lead to increased government borrowing, competing with private sector borrowing for available funds. This can drive up interest rates and crowd out private investments, leading to reduced economic growth and potential inefficiencies in resource allocation.

5. Slower Growth and Economic Consequences: Excessive debt can result in fiscal imbalances and uncertainty, which may hinder private sector investment and economic growth. Additionally, high debt can limit the government's ability to respond to economic downturns with fiscal stimulus, potentially prolonging recessions.

Evaluation of Concerns:

While the concerns surrounding high levels of public sector debt are valid, some aspects need further evaluation:

1. Ability to Create Money to Clear Debts: Governments with control over their own currency can, in theory, create money to pay off debt obligations. This process is known as "monetizing the debt." While this option may provide a short-term solution, it poses risks such as inflation and loss of confidence in the currency. Over-reliance on money creation can lead to hyperinflation, eroding the value of the currency and undermining economic stability.

2. Sustainability of Debt Levels: The impact of debt on an economy depends on several factors, including the size of the debt, economic growth rate, interest rates, and fiscal discipline. If the economy grows faster than the debt, the debt-to-GDP ratio may decline over time, making the debt more manageable. However, if debt growth outpaces economic growth, the debt burden becomes less sustainable.

3. Fiscal and Economic Policy Mix: The effectiveness of managing high debt levels depends on a balanced mix of fiscal and economic policies. Countries with high debt must implement sound fiscal policies, structural reforms, and investment in productive sectors to support economic growth and revenue generation.

4. External Factors: Global economic conditions, interest rates, and investor sentiment also influence the impact of debt. Countries with high debt must consider external factors when managing their fiscal policies.

In conclusion, concerns about high levels of public sector debt are genuine, and governments should address them to maintain fiscal sustainability and economic stability. While monetary tools can provide short-term relief, a comprehensive approach involving prudent fiscal management, structural reforms, and responsible borrowing is essential for long-term sustainability. Countries with high debt should prioritize policies that promote economic growth, enhance revenue generation, and maintain investor confidence.

---

Tightening Fiscal Policy during Economic Downturns to Reduce the Deficit:

Tightening fiscal policy during economic downturns is a strategy that involves reducing government spending and/or increasing taxes with the aim of decreasing the budget deficit. The rationale behind this approach is to restore fiscal discipline, control rising debt levels, and improve long-term fiscal sustainability.

Pros of Tightening Fiscal Policy during Downturns:

1. Reducing Debt Accumulation: Lowering government spending and increasing tax revenue can help curtail the accumulation of public debt. By reducing the deficit, governments can prevent the debt-to-GDP ratio from rising excessively.

2. Restoring Market Confidence: A commitment to fiscal discipline can enhance investor confidence in a country's economy. This may lead to lower borrowing costs and improve access to international capital markets.

3. Preparing for Future Shocks: Reducing the deficit during an economic downturn allows the government to create fiscal space for future economic crises. A lower deficit provides more room for expansionary fiscal policies when needed to counteract future downturns.

4. Preventing Inflationary Pressures: During periods of economic downturn, increased government spending could lead to inflationary pressures. By tightening fiscal policy, the government can avoid exacerbating inflation risks.

Cons of Tightening Fiscal Policy during Downturns:

1. Aggravating the Downturn: Reducing government spending and raising taxes can lead to decreased aggregate demand, potentially deepening the economic downturn and prolonging the recession.

2. Unemployment and Welfare Impacts: Austerity measures often result in cuts to public services and government-funded programs. This can lead to job losses and negatively impact the most vulnerable sections of society that rely on social welfare programs.

3. Slower Economic Recovery: Tightening fiscal policy may hinder the economy's ability to recover quickly from a recession. The lack of government stimulus can delay the return to full employment and sustainable economic growth.

4. Demand Deficiency: In certain cases, a downturn may be primarily caused by demand deficiency, and fiscal austerity could worsen the problem by further reducing demand.

Evaluation:

The appropriateness of tightening fiscal policy during economic downturns depends on several factors:

1. Severity of the Downturn: In mild economic downturns, moderate fiscal tightening may be appropriate to address the deficit. However, during severe recessions or financial crises, aggressive austerity measures may exacerbate economic problems.

2. Flexibility and Targeting: The effectiveness of fiscal tightening depends on how it is implemented. Targeted reductions in less essential areas of spending and measures that promote economic growth are more likely to be effective than across-the-board cuts.

3. Monetary Policy Accommodation: The effectiveness of fiscal tightening can be influenced by the stance of monetary policy. If central banks adopt expansionary monetary policies (e.g., lowering interest rates), it can partially offset the contractionary effects of fiscal tightening.

4. Public Debt Levels: Countries with already high debt levels may face greater challenges in implementing fiscal tightening, as excessive austerity measures could lead to a debt-deflation spiral and worsen the economic situation.

Is Debt Always a Bad Thing?

Debt is not inherently a bad thing, and its impact depends on various factors, including:

• Debt Sustainability: Whether the debt is sustainable relative to the country's economic capacity to service and repay it.
• Purpose of Borrowing: If debt is used for productive investments that generate economic growth, it can be beneficial in the long run.
• Interest Rates: The cost of borrowing influences the affordability and attractiveness of public debt.
• Economic Conditions: Debt may be more manageable during periods of economic growth than during economic downturns.

In conclusion, tightening fiscal policy during economic downturns to reduce deficits should be carefully evaluated considering the severity of the downturn, the appropriateness of the measures, and the overall macroeconomic conditions. Debt is not inherently bad, and its impact on an economy depends on how it is managed, invested, and the country's fiscal sustainability. Governments should strike a balance between fiscal discipline and supportive policies to promote economic stability and growth.