Knowing and Making

Regular readers may be relieved to hear that I'll be back onto regular economics soon. If nothing else, even I will be bored of the election before long. But I have a couple more political articles to come first. The debate over forming a coalition to govern the UK seems to be mainly focused on the question of "who won?" Was it the Tories, because they are the largest single party with 36% of the vote (and 47% of the seats)? Was it a combination of Labour and Liberal Democrats, because together they represent over 50% of people? Or, similarly, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, who have about 59% between them? Should we reform the voting system so that the majority of votes always reflects a majority of parliamentary seats? All this debate ignores a deeper point. This is not a football match. The electoral system is not intended as a talent contest to award a prize to whoever can perform better and impress more people. It's meant to provide a way for the p...

This slightly sordid but predictable story about the collapse of an airline covers the alleged overspending of the chief executive, the financing of yesterday's bills from today's revenue, and the likely explanation: ultimately, this company collapsed as a knock-on effect from some other airlines, which failed while owing it  money. It's unfortunate for the creditors and those who had bought tickets, but these things happen. The first comment on the BBC story? There has to be something inherently wrong and deficient about Gordon Brown's handling of the UK's financial landscape. "Prudence"???? ...I don't suppose the Company bought tables at Labour Party dinners - or did it? "Prudence" or "Darling Pridence" - Would you trust them to look after a bag of sweeties? The guy just can't get a break.