More Dubious Right Wing Matter

The usual person I read has again put forth a number of the assertions that are simply plain wrong and deceptive, as I've pointed out before using genuine, actual data as opposed to unlinked assertions. The main thing is the usual blather about the deficit - apparently, to run a deficit in the largest economic downturn in 80 years is not Christian. That's right: To refuse to pay benefits to unemployed because it will lead to a budget deficit.

Apparently, Christians should be all for the current government's "more targetted" reforms, which actually mean simply having a tighter budget and imposing cuts, making many more mistakes along the way. The current government's more targetting immigration strategy (a cap, often zero for individual firms regardless of their multinational status, on non-EU immigrants) is keeping out Christian missionaries from settling in the UK I found out last weekend on the St Ebbes Church Weekend Away. So that's the Christian response is it? The more botched targetted EMA will likely also cut out plenty of people the previous system would have covered.

I'm not going to object to every cut, but instead I'll say that the Christian should be in favour not of what the Conservatives propose (some cuts here and there but the essential framework unchanged), but nor should the Christian be simply trying to uphold the status quo. Education and health probably should be done differently than we do in the UK, and in doing them differently we can improve efficiency - but not in the way the Conservatives think. I will try and write a little more on this in the coming weeks - right now I have to prepare lectures and meet students.

But the fundamental thing Cranmer always misses out on is that charity will not be up to scratch for the kinds of things he and the Big Society are supposed to provide. Yes you can go on about, and assert without any supporting evidence, how the state has crowded out charitable giving and activity, but the fact is the kinds of things charities do tend to have positive externalities (when providing, like health and relief) and negative externalities (when trying to discourage, like homelessness and prostitution). This means that the private sector outcome of simply relying on charitable giving will be underprovision of healthcare and education amongst other things, and an overprovision of other less desirable things like homelessness. This is basic, simple economics, the kind the right wing tends to ignore - instead they blithely (and again without any supporting evidence) insist that poverty is defined by absence of flat screen TVs and BS like that.

Hence these are the kinds of cuts to government provision that Christians should think a lot more about instead of simply (a) going out and protesting and (b) writing blogs like Cranmer does. Think about how the government provides and whether the government is the best provider but in finding solutions recognising these externalities. This is why economics is so central to thinking about these matters.