The WEEK BLAIR’S BABY BONDS
. . . * Don’t trust the parents . . .
mbs; Baby bonds (bb) if anything lean in the direction of liberalism, classical variant. They are pure cash, not some service controlled by agents of the state. See LeGrand (Strategy for Equality) for how British public service provision, notwithstanding the soc-dem context, bend in the direction of upper- and against lower-income persons.
* Popular capitalism for babies The government is making a point of breaking with the traditions of the welfare state. Instead of providing education and health from the state’s resources to people who need them, the government proposes to give them some of the capital for them to invest for themselves; or, as
mbs: it's not "instead"; it's in addition to. Something tells me JH does not favor an expansive welfare state anyway, so this is demagogy.
Harold Macmillan once remarked of Mrs Thatcher’s policies, to sell off the family silver.
mbs: depends on how the bonds are financed. It could be financed by selling off Macmillan's silver.
* Thinktank twaddle New Labour policy wonks are peddling the superannuated myth that capital can be owned by everyone, and if we just invest our bonds wisely they will go on growing and growing. They forget that interest income does not fall from the skies; capital is a social relation in which some are exploited by others, and we cannot all exploit each other.
mbs: some may exaggerate the egalitarian import of the BB's. In light of the fact that the target of this criticism is a progressive redistribution of wealth, it's pretty bizarre.
* Forgotten by history The baby bond scheme is a warmed over version of the scheme proposed by Major Douglas, ‘Social Credit’, that enjoyed a sudden but brief popularity in the 1930s. With hopes crushed by recession, Douglas’ proposal to pay everyone dividends on the social capital seemed - for a moment - to make sense, before being revealed as the political equivalent of pyramid selling. (CH Douglas, Social Credit, NY, 1933)
mbs: the state can extend credit w/out creating pyramids. It all depends on the rate. If, for instance, population (and workforce) grow at rate 'r,' the state can tax you a dollar today and give you a dollar times 1+r tomorrow. Without setting up any kind of fund or investing. Forever. Samuelson explained this about 45 yrs ago.
* Writing off a whole generation Government spokesmen have insisted that the scheme is not a gimmick but an attempt to give the young a stake in society ... the young in about 20 years time that is. It seems New Labour is so disappointed by the current generation of adults lack of enthusiasm for British society that it has written them off, and is pinning its hopes on our infant sons and daughters instead.
mbs: mere sarcasm.
* Don’t trust the babies No sooner was the proposal made public than the alarm was raised that 18 year-olds would spend the money on clothes and holidays instead of investing it in their futures. Ministers reassuringly explained that the stakeholders of the future would have to be told what to spend their money on.
mbs: even if it was regulated, it would still be a good thing. Only a madman, for instance, would complain about what you can't buy w/Food Stamps.
The Week shall not inherit the earth.