As minister of finance and candidate for prime minister, Rishi Sunak was a major figure in British public life. That is why his conference in Mais (which is held annually at the business school in .) Bayes) deserves attention. It represents your beliefs. He is also clear and intelligent, but he is far from what is necessary. Most importantly, it does not face inheritance failure Margaret Thatcher.

Almost 43 years have passed since Thatcher he became prime minister. The Conservatives have been in power for 30 years and the Labor Party for 13. But the New Labor Party has largely adopted the legacy Thatcher in terms of economic policy and the size of the State. So what happened?

sunak aptly points to stagnant productivity and asks “how do we accelerate growth and rejuvenate productivity?” The answer is “new corporate culture”. But don’t we have a culture of entrepreneurship for four decades? So what failed and why? And what’s the difference this time? It’s disappointing that you haven’t answered these obvious questions.

The painful reality is that its long-term track record remains lackluster. Let’s compare the results of the UK with our neighbors in Europe, German, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Spanish, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, norway, Dutch, Portugal, Sweden and Switzerland. In 1980, the hourly output in great Britain he is fifth from bottom in this group. In 2019 it dropped to fourth place (just ahead of Greece, Portugal and Spanish). Again, in 1980, the UK’s gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was fifth from the bottom. In 2019, rose to sixth, ahead of Greece, Portugal, Spanish, Italy and France (from the last country, almost).

Given this poor track record, it’s common for Rishi Sunak at the discretion of the economist Adam Smith they are empty. All of these high-income countries understand that an open economy, the rule of law, and private enterprise drive growth. great Britainwhich substantially increases trade barriers with its major partners (with enthusiastic support from sunak), maybe he’s the one who doesn’t understand it the most. That Heritage Foundationa conservative think tank Ieven find great Britain behind Ireland, Netherlands, Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Germany and Austria on their index of economic freedom. It is clear that in order to approach Adam Smith Brexit is not needed.

Politicians with Thatcher leanings will have to dig deep to understand why the results have been so flagging. Many of them emphasized the need for a “lower tax economy,” including Rishi Sunak, but the evidence suggests that this doesn’t really matter, just as self-serving rich people insist otherwise. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), among the 15 countries, the tax burden is great Britain It’s the third from the bottom. If high taxes cripple prosperity, great Britain he must have been among the richest, but he wasn’t. Finland, Belgium, Austria, Sweden, Germany, Netherlands, Denmark and norway they have a much higher tax burden and a higher GDP per capita. Therefore, when sunak stating that he believes “in lower taxes”, he is simply uttering ideology.

That ideology costs money. Distribution of household disposable income in great Britain by far the most unequal of these 15 countries, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Moreover, this is also the result of changes in the 1980s, which were never reversed. In judging the track record, one also cannot ignore the financial crisis and the ensuing austerity, both consequences of ideology Margaret Thatcher.

These changes also have significant implications for the absolute and relative living standards of the least fortunate. Unsurprisingly, the years since 2010 first saw stagnation and then a decline in life expectancy. This is consistent with the US experience. Nor is it surprising that politics have shifted toward questions of identity, particularly Brexit, and away from prosperity.

sunak You are correct in saying that withholding taxes does not pay for itself. Also by stating that current expenses must be paid with current income. In this regard, he reiterates the view of his 1980s predecessors that public finances should not be sacrificed on the altar of supply-side tax cuts: great Britain Not that I; However, basic common sense is not enough. Yes sunak want to convince as a thinker about the present, he must be more honest with the past. It should show which part of the ideology Thatcher work and which ones to throw away. You don’t have to tell us that the private sector is important; we already know that. It should tell us how it can improve, and how the public and private sectors can work together more fruitfully in the future.

It’s not fair to say that sunak, like Bourbon, haven’t learned or forgotten anything, but that wouldn’t be completely unfair. You have to think more.

I

I