Hugh Lind

Macro | Politics | Singapore | Warwick | Cambridge | Views my own

[Robert Lind @rlind67]

Why Ed Miliband should be the UK’s next chancellor https://t.co/2ZHH3DUgL6

[Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall]

Great to see another firmly modernising move from the Royal Family

[Natalie @FalcoNat38]

ooh i’m zohran mamdani. my wife is hot. my favorite soccer team won the league for the first time in 22 years. my favorite basketball team won the championship for the first time in 53 years. fuck you man.

[Hunter📈🌈📊 @StatisticUrban]

The US is one of very few countries in the world that can do this.

[New Left EViews @NewLeftEViews]

I think the vitriol hurled at Piketty, Stiglitz, Zucman and Ghosh is completely absurd, but part of the proposal is definitely problematic. My two cents:

1. All our evidence suggests that growth has been the sine qua non of sustained poverty eradication, that is beyond big ‘post-feudal’ redistributions of land and income. For developing countries arguably nothing is more important than brute forcing nominal output growth. But even for advanced economies, long spells of growth stagnation are linked to declining living standards. Italy is a great recent example where pure growth, no matter how chaotic, has proven beneficial.

2. It could well be that comfortably meeting resource sustainability and emissions reduction targets in a timely manner without giving up on growth-led development strictly necessitates convergence on consumption levels that imply a significant reduction for rich counties.

3. This might be compositionally impossible: a managed decline in rich countries could foreclose on development in poorer countries.

4. Even if it is possible, it is very likely that de-growth in the Global North is not just a political non-starter but politically corrosive to any decarbonisation effort and ends up having the opposite intended effect for our emissions path.

To me this just seems intractable. Either side claiming that their path is feasible is misleading either themselves or others.

[Matt Darling 🌐🏗️ @besttrousers]

Piketty's thesis is the early 20th century destruction of capital (primarily the world wars) made the 20th century Very Weird, and we should expect the *21st* century to be more like the 19th.

[Branko Milanovic @BrankoMilan]

I simply could not believe it when right in the middle of the first half of the Mexico-South Africa game, a bunch of commercials appeared out of nowhere. Football is getting lower and lower. VAR breaks the flow of the game; players and the public wait for minutes to find out what happened; now players stand aimlessly around until the commercials are finished.
Shameful performance by FIFA.

[derek guy @dieworkwear]

On the chance this tweet takes off, the last paragraph of the text above is bothering me. I meant to say these are are cultural expressions shaped by larger structural forces, such as economics and technology, not that they're cultural changes alone. The changes are structural.

[David Gauke @DavidGauke]

I didn’t vote for either of the winners of the last two General Elections but “traitors” for whom a “reckoning is coming”? Really? This very excitable, angry & hyperbolic man should be nowhere near a position of responsibility in a political party that aspires to power.

[David Gauke @DavidGauke]

Most of the policies that Tony Blair is (rightly) calling for can only be delivered by a centre-right government. Much of the coverage is about what he is saying about and to the Labour Party, but it is also the Conservative Party who should be paying close attention.

[Nick Field @nick_field90]

I read in the NYT recently that Harris is the one who can't answer a simple question and talk in circles.... https://t.co/pTt6z9Psy6

[Hugh Lind @hugh_lind]

If the dividend yield of the ftse 100 is (taking a high estimate) 4% ish then you’d have to own £250,000 in shares to earn just £10,000 in dividend income. Working age people earning large amounts in income from shares are obviously incredibly well-off.

[Politics UK @PolitlcsUK]

🚨 NEW: Keir Starmer says Brits who get additional income from stocks don’t count as ‘working people'

[@Bloomberg]

[. @GregTSargent]

Notable: Trump didn't just say he'll fire Jack Smith. He also added this ominous line: "We got immunity at SCOTUS."

Trump fully expects that in a second term he'll be unaccountable to the law.

On the pod, @BarbMcQuade is brilliant in unpacking all this:
https://t.co/rv5i2kb8JE

[Ben Rhodes @brhodes]

It would be nice to return to a politics where Americans can agree on some fundamental things, like there is no place for anyone who expresses admiration for Hitler.

[Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 @Noahpinion]

We're in such deep shit

[Headquarters @HQNewsNow]

Trump says Americans who criticize the Supreme Court for overturning Roe v. Wade should be imprisoned: “These people should be put in jail for the way they talk about our judges and justices”

[Hugh Lind @hugh_lind]

@trunembak You may not get a president for decades, supreme leader close to the mark

[Mujtaba Rahman @Mij_Europe]

If you're looking for the worst take on Rachel Reeves' fiscal rule change, Andrew's tweet below - and what it implies - delivers nicely. There's no comparison between Truss's mini-budget and what Reeves is doing now. Also the view of the IMF, OBR and a majority of economists too

[Hugh Lind @hugh_lind]

Economically illiterate. Has nothing happened to the economy /interest rates in the intervening three years, nothing at all?

[Andrew Neil @afneil]

UK 10-year bond yields before Rachel Reeves’ first Budget are not far off where they were after Liz Truss’s first and last Budget.

[Simon French @Frencheconomics]

My conclusion is that the Gilt market is generally relaxed at the UK's fiscal tweaks, but with a small uncertainty yield premium on fears that the looser stance of capital will slip into resource spending. This makes Darren Jones' (CST) "guardrails" comments, and focus on value for money in infrastructure v important. With particular thanks to @carsjung @ChrisGiles_ for recent challenge/ helping shape my thoughts.