Centre for Poor Statistics
Reading more of the Daily Mail (which is getting ever more pro-criminal, now it even supports murderers) I found the statement that Gordon Brown has 'cost the average British household £6,000' since he took office. I thought I would see how this figure, taken from this CPS report was arrived at.It should be noted that the CPS takes Gordon Brown's chancellorshp as beginning in 1998 for reasons which are reasonable enough.
The first chunk of this £6,000 cost, £1900 the CPS finds through noting that the UK economy grew 2.4% per annum in this period, compared with 3.2% over the last five years of the Conservatives. This the CPS argues is Gordon Brown's fault, because the world economy slowed by just 0.3% from 3.6% to 3.3% in this period.
It's hard to know where to begin with this argument. First, let's remember that in 1993 the economy was coming out of one of the steepest recessions of the 20th century caused by 15% interest rates required because of Lawson/Thatcher's failure to keep inflation under control. Economies always grow faster when first coming out of recession because there is much spare capacity to be used up. Thus comparing 1992-98 with 1998-2002 is pretty silly.
Second, the CPS argues that 'If Britain had just kept pace with the world’s GDP growth rate since 1997, national income per household would now be nearly £1,900 higher'. The beauty here is the word 'just'. I thought I would see in how many five year periods since 1970 the UK economy has grown 'just' as fast as the world economy. Using the same source (the IMF's world economic survey) as the CPS, the answer is, well you've guessed it, none.
So let's recap. £1,900 of this £6,000 Gordon Brown has 'cost' us is because the British economy has not done what it has not done in 33 years; grown as fast as the world economy. This might have something to do with China, and other developing countries, but clearly that's beyond the CPS.
I'll get onto the other £4,000 or so later.