Andy Sloan: Lessons from literature

‘Failure is not a fate, but a choice.’ So says Johan Norberg, author of Peak Human, a guide to the rise and fall of golden ages over the last three millennia. Light opening, eh?

I’d been looking for summer holiday reading and came across this little bit of easy reading on the Economist’s list of 40 best books published so far this year. I was sold. It had all the hallmarks of one of those guiding ‘tomes for life’ quotations, and I fancied trying to shoehorn a lesson for Guernsey into this column on the back of it.

Sadly, it wasn’t to be. It wasn’t in stock in Town (shop local – I do recommend it; it’s rare I find that one needs the instant gratification of Amazon when it comes to books), so I made do with Ruchir Sharma’s What Went Wrong With Capitalism, on the Wall Street Journal’s recommended list. From the dust jacket, it looks like I’m in for a right summer treat:

‘Capitalism didn’t fail, it was ruined… Taking you back to the 19th century, Sharma shows how completely the reflexes of government have changed: from hands-off to hands-on, from doing too little to help anyone in hard times to today trying to prevent anyone suffering any economic pain, ever…

'Inadvertently, they have made capitalism less fair and less efficient, which is slowing economic growth and fuelling popular anger. The first step to a cure is a correct diagnosis of the problem. Capitalism has been badly distorted by constant government intervention and the relentless spread of a bailout culture. Building an even bigger state will only double down on what ruined capitalism in the first place.’

I don’t think I’m going to be disappointed. And I’m looking forward to enjoying it on the veranda in the mountains in Italy in a couple of weeks. It’s clearly going to be major comfort reading – reaffirming all my currently held beliefs about the rise of public spending sounding the death knell of the Western economic model.

Don’t believe me? Read this, lifted from my own book This Is What A Rich Death Feels Like:

‘If the columns in this book have told a story, it is one of drift. Drift at the global level, where central banks spent a decade pumping free money into broken systems. Drift in the international debate, where economic groupthink calcified into orthodoxy. And drift at the local level, where Guernsey’s political system has grown sclerotic, incapable of facing up to reality, let alone reforming itself.

For years, we’ve indulged the myth that we are a low-tax, low-spend, agile jurisdiction. The truth is less flattering. Our spending has surged. Our tax base is narrowing. Our competitiveness is eroding. And our politics has become a client service – handing out benefits, avoiding reform, and pretending trade-offs don’t exist. And like all unsustainable things, it will persist – until it can’t.’

As you might imagine, I toned down the rhetoric for the general election campaign. And again, in my maiden speech this month, where I chose to underline my long-held concern about the lack of clarity on our underlying fiscal position. Our spangly new accounts might come with an international standard-compliant seal of approval, but it’s still a so-and-so of a task trying to figure out the fiscal variable of interest.

And while I kept my maiden speech to the topic at hand – namely, the accounts – I obviously used the opportunity to repeat my campaign message: the deficit is real, and spending restraint, GST and corporate tax reform are all going to be needed to solve it. I also reminded colleagues that the moribund state of our economy is another underlying factor.

I’ve confessed this before, but I’m just an 80s guy at heart. And we forget the lessons of that time at our peril. Among other things, in these columns I’ve lamented the march of today’s global groupthink — and warned of the dangers of the so-called ‘global policy consensus.’

Eighteen months ago, I light-heartedly opened one column with a quote quiz: Who said they were ‘here to tell you that the Western world is in danger, and it is endangered because those who are supposed to defend the values of the West are co-opted by a vision of the world that only leads to socialism and poverty. And I’m here to tell you that collectivist experiments are never the solution’?

It was a tongue-in-cheek piece about Javier Milei, the then-new Argentine president’s address to the World Economic Forum. At the time, the Davos crowd dismissed him as just another swivel-eyed loon. But writing just this week, The Economist reported he’d cut government spending, pulled down inflation, and reduced poverty. So maybe not.

When I tried to find the article where I’d referenced Javier, I decided to cheat and ask ChatGPT when it was and what I’d said. This is what she confidently told me:

‘Shock therapy or slow decline?’ by Dr Andy Sloan, April 2024 – Guernsey Press.

‘Javier Milei may not be a household name in Guernsey – yet. But the Argentine president’s radical assault on public spending deserves our attention. Elected on a libertarian wave, Milei has taken a chainsaw to the bloated machinery of the Argentine state.

'Because while Argentina’s problems are of a different scale and origin, the underlying message is painfully familiar: a state that keeps spending more than it earns eventually runs out of road. And when it does, change comes not gradually, but brutally.

'Guernsey’s version is more polite. We host debates. We form working groups. We issue policy letters. But the fundamental problem is the same — for more than a decade, we’ve known the numbers don’t add up… Guernsey still has time to make choices deliberately. But that window is closing.’

Impressive, huh? Except, while I might think it, I wrote not a word of it. My actual April 2024 column (I did check) covered Liz Truss’s autobiography, house prices, GP11, Gpeg, Horace Camp, and the Government Work Plan — but not a mention of Javier.

One thing I’ve learned about AI: it has a remarkable capacity to fib. And sometimes on quite a grand scale. She produced many more hundreds of words than that. It was really good stuff. But I wrote none of it.

But so what? I hear both my regular readers cry. Why the fiscal rant again this month? Frankly Sloanie, haven’t you been a bit, well, boring? Don’t we have a shiny new States? Isn’t everyone getting along just fab? And didn’t you get the job you wanted – president of Scrutiny? Anyway, it’s summer recess – surely you could try to be a bit more upbeat?

It’s an affirmative to all those rhetorical questions. But despite all that, right now I’m not feeling too chipper. Why?

Just four weeks ago, there was an election for president of P&R, with three candidates. One of them, in their speech, made the case that government should try to do less – and do less, better. It’s a view I share. And I believe many in the public do too.

It’s a view that, as my rather staccato contribution this month illustrates, I think is beginning once again to gain traction – as the pendulum of global public opinion swings.

I know no more than what has been reported of the events of the last week concerning one of those candidates. I know it’s not being discussed in public or in print.

I know I ordinarily count that person as a friend and ally. I know I have respect and trust in that person. And I know it’s not for me to judge recent events, whatever they are.

But I also know this: if, as a result, we are deprived of their political contribution – and their voice in support of government doing less, when it will be most needed – the loss will be ours.

Done. I’ve said what I needed to. Happy holidays. Enjoy the reading.