A new name for an old game
This is Part 2 of a two-part post reviewing Finance for the Future's paper proposing so-called "Green Quantitative Easing (QE)".
PART 1 of the post, "A Doomed Assessment", reviews Finance for the Future's assessment of the Bank of England's Quantitative Easing programme in 2009-10.
PART 2 reviews Finance for the Future's proposal for government investment in the economy specifically to further green objectives as outlined in the New Economics Foundation (NEF)'s Green New Deal. I would like to make it clear that, as I am neither an economist nor an environmentalist, I am not concerned with the merits of the Green objectives themselves. I am merely commenting on the financing proposal. For a discussion of the Green objectives and their potential economic impact, I'd suggest you read Simon Cooke's blog.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF PART 1
Part 1 of this post can be found by following the link above. I admit it is pretty wonkish and therefore hard…
PART 1 of the post, "A Doomed Assessment", reviews Finance for the Future's assessment of the Bank of England's Quantitative Easing programme in 2009-10.
PART 2 reviews Finance for the Future's proposal for government investment in the economy specifically to further green objectives as outlined in the New Economics Foundation (NEF)'s Green New Deal. I would like to make it clear that, as I am neither an economist nor an environmentalist, I am not concerned with the merits of the Green objectives themselves. I am merely commenting on the financing proposal. For a discussion of the Green objectives and their potential economic impact, I'd suggest you read Simon Cooke's blog.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF PART 1
Part 1 of this post can be found by following the link above. I admit it is pretty wonkish and therefore hard…