Britain, Economic, Government, History, Society, Technology

AI is not a threat but an opportunity

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

IS the march of technology and machines something to be fearful of? Andy Haldane, the Bank of England chief economist, thinks we should be wary at the very least. He recently told the BBC that the rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) will make many jobs obsolete with far-reaching social and cultural consequences. He predicted a “Fourth Industrial Revolution” on a scale greater than anything seen before. “Each of those [previous industrial revolutions] had a wrenching and lengthy impact on the jobs market, on the lives and livelihoods of large swathes of society,” Mr Haldane said.

There is a distinction to be drawn between the short and long-term impacts of such upheavals. The western world has become immeasurably wealthier since farming techniques drove millions off the land and labour-saving automation took hold at the end of the 18th century. The increased prosperity that followed cannot be gainsaid though economic historians argue over when real living standards really began to rise for the majority. The period of transition was marked by social unrest and repression both here and on the continent.

But it remains the case that significant technological advances, whether they be the coming of the railways or the arrival of the silicon chip, have been accompanied by economic growth and higher per capita GDP.

Arguably, we have been too slow to adapt to automation in the UK, with too many jobs that could be mechanised still being carried out manually. This is one reason behind the UK’s poor productivity and sluggish wage growth, which have been the hallmarks of the economy in recent years. Stopping automation or taxing it as Labour threatens to do would stifle investment and worsen the country’s competitive position.

Mr Haldane was right to have said we cannot be sure whether the new machine age will destroy jobs or create new ones and on what scale; but seeking to stop it, as history shows, would be foolish and futile. Although AI will have a significant impact on manual work, many of the jobs likely to go will be middle-income posts in service industries – but these will be people who should be able to adapt to new challenges. Rather than stand in the way of progress, governments should ensure that their policies are geared towards encouraging the uptake of new skills and retraining. Automation should not be considered a threat but an opportunity.

Standard
Africa, Aid, Britain, Business, Economic, G7, Government

Britain: Aid cash to be used in boosting trade with Africa

FOREIGN AID BUDGET

THERESA May has pledged to use Britain’s overseas aid budget to boost post-Brexit trade with Africa.

She told an audience in Cape Town that she is “unashamed” of her ambition to ensure the multibillion-pound pot “works for the UK”.

The Prime Minister said that from now on Britain’s foreign aid budget will not only help combat poverty, but support “our own national interest”.

It comes after the bloated aid budget – now standing at almost £14billion a year – has come under fire as officials struggling to spend the money quickly enough have donated to a series of increasingly controversial projects.

Mrs May said funds will be specifically used to “support the private sector to take root and grow”. This means Britain will employ its aid to help create the conditions for UK businesses to have confidence to invest in Africa.

She also said the funds should go towards boosting security and tackling terrorism in the continent – a move to which she insists will make the UK safer.

The money will also be used to encourage potential migrants to stay in Africa so they are not tempted to make the dangerous journey to Europe.

The commitment comes amid the UK’s huge foreign aid budget struggling to maintain public support. Critics have long opposed David Cameron’s controversial policy and target of spending 0.7 per cent of national income on overseas aid.

The target has meant huge increases in aid spending in recent years – and guarantees it will continue to grow.

Public anger has grown given some of the examples of how the money is spent. These include a £5.2million grant to girl band Yegna, nicknamed the “Ethiopian Spice Girls”, whose funding was only halted last year.

Downing Street will now hope that the announcement of a realignment of spending will help convince voters of its worth.

The Department for International Development gives around £2.6billion a year in bilateral aid to Africa. The Prime Minister has also announced a new ambition to make Britain the G7’s largest investor in the continent within four years.

At present the U.S. is the largest contributor to African investment, but Mrs May aims to leapfrog it by 2022.

In Cape Town, the Prime Minister talked about changing the face of the UK’s aid spending in Africa both to reflect the continent’s rapid growth and to benefit Britain. There is a huge opportunity for British trade in a post-Brexit world. Mrs May’s three-day trip to the African continent will also take in visits to Nigeria and Kenya.

The PM said: “It is the private sector that is the key to driving that growth – transforming labour markets… And the UK has the companies that can invest in and trade with Africa to do just this.

“The private sector has not yet managed to deliver the level of job creation and investment that many African nations need.

“So I want to put our development budget and expertise at the centre of our partnership as part of an ambitious new approach – and use this to support the private sector to take root and grow.

“I am unashamed about the need to ensure that our aid programme works for the UK.

“I am committing that our development spending will not only combat extreme poverty, but at the same time tackle global challenges and support our own national interest.

“This will ensure that our investment in aid benefits us all, as is fully aligned with our wider national security priorities.”

The Prime Minister also set out why working with Africa to deliver jobs, investment and long-term stability is in the interests of Britain and the wider world.

Mrs May pointed out that Africa needs to create millions of new jobs every year to keep pace with its rapidly growing population, adding: “The challenges facing Africa are not Africa’s alone.

“It is in the world’s interest to see that those jobs are created, to tackle the causes and symptoms of extremism and instability, to deal with migration flows and to encourage clean growth. If we fail to do so, the economic and environmental impacts will swiftly reach every corner of our networked, connected world.

“And the human impacts . . . will be similarly global.”

Addressing the issue of British trade, Mrs May said: “As Prime Minister of a trading nation whose success depends on global markets, I want to see strong African economies that British companies can do business with in a free and fair fashion.

“Whether through creating new customers for British exporters or opportunities for British investors, our integrated global economy means healthy African economies are good news for British people as well as African people.

“I want the UK to be the G7’s number one investor in Africa, with Britain’s private sector companies taking the lead in investing the billions that will see African economies growing by trillions.”

Standard
Banking, Economic, European Union, Greece

The Greek bailout: Athens is still being betrayed by the EU

ESSAY

AFTER several years in which Greece was kept afloat by the munificence of the eurozone countries, Athens was trumpeted by many media outlets this week as being free at last from an EU bailout programme worth 61.9billion euros (£55billion) in emergency loans. That was part of an eight-year rescue package worth £258billion.

Despite the reports of economic privation and the dark clouds over Greece finally lifting, the reality is that Greece is far from saved from pecuniary disaster. The harsh economic medicine forced on the country by the EU and Germany in particular as conditions of the bailout has resulted in death by a thousand cuts.

The country’s once elegant capital has become one of the most depressing and untidiest cities in Western Europe, a city that is now in terrible decay. Shops on once booming boulevards are shuttered, while heavy machines and cranes stand idle over the shells of unfinished buildings. Much of Athens is covered in ugly graffiti. Even the awnings around Greece’s most revered ancient site the Parthenon, on the Athenian Acropolis, is covered in unsightly painted drawings.

The hardships and deprivations are everywhere – all the more heart-breaking in that this downward spiral had been caused by European leaders who were masquerading as people bearing gifts. Most Athenians are struggling to make ends meet.

 

HOSPITAL doctors, for example, have seen their monthly pay cut to just over a thousand pounds a month. It is only through social conscience and the love of their country that has kept some of them in Athens.

Some 70,000 highly skilled professionals including doctors, dentists and pharmacists have left the country as part of a broader Grexodus of 500,000 people.

The best way for any country to emerge from financial crisis is to increase its national income so that tax revenues rise and global debts can be paid off. But during the last eight years, Greece has moved in precisely the opposite direction. National output has slumped by an astonishing 25 per cent. The result is adult unemployment of 20 per cent. Even more shocking and socially disruptive, some 40 per cent of 18 to 25-year olds are out of work.

Without any income for the young, it is now commonplace for three generations of the same family to be forced to live cheek by jowl in the same crowded apartments. The fact is that the austerity imposed by the eurocrats has ruined Greece and done nothing to relive it of its monstrous level of debt.

It has snuffed out entrepreneurship, as well as created a poisonous political legacy where a far-Left Marxist party headed by Alexis Tsipras rules with the support of fanatical politicians on the populist Right.

The end of the EU’s bailout programme may technically mean that Greece can return to the international markets to borrow again, but any notion that the world’s commercial bankers and financiers will be queuing at Athens’ overcrowded and dilapidated airport to lend – and pour good money after bad – is a fantasy.

After all, the country is still sitting on a debt pile of 289billion euros (£258billion) which the International Monetary Fund (IMF) puts at 191 per cent, or almost twice the nation’s total annual output.

To place that in context, it is more than two times the ratio of Britain’s national debt to output, which after a decade of UK cuts to public services and surging tax incomes as the economy has grown is now, thankfully, on a downward path.

Not only that, Greece’s stricken financial system is currently being kept afloat by short-term cash assistance of some 40billion euros (£35.6billion) per month from the Frankfurt-based European Central Bank. Without this help, which is akin to that provided by the Bank of England to the British banks at the height of the financial crisis a decade ago, the four biggest Greek lenders would be effectively bankrupt.

Together the bad loans on the books of these banks – Piraeus, Alpha, Euro Bank and National Bank of Greece – amount to 101billion euros (£90billion) or 50 per cent of the total, the highest level of any country in the European Union. Indeed the banks, the lifeblood of any Western economy, are so indebted that they cannot lend any more.

 

WHICH means the small and medium-sized enterprises that are the country’s business bedrock cannot get the finance they need to carry on and invest. Nor do ordinary consumers find it possible to obtain credit.

This desolate financial scenario is a direct result of the austerity conditions demanded by Brussels eurocrats and German central bankers. Over the last eight years successive Greek governments have been forced to attend no fewer than 95 meetings at which the most stringent measures have been imposed on them.

The results for the Greek people have been nothing short of catastrophic.

Yet in their determination to preserve the greater political project of the eurozone and the EU, and to keep Greece as their client state, Brussels and German politicians have been utterly ruthless.

In spite of personal appeals from the IMF’s euro-supporting managing-director Christine Lagarde to forgive Greece its debt burden and allow the country to be given a fresh start, the eurofanatics have been unrelenting in their determination to keep the debt anvil hanging around its neck.

Greece is in an armlock it cannot escape because of a combination of its debt burden and the fact that its membership of the eurozone means it can longer devalue its currency. And the EU and Germans are determined to keep it that way to save their precious euro.

So, despite the joyous and uplifting media reports about the bailout this week, be in no doubt that this Greek tragedy is very far from being over.

 

GREECE should ditch the euro as it emerges from eight years of austerity caused by punishing EU bailouts.

The country also should have been afforded the right to have gone bankrupt at the height of the eurozone crisis instead of having been forced into a strict rescue package dictated by Brussels and Germany.

The EU pushed the country into accepting massive loans to save German and French banks from collapse. Greece’s creditors effectively turned the country into a dead colony that had been left devastated by fiscal austerity, with citizens having endured years of pain and misery.

Greece has now existed the final stage of an eight-year, £258billion bailout programme, which has left Athens crippled by soaring unemployment.

On the face of it, what has really changed? Greece’s state debts have not become lower, but higher still. The state is still destitute, private citizens have become poorer, companies are liquidating at an unprecedented rate, and its gross national product has decreased by 25 per cent.

The bailout was intended only for German and French banks who had, against all reasonable logic, loaned vast sums of money to the Greek state and oligarchy. As for the Greek banks and state, they should not have been saved. The country should have been allowed in declaring insolvency, to have suffered the consequences but then being allowed to have picked themselves up and by moving on – something these huge bailouts prohibited.

In a television interview, Yanis Varoufakis, a former minister who served in the Left-wing Syriza government, said: “It was absolutely necessary that the country be prepared to return to its national currency”. Unable to pay its debts, Greece faced a so-called “Grexit” from the eurozone in the aftermath of the global financial crisis of 2008. The economy has now returned to modest growth, but one in five Greeks are unemployed, average incomes have dropped by more than a third and taxes have rocketed.

Critics have argued that Greece would have fared better outside the euro, enabling it to carry out a range of measures including devaluing its currency and lowering interest rates to make the economy more competitive.

EU figures have this week tried to paint the bailout programme as a success, with European Council president Donald Tusk saying: “You did it! With huge efforts and European solidarity, you seized the day.”

Rather, the EU put Greece into a permanent coma and prefer to call it stability.

Standard