(Hayek, Milton Friedman)

Soviet economists were trapped in a Marxist/Leninist cage and most accepted it. The majority of British economists occupy a government funded cage but will not admit it. This is surprising because, as in the former USSR, the majority of British economists are on government payrolls, i.e. paid by the taxpayer.

Politicians dream of finding the elixir which will deliver growth and prosperity for ever. They have been disappointed by industrialists, by scientists and by workers but since the 1930s the siren voices of economists have sung the loudest. "We will show you how to deliver so that the grateful voters will keep you in power for as long as possible." [Sweden was the usual example they gave.]
(As an individual, you know how to contact a doctor, a dentist, even a bridge builder - but other than in a university or a Think Tank or a government department or amongst the slickers in the City, where would you expect to find an economist? A dinner party guest may begin "My personal trainer says..." Who has ever heard one begin "My economist believes".
Individuals and firms sometimes consult financial advisers but for business advice Harvey Jones or Alan Sugar is a better bet. Yet what is an economy but the sum of millions of individuals and firms.

So why this special class called economists -- they have insinuated themselves into our national affairs rather like communist party functionaries who pretended to act in the interests of the people, but more cynically were licking the boots and hands of those in the Kremlin who fed them.

Economics is not a science nor is it a discipline like accountancy. Its ascendancy is a sad commentary on 20th century western political failure. Politicians' inability to establish the right framework for enterprise to flourish in all locations and at all levels - from the bottom to the top of western society - is a social tragedy, an unnecessary, multi- multi-trillion-dollar loss which has led to the moral and physical destruction of millions of lives.

Aberrations like WW1, WW2 and the "Depression" were setbacks and tragic but limited in time, scope and wreckage within the 100 years of rapid scientific and industrial progress that was side tracked by these flat-earthers. For example, interest rate setting by bank governors after a monthly lunch is as ridiculous a ceremony as a bone reading convention of New Guinea witch doctors.

However even the great shrink Hayek believed in intervention. He put it as "saving us from the exuberance of fools". In contrast, in medicine, nuclear physics or diesel engines workers strive to "automate" difficult processes to "save us from fools". Hence one would expect to hear from mean critics of manual intervention in the "free market". Instead what happens? Speculation is rife and the "sincerest form of flattery" (imitation) of Hayek's ideas, from within the hundreds of Think Tanks and economic departments of Universities.

Their Professors of economics are so smug and stale, safe in their state bunkers, that their only response is to create "shadow monetary committees" to bet on the outcome!! These include the Adam Smith Institute, the IEA, The Times and Guardian. Their attitude encourages the new groupies in "property" to believe that rising property prices are so beneficial for everyone, that no steep drop will be risked by government. In plain English, this means that the MPC is not about interest rates but about steering the price per square property metre!!!