Stephanie Flanders

Labour's growth plan is more investment. Most (80pc) is UK private sector. By driving up employment costs, it is pushing firms to invest. The numbers are improving. But the price is higher unemployment. UK is looking US these days, and more French bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

Excellent, thoughtful column.

Given the dilemma whether to tack left or right to reclaim supporters, the government seems to be choosing “both”. But hasn’t Reform been doing the same?

He has such good political instincts, it’s interesting to me that Farage doesn’t fear blowback from testifying against the UK in another country - and even offering tacit support for US countermeasures. Even 5 years ago it would have been v unpopular.

After six years of reporting in Hong Kong, and at eight months pregnant, I’m very sad to be leaving my colleagues, friends and the place I’ve called home.  fcchk.org/visa-denial-fo… I’ll be out of office for a while on maternity leave. Wherever I land, catch you on the other side

In which I join the @business Trumponomics podcast to discuss tariffs, inflation, and the Fed. Really enjoyed talking with @AnnaEconomist, one of the few honest brokers out there willing to say when the economics profession is just getting it wrong. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

Is Trump right that the Fed is getting it wrong? The fear is that tariffs will stoke inflation, but that is not supposed to happen when inflation expectations are ‘well anchored’, as the Fed insists. So what gives? @oren_cass and @AnnaEconomist get into it shorturl.at/Hjtma

AND f you can’t get enough of this talk there’s Trumponomics - in which economist and Donald Trump fan Stephen Moore explains why he’s bullish about the US even though he’s not happy at all with higher tariffs. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

A double dose of podcast magic this week as I reunite with @peston to talk US tax cuts, the mad pace of politics and economics coverage today, Labour’s new tilt on immigration and much else. open.spotify.com/episode/4E47y9…

@nouriel: “The strike price for a Trump put is much higher than for the Powell put and also higher than for the Xi Jinping put. In other words: Trump is gonna blink before the Fed does and before Xi Jinping. “

Could China win this trade war with the US? Losing its biggest export market is a big deal, but as @nouriel explains, Xi Jinping has a higher pain threshold than Donald Trump - and more room to cushion the blow on the domestic economy shorturl.at/3TFhN

Powerful @nytimes Daily podcast with a US small business owner at the sharp end of the trade war with China podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the…

Enjoyed discussing the new tariffs on @KQEDnews @KQEDForum show/podcast this morning with @WallachLori and @MyStephanomics, and Alexis Madrigal. You can listen at the link or wherever you stream podcasts. kqed.org/forum/20101019…

One of the more interesting historical parallels I’ve seen for the past week…Trump Isn’t the First President to Blow Up the Trading System thefp.com/p/to-understan…

Not all economists agree on this topic, to be sure…(and yes there will exporters in 10% countries like the UK who may now see a greater capacity to compete against China in global markets).

Running bilateral trade surplus/deficits with different countries is the way it should be. Trying to eliminate each one is simply stupid. I have a trade deficit with my grocer, a trade surplus with my employer. I am not sure it would be a great idea for me to work for my grocer. (Even if the loss for the economic profession was minimal, I am not very good at packing groceries.) Same thing with countries. There are reasons why we sell more to one, buy more from another. Different tariff rates across countries imply reshuffling of deficits and surpluses across countries, but no obvious change in the overall trade deficit. To go back to the economist’s mantra (and the power of identities): If you want to reduce the overall trade deficit, increase saving (you might consider decreasing the budget deficit?) or decrease investment.

Madagascar faces nearly highest (47%) tariff in President Trump’s plan. It ranks 176th in the world with income per head of $500. None of the 5 facing the highest rates has a per capita GDP over $5000 (or $15,000 PPP adj). Are these now countries the US wants to compete with?

@Phillip_Blond These are good questions and a useful thought exercise, but what is the evidence that tariff revenues will be used “to cut taxes on labour”? In Trump 1.0 tax cuts were skewed to wealthy owners of capital. And tariff revenues were largely used to compensate farmers lost markets.

In all the conventional hysteria about Tumps Tariffs its worth asking what are its distributional effects for the American working class for whom these were explicitly designed and designated. So a series of questions

Donald Trump has committed the most profound, harmful and unnecessary economic error in the modern era. Almost everything he said—on history, economics and the technicalities of trade—was utterly deluded econ.st/4j8e0DG

On tonight's Any Questions, @AlexForsythBBC is joined in Huntingdon by Torsten Bell, Stephanie Flanders, Sarah Olney and Helen Whately. #BBCAQ Listen 8pm Friday / 1.10pm Saturday on @BBCRadio4 on on demand on @BBCSounds. bbc.in/3Y1jTKU