Putting a former postman in charge of economic affairs. First of all, since he knows nothing about economics he won't realise when he has lost the argument, and second, being a former postman he will know how to write what he does know on the back of a postage stamp.
6 comments:
And delivering the wrong things to the wrong places.
Whereas George Osborne is the heir to a paint fortune and did fuck all before he entered politics because he didn't have to.
What is your point?
Osborne managed a 2.1 at Oxford. That usually indicates intelligence and aptitude. My guess is that he can probably handle being Chancellor. My guess is that Johnson could not, but at the moment all he has to do is toc riticise whenever others tell him to.
Only a 2:1? Based on your previous posts about educational attainment, surely this marks him as not intellectually equipped to handle the role of chancellor?
It (Johnson) was a strange choice though, I think it was really just to draw attention to the fact that when George Osborne is talking about austerity it is clear that it isn't something he has had to deal with in his life.
Couple his personal fortune, aristocratic status and moves to supress various benefits and public spending measures (plus backing down on CGT which was weak) and Alan Johnson starts to make more sense.
Alan Johnson doesn't even get to the starting line. he will not be Chancellor even if there is a Labour government.
He clearly isn't going to be there for the long term but he could do enough damage to Osbo/The Conservatives in the short-term should we slip back into recession.
Anything that weakens the coalition and makes it less effective is likely to be the Labour tactic. I'm unsighted on the strength of this weird five year deal the Con/Dems have made so difficult to predict the length of this parliament.
Post a Comment