Providing a bit more evaluation here, this is something I wrote up regarding a policy that was actually spoke about today, so it's pretty much as contemporary as you can get. I have adapted it for ECON 4 evaluation.
- UK Government introduction of policy of subsidising private investment, including infastructure investment, through loan guarantees. As a result, private corporations are funnelled money, rather than using expansionary fiscal policy and restoring huge cuts in public investment. This alternate route is namely recognised as a blunder; as this shows that over the two years of the Cameron government, they have wasted time doing exactly the wrong thing. Prof Krugman writes that ‘privatising the process will confuse enough people that it can escape blame.’ He further states that in the introduction of this ‘supply-side manifesto’ of subsidising capital projects, unlike government contracting which has safeguards in place, this new subsidation process will allow for ‘big giveaways’ to favoured industries that nobody will notice. Krugman dubbed this Crony Keynesianism – doing policies which logically call for government spending, but take the form of favoured private sector interests.
The main jist of this is that Osborne is subsidising capital firms that the private sector will play a role in. As such, instead of using expansionary policy which would restore the cuts, the Cameron government has chosen to initiative a campaign for austerity and the emerge of greater market forces. But this is obviously flawed, as not only is this the EXACT OPPOSITE of what they have been doing and showing their complacency, they are using private firms which will inherently mean bigger payouts and a further disruption to the system.