Is it just me, or does anyone else get the distinct impression that we, the great British public, are being encouraged by our politicians to hit the high street as hard as we can  and to ‘spend spend spend’?

Is there any chance that one fine morning in the not too distant future SOMEONE will appear on our television screens to point out that this might NOT be the greatest of all ideas.

Whether or not certain politicians are even allowed to say such a thing is not the point.  Someone has to say it.  And frankly, it would help if it wasn’t a politician.

If one of the causes of the financial crisis was that people were spending money they could not afford to spend, notching up debts they could not repay, then where are the voices of common sense (or at the very least, balance) as we tune into the Today programme each morning? 

Speaking of things that politicians are and are not ‘allowed’ to say, RSA Chief Executive Matthew Taylor writes far more eloquently than I could on a subject which has been on my mind this week;

“Sticking on the combined topics of the downturn and my grumpiness, it is depressing that Tory health spokesman Andrew Lansley has agreed to apologise for his comments about the health consequences of recession. He simply said on his blog that by reducing consumption on things like booze, fags and sweets a downturn can be good for our health. Not only is it true but it is a rare example of a politician engaging seriously with what the downturn will mean for us. Governing politicians (here, and particularly insanely in the US) are like drug dealers encouraging us to get hooked onto debt again, while the Conservatives try to imply there is another way out of the crisis without ever quite telling us what this is and why no other Government in the world seems to agree with them. In contrast Andrew Lansley said something honest and thought provoking – no wonder he was forced to recant.”

As the British Chancellor unveils his Pre-Budget Report, our national news and media wheel out a series of ‘experts’ to pass judgement on what they seem to regard as the gamble to end all gambles.

How risky though, to assume that these sages have any real idea what they are talking about, given the failure of the vast majority of them to predict any of the current global financial crisis.

As I tune into this evening’s news broadcasts, I hope to see the more balanced blend of Gypsy Rose Lee, (or another leading fortune teller), accompanied by a leading psychologist.  Because if a large part of the ‘gamble’ comes in predicting how the British public will behave and spend on the high street, I certainly don’t want to leave it to an economist to gaze into the tea leaves on my behalf.  Do you?

Four minutes from President-Elect Obama’s acceptance speech, recorded from a post-election party here in Los Angeles;

Discussing the day’s vote with our friendly waitress Heather, at Jinky’s in Santa Monica, California.

More on California’s Proposition 8 here.

“Proposition 8 is an initiative state constitutional amendment on the 2008 California General Election ballot, titled Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry.  If passed, the proposition will “change the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.”  A new section would be added stating “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

 

To the United States, for the annual gathering of the British American Project.  Just in time for today’s big day, election day 2008!