Category Archives: Main Page

Class, housing and the economy

Posted on by

Lynsey Hanley, author of [amazon_link id=”1847087027″ target=”_blank” ]Estates: An Intimate History[/amazon_link], was one of the speakers at the Festival of Economics in November. I just read her book, which is terrific. It restores to centre stage the key issue of class in understanding British society and the economy – and in thinking about the challenge of tackling embedded poverty, which is almost always located in these specific areas of housing we call estates. (Funny to think their name must have originally meant to evoke the arcadian idyll of country estates.)

[amazon_image id=”1847087027″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Estates: An Intimate History[/amazon_image]

I’ve long thought we talk too little about class in the policy debate. Take schooling, for example. Children at London’s schools on average now have higher attainment than the English average; but I’ve lost count of the number of middle-class London friends who claim to have opted for private schools for their children because they’re worried about their education. Nonsense (I think) – they’re actually more worried about the social contagion of mixing with working class children. Nobody is entitled to call themselves left-wing or progressive, in my view, if they opt out of their local state schools, that is opt out of their community. As Estates points out, they key failure of the education system has been the low expectations, on the part of teachers and politicians alike, of what children from low income families can achieve.

Lynsey is brilliant in writing about the effect of the physical environment of post-war council estates on their inhabitants. “It has insanity designed into it,” she writes of the example of the Wood estate in Birmingham, where she grew up. Estate inhabitants have worse health, including mental health, lower life-expectancy, higher risk of drug abuse and unemployment. The book describes the interaction of the dreadful design of the housing, using poor quality materials and not maintained, with the evolution of housing policy. In particular, the Thatcher era sale of council housing, with local authorities forbidden from using the proceeds to build new homes for rent, meant the rump of unattractive estates were quickly filled with the ‘problem’ families. They became isolated locations for one class only, the underclass. Their downward spiral was then inevitable – from the inner city slums of the Industrial Revolution to the ‘slums in the sky’ tower blocks, whose inhabitants above the 5th floor are likely to be on benefits and members of an ethnic minority.

As she notes, Thomas Sharp in his 1949 book [amazon_link id=”B0007JU6EY” target=”_blank” ]Town Planning[/amazon_link] was clear about the danger of one-class communities – he described them as “social concentration camps: places in which one social class is concentrated to the exclusion of all others.” Add in the absence of amenities – shops, pubs, parks, buses – and they became the exact opposite of the Jane Jacobs ideal of a vibrant urban community (in [amazon_link id=”067974195X” target=”_blank” ]The Death and Life of Great American Cities[/amazon_link]).

Of course, one challenge in post-war housing policy was the shortage of housing, given strong demand and planning restrictions. (I think that Lynsey en passant assumes too readily that all of the green belt has to stay sacrosanct – only 1.5% of the UK’s land area is built on, only 2.3% in England – see also Kate Barker’s excellent Review of Housing Supply and , and [amazon_link id=”0099539772″ target=”_blank” ]Edgelands[/amazon_link] by Paul Farley and Michael Symmons Roberts.) In the immediate post-war years the shortage was so acute that many returning servicemen had to live in prefabs – as my parents and aunties did for some years.

My auntie and uncle, cousin and big brother, outside the family prefab

The UK’s housing crisis is still acute, although now middle-class young people too cannot easily afford to buy a first home, and many middle-class as well as working-class families will struggle to pay their mortgage if interest rates ever go up. Despite the sluggish economy house prices in some areas have continued to rise, so pronounced is the shortage, while other areas have a surfeit of homes to buy and unmet demand to rent. This market does not work at all well. It also destabilizes the economy as a whole. One day, one of the political parties will see an opportunity in this. But it is a huge challenge too.

I highly recommend [amazon_link id=”1847087027″ target=”_blank” ]Estates[/amazon_link]. Good reading alongside Owen Hatherley’s [amazon_link id=”1844677001″ target=”_blank” ]A Guide to The New Ruins of Great Britain [/amazon_link](I’ve not yet read his latest, [amazon_link id=”1844678571″ target=”_blank” ]A New Kind of Bleak: Journeys Through Urban Britain[/amazon_link]), as well as the other books referred to above. And I just bought [amazon_link id=”1844678644″ target=”_blank” ]Chavs: The Demonisation of the Working Class[/amazon_link] by Owen Jones, another book about the neglected and disparaged working class.

[amazon_image id=”1844678644″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class[/amazon_image]

Through the Eye of A Needle

Posted on by

Over the past few days of holiday I’ve read Peter Brown’s [amazon_link id=”069115290X” target=”_blank” ]Through The Eye of A Needle[/amazon_link]. It’s about the effect of increasing wealth in the early church in western Europe, changing it from a new religion emphasising austere living and personal charity, in the Roman empire, to a rich institution increasingly exercising worldly influence after the Fall of Rome. The duty of well-off Christians morphed from using their money in individual acts of philanthropy (in what the author describes as a ‘counterculture’ like flower power in the 1960s) to, instead, donating it to the church. From the end of the fourth century, the rich converted to Christianity and, as they entered the church, took leadership roles in it. From the late fifth century onwards, the book shows, church leaders turned their energy to the administrative role this implied.

[amazon_image id=”069115290X” link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD[/amazon_image]

This is not at all a subject on which I’ve got any background knowledge, but it proved an interesting dip into a time and subject about which I know very little. The book is packed with description and spans all of western Europe and the Mediterranean. It was intriguing to try to step into the mental world of people living in the centuries right after the fall of Rome – not that the mediaeval mindset was much less different from our own, but the high Middle Ages are a somewhat more familiar period.

This was also, of course, a decisive period for the church as an institution that fundamentally shaped western societies, and I had never really thought before about how it came to be so influential from its early beginnings as a protected but minority religion, among the pagans, in the Roman empire. As this is a big book, more than 750 pages of beautifully produced hardback, the worldly festival of Christmas is probably the ideal time to have read it, in more than one way – propped up with it on the sofa, surrounded by material goodies but with ethereal carols on the radio in the background.

Reviewers who know far more about this period than I do have given the book glowing praise – for example Tim Whitmarsh in The Guardian and Tom Holland in History Today.

 

Whose internet?

Posted on by

It was with great excitement that I read this morning that John Naughton‘s new book [amazon_link id=”0857384252″ target=”_blank” ]From Gutenberg to Zuckerberg: What You Really Need to Know About the Internet[/amazon_link] is out. I’ve ordered it pronto, and am sure it’s a worthy successor to his [amazon_link id=”075381093X” target=”_blank” ]A Brief History of the Future: Origins of the Internet[/amazon_link] from 2000; but meanwhile he has written a column about the new book in today’s Observer.

[amazon_image id=”0857384252″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]From Gutenberg to Zuckerberg: What You Really Need to Know About the Internet[/amazon_image]

The theme of the column is the intensifying struggle to control the Internet – on the one hand by authoritarian governments, as demonstrated at the recent ITU-organised WCIT-12 World Conference on International Telecommunications, and on the other hand by large corporations – something that always happens in the communications and media sector, as Tim Wu documented in his brilliant book [amazon_link id=”B0092I2BFS” target=”_blank” ]The Master Switch[/amazon_link].

[amazon_image id=”B0092I2BFS” link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]MASTER SWITCH THE AIR EXP by WU TIMOTHY ( Author ) ON Mar-01-2011, Paperback[/amazon_image]

Naughton writes: “Ever since the internet burst into public consciousness in 1993, the big question has been whether the most disruptive communications technology since print would be captured by the established power structures – nation states and giant corporations – that dominate our world and shape its development. And since then, virtually every newsworthy event in the evolution of the network has really just been another skirmish in the ongoing war to control the internet.”

Interestingly, I heard some two years ago that China was becoming much more active in the UN organisations but especially the ITU (International Telecommunications Union) based in Geneva. Maybe that diplomatic investment is paying off. I agree with John Naughton that the struggle is going to be immensely important.

The Information Age, 1749

Posted on by

As we glide in towards the holidays, I treated myself to [amazon_link id=”0674066049″ target=”_blank” ]Poetry and the Police: Communication Networks in Eighteenth-Century Paris[/amazon_link] by Robert Darnton. Professor Darnton is the University Librarian at Harvard and has written a number of brilliant articles (like these in the New York Review of Books) about the modern technology of information, and its implications for books, libraries, and access to knowledge. I’m a fan.

This is a short book about the circulation of poems and songs attacking King Louis XV and his mistress, the notorious Madame de Pompadour, in 1749. A police investigation led to the arrest of 14 minor clergy and lawyers’ clerks – “In the end, the police filled the Bastille with fourteen purveyors of poetry. It was known as L’Affaire des Quatorze. It was impossible to prove authorship of the poems, as people added to them or adapted them, and they were often anyway descended from traditional songs or poems. Their creation was collective, a kind of UGC.

The book has a website that recreates how some of the songs might have sounded. Although this was four decades before the French Revolution, the affair reveals some of the social and political forces that led the country to that upheaval. The book concludes with some reflections on whether public opinion could be said to have existed in 18th century France, with this exuberance of singing rude songs and declaiming poems criticising the King. Professor Darnton concludes that in some form it did, so extensive was the transmission of these popular expressions: “The information society existed long before the Internet.”

He notes that by the early 1780s, Condorcet clearly saw public engagement as part of the playing out of political ideas: “Men of letters developed conflicting views of public questions and consigned them to print; then, after weighing both sides of the debates, the public opted for the better argument. It could make mistakes of course, but ultimately truth would prevail, because truth really existed, in social questions as in mathematics….Public opinion therefore acted as the motor force of history.”

We might accept the last leg of this Enlightenment optimism today, but probably not the first part. After all, in 1789 public opinion welled up from the streets of Paris in anything but a calm, reasoned manner.

[amazon_image id=”0674066049″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Poetry and the Police[/amazon_image]

Business monoculture

Posted on by

My post yesterday on the lack of interest in Lincoln Electric’s combination of profit with an employment guarantee has prompted some debate. The story is told by Frank Koller in his book [amazon_link id=”1610390539″ target=”_blank” ]Spark[/amazon_link].

[amazon_image id=”1610390539″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Spark[/amazon_image]

Henry Stewart (@happyhenry) of Happy Computers pointed to more evidence on the commercial benefits of good employment practice (in his comment). On Twitter, Stephen King of HSBC (@KingEconomist) said Lincoln’s practice sounded like the Japanese system of a lifetime employment guarantee, which was now discredited. I think it’s actually a bit different: a promise by specific firms not to lay workers off rather than an expectation that many or most people in society will stay in one firm for their whole career. After all, Lincoln operates in the context of the fluid US labour market.

However, Stephen and I agreed that there is every reason to prefer a plurality of corporate models, and what a shame it is that there are not more alternatives to the conventional joint stock model. Monocultures are rarely healthy.

The model chosen by a specific business should depend on the transactions costs and information asymmetries that we know are important in determining the shape of any business. A commitment by employers to keep workers in a job as long as they want will make a lot of sense in an industry where craft skill and tacit knowledge is vital, for the reasons explained by the signalling literature; less so where the tasks involved in the job are easily codified.