The conversation then turns to the Planning and Infrastructure Act and its restrictions on vexatious judicial reviews, using the recent case of a solar farm as the first real-world test. The panel assesses whether cutting the artificial waiting period from 14 months to two months represents a genuine turning point for infrastructure delivery in Britain, or whether NIMBYs will simply adapt and find new avenues for delay.

The final segment examines a warning from Conservative MP Neil O’Brien that Treasury forecasts for capital tax revenues may be built on shaky foundations. With the Government leaning heavily on stamp duty, capital gains tax, and inheritance tax to plug a fiscal gap, Boboc and Niemietz argue the tax base is too narrow, too volatile, and too geographically concentrated to deliver the roughly £30 billion the Treasury is counting on by 2030.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

The discussion opens with the challenge of winning public support for a smaller state, with Lord Frost arguing the current tax and spend model is close to exhausting itself and that the ideas need to be ready for when it does. The panel go on to address Milton Friedman’s monetary theory and how it applies to recent inflation, before turning to climate policy, where they make the case that adaptation through market incentives is preferable to emergency state-led intervention. The housing section examines why supply constraints drive price volatility, why migration has complicated the political case for building, and why expectations of ever-rising house prices are a consequence of policy rather than culture. The episode closes with questions on the Norway model, the Reform versus Greens policy comparison, whether small staters should work in the public sector, and Stephen Davies’ Great Realignment thesis.

The panel also reflect on passing 200 episodes of the weekly podcast and what the IEA’s role is in shaping the economic debate at a moment when the dominant political settlement looks increasingly fragile.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Thumbnail image: Greta Thunberg, Stockholm, 30 April 2024. Photo by Frankie Fouganthin, licensed under CC BY 4.0. via Wikimedia Commons.

Thumbnail image: Margaret Thatcher. Photo provided by Chris Collins of the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Then the team turns to wealth taxes. Kristian has published a new IEA paper demolishing the case for them — and the arguments are sharper than you might expect. Britain already raises more from wealth-related taxes than almost any OECD country. Wealth inequality has been broadly flat since 1990. And even the most optimistic wealth tax proposal would raise, at best, 1% of GDP — nowhere near enough to fund the endless list of promises its advocates attach to it. The real question is why this idea has consumed so much of the national conversation when it solves almost nothing.

Finally, the Government’s plan to effectively ban traditional tumble dryers in favour of slower, less effective heat pump models. Is this net zero policy, EU alignment by stealth, or simply Ed Miliband picking your appliances for you? The team argues it is a perfect microcosm of everything wrong with British economic policy — a rich country solution imposed on a country that simply cannot afford it. Subscribe to the IEA on YouTube and on Substack at iea.org.uk for more.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

The conversation examines the core problems with a wealth tax in practice: the valuation difficulties, the risk of capital and people leaving the country, and the fundamental contradiction at the heart of the wealth tax campaign, which simultaneously promises to cut taxes on working people, fund the NHS, finance the climate transition, and reduce inequality. Advani draws on the Wealth Tax Commission’s findings, including the estimate that a 1% tax on wealth above £10 million could raise around £10 to £12 billion, but notes that behavioural responses mean the real figure would be considerably lower. Niemietz argues the real cost of the wealth tax debate is its opportunity cost: every hour spent on a policy that will not work is an hour not spent on things that would.

The final section turns to what should be done instead. Niemietz points to the genuine drivers of falling wealth inequality in the post-war period: wider pension saving and rising home ownership. He argues that liberalising planning rules and building more homes, at the scale Britain managed in the 1930s, would do more to spread wealth than any tax on it. Advani adds that fixing the existing, poorly designed taxes on capital income and transfers would be a more productive use of political energy than building an entirely new tax from scratch.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Maggiori explains how MMT was built on a foundational accounting error made in the late 1990s, when its originators misread the operations of the US Treasury and Federal Reserve and concluded that government spending creates new money from nothing. The discussion examines MMT’s theory of taxation, which holds that taxes do not fund government but instead legitimise currency, redistribute income, and dampen inflation. Snowdon and Maggiori also go through MMT’s policy proposals, including the Green New Deal financing paper, and find them riddled with assumptions about the mobility of resources that do not hold up in practice.

The conversation also covers the rhetorical tactics used by MMT advocates online, the response of serious left-wing economists who have rejected the theory, the Argentina example of nominal versus real wealth, and how figures like Zach Polanski have confused MMT’s hypothetical world with how things actually work. Maggiori explains why MMT’s inflation theory functions like an on-off switch and why that is fundamentally at odds with how real economies behave.

Emmanuel’s new book, If You Can Just Print Money, Why Do I Pay Taxes?, is out now (https://emaggiori.com/mmt/)

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Roger sets out how the WHO’s funding model has shifted dramatically over its 80-year history, with over 80% of its budget now coming from voluntary donors including the Gates Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies and the European Commission rather than nation states. He argues this has left the organisation aligned to donor priorities rather than public health needs, contributing to its failures on COVID — from dismissing the airborne nature of the virus to going along with Chinese-style lockdowns while abandoning its own pandemic playbooks. The conversation also covers the ongoing pandemic treaty negotiations, the WHO’s damaging stance on tobacco harm reduction and vaping, and the question of who should lead the organisation next.

Roger and Christopher discuss whether the WHO can be reformed from within or whether a replacement organisation is needed, the role of billionaire philanthropy in distorting global health science, and why budgets for tuberculosis, malaria and HIV are being squeezed to fund pandemic preparedness plans modelled on the very response that failed. Roger argues the most momentous event since the Second World War has gone almost entirely without honest evaluation — and that without one, the next pandemic will repeat every mistake of the last.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

The episode opens with the latest jobs figures, which showed unemployment falling to 4.9% — but with the bulk of that drop driven by people leaving the workforce altogether rather than finding work. The panel examine the role of the Employment Rights Act, rising employer National Insurance contributions, and the equalisation of the minimum wage for younger workers, arguing these policies have made hiring significantly more expensive and are contributing to rising economic inactivity, particularly among 18 to 24 year olds. The panel also touch on the Unite Union staff strike against their own union and the broader implications of expanded trade union access rights. A new Centre for American Progress report on AI and the UK labour market is then assessed, finding little disruption to employment so far, with the counterintuitive example of programming jobs actually rising since the rollout of tools like ChatGPT.

Andy Mayer then walks through Ed Miliband’s proposal to reform the renewables obligation system, which would shift older wind farm contracts from market-linked pricing to the contracts for difference model. Mayer argues that while the reform may produce more price stability, it is unlikely to deliver lower bills and risks undermining the price mechanism in the electricity market, leaving Britain with a consistently expensive energy system. The panel close by discussing what a sensible alternative energy mix might look like, with nuclear identified as the only viable firm, low-carbon power source.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

The conversation digs into the polling that defines the moment. More than one in three young Britons hold a positive view of communism, two-thirds back BLM, and around half favour reparations for the transatlantic slave trade. Kristian argues this is not boomer slop from the right wing press but the sincere answers of millions of young people, and he dispels the comforting myth that this generation will grow out of it. The data shows older millennials in their early 40s already think indistinguishably from teenagers, meaning the traditional rightward drift with age has effectively stalled.

Callum and Kristian also explore why the old left-right map no longer fits, with progressives driving cancel culture and the British right increasingly defined by NIMBYism and a refusal to build anything. They discuss what unites today’s young classical liberals with the boomer-era thinkers who came before them, the intellectual sources they still draw on from the Chicago and Austrian schools to Robert Nozick, and what gives Kristian hope that liberalism can survive as one credible option among many, even if it never becomes the majority view.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

The panel examines the IEA polling which found that most Britons believe the UK is wealthier than comparable economies such as the United States, Australia and Singapore, when in fact it lags behind most of them significantly. The discussion moves to the generational and gender divides in political opinion, with Kristian noting that Britain is something of an outlier internationally, where young people across the board have moved left rather than following patterns seen in France or Germany. On the NHS, the panel critiques the IPR’s report arguing against a move to an insurance-based funding model, questioning whether it engages seriously with why some health systems outperform others and what role market mechanisms and incentives play.

The final segment takes on the SNP’s pre-election pledge to introduce price caps on staple foods including bread, milk and eggs. Kristian sets out why price controls distort the signals that coordinate supply and demand, and Lord Frost and Callum explore the practical consequences, including reduced supply, gaming of the system by producers, and the likelihood of follow-up interventionist legislation to paper over the failures of the original policy.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Catherine and Andy examine the specific industries that have been lost or are disappearing, from aluminium smelting and titanium dioxide production to ceramics and cement, and why highly productive industries are being replaced by low-productivity service jobs. They debate the role of the emissions trading scheme, the windfall tax on North Sea producers, and how the Government’s planning and licensing regime has made the UK uniquely hostile to domestic energy extraction compared to Norway and the US.

The episode closes with Catherine’s three priorities for any future government: lifting the windfall tax and other levies on North Sea producers, scrapping the licensing restrictions that prevent new wells, and reversing the net zero framework that she argues has made no measurable difference to global emissions while destroying competitive industries. She also highlights the critical minerals sitting in old coal mine tailings across the UK and the safety risks of the proposed carbon capture pipeline through the Peak District.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Matthew Lesch, public policy fellow and country manager at Freshwater Strategy, joins the IEA podcast to walk through a major new polling project of 3,000 people and a series of focus groups. The findings are striking. Two thirds of Britons think the country is heading in the wrong direction. Most believe their living standards are lower than their parents’. And when asked where the UK would rank if it were a US state by income per capita, the average guess was seventh. The real answer is 51st.

What does the public actually want? Lower energy bills, tax cuts for workers, more housing, and public services that work. Not ideology, not abstract GDP targets, just tangible improvements to daily life. Lesch breaks down the six political tribes driving opinion, explains why Reform and Green Party voters have more in common than anyone expects, and sets out what it would actually take to build a public mandate for pro-growth reform in Britain today.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

On the free speech and visa question, the panel examines whether the government was right to bar Kanye West from entering the UK, whether non-citizens should enjoy the same speech protections as British nationals, and how visa denial powers tend to be applied inconsistently along political lines. Kristian argues the same standard applied at the border should mirror what would be permissible to say domestically, while Lord Frost contends governments retain a legitimate interest in controlling who enters the country, provided it is done within clearly defined rules.

The conversation then turns to rent controls, where Kristian sets out why near-unanimous economist consensus against them exists, distinguishing between first and second generation controls and explaining why both produce misallocation and supply problems. The panel also discusses Ryan Bourne’s recent Times column on the minimum wage, arguing that political pressure has pushed it far beyond the level at which negative employment effects can be avoided, and that the policies most often defended as helping low-paid workers tend in practice to harm them most.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

From the 2008 financial crisis to the dotcom bust of 2001, Goodspeed reframes some of the most consequential economic events in modern history. Was 2008 really caused by reckless mortgage lending and greedy bankers? Or was a record-breaking energy price shock the real trigger? Was 2001 the dotcom crash — or was it September 11th that tipped the US economy into recession? And what does 300 years of data actually tell us about speculative bubbles, creative destruction, and the moral stories we tell ourselves when economies collapse?

The conversation also turns to Britain’s chronic underperformance since 2008, and why the UK remains at least 30% poorer than the United States. Goodspeed argues this is not the unavoidable aftermath of a financial crisis — it is the direct result of policy choices on taxation, land use, energy costs and financial regulation. For policymakers who claim to want growth, his message is clear: the first rule, as with medicine, is do no harm.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Recession is available now in bookshops on both sides of the Atlantic.

The panel examines the case for and against the triple lock, exploring what a fairer, more sustainable pension system might look like and how the retirement age should relate to rising life expectancy. They also dig into the Adam Smith Institute’s proposed free speech bill, asking whether Britain’s long-standing reputation as a bastion of free expression still holds up when you look at the laws actually on the statute book.

Finally, the group debates the real-world costs of building safety regulation, and whether politicians and the media are willing to have an honest conversation about trade-offs. It is easier said than done, but without that conversation, good policy becomes almost impossible to make.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Glaeser sets out the economic case for cities, arguing that density drives productivity, innovation and upward mobility. He examines Britain’s chronic failure to build housing and infrastructure, tracing it to planning restrictions that have constrained London’s growth and throttled the capacity of other cities to develop. Drawing on data from across the United States, he argues that high house prices are a supply problem, not a demand problem, and that the places which build the most are consistently the most affordable. He also challenges the case for rent control, new state-built cities and large-scale rail investment, arguing instead for deregulation, brownfield densification and mass production in housebuilding.

The panel discussion ranges across Britain’s 18 years of near-stagnant per capita growth, the counterintuitive finding that planning restrictions worsened under Thatcher, the limits of government competence in directing economic development, and Lord Frost’s observation that government policy effectively killed Birmingham as a productive city in the post-war decades. The conversation closes with the argument that Britain is not physically full — it simply believes it is, and that changing that psychology is essential to changing the country’s economic prospects.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

At the heart of Law, Legislation and Liberty is Hayek’s theory of cultural evolution: the idea that our most important institutions -- justice, morality, language, markets -- were not designed by anyone, but emerged gradually over millennia. Butler explains why Hayek believed this process produces a kind of accumulated wisdom that no government planner can replicate, and why attempts to redesign society from scratch -- from the French Revolution to Soviet Russia -- have so consistently ended in failure, repression, and corruption.

The interview also covers Hayek’s famous critique of social justice, his views on the proper limits of democracy, the difference between “law” and “legislation,” and what the most important lesson of the book is for policymakers today. Dr Butler’s guide to Law, Legislation and Liberty is published by the IEA and is available now -- link in the description.

Dr. Clark sets out his argument that pre-industrial England was characterised by a consistent fertility advantage among the upper and middle classes, with wealthier families producing significantly more surviving children than poorer ones. He explains how this demographic pressure drove the slow downward spread of commercially useful traits through the population over many generations, contributing to declining interest rates, rising literacy, and falling rates of violence long before industrialisation took hold. The discussion also covers why other societies with comparably sound institutions, including ancient Rome, Babylonia and Qing Dynasty China, never made the same transition, and what role European marriage patterns, particularly the tendency to marry later and for love rather than family arrangement, may have played in shaping the distribution of abilities within society.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

The conversation then turns to the Government’s new towns plan, narrowed from 12 to 7 proposed sites. Kristian and Lord Frost debate whether these amount to genuine new towns or simply extensions of existing conurbations, whether the history of new towns offers any useful lessons, and whether the current planning system is capable of delivering the housing numbers the country needs.

The final segment examines a piece in The Critic by Steve Loftus arguing that AI will be so transformative that capitalism itself will need to be replaced. Kristian and Lord Frost push back, questioning whether AI is truly different in principle from previous technological revolutions, what the productivity figures actually show so far, and what Hayek’s insights about tacit knowledge mean for the limits of machine intelligence.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

0:00 Introduction

1:56 OECD Growth Forecasts & The UK’s Energy Crisis

11:20 New Towns: Central Planning or Pragmatic Housing Policy?

24:18 Will AI Replace Capitalism?

Rangeley then takes the argument further, showing how each recession since the late 1980s has been met with lower interest rates and larger debt bubbles — from the dot-com crash to the 2008 financial crisis to the present day, where total global debt has surpassed $300 trillion. Using original data on corporate productivity, zombie companies and asset valuations, he argues that this cheap credit has not driven investment and innovation but instead entrenched stagnation, priced young people out of housing, and suppressed birth rates across the developed world.

Baker closes with a warning and a call to action. When this bubble bursts, he argues, it must not be misdiagnosed as a failure of free markets — it is the product of a centrally planned monetary system propping up a welfare state that cannot fund itself through taxation alone. The speakers urge economists, journalists and policymakers to undergo a paradigm shift in economic thinking before it is too late, and make the case that the choice ahead is not inevitable decline but one between collapse and renewal.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.

The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

The conversation then turns to the Green Party leader’s economic speech, which the panel characterise as “karaoke anti-Thatcherism” — a consistent set of arguments, consistently wrong. Topics covered include the claim that private housebuilding cannot solve the housing crisis, the energy supply problem, and the proposal for a wealth tax projected to raise around £15 billion, which Dr. Bok notes is roughly four or five days of current government spending. Kristian also examines the historical record of wealth taxes and why a narrowly targeted version is unlikely to raise the sums being claimed. The episode also addresses the government’s approach to youth unemployment, where measures including the National Insurance rise and the Employment Rights Bill are seen to be working against the very problem a new youth employment hub is supposed to fix.

The final segment covers a piece on supermarket planning restrictions, exploring how the town centre first policy has driven up costs, squeezed out independent retailers and forced supermarkets into buildings never designed for the purpose. The panel argue that the real issue is not supermarket-specific but reflects a broader failure of land use and planning policy — one with consequences across housing, energy, infrastructure and the cost of living.

The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.

Photo: Chris McAndrew / UK Parliament