In this Institute of Economic Affairs briefing, our Head of Media, Reem Ibrahim, interviews Chris Snowdon, Head of Lifestyle Economics, about his new discussion paper "Anti-Capitalism and Public Health." The conversation examines how public health discourse has evolved from targeting specific industries like "big tobacco" and "big food" to attacking what academics call "commercial determinants of health" - essentially any profit-making enterprise.
Interesting interview Reem. And I think Christopher has a good point here. I replied earlier to the listing on IEA without first seeing and hearing the interview. I probably got the wrong end of the stick and now see where Chris is coming from. He is right to question the WHO and others intention to take their health concerns to that degree of concern over public health snd the detrimental business effect on health. It’s worth saying it’s gone too far do Chris is right to question snd highlight this phenomenon. But as I have said it’s hard to disentangle monetary and business effects and impacts on public health. I think what comes out of this overreach is just that. It’s too far to throw the baby out with the bath water. I think there has to be an economic storm to rotate and channel the need to work, strive and invent. We gave to have a coherent system and framework to interact. And we need the care and protection the state can give. But at the same time we need to take heed of the need to create best practice and think of the impacts of business and money. Growth, is a peculiar word. It’s easily said and equally misunderstood. Growth can mean more wealth or larger profit. Or it can mean improve or better one’s position. It means to do economist GDP but that’s not the same to Rachel Reeves! To her it means sufficient tax income to the exchequer so as to prevent cuts, tax hikes and prevent borrowing! So it depends on your view. I believe it should be better explained. It’s like ‘smash the gangs’! Its meaning is unclear. Words are nothing without real accurate meaning. Many people think they know what it means but, sadly don’t or get it wrong because, it’s not fully clarified. I think reason will always prevail, at least I hope so. It’s right Chris shouts this out but the care they want snd the need for an economy that works meets favourably in the middle of both somewhere. Thanks again for another insightful interview from the IEA. You may notice, these interviews take my thinking for run. They put my brain through its paces! Lots to take in.
Interesting interview Reem. And I think Christopher has a good point here. I replied earlier to the listing on IEA without first seeing and hearing the interview. I probably got the wrong end of the stick and now see where Chris is coming from. He is right to question the WHO and others intention to take their health concerns to that degree of concern over public health snd the detrimental business effect on health. It’s worth saying it’s gone too far do Chris is right to question snd highlight this phenomenon. But as I have said it’s hard to disentangle monetary and business effects and impacts on public health. I think what comes out of this overreach is just that. It’s too far to throw the baby out with the bath water. I think there has to be an economic storm to rotate and channel the need to work, strive and invent. We gave to have a coherent system and framework to interact. And we need the care and protection the state can give. But at the same time we need to take heed of the need to create best practice and think of the impacts of business and money. Growth, is a peculiar word. It’s easily said and equally misunderstood. Growth can mean more wealth or larger profit. Or it can mean improve or better one’s position. It means to do economist GDP but that’s not the same to Rachel Reeves! To her it means sufficient tax income to the exchequer so as to prevent cuts, tax hikes and prevent borrowing! So it depends on your view. I believe it should be better explained. It’s like ‘smash the gangs’! Its meaning is unclear. Words are nothing without real accurate meaning. Many people think they know what it means but, sadly don’t or get it wrong because, it’s not fully clarified. I think reason will always prevail, at least I hope so. It’s right Chris shouts this out but the care they want snd the need for an economy that works meets favourably in the middle of both somewhere. Thanks again for another insightful interview from the IEA. You may notice, these interviews take my thinking for run. They put my brain through its paces! Lots to take in.