Brad DeLong offers instalment 328 in his pleas for a better press corp. A vital lesson in unpicking the facts behind seemingly innocuous, flabby statements in a newspaper article.
There isn’t a lot new to say about Sweden’s resounding rejection of the euro yesterday. But I hope it puts paid to the notion that the case for the euro can be made by economic argument.
Despite Gordon Brown’s famous five tests nothing conclusive is ever going to be determined by looking at the economics. If one side produces 100 famous economists who are pro-euro, the other side will have no problem producing 100 who are anti-euro.
The currency decision is political. If you are against growing integration in Europe and believe the myths about Brussels bureaucrats, you are going to be anti. If you think closer European integration is a good thing, and you want to see your country at the heart of it, you will be pro. I’m pro, and disheartened by the failure of the pro movement in the UK (as in Sweden) to make the political argument with conviction.
The moment he fell out of love 
It’s generally a bad news day. If you want to let the gloom settle further, read Luke Harding’s report on India in The Guardian.
The collapse of the WTO talks in Cancun is depressing news both for global economic recovery and the developing countries that hoped for so much from this Doha round. The talks seem to have failed because of European and American intransigence over agricultural subsidies — a system that is intellectually and morally bankrupt — and European determination to press through with investment rules that no one seems to have wanted.
Cafod’s Patrick Nicholson provides a useful instantaneous reaction. “A deal at Cancun that reflected the concerns of developing countries could have lifted millions of people out of poverty. The World Bank estimated that 144 million people in the Third World would benefit from the new round of trade talks.”