The joys of government planning. Again.

The argument in favour of government planning things is that only those looking from the disinterested and Olympian heights can possibly take all societal interests into account. If mere economic actors, those who would be directly affected by decisions and actions, were to decide what is to be done then important larger considerations would be ignored.

Then we have the reality of government planning:

Up to one in five train services will be axed next year under radical plans being considered by ministers to prevent a multi-billion-pound taxpayer bill spiralling out of control.

Whitehall officials are considering proposals to cut Britain’s rail capacity to around 80pc of pre-Covid level, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.

Nothing wrong with that as a proposal nor action. A smaller economy will have fewer people travelling. It will have less money to subsidise those who do. We’ve all had a taste of working from home and some at least - enough to shade the numbers travelling - have found that both it and we work when we do so.

However, this is being done at the same time as HS2 starts, that plan to expand the capacity of the network, for commuters, at the cost of £100 billion and counting.

That is, government planning doesn’t mean disinterested decision making from those Olympian heights. The why being that HS2 or not, or more train capacity or not even, has become a political argument not a rational one. HS2 doesn’t even pass its own cost benefit test but tribes are lined up on either side and they shout at each other. Who wins, whether it goes ahead or not, is based upon who can shout loudest - who has the political power.

This being the problem with political direction of the economy. It always does come down to politics. Debate and persuasion are good and useful things in their place but as it turns out they’re not good ways of spending money.