Our consumer choices, from buying less tobacco to more diesel, are all influenced by government policies. What if we apply it to air travel?
This is an article in the third issue of New Economics Magazine.You can read the full question Here
It is difficult to change the system. no doubt. However, if there is a moment to challenge the comfortable consensus of 21st century economics, it is after such a crisis. Breaking so many economic myths has opened a door to flexible rules, but there is still no guarantee that the system will change. The establishment of the NHS and the expansion of the welfare state after World War II showed us the possible achievements. However, we at NEF, like many others, failed to trigger a green investment revolution and better working conditions during the 2007/08 financial crisis: the Green New Deal. The neoliberal institutions prevailed and hijacked the narrative with their austerity agenda.
A few weeks ago, with the latest release of the National Bureau of Statistics (ONS), I received a grim reminder about our failure Family Expense Handbook. This data set Track the average household expenditure pattern in the UK in relatively detail and allow comparison of expenditures for 2001-02 and 2019-20 fiscal years.What it shows is shocking: After adjusting for inflation (that is, at current prices), the average household expenditure in the UK has only changed by 1 pound, from 586.90 pounds in 2001-02 to 587.90 pounds in 2019-20- Anyone else wants to know what happened to all the GDP growth reported in the media continuously talk?
However, under the hood, things Have changed. The proportion of funds used by British households for rent and construction service fees has doubled.Gas and electricity bills have both increased Their The share of total expenditure has increased by 40%, while the railway season ticket has increased by 50%. Municipal tax expenditures increased by 40%, reflecting the brave attempts of local authorities to mitigate the damage caused by austerity policies. With the slow progress of the NHS privatization process, the expenditure of dentists and opticians has tripled.
In this series of frustrating predictable statistics, one type of household expenditure stands out. The change in international travel expenditure is greater than in any other category. Family spending on international air tickets increased by 330%, spending on holiday packages abroad increased by 50%, spending on accommodation abroad increased by 80%, and money spent directly overseas increased by 32%. In 2001-02, expenditures for these four categories (2019 – 20 prices) were approximately £1,600 per household per year. By 2019-20, expenditures have reached £2,600.
“…These changes are not purely driven by personal preference.”
Sitting behind these numbers are the benefits of more opportunities and cultural exchanges, as long-distance travel has become more popular. However, these changes are not purely driven by personal preferences.The government promotes international air travel by providing tax exemptions to the aviation industry Worth about £7 billion per year, Provide exemptions from climate targets and A carbon tax plan worth billionsOver the years, the government has approved a large number of airport expansions-directly harming the interests of surrounding communities, which need to deal with the impact of noise and air pollution on health and well-being.they have Issued billions Provide emergency support to airlines and airports during the pandemic.
The decision to inject substantial state support into the air travel industry is not intended to provide travel opportunities for everyone.In fact, there is ample evidence that air travel still exists The domain of the richIn fact, the government’s preference for aviation is more related to the previous set of economic models, but now it is an economic ideology. These models show that as long as we have more flights, more routes or closer airports, we can achieve endless economic growth.
Few people suggest that we end air travel completely. But the UK already has enough air transport capacity to send every resident into the sky at least three times a year.Many of us Yes Suggest that we stop expanding our air freight capacity. After all, while the aviation industry is developing, there is no safe path to a zero-carbon economy—technology simply does not exist. But to solve the aviation problem, we need to face economic orthodoxy. At the time of writing this article, this kind of thinking made parliamentary heads across the country support the expansion of the airport, which dazzled the planning inspection bureau (which recently approved the Stansted Airport application) and discouraged many people in the UK. The political opposition fell into a terrible silence.
“The decision to inject substantial state support into the air travel industry is not intended to provide travel opportunities for everyone. “
The choices we face in the aviation sector reflect the larger problems facing British society. What kind of future do we want?If it prioritizes a vibrant local economy with a focus on social and environmental well-being, now is not the time to encourage tourists to flow into overseas economies through airports, leading to inflation. The UK’s travel expenditure deficit At the same time, pollutants are pumped out at high altitude.
Evidence from household expenditures over 20 years shows that the government has the power to change this system. Looking closely at the data I mentioned above, you can see the decline in household tobacco expenditures, which is a direct result of active government policies and supervision. But you can also see that there are problems with government policies, such as the substantial increase in expenditures on heavily polluted diesel fuel, which is a direct result of the misleading subsidy system.
Tackling the climate crisis, and ‘To rebuild better from the global pandemic-two key promises of our current government-the government cannot be afraid to use its power to shape not only personal spending decisions, but also the structure that determines our economic fairness and sustainable development. Part of it should be frequent flyer tax. Through frequent flyer tax, each passenger will not be taxed on the first return flight of a year, but each subsequent flight will be taxed at an increasing tax rate. Frequent travelers (usually high-income earners) will charge higher fees to encourage them to reduce flying. This policy is a useful flagship because it embodies the principles of environmental action and social justice in a relatively simple concept. The frequent flyer tax also poses a direct challenge to the comfortable consensus of airport and air travel economics, but for this reason, it needs more than a think tank report.
If we are to avoid a repeat of history, and this time succeed in our Green New Deal campaign and frequent flyer tax policies, we will need to better organize and build power to ensure that our alternative vision, the UK, is heard and becomes inevitable . After a decade of failure, the current government’s determination in its neoliberal ideology has weakened. We have seen multiple examples of how concerted mass pressure has caused this inevitability. The government’s surrender of free school meals became inevitable, as did the collapse of the European Premier League, the extension of vacation plans, and the increase in general credit. The power to create inevitability is not in the hands of corporate interests and the super-rich; it is only in the hands of people and communities. Let us end the consensus on comfort, which is also inevitable.
Image: Pexels
