Maduro may soon be out of work down in Caracas; maybe he can head up a new control authority here

Central planning has worked superbly everywhere it’s been imposed, including the US, so why not bring it back?

Powerline: Everything Old is New Again

As everyone knows, socialism is back big (except in nations that have had it already, like Cuba, Venezuela, California, Seattle, etc). So it is not surprising to see headlines like this:

For sustainable finance to work, we will need central planning

The holy grail of sustainable finance is figuring out how to distinguish sustainable from unsustainable investments. Get this right, and the public and private sectors have a guide to their decision-making. Get it wrong, and everything downstream becomes haphazard. . .

What’s required instead is investment-level classification: how can investments with good system-level impacts be separated from those with bad ones? . . .

Instead of waiting for the market to speak, a planning body — whose composition and accountability require careful consideration — should formulate plans for each of the five systems, which should then be translated into project-level criteria for sustainable investments.

Great: enlightened central planners, assembled only after “careful consideration” (and a swampland purchase in Florida).

So where does this appear? The Nation or The New Republic? Jacobin magazine perhaps, or The American Prospect? The answer is . . . (checks notes) . . . the Financial Times.  Once upon a time you could count on the FT to be economically literate.