IEA Podcast

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, Managing Editor Daniel Freeman interviews Professor Donald Boudreaux, who is a professor of economics at George Mason University, a senior fellow at the Mercatus Center, and a member of the IEA’s Academic Advisory Council. The conversation focuses on Boudreaux’s new book, The Triumph of Economic Freedom: Debunking the Seven Myths of American Capitalism, co-authored with former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm. They discuss why these economic myths persist and how they distort policy debates in both the United States and the United Kingdom.The interview examines several key myths, starting with the claim that the Industrial Revolution impoverished workers. Professor Boudreaux presents evidence showing that real wages, living standards, and life expectancy began rising for ordinary workers in Britain no later than the 1840s, and possibly as early as the mid-18th century. They discuss the so-called Engels pause and why workers voluntarily moved from the countryside to urban factories, voting with their feet for better economic prospects. The conversation also tackles the debate around tariffs and protectionism, particularly addressing claims that 19th century American prosperity was built on high tariffs rather than economic freedom and open immigration policies.The discussion concludes with an analysis of the China shock and manufacturing job losses in America. Professor Boudreaux presents research showing that regions affected by increased Chinese trade are actually better off today than before, and that approximately 87% of manufacturing job losses come from labour-saving technology rather than trade. He challenges the national security argument for tariffs, noting that broad-based tariffs like those imposed by recent US administrations hit allies just as hard as adversaries. Throughout the conversation, they emphasize how economic myths continue to shape misguided policies despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs clip, Aymen Aulaiwi explains how Stalin's command economy functioned and why centrally planned socialist systems inevitably fail. He breaks down the mechanics of Soviet five-year plans, where Gosplan set production targets that cascaded down through ministries to individual factories, completely bypassing market signals and consumer demand. Aulaiwi describes how Stalin's obsession with heavy industry - driven by Marx's "fetishisation of industry" and fears of capitalist invasion - led to an economy that prioritised steel and coal production over consumer goods, creating a system where "I do not buy sheets of steel off a catalogue, but I do buy lamps and textbooks." The discussion explores the three fundamental problems that doom all command economies: information asymmetries, soft budget constraints, and principal-agent problems. Using the example of a Newcastle café owner wanting to sell Dubai chocolate versus a Birmingham baker making poppyseed muffins, Aulaiwi illustrates Hayek's argument that economic information is too dispersed and localised for any central planner to understand. He explains how this connects to Marx's outdated labor theory of value, which ignores both the role of capital and consumer demand, treating products purely as embodiments of labor time rather than responses to market needs. Aulaiwi reveals a striking contradiction at the heart of Stalin's "socialist" system - despite Marx's belief that capital was pure exploitation, Stalin actually focused obsessively on capital accumulation and investment levels, making him "literally a capitalist" who suppressed worker consumption to fund industrial expansion. The conversation demonstrates why socialist calculation is impossible without real market prices, and how even modern attempts to introduce "social costs" like carbon taxes face the same information problems that destroyed the Soviet economy. This clip provides a devastating Austrian School critique showing why socialist economics cannot work in practice, regardless of good intentions. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, Head of Media and Linda Whetstone Scholar Reem Ibrahim interviews Deirdre McCloskey, Isaiah Berlin Chair in Liberal Thought at the Cato Institute and Distinguished Professor Emerita of Economics, History, English and Communication at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The conversation explores McCloskey’s concept of “equality of permission” from her forthcoming book, examining how this primary liberalism of 1776 and 1789 differs from modern notions of equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.McCloskey argues that true liberalism isn’t about material redistribution or state-enforced equal starting points, but about removing obstacles that prevent people from pursuing their own flourishing. She critiques both socialist equality of outcomes and the impossible goal of equality of opportunity, advocating instead for a society with no masters rather than no poor. The discussion covers how this framework applies to occupational licensing, immigration, consumer protection, and economic regulation, with McCloskey contending that professional licensing requirements and government regulations often create artificial barriers rather than genuine protection.The interview concludes with reflections on the future of liberalism and the importance of free speech and a free press as essential battlegrounds. McCloskey draws parallels between government censorship of drama in London until 1967 and modern debates about regulating AI and hate speech. She remains optimistic that people’s hearts desire freedom, while warning against the temptation to become “wards of the state” rather than free adults. The conversation touches on everything from Abraham Lincoln’s self-education to the quality of ploughman’s lunches in Oxford pubs. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, IEA Communications Director Callum Price is joined by Editorial Director Kristian Niemietz and Managing Editor Daniel Freeman. The conversation covers the newly enacted Renters Rights Act, examining how the legislation effectively introduces rent control through the back door and will likely reduce the supply of private rental properties. They discuss the end of fixed-term contracts, the tribunal system for rent disputes, and how these measures could drive landlords out of the market, reducing labour mobility and worsening housing availability for young professionals.The discussion then turns to wealth taxes and the broader economic landscape, with Kristian explaining why wealth taxes are fundamentally flawed, comparing them to “eating your seed corn” - consuming capital that should be generating future returns. They examine how capital flight has already occurred in countries like France, Norway and Switzerland, and why the UK’s economic stagnation makes politicians reach for fantasy solutions rather than addressing the real problem of economic growth. The team also discusses the IEA’s “Sharpen the Axe” series, which identifies concrete areas where government spending could be cut.The conversation concludes with an analysis of the government’s fiscal position ahead of the upcoming budget, looking at why promised tax rises keep recurring despite claims each budget will be the last. They explore Labour’s abandonment of planning reform and abundance agenda, the shelving of disability benefit reforms, and why Britain seems stuck in a doom loop of stagnant growth, rising demands on the state, and political unwillingness to make meaningful cuts to government spending. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, IEA Director of Communications Callum Price interviews Axel Kaiser, co-founder and president of the Foundation for Progress in Chile and senior research fellow at the Adam Smith Centre at Florida International University. The conversation examines Argentina’s dramatic midterm election results under President Javier Milei, exploring how the libertarian government survived a critical political test after months of legislative battles, economic uncertainty, and a devastating provincial election loss that threatened to derail the entire reform agenda.Axel discusses the political warfare waged by Peronist and Kirchnerist opposition forces, who passed legislation to increase government spending and nearly collapsed Milei’s stabilisation program. The conversation covers how rising inflation, plummeting economic growth, and a 14-point loss in Buenos Aires provincial elections created fears that Argentina would revert to its century-long cycle of populism and economic failure. Despite these setbacks, the midterm results on Sunday represented a referendum between free markets and classical populism, with voters decisively backing Milei’s radical reforms.The interview concludes with lessons for Western democracies, particularly the UK and Europe. Axel argues that Argentina proves freedom works and that voters will support radical austerity and free market reforms if leaders tell the truth about economic realities. He criticises the welfare state model as no longer viable and expresses pessimism about Europe’s willingness to embrace necessary reforms, while suggesting the UK’s less ideological culture might make it more open to change than countries like Germany or France. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs panel discussion at the Conservative Party Conference, Callum Price hosts Charlie Dewhirst MP for Bridlington and The Wolds, Andrew Griffith, Shadow Secretary of State for Business & Trade, and Christopher Snowdon, IEA Head of Lifestyle Economics. The panel examines how Labour has carried forward paternalistic Conservative policies including bans on disposable vapes, advertising restrictions on food, and the generational tobacco ban. They discuss how governments get bounced into nanny state measures by pressure groups despite these policies rarely appearing in manifestos or being close to ministers’ hearts.Christopher Snowdon presents a six-point plan to prevent future Conservative governments from capitulating to activist demands, including abolishing the public health minister post created by Tony Blair, banning state funding of pressure groups, and removing civil servants focused solely on policy development. The panel debates why such measures proliferate when politicians weigh up political costs and conclude it’s easier to give activists what they want rather than face accusations of kowtowing to industry. They criticise policies like the online safety act, Nando’s Coke refill bans, and restrictions on advertising tasty food as examples of petty prohibitionism.The discussion concludes with questions on football regulation, with panelists warning about inevitable mission creep from regulators. They argue the Football Association should sort out its own fit and proper persons test rather than creating new government oversight. The panel emphasises conservative principles of individual sovereignty, distrust of the state, and the belief that government should be servant not master, while acknowledging these are questions for democratic resolution rather than quango decision-making. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, IEA Head of Communications Callum Price speaks with Editorial Director Kristian Niemietz and Managing Editor Daniel Freeman. The conversation covers the Treasury’s recent briefings that the OBR is predicted to downgrade UK productivity growth forecasts ahead of the budget, with Brexit being cited as a contributing factor. They examine whether there’s credibility to these claims and discuss how the political taboo around discussing Brexit has begun to break down at senior levels of the Labour Party.The discussion moves to wealth taxes, with the panel analysing recent speculation about potential tax rises in the upcoming budget, including capital gains tax increases and changes to inheritance tax. They explore how these policies might affect economic behaviour and investment decisions, questioning whether the predicted revenue from such measures would materialise given likely behavioural responses from taxpayers.The conversation concludes with an examination of the government’s ambitious housebuilding targets of 1.5 million homes over five years. Despite positive rhetoric from Housing Minister Steve Reed, housing starts are running at less than half the required 75,000 per quarter. The panel discusses the barriers preventing progress, including the building safety regulator, nutrient neutrality regulations, and affordable housing requirements, with London’s housing starts now falling behind even Auckland, New Zealand in absolute terms. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this fourth and final episode of the Land of Opportunity series, a partnership between the Institute of Economic Affairs and Land of Opportunity, former MP Sir Philip Davies speaks with Tim Phillips, former president of Americans for Prosperity. The conversation explores how Phillips and the Koch brothers built one of the most successful grassroots campaigns in American history—mobilizing millions of citizens to fight for economic freedom, lower taxes, and reduced regulation. Phillips explains how Americans for Prosperity was never about lobbying for specific industries, but rather building a genuine grassroots army for the ideals of economic freedom that would allow entrepreneurship and opportunity to flourish for Americans from any background. The organization pioneered community organizing on the right, recruiting and training activists at the local level to advocate for pro-growth policies across all fifty states.Phillips reveals the strategic decisions behind the movement’s success, including why they chose to be “for” prosperity rather than “against” something, how they defended policies by making economic arguments rather than moral ones, and why running entrepreneur candidates against incumbents proved so effective at changing political behavior. The discussion covers Americans for Prosperity’s role in the Tea Party movement, their fights for education reform and tax cuts including the 2017 Trump tax reforms, and how they overcame attacks of being “astroturf” by simply building undeniable grassroots strength with thousands at rallies and hundreds knocking doors every weekend. Phillips shares insights on federal competition between states, explaining how low-tax states like Texas and Florida are gaining congressional seats and political power while high-tax states like California and New York hemorrhage population—creating a feedback loop that rewards pro-growth policies with increased representation.The episode concludes with Phillips’s direct advice for Britain: the Conservative Party has lost its way by offering “pale pastels” instead of “bold colours” on issues like net zero and energy costs, where British entrepreneurs now pay four times what Texans pay for electricity. Phillips argues that prosperity must be created by culture and political philosophy, not just individual policies, and that Britain has all the ingredients—world-class talent, innovation, and entrepreneurial spirit—but needs leaders willing to raise the banner for economic freedom. Davies and Phillips reflect on the key insight that human nature is universal: everywhere, people want to belong to something bigger, want their voices heard, and want to make a difference for their families and country. The challenge for Britain is adapting that universal truth to local culture and building a movement that celebrates aspiration, rewards success, and treats economic freedom as a bipartisan priority—just as America has with the American Dream. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, Head of Media and Linda Whetstone Scholar Reem Ibrahim interviews Lord Toby Young, journalist, author, and founder of the Free Speech Union. The conversation examines the erosion of free speech in Britain, exploring how Young’s own cancellation in 2018 led him to establish an organisation dedicated to protecting freedom of expression. They discuss the legislative landscape that has restricted speech rights, particularly the Online Safety Act and the problematic use of existing laws like the Malicious Communications Act and Public Order Act to prosecute individuals for their views.Young argues that the current government’s crackdown on free speech stems from a collapsing faith in multiculturalism and fear of populist movements like Reform UK. He explains how authorities are increasingly using censorship rather than engaging in public debate about immigration and other contentious issues. The interview covers specific cases the Free Speech Union has defended, including individuals arrested for social media posts and silent prayer outside abortion clinics. Young criticises the police’s handling of non-crime hate incidents, noting that over 60 are recorded daily despite attempts at reform.The discussion concludes with Young’s perspective on whether Britain needs its own First Amendment. He advocates for repealing restrictive speech laws and establishing constitutional protections similar to those in the United States, while acknowledging the challenges posed by parliamentary sovereignty and judicial interpretation. Despite his concerns about the current state of civil liberties, Young expresses cautious optimism that a future government might prioritise restoring free speech rights, particularly if the British public can be persuaded of their fundamental importance. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

Tom Clougherty, Former Executive Director of the Institute of Economic Affairs, hosts a Conservative Party Conference panel discussion on Britain’s tax system and its impact on wealth creators. Joining him are John O’Connell, Chief Executive of the Taxpayers Alliance, Mark Garnier MP, Shadow Economic Secretary, Samuel Hughes, Editor at Works in Progress, and Alys Denby, Opinion and Features Editor at City AM. The panel examines how Labour’s tax policies - including changes to non-dom status, inheritance tax on global assets, and VAT on private school fees - are driving entrepreneurs and wealthy individuals overseas, with particularly stark examples of the exodus to Italy and America.The discussion covers the complexity of Britain’s 20,000-page tax code and its damaging effects on economic growth. Mark Garnier highlights how British entrepreneurs in their twenties are taking their ideas to countries like Thailand and Vietnam, while Alys Denby reports on the collapse of London’s prime property market and high-profile non-dom departures. Samuel Hughes explains how stamp duty prevents efficient housing allocation and how the upcoming landfill levy threatens to destroy housebuilding viability across urban England. The panel proposes radical solutions including the Taxpayers Alliance’s Single Income Tax model and the abolition of inheritance tax, which polling shows is supported by over 50% across all demographics except PhD holders.The conversation concludes with passionate audience contributions, including an entrepreneur forced to take his start-ups to America for funding and a City lawyer whose firm has hired additional Italian tax specialists to handle the exodus crisis. The panel emphasises that the Conservatives remain the only centre-right party on economics and must develop credible alternatives to Labour’s approach. They argue for policies that reward rather than punish wealth creation, with Mark Garnier warning that envy-driven taxation is forcing Britain’s most productive citizens to seek opportunities elsewhere, ultimately harming the economy and public services that tax revenue supports. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe