Really important stuff from OBR: "We find a sustained 1 per cent of GDP increase in public investment could plausibly increase the level of potential output by just under ½ a percent after five years and around 2½ per cent in the long run (50 years)." t.co/io9DwohgnC

2 points: Looking back, Osborne's 2010 cuts look even more economically self-destructive than I and others said at the time. The OBR analysis is similar (conceptually/empirically) to my analysis for the TUC at the time: www.tuc.org.uk/sites/defaul...

Still, dispiriting that with reams of data, decades of detailed research, and access to supercomputers the obr can't do better than assuming a single elasticity to cover every possible investment. It's not *that* hard.

The language is SO cautious though

Isn't that normal? What is the sensitivity of GDP to public investment?