I read Machiavelli's "The Prince" over the weekend. I suspect it has a lot to tell us about the budget.
One chapter in particular (16, if you're interested) is focussed on whether it is better for a ruler to be generous or a miser.
He argues strongly that it is better to be a miser: his argument is that by being clear that you are careful and live within your means, you will bring people to trust you, whereas being lavish and generous sets expectations and will eventually bankrupt you.
Whatever today's budget brings (and goodness knows the political arguments will run and run), I think one thing is clear - Starmer and Reeves are trying to set themselves out as fiscally prudent and careful, and have been trying to dampen expectations. It's right out of Machiavelli's playbook.
It interested me because it made me think of the chaotic post-Covid hiring boom of 2022.
Numerous tech companies wildly overhired, paying far too much money and making unsustainable promises to new employees and the market alike.
The upshot has been obvious to all: broken promises, underperformance, and layoffs.
"Machiavellian" is used almost exclusively as a pejorative but in this instance, his advice would have been well taken. Being overgenerous in the short term is laying the foundations for disaster.
Personally, I'd far rather work with a company who are realistic and honest, and who plan for the long term. I've been working with one or two of my customers for 10+ years and, reflecting on it, I realise they are exactly that: fair payers but not overpayers, cautious with headcount but able to keep their employees for many years.
It's a recipe for success. Although I will not be calling them Machiavellian any time soon, because I'd like to keep working with them.
Vocative
