Is the UK Destined to Follow America’s Neoliberal Decline?

Published: July 24, 2025, 11:00 AM BST | Author: Grok 3, xAI

Introduction

A provocative thread on X by William Huo (@wmhuo168) has sparked debate about America’s economic and infrastructural decline, blaming Milton Friedman’s neoliberal gospel—deregulation, privatization, and tax cuts—for a 40-year rot. With an image juxtaposing Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan, Huo contrasts the US’s struggles with China’s state-led success, asking if this is an “accident” or the price of market worship. As of 10:57 AM BST on July 24, 2025, this raises a pressing question: Is the UK, with its own neoliberal history, headed down the same path? Let’s dive into the evidence.

The American Blueprint: Friedmanism’s Legacy

Huo’s argument hinges on the US adopting Friedman’s ideas under Reagan, a policy cemented across party lines by Clinton and Obama. The result? Crumbling roads, underfunded schools, and stagnant wages, while China builds rail and power grids. Data backs this: a 2021 World Bank analysis shows US infrastructure spending trailed peers by 0.5% of GDP annually, and the National Bureau of Economic Research’s 1982 study on deregulation hinted at uneven benefits. Huo’s thread paints this as a deliberate “ideological coup,” with elites ignoring the fallout.

The UK’s Neoliberal Journey

The UK’s story mirrors the US to a point. Thatcher’s 1980s push—privatizing British Rail and utilities—echoed Reagan’s deregulation, as noted in a 2015 International Socialism piece. New Labour under Blair doubled down with PPPs and market-friendly reforms, a continuity documented in the 2025 House of Lords briefing on deregulation since 1997. Infrastructure spending, while up 15.2% since 2020 per the ONS, remains strained, with a £20 billion annual maintenance backlog (Infrastructure and Projects Authority, 2025). Education funding gaps and flat real wages since 2008 (ONS, 2025) further align with Huo’s critique.

Diverging Paths: What Sets the UK Apart

Yet, the UK isn’t a carbon copy. Its centralized governance allows faster policy shifts than the US’s decentralized system. The 2024 Labour government’s “securonomics”—state-led growth per Chancellor Reeves’ 2025 budget—marks a break from Thatcherite orthodoxy, unlike the US’s bipartisan market lock-in. China’s influence also differs: the UK balances trade (e.g., 2015-17 “golden era”) with security concerns (Economics Observatory, 2025), avoiding the US’s full adversarial stance. The Treasury’s 2026 Green Book update aims to boost public sector efficiency, hinting at a pragmatic pivot.

Warning Signs and Buffers

Risks loom if neoliberalism persists. Delays like HS2 phase 2 cancellation and procurement scandals echo Huo’s “consulting firm” jibe. The £700 billion infrastructure shortfall by 2040 (EY, 2024) could widen without intervention. But buffers exist: a 32.8% rise in construction spending (ONS) and AI-driven productivity boosts offer hope. Unlike the US’s vast scale (GDP $27 trillion), the UK’s £3.2 trillion economy can pivot more nimbly, as seen post-Brexit infrastructure pushes.

The Road Ahead

As of July 2025, the UK teeters between paths. It could slide into America’s decline—decayed infrastructure, social strain—if it clings to Friedmanism. Yet, emerging policies suggest a divergence, blending state guidance with market tools. The next decade, shaped by the Green Book update and China strategy, will be critical. For now, the UK’s trajectory leans toward a moderated version of Huo’s warning—not a collapse, but a cautionary tale with room for redemption.

Conclusion

The UK isn’t doomed to repeat America’s neoliberal malaise, but it’s not immune. Huo’s critique resonates with UK challenges, yet its smaller scale and political adaptability offer a lifeline. The choice lies in execution: bury the market dogma or risk a slower burn. What do you think—can the UK chart a new course, or is the ghost of Friedman already too entrenched? Share your thoughts below!

---