Perhaps the gaslighting is not restricted to the Conservatives (Rachel Reeves accuses Tories of ‘gaslighting’ public over economy, 7 May). Yes, the economy is in a mess, but there are alternatives to continued austerity and the continued impoverishment of increasing numbers of people. The Labour government in 1945 faced a much more difficult task than that facing governments today. Instead of listening to the siren voices of the City, it prioritised the wellbeing of people over reducing the national debt. The City may have disliked the radical policies of the government, but it could live with that, as it realised that there was a workable plan for economic recovery. A policy that prioritised people’s wellbeing would be one that redistributed income from the wealthiest to the poorest. Labour faced a far worse housing crisis then than it does today. The government rejected the idea of subsidising private rents, realising it would be a cash bonanza for landlords who could keep increasing rents, knowing the government would pay. Instead, it introduced rent controls and security of tenure, and started a large social housing programme – all of which kept housing costs down to an affordable level. Vienna today offers a contemporary example of benign intervention in the housing market, to the benefit of the Viennese people. Dusting off the old policy manuals and embarking on a major programme of income redistribution would work wonders for everyone. As a 77-year-old, I am sceptical about governments going for growth; I am old enough to remember Reginald Maudling’s disastrous “dash for growth” and many other successive similar failed attempts. Derrick Joad Leeds Labour will draw on “new economic thinking”, says Rachel Reeves. It was new economic thinking drawn on by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan in the 1980s that has ultimately got us into the mess we’re in today. What we need is old-fashioned thinking: don’t spend money you haven’t got. Pete Lavender Woodthorpe, Nottinghamshire