I so agree with this:
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I so agree with this:
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Tax Research UK Blog is written by Richard Murphy unless otherwise stated and published by โTax Research LLP under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Design by Andy Moyle
Superb. A real New Year’s gift.
Thanks.
It’s nice to see a real Englishman ( and a bright one at that) talking like this.
I love the English of T. S. Eliot; of Shakespeare; Graeme Green; Iris Murdoch, Paul Auster and Mark Twain
But I also love our regional dialects. Such wonderful variety in such a small island.
Any road me ‘ode ducks, a belated Happy New Year!
And to you
Much as I agree with and appove of all you’ve written above @Pilgrim Slight Return, I must pedantically insist on correcting one thing, as I wrote my thesis on his work: it’s Graham Greene ๐
Words have always been my passion. Greene used them beautifully, the way I love. Precisely, simply, often sparingly. A lover of words, not of flourish.
Steven Fry too is a lover of words, and I enjoyed that piece for Radio 2, thank you for sharing it.
Let’s hope language continues to matter, let’s hope languages continue to be learnt and used, because words enjoyed, shared and understood, make the world a better place as well as people happy.
Without pedantry, but instead, with generosity.
Happy new year to you, to Richard, and to all contributors on his blog.
May they keep learning new words each day.
I share his passion
Oops – sorry Marie – all the ‘Grahams’ I work with are ‘Graeme’. That’s my excuse and I’m sticking rather pedantly to it.
HNY.
There’s pedantry, and then there’s ambiguity. I’ve got three passions: eating my family and punctuation.
๐
Jonhd, I don’t know if your comment was purposeful irony about punctuation and ambiguity but I read your first passion as
“… eating my family”
What an unusual hobby, I thought to myself. ๐
Richard, great video & thanks for posting – I too love words, and try (sometimes) to avoid pedantry, if the meaning gets across, that’s language. Irony is my favourite humour, and can often get lost between the words spoken or written and what people hear.
My pet hate is what I call ‘business speak’ – a laboriously large email, littered with large words inappropriately used, saying nothing. (except that the writer’s ego far exceeds their desire to say anything useful, and so likely any skill).
๐
Johnd
You did that on purpose. A sneaky way of standing up for pedants? HNY!
Happy New Year Richard, and all involved in putting this site together.
Tax Research UK is easily the most informative political economy site in the country and the quality of comments is excellent. I love the way you deal with trolls.
Today’s wee vid by Stephen Fry was brilliant. He is a wordsmith par excellence.
Punctuation does affect the meaning of a sentence and I try to use it accurately, but I had English grammar drummed into me at Primary school, and my attitude reflects this. It’s not for me, however, to criticise others’ use of language. I’d rather try to understand what they’re saying.
Thanks
Excellent. I cannot disagree with any of that.
I’ve always admired Stephen Fry.
Craig
Stephen Fry, September, 2014. ” I am a lover of freedom”. Just not for Scotland.
I agree with everything expressed above with the proviso: it should be understandable!
We are, hopefully, all ‘lovers of freedom’ and that extends even to those who are wrong! In that situation, it is our responsibility to convince them they are! ๐
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your YouTube series that has clarified many things for me. You asked for any questions to be submitted via this blog.
One thing about money creation still puzzles me. I understand that as a loan is paid back, “money” disappears out of the system but only the capital does so; all the interest paid is still there when the loan has been paid off. Who created this and what does it mean? For example, does it build an absolute need for constant growth into a debt-based economy?
I’m sorry if my puzzlement is just dumb and the answer is simple.
Thanks again,
Anthony Molloy
Anthony
This is simply paid as any other bill is – using the money created within the government and commercial baking lending cycles
This is not a stock of money it’s a flow. Flows are what the stocks are used for until they are extinguished
I’ll schedule a video on this
Richard
Thanks, Richard.
So does this mean in a roundabout way that banks do indeed “create money” when they issue debt, namely the interest on the debt – which is often of the order of (or more than) the capital?
I realise that this money has to be pumped into the economy by the government but the decision about how much is made is by bankers.
Anthony
Bankers very definitely create money when they create loans
And they can create the money to pay interest, of course.
But inetr3est paid to them comes out of trade paid for with money created by loans – but not by new loan generation.
There’s a super extended YouTube along similar lines with Stephen Fry in Conversation with Shappi Khorsandi at the 200th anniversary of the Royal Society of Literature. An hour and a half but so worth it ๐
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aG7FqTDa2oI
Down with grammar and spelling pendants! ๐
One for later
I have often loved to hear Stephen Fry’s opinions and oratory too, and I accept that the grammar pedants can be both boring and (Damn, lost the word on the tip of my tongue).
Stephen Fry’s education is way beyond mine, so I fear to make any criticism, but I do sometimes regret the inaccurate use of some words, which by now have lost their original precise meaning through unknowing incorrect use. I suspect Stephen approaches the subject from the Artist’s perspective rather than from the Scientist’s one, where accuracy and rigour are perhaps more necessary.
Split infinitives? Yes the battle was lost years ago thanks to the darned Yanks need for instant gratification. Now, there is hardly any technical article written without every infinitive blasted apart.
Sadly my grey matter is wearing out with age, and I find more and more that I cannot bring forth the word that I need. It is infuriating and frustrating, made much worse by the knowledge that the damn word is still in there, just inaccessible, but it brings home the realisation of just how important it is to be able to express the pearl that one wishes to pass. (I beat that preposition!)
Stephen’s proposition is therefore one, up with which, I prefer not to put!
Happy New Year to all.
I agree: when you recently claimed
“There is no excuse for a single school in a tier 4 area, and maybe beyond, to be open next week. Heads and governors should shut them all, giving the straightforward reason that Covid wards are now full of children with the disease and they cannot risk childrenโs safety.”
and it is obvious that Covid wards are at best partially occupied with children with a +ve test outcome for the disease, then we should cut you some slack. What was said was not what was meant.
I confess I do not follow your logic
Following what Anthony Molloy said about asking questions; How can we ask an off-thread question on the blog without altering the flow of a current thread? In the past I have just emailed you direct. I note that you have not yet had time to address my charity question.
I try to answer emails but also admit that I get so many I do sometimes fail
That’s probably the best way
Melvyn Bragg’s book:
The Adventure of English
is a great history of the English language.
Explains how it became codified and “proper” grammar was imposed on it.
Language is really about communication and being understood not about structure and control.