Earlier this week I wrote a Twitter thread on why national insurance should not be used to fund social care. I reposted it on the blog, but it was a quiet day for reads here; relatively speaking the issue was not well noted.
On Twitter it was a different story. This was the opening tweet in the thread:
The idea that national insurance should pay for the increased cost of social care for the elderly is hideous. It reveals that the government does not know how tax works, how the economy functions, or how tax impacts inequality. A thread……
— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) July 20, 2021
This is the data on how well that has been read now:
Very clearly 700,000 people did not read that tweet: reaching a person does not equate to tweets read. But equally, reads are also likely to be somewhat higher than the number who engaged with the post. Reading does not require reaction on Twitter, which is what engagements monitor.
Surprisingly, reactions for tweets much further down the thread are also high; people read their way through this.
Why note this? Four reasons.
First to note that sometimes blogging is not the best outlet for effort, even if it has underpinned my campaigning for fifteen years now.
Second, to note that this issue has resonated: there is political mileage in this, I would suggest. Opposition parties will, I hope, note this.
Third, to note that explanation remains key to campaigning. So much of the comment I read on this issue assumed a high degree of knowledge of a reader on tax issues when many do not have that. The tweet thread explained my logic as it progressed.
Finally, to reiterate a conviction I have had for a very long time. I put forward range of alternative policy options in this thread. Solution focussed campaigning is essential, in my opinion, and the more options that can be offered the less prescriptive but the more useful the contribution is.
I need to remind myself of all these things from time to time. That's why I note them here.
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 must own up. Having read your blog the hiked national insurance to pay for social care proposal, I immediately went to twitter and linked to this blog.
I am surprised that during my lifetime no political party has had the commitment to tackle financial social injustice in any significant way, more so in recent years.
Now we must as the finances needed to urgently deal with climate change while maintaining a reasonable level of living requires going after the rich and very rich to help pay for this.
On a tangent –
It has been mentioned that the basic state pension triple lock might result in an 7-8% rise in April, which the chancellor might decide to come up with an excuse not to pay.
As a better option I was thinking it should be paid and it would be an ideal opportunity to reduce NI by 5% and increase income tax by the same amount. Thus the poorest pensioners would gain whilst the richest wouldn’t. And we can start along the path of getting rid of NI!
Just a thought – Can’t see it happening though.