On Monday I asked what it was that readers thought I should be writing about as the relatively quiet weeks of summer stretch before me. So far there have been over 80 comments, and the thread is not closed as yet. Other have emailed me, sometimes at length, and I am not complaining.
Every time I have said 'noted' in reply to a comment I literally mean that. I plan a great deal of what I do and write using mind maps. For the tech minded, I use iThoughtsx for this purpose, which is relatively cheap for software of this type, excellent in use, but only available on Macs. And what is developing is a plan for new writing that is deliberately intended to address the issues that people seem concerned about.
The aim is, at the same time, to have some sort of order to this so that what is written will in turn be capable of assembly into another ebook like 'Money for nothing and my Tweets for free' (or maybe, even, a real one) that answers the host of questions that people obviously have about the economy that we live in and share, but whose workings remain a mystery to most.
It so happens I have some freedom in deciding what I am going to be doing over the next year or two. To summarise my current work commitments, there are five.
First, I am engaged on a project for about a day a week with Copenhagen Business School over the next four years. This is called 'Time Mirror' and is about developing sustainable cost accounting.
Second, I am, one day a week, Professor of Accounting at Sheffield University Management School. Sheffield has now confirmed that they wish me to focus on research work around auditing, accounting and tax and that I will only be doing occasional lectures, rather than being responsible for teaching a course. The aim is to create impact case studies for them targeted on the next research review date, which is in 2028. I have such a case study in the 2021 REF (as it is called) for City, University of London.
Third, I am working through the Corporate Accountability Network on a project funded by Luminate working on audit reform. As it turns out, most of this is in partnership with Sheffield colleagues. The project runs until next March, although the focus has been quite heavily on making submissions to the UK audit reform consultation, which is now closed. Two lengthy submissions have been made.
And fourth, I have just secured funding from the Polden Puckham Charitable Trust through Finance for the Future LLP, which is a partnership between me and fellow Green New Deal Group member Colin Hines, to work on the promotion of new funding sources for the GND, which will include building on the narratives created on this blog. This last for three years, and is worth £10,000 a year.
Finally, there is the blog, where donations are still welcomed.
The reality is that I know that this leaves me with maybe two days a week from the end of the year available to develop the type of writing to which I referred in my blog post on Monday, and that is now what I would really like to work on. If funding is available, that would be good because it always helps to be able to partner with editors, designers and others to add focus to projects: getting messaging right takes time and is fundamental to change. Ensuring that the work informs others is also vital: I want to use this thinking to empower other campaigns to think that the means of funding that they want for the projects that they think desirable is achievable despite the prevailing government narrative that 'there is no money' that is going to be heard so often over coming years.
So, all those comments are useful. And, with luck, this should result in more blogs, Twitter threads (which are the most powerful outreach mechanism I have right now) and publications. That's the hope - and the responses that request I made is getting are helping shape that work. So, thank you.
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:
Buy me a coffee!
Richard,
Thank you
John
Hi Richard,
You’ve probably heard, we’re (XR) are organising Rebellion focussing on finance and economics from August 23rd – so specifically targeting the City of London.
There’s a lot that you could (and already do) write that’s very helpful. But here’s a few initial thoughts:
1) a really clear explanation of the link between tax havens, the accounting and economic professions, and our failure to address climate change.
2) an assessment of whether Biden’s promises to on climate (including reform of tax havens) have really amounted to enough, then the detail on what the UK must do in this area.
3) carbon trading:
I only recently understood that the HMRC Vat carousel fraud was based on carbon credits.
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2019-05-07/how-major-banks-turned-a-blind-eye-to-the-theft-of-billions-of-pounds-of-public-money
Seems carbon trading isn’t just ineffective, it also opens another opportunity for City fraud. Aware that was quite a few years ago so, how flawed is this system now?
4) any help you can offer with a critique of the City of London’s Green Finance Institute would be a massive help. It seems they are talking about mobilising trillions for green projects, without having ever sought to put any real restriction on fossil fuel emissions. This total reliance on the logic of offsetting seems disastrous – what do you think?
5) our new immediate demand (pre Glasgow) is to stop funding all new fossil fuel projects. So there’s also an opportunity to make other points E. G: all the market based approaches they’ve relied on so far have failed. What do you think?
Thanks and very happy to discuss
Will
Thanks Will
By all means mail me
As an interested if irregular visitor I can offer some material on health inequalities. Be glad to do so. No particular expertise except for a life lived with chronic illness. Yes, no?
Sam
Sorry, that’s not the way the site works
It is 99% me plus a very few occasional guests who I have got to know
Richard
The thing is I was surprised you asked as you asked about what you should be writing about not so long ago.
I felt and still feel that you are writing about the right things – the macro stuff – finance, fiscal policy and tax plus the more micro stuff in the form of accounting and tax practice and how its weaknesses aid and abet macro level abuses and curtail innovation and the answering of the big questions.
Basically I think you’ve got it all covered to be honest.
The responses this time have been very focussed and helpful
I was thinking of sending you material that might be of interest and use to you on that subject, for your use, perhaps, rather than posting stuff under my name which I have no desire to do.
Send by all means!
That’s good.If you are agreeable, I would like to send a number of pieces that should not take too much of your time and enough to give a reasonable coverage of the topic.
It is unlikely that an economy of any country will be healthy if the people in it are not healthy. Health inequalities are measurements of life expectancy and periods of life free from disability. These measurements enable comparisons of health inequalities to be made among countries and within regions of a country. There is a gradient to health inequalities. At the bottom are those of lowest socioeconomic status. At the top of the gradient, those of highest socioeconomic status. On average,the richest will live longer than those below and will have lives free from disability for longer than those below.
Health inequalities are avoidable and do not occur randomly or by chance.They are socially determined and are largely beyond individual control. They are unfair, disadvantaging the poorest, damaging their health and shortening their lives. They are enormously costly economically and in terms of lost potential for society as a whole.
The research at the link is done by Scottish researchers looking at what are known as “diseases of depair”. The research brings out a theme repeated frequently in other areas of research. Socioeconomic conditions, caused by UK government policy, are the drivers of health inequalities.The fundamental remedies are not within the powers of nay of the devolved governments.
https://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/21/jech-2020-216220
Sam
I have to stress – I am very unlikely to post pieces of this sort
I am offered them everyday by email and in 15 years have not accepted them as yet
That is not how this blog works
Richard
Richard, I’m telt.
I think though we may be a bit at cross purposes. I don’t want what I sent to be posted but only, perhaps to be read by you as something of interest. My apologies.
Ok!