A year ago I was setting out on writing a book. That book was one of the casualties of my long-Covid in the second half of last year. I abandoned work on it last summer and for all sorts of reasons do not plan to return to it in the form then planned.
However, one thing I realised when writing that book was that without an extensive glossary of technical terms that book would have made little sense to many readers, because with the best will in the world, writing such a book without using at least some of the language of economics, accountancy and tax would be nigh on impossible.
As a result I did quite a lot of work on a glossary. Over the last couple of days I have revisited that glossary, and have added to it all the terms that I still think useful that I have defined in various other glossaries that I have produced over the years.
I now think that this glossary might have a life if its own. Currently standing at 23,000 words it is not overly long, but big enough to put out, probably as a free PDF.
Any such glossary has to be a living document. In other words, it is bound to be updated. That is a reason for it being in PDF format.
But that then made me wonder what I might have missed? There is a lot in there, with a bit of a tax bias. But what terms would you want defined? I am genuinely curious to know, without promising I will necessarily deliver on them all.
Comments are welcome. A few volunteer readers to review it prior to publication might also be useful.
My hope is to get on with this quite quickly, always being aware that updating should be possible at any time and that perfection is impossible.
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:
Hi Richard
I would be willing to give it a read. Qualifications: Cambridge arts graduate, so literate but not an economist.
What is your timescale for turning it round?
Best wishes, David
Thanks David
I will be in touch soon
Happy to volunteer as a reader, if you wish to take the offer up, Richard.
Appreciated
Happy to help but be careful what you wish for!
I am sure there are a lot of expert readers of your blog who will have a lot to contribute but we an opinionated bunch (or why else would we comment). Indeed, many of us hold opinions where we are not expert and you might get more than you bargained for.
If you go down this route we (me and my fellow contributors) must be disciplined… and you will have to enforce it!
Clive
I am aware of the risk of this – but better find out gather problems early, I think
I will be in touch
Richard
For the avoidance of doubt I saw this as performing a peer review type task, at the very most. A dispassionate reader’s eye view (impartial has become a rather partial term). At least that was how I approached it. Happy if Richard wishes to set some ground rules.
I will
If it’s a glossary for the wider public, I would probably go as basic as you think you need to and then a little bit more. (I say that with empathy, not judgement!)
If it’s aimed more at the type of person who regularly reads your blog and with a pre-existing interest in economics and finance, maybe you could save yourself some work.
With the recent news of the quality of economics reporting at the BBC, perhaps the former is what is truly required.
I am heading towards the former without patronising anyone, I hope
I would be interested in volunteering as a reader – of the ‘typically ignorant of economic terms’ kind.
I would like to see the real definition of ‘inflation’, together with a definition of its common usage, as I think they are different?
Noted and thanks Candy
I will be in touch
I’m happy to help too.
But before I actually see it, my advice is about the language of debt and fiscal policy – sometimes it is confusing. Somethings are debt, some are not but then some is savings.
The approach should be one that you would take if your were talking to an alien from another planet!!
Good point
I think I have the review team now….
Thanks
Richard
I’d be happy to read it and give comments. What is that – about 50 pages?
About that in 11pt right now
And thanks
I’ll review it too. You’ve got my email address. I’ve also done a glossary as part of a paper I wrote that started with an explanation of basic bookkeeping, without knowledge of which I don’t believe it is possible to understand how the monetary system works. It’s all a matter of debits and credits, assets and liabilities. It’s surprising how many people are frightened by the term “balance sheet” – even the CEOs of quite large companies I used to deal with. But mine has only a couple of dozen words otherwise the trageted reader would quickly give up.
Please share Nigel
It could be a guest post here first
I’m not prepared to share it at the moment because it takes a slightly different view of how what we think of a money is created which is not what MMT says – nor quite what you say either. It’s being reviewed by two colleagues, one of whom is an economics graduate, to see if they think there are any holes in my argument. I’m meeting with one of them tomorrow.
Good luck
You’ve stirred (bullied?) me into actually completing my glossary. It actually has 23 words and terms which are – Accrual basis accounting, Asset, Balance sheet, Banknote, Bond, Cash basis accounting, Central Bank, Chart of Accounts, Coin, Commercial Bank, Credit, Debit, Deposit (verb), Deposit (noun), Exchange Settlement, ESA, Fiscal deficit, Gilt, Gold Standard, Inflation, Liability, NLF, Nominal account, Reserve, Reserve account, T Accounting. In alphabetical order only referring to words used in the paper. I won’t give my definitions.
Interesting. Some of those I would have never considered, and will now think about. Thanks..
I would want defined any term that the government has used, let’s say in the last 10 years. There is a terrible tendency for economics to define meaning of words differently to how they are used every day. And it isn’t always clear which meaning is implied by the speaker.
Savings, investment, capital, GDP, GDP per capita, unemployment, unemployment rate, money supply, inflation. Also it should include useful distinctions such as the differences between national debt, public debt, private debt, government debt, household debt, etc. Living wage v minimum wage and so on.
Thank you
Very useful
Richard
without clogging up the glossary i would like to see the double- entry of the Govt. money creation process with the debit & credit in the Treasurys books , the BoE s & the CBRAs location in the commercial banks
pleased you have got your review team lined up
Much too complicated
But you make me think adding links to blog posts might be useful
And videos
I will muse on that
I liked your video ‘Why would we want to repay the national debt?’ explaining types of government debt and when/if it needs to be repaid.
A list of everything classed as government debt, and if/when it could/should be paid back would be a useful tool. Am I correct in saying that even the cash in your pocket can be defined as government debt?
Such information should be in wide circulation and regularly referred to especially with media brave enough to broadcast it whenever they discuss national debt.
Noted
Thanks
The most important words to include are those that we hear on TV most: interest rate, base interest rate, inflation, national debt/deficit, government debt/deficit, monetary policy, fiscal policy, borrowing, etc.
I think it is also important to frame the core vocabulary as seen from neoclassical and modern money points of view. For example, most people see the national debt as a debt, modern money does not.
Agreed
And noted
+ A PDF file can be cumbersome. You have to download it, and it does not display well on mobile devices.
+ A Website would be more accessible.
+ If you are using WordPress, then there are add-ons to help too. See for example: https://wpengine.co.uk/resources/how-to-create-wordpress-wiki/
+ You may also find a plug-in that lets you convert selected pages from such a WordPress website into a single PDF file.
+ It would also allow you to optional offer collaboration of the site:
.. (highlighting typos, new material, links, providing references and citations, cross-references).
+ It would also automatically track the most popular words, generate word walls, show recent additions, etc.
+ I’m sure you are capable, but there may also be volunteers here who could help set it up.
+ I also note that there are neoclassical economics glossaries already on-line (e.g. the Economist, ONS, Investopedia etc),
+ Would it be useful to frame your glossary as a “political economics glossary” so that people are aware of its context?
Ian
Fascinating
But as the linked site says – you need the content first
I already have a wiki, but let’s create the content first
Richard
It depends what you want. If you want comments, circulating a PDF might be fine. If you want collaborative contributions, that sort of thing might work best as a wiki but you’d have to open it to editing – either to the world or a selected group.
I am not open to collaborative editing – the trolls would ruin it
Sorry, don’t know if this is a repost, it is not showing.
+ A PDF file can be cumbersome. You have to download it, and it does not display well on mobile devices.
+ A Website would be more accessible.
+ If you are using WordPress, then there are add-ons to help too. See for example: https://wpengine.co.uk/resources/how-to-create-wordpress-wiki/
+ You may also find a plug-in that lets you convert selected pages from such a WordPress website into a single PDF file.
+ It would also allow you to optional offer collaboration of the site:
.. (highlighting typos, new material, links, providing references and citations, cross-references).
+ It would also automatically track the most popular words, generate word walls, show recent additions, etc.
+ I’m sure you are capable, but there may also be volunteers here who could help set it up.
+ I also note that there are neoclassical economics glossaries already on-line (e.g. the Economist, ONS, Investopedia etc),
+ Would it be useful to frame your glossary as a “political economics glossary” so that people are aware of its context?
All noted in the work I am now doing
The pdf is pretty much forgotten now, but not quite
Based on comments today and my extrapolation of them there are 50 to 60 new entries to write now,
Give me day or two…..
A million thanks for producing the glossary, I’ve been trying to understand economics and finance since secondary school many many years ago. There is always a word in texts and articles in texts and media on it all it that throws so many concepts into a confused uncertainty. A definitive growing glossary would be such a great assistance in increasing personal understanding of the subject and a great source to refer others to.
I hope it will work for you
Happy to help Richard
QE please as I find people in general, do not accept/believe the government can, or do create money.
Noted
Excellent idea and thank you. I think it could become a very useful reference tool.
If it’s in alphabetical order, I expect you’ve thought to include “see also” or some other way for referring to other similar but commonly confused terms e.g. debt / deficit; income / revenue; rather than having the two (or more) terms defined together.
I also expect you know this Commons Library Briefings site:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06167/
which in the example here supposedly explains the Budget Deficit. Do you intend to explain where your glossary differs from commonly misconceived explanations and definitions?
There will be / already are a lot of ‘see also’ entries
That text noted
I followed your link and the resulting documenat had istself a link to an OBR document “A Brief Guide to Public Finances”. A complete work of fiction. Presumably people are paid large amounts of money to produce this utter nonsense.
Noted
I will take a look
The world of finance is indeed foreign to most people and to outsiders its language looks wilfully obscure, for example, even the idea of ‘buying debt’.
I would be willing to have a look at the glossary, given that I’ve often had to look up things you’ve mentioned. I have published on political economy, but accounting vocabulary is somewhat different . . .
Noted
And thanks
Although I may have too many volunteers to handle now
Saying which, the glossary is gripping rather rapidly at the moment
ONS publish a couple of glosseries. One covers economic terms. Written in succinct, clear English.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/methodologies/glossaryofeconomicterms
A second longer glossary covers terms used in national accounts. Enteries are longer and far less clear. Some entries are plain unhelpful to the non-expert e.g.
Bank of England
This comprises S.121, the central bank sub sector of the financial corporation’s sector.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/compendium/unitedkingdomnationalaccountsthebluebook/2021/glossary
Not for most journalist! They do however have their own sources. Major publications work closely to internal style sheets to ensure consistency. The Guardian publish a specific glossary for business terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/glossary-business-terms-a-z-jargon
Title and cover? Your previous publications have clearly communicated they are accessible, to everyone. Indeed, ‘The Joy of Tax’ led me to this blog.
All noted – thanks – but doing different jobs from those I want to achieve
Apologies for being late to the bunfight: attending funerals seems to be my first priority nowadays. You seem to have plenty well-qualified respondents for the Glossary vetting but I’d be happy to do proof-reading if required.
One word has been largely missing from contributions so far: ‘borrowing’. It’s a word that gets bandied about by constantly politicians, journalists, commentators and the public, but it can mean subtly different things in different contexts. Do they mean QE, or gilt sales, or going cap in hand to the IMF, or something completely different? To the layman it can mean a drain on cash flow, a threat to personal liquidity, but to the Treasury it can mean effectively borrowing from itself to create liquidity with no requirement ever to “repay” it to itself.
I was once given some priceless advice by a BBC producer for whom I was writing some scripts. He read my first script and said “It’s very ‘Glasgow Herald’, but what we need is ‘Daily Record’ “. Translated into everyday English that comes out as “very ‘Times/Guardian/Telegraph’, but what’s needed is ‘Daily Mail/Express’ “. Worth remembering as long as it’s not ‘The Sun’!
Interesting……it is not in right now
It will be added