Who cares what shares are worth? What economic news do we need on the hour, every hour, on things that matter in life?
This is the audio version:
This is the transcript:
On the hour, every hour in every news bulletin, be it on television or radio, you will be told what the value of the FTSE 100 is if you are living in the UK, or the S&P 500 if you are living in the USA, or whatever your local stock exchange might be, wherever you are around the world. And why do you need to know? Because the vast majority of people in the UK, the USA, France, Germany, and wherever you might be have probably got very few shareholdings in their own name.
So wouldn't it be more useful to have some relevant information on the hour, every hour, that might talk about the state of the economy as it affects you?
Like, what is the rate of employment right now?
What's the average wage right now?
What's the average earnings per household right now?
What's the average rent right now?
What's the price of a typical basket of goods that you might buy in the supermarket each week? Not that basket of goods that is used to calculate the inflation index, which includes things that you will never buy, and you wonder who does even buy, but actually your household shopping?
How many children are there in poverty?
How many people are waiting for treatment on the NHS, if you're in the UK?
What are the latest cuts in government services that are going to impact you, a problem right around the world?
What's the average wage by decile, by which I mean what are the lowest 10% of earners on and what are the highest 10% of earners on? And has that changed, because that's a measure of inequality.
And just as a measure of stress within society, how many children have been suspended from schools in your country in the last week?
These things are measures of issues that are of real consequence for real people in real lives that will tell people what's really going on and give them an indication of how change is taking place.
Why won't our broadcasters provide this information?
Information on the exchange is almost and utterly, totally irrelevant to people, but these things aren't. These things matter.
Can we have some of that, please, broadcasters, because these things would make your bulletins of interest to people.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
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!
Very good point. What we actually need is a dashboard. Ideally hosted on the BBC website. As well as fairly static info such as min wage, state pension, JSA it would show your suggestions. Median earnings, rent in different regions etc, unemployment rates. Furthermore, inflation figures for different and more meaningful categories – food, fuel & transport etc. It could have a wellness index for each region encompassing all of it split by say quartile based on household income.
I suspect the BBC is too timid to instigate this. Someone like yourself would have to do it. In fact, we’re closing a large chunk of our business next month so I’ll have a go
Good luck, in several ways
Yes please Kevan! I assume that the lower a household’s income, the greater inflation hits, as it’s the necessities like energy, food and water that are going up fastest. Seeing how economics affect different groups in different areas would make inequality much more visible and concrete, would help people see the link between declining incomes for the many and snowballing wealth for the few, shining the light on the relevant facts rather than the divisive blame stories echoed by much of the media. That is a terrific project.
I agree…
There has at least started to be some discussion of GDP Per Capita, showing that a small increase in GDP may not mean an average person is better off. That still misses the deciles that show inequality but it’s an improvement on past years.
I agree with most of the suggested figures – energy price changes do get discussed more, so news that the next change is expected to be down more than they went up the previous adjustment is welcome and relevant.
If reducing poverty is a priority, then perhaps not even median instead of mean values are suitable, but rather something like lower quartile figures? Or how about an affordability index putting that basket of essentials against minimum wage post-tax income?
Thanks
Sad to hear the SNP have ditched their climate action along with health improvements by abandoning their car reduction target for 2030. Motonormativity is a big issue for the world in terms of health, both physical and mental. Sadly as a cyclist in Edinburgh I have had to invest in a bike helmet camera to both protect myself and encourage better driving from my fellow road users
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1jxk9949e5o
https://transform.scot/2025/04/24/commitment-to-20-car-traffic-reduction-dropped-our-response/
It seems to me that both politicians and the media have always obsessed over headline grabbing but pointless statistics. In the seventies they were obsessed with the “balance of trade” which appeared to me to be based on little more than rudimentary guesswork rather than reliable figures that related to the real economic state of the country.
Thank you and well said, Richard.
Most financial services people I know, unless on the trading floor, pay no attention to these headlines and so-called business news and commentators, especially on the BBC and C4.
Other than the BBC, Bloomberg, CNBC and Fox (sic) Business News, other channels around the world rarely bother. There was some interest in the mid-late 1980s, older readers may remember Susannah Simons and John Plender on C4 at lunchtime, and mid-late 1990s to the dot com crash when Sky had a daily feature from NHK in Japan. French and German media had their bit, too, but lost interest after crashes.
I watch French tv news regularly and compare how practical and useful their news reports are compared to what the BBC and C4 put out. They are also rooted in France and don’t have the delusions of grandeur* associated with the BBC and C4, who often prioritise international stories of obscure value.
I have long wondered why the opposition to neoliberalism did not reply to these useless snippets of information, whether from the media or government sources, with information that is rooted in people’s reality.
One news item that should definitely be covered, and perhaps the subject of a post by Richard, is Reeves’ roll back of the post-2008 reforms like ring fencing and senior manager accountability. Richard’s friend Prem Sikka, this morning, was right to say she’s playing with fire. I worked on these matters and noted how watered down proposals were adopted. If the roll back goes ahead, it’s a question of when, not if, the crash happens. It may be left to Reform a bit after 2029 to put out the fire.
I will get to that
Back from the weekend away now.
Reality is re-emerging.
The economic news we need is very simple:
Professor Richard Murphy appointed as Chancellor.
There used to be no way that will happen.
One notes you used the past tense, is it possible, and as a question, can a Chancellor of the Exchequer be un-elected?
I think not
Technically they could be a peer
Might this article be of interest/relevance?
https://www.counterfire.org/article/eight-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-bbc/
It feels very far from balanced. It’s bias feels no better than a right wing one to me.
The advantage of the FTSE or other indices is that they are constantly updated, which is handy for anyone wanting to report today’s news. Your other indicators tell us a lot more about the economy and the country, but realistically the only organisation with the means to collect data is the government (via the ONS when it is working functionally) and the numbers will always be months old by the time the data is collated and reported.
The disadvantage of the FTSE etc is that they report something that doesn’t directly impact the average person. The question is whether quoting rises and falls in the media is ever relevant; mostly it seems to be headline bait but I think the reported S&P behaviour over the last few months is actually a fairly meaningful indicator of the impact of Trump on the American capitalist economy.
For most of us stock market indices are only relevant for following the long term trend of our pension funds; most salary earners are in some sort of pension scheme where money is invested in unit trust funds which we want to grow enough to support our retirement. And the US is important because the UK is so small these days that those funds are likely to invest internationally where the US stock market represents (I read somewhere) over 50% of investable global businesses.
Then this is not news.
It is time filler.
And the others could be rotated.
I agree, the daily reporting is not actually news, in the case of the S&P it is the volatility accompanying Trump’s decrees (over weeks and months) that is.
In principle HMRC ought to be able to produce automated monthly reports based on individual taxable income that month although I don’t know how fast the information flow is from the PAYE employers (etc) is. But even for household income, I can’t think how my wife’s NI number might be tied to mine other than address; but then my daughter’s NI number is also linked to the same address for correspondence purposes even though for the next few years she will be living in temporary rental accommodation.
But many of your other indicators are hard to automate. They would need questionnaire surveys, which requires government-level funding.
If the average potential voter valued having information made readily available which would help them make informed choices which could improve their lives, why doesn’t some one or an organisation make this information available?
All political parties and many think tanks operate focus groups. Defining the information people would value, find useful and be able to use to improve their lives should be feasible?
It should be….
But will they see the need for the obvious?
Which media outlets would we trust to give us the figures you so rightly think we need to know? Statistics are so easily manipulated.
Inevitably they would be produced by major agencies, and a few NGOs, maybe. But they need publicity anyway.