I did this podcast-style interview for The National in Scotland last Friday, talking about the economics of benefits and the tax gap, in particular:
I promote this for its own sake, but also to ask, would this sort of thing be popular if we did it?
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. Packed full of information.The themes are very familiar with those that visit the blog.
Who is the pod-cast aimed at? if it is the general public, then perhaps focus on a single subject (benefits, or tax gap) from the point of view of info retention & passing the story on:
man in pub to other man in pub “eh – did you see that pod cast in the National – .all about benefits – looks like the tory-rags are talking shite about benefits…. we could raise em & most of it would come back as tax, it would cost us nowt”………..”nah go away – how do you know that” etc etc”.
Just saying.
Back in circa 1983, I worked out what I paid in tax, not just income etc but also petrol etc etc. I gavce up after circa 70%. Anybody can do that.
“For those that find it difficult to believe that all benefits paid out come back as tax, I encourage listeners to do the sums themselves – what is their income, what is it spent on, what up-front taxes do they pay either income or VAT – then guestimate what the taxes might be that the suppliers of goods & service pay……..anybody can do it and in so doing prove the point I am making” – encourage people to prove to themselves the point you are making.
It was aimed at The National reader. I admit the number of veiws was remarkably low.
Just for your information, Richard, regarding the low number of views to your podcast.
I am a subscriber to The National and regular reader of your (now) Monday column. Had I seen the podcast listed, I would have undoubtedly have watched but saw no such listing. Even looking at Xander Elliards’ recent articles, I can see no mention.
I am beginning to wonder whether The National has the same commitment to the cause of Scottish Independence that it once did and is, instead, pushing anti-SNP clickbait articles.
Weird
I will discuss with the editorial team
oh dear.
I like the format – two people makes it lively. Maybe keep it very much back & forth with short responses?
usual stuff ref “benefits” “they only spend it on fags and booze”……………..”putting to one side the health impacts lets look at how such spending rapidly returns the benefits that were paid back to the government through tax” – use the idiot arguments by the right whinge against them – in a way the people would recognise & which would resonate with them.
I’m reading Superbloom (Carr). He cites Tony Schwartz book “The Responsive Chord” – “in the mass media age people have more info than they can handle. Don’t give them more info rather activate the info & emotions already present – evoke stored info out of them in a patterned way”. “a successful message doesn’t deliver meaning – it calls forth meaning”.
And that is hard to do…
I read the National every day, I check every new article but didn’t see a reference to your podcast.
I’d have read it.
It would be possible to come up with a reasonably simple ‘calculator’ for people to work through, I think. Which would remove some of the friction for actually doing it.
My personal preference is for the written word, but it’s the videos that get the message out there and being attended to.
As I have said this week, I like the dialogue method.
There’s a place for this longform “podcast” method of dialogue (confession – I generally don’t like podcasts!) and this communicated some juicy facts clearly, and the keys stats were highlighted well, without drowning us in detail. It communicated a sense of outrage at our ridiculously useless tax system very well. You also communicated your experience/qualifications well. I particularly liked the quip near the end about the UK being worse on company registration than Jersey, Guernsey, Caymans etc.
But I also would like to see the shorter “Thomas as troll” dialogue videos, with the “Yeah but…” questions in. I hope he is studying his archive of Daily Mail headlines and Daniel Hannan speeches. 😉
🙂
I wanted to pass on your National article on Economics of benefits but as it was behind paywall I had to leave it.
I shall pass on your article yesterday on the same subject but for me the National article was an easier read
There is a video version here now…
Thank you for this Richard.
Let’s not also forget that a large parts of ‘benefits’ paid, i.e. for example as part of Universal Credit are not only paid to people who are working, but it is made up of ‘elements’ that includes Support with Housing Costs (and this is often by far one of the largest in the calculation) which all goes towards rents to private landlords as well as Housing Associations and Local Authorities (but the largest to Private landlords) and as the ‘eligible rent’ which constitutes the Housing Element is often under the actual market rent, more of the claimant’s benefit (i.e. what they are allowed to ‘live on’) will go to top up their rent if they want to keep the roof over their head, not fall into rent arrears and end up being served a Section 8, being evicted and then fall back into temporary accommodation which costs a fortune. So Universal Credit subsidises the high rents charged by private landlords.
Errors in benefits in my experience are due to (sorry I have to say it) DWP incompetence, and it is exhausting to try to get them to get the figures right. So there are so many endemic issues that need correcting in order to truly reclaim what I see as ‘the value’ of the welfare state.
Much to agree with
And local authorities are facing Bankruptcy because of the escalating costs of temporary accommodation (e.g. Eastbourne Borough Council – e.g. just under half the council tax they collect goes on the costs of temporary accommodation!). I never heard this government say they are going to cap the rents that Private Landlords can charge NEVER. They ‘cap’ the rate of benefit that can be claimed, e.g. Local Housing Allowance (LHA), the maximum weekly eligible rent that can be claimed in a designated postcode, frozen again etc.