As my energy levels slowly rise again, I have been looking at some of the projects we have begun recently, all in the context of the overall plan for this blog and our YouTube channel.
In doing so, I am aware of recent comments on this site about our publishing a great deal of information here now, and that some people feel overwhelmed by that. However, with a team of four people, plus a summer intern currently in the Funding the Future team, this is perhaps an inevitable outcome.
That said, we recognise that overload is not a sales pitch, and so we have come up with a possible solution we want to try.
The morning publishing round, of the video plus commentary on the day's events and issues related to them, will remain much as at present. The Debate Ammunition will also appear at this time. This material is the bedrock of the blog.
The materials we are now adding, or have sought to add of late, will become part of a later-day publishing routine, with some possibly arriving around midday and others by 5 pm. It is unlikely that there will be more than two a day.
What are the items that will appear here? The list is by no means fixed as yet, but the following are possible:
- Glossary entries (and please note, requests are welcome for these), of which there have been several hundred to date.
- The Economics of Hope series, which has twenty-three more essays outlined at present.
- The View On series, which is now being entirely rewritten in the first person, as requested. Around 100 titles are listed for this series at present, and a final format is being developed.
- A new series on the Politics of Care, being largely written by James, based on practical examples from local government, in which he previously worked. There are around 12 case studies in draft here.
- Another possible report series on what has gone wrong in the UK, starting with local government, with others possibly to follow. This, again, is an issue where James is taking the lead. These will be report-length. Ideas for these are developing.
- Podcasts may also feature in these time slots.
There is a lot of work in all this, but with clear aims.
The glossary, Economics of Hope and View On series are all about laying foundations and explaining what is possible. There has been a great deal of material published here over the years, not all of it very accessible. The aim is to improve accessibility to core data and ideas.
The last two exercises, led by James, the first of which looks likely to start soon, are intended to show that change is possible.
All of these, along with the Debate Ammunition series, are intended to inform debate.
Many of these materials might end up in e-books or downloads in due course.
We need a politics of care and an economics of hope. These are the materials to support that goal.
Will this work for you? Comments are welcome.
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!
I am particularly interested in the two items that James is working on. Having spent the majority of my professional life in the law centred on local/central government in the sphere of planning and environmental law (and having written about it for 30 years or so) I can now look back with the detached perspective that retirement affords. In my opinion, things began to go wrong with the introduction of compulsory competitive tendering in the early 1980s, the introduction of the “cabinet” system, the diminution in the role of local government coupled with over centralisation of power at Westminster, the crazy Right to Buy scheme with its embargo on local authorities building replacement council homes, the perpetual tinkering with the planning system by politicians with no idea what they were doing, the coalition government’s abolition of local authority auditing and the increasing starvation of funds from local authorities. It seems to me that the chickens are coming home to roost for Whitehall. Will Burnham make a difference? I hope so, but I very much doubt it given the people that seem to be surrounding him. If he fails then the cost to the political system may be high. For example, Labour’s ridiculous promise to build 1.5 new homes by 2029 was never going to fly. The resulting public dissatisfaction will be significant. I do not say this lightly, but Count Binface has caught on to this with his manifesto promise for Clacton to build at least 1 more affordable home. KUTGW but do pace yourself!
Thanks
This will be in our morning discussion.
Richard, please tell James that he should feel free to contact me on the email address that you have for me. I would love to help and also lighten your load a tad bit. By the way, I watched a fascinating discussion on France 24 about the problems with the French housing market and dodgy developers reneging on promises to build eco friendly homes. It seems the ills of neoliberalism have spread large and wide.
Many thanks
Really pleased to see the new material you are planning on local government which is so vital to any politics of care and so utterly neglected, undermined, denigrated and more by successive administrations. I don’t know if comparisons between the situation in Scotland and N Ireland and that in England and Wales would yield any useful case studies?
We may get to that….
I am sure that James is on to this but the Town and Country Planning (Discharge of Local Authority Functions) (England) Regulations is yet another nail in the coffin of local democracy. It takes LINO as far away from the Attlee government’s approach (spearheaded by Sam Silkin) to a planning syem that worked in the public interest. Not only doe it hand the power to developers it also will, in my view. increase the risk of corruption.
Thanks
We will discuss this. Might he come back to you?
Hannah I agree, local government has been starved and vilified for decades, gripes about ‘ The Council’ are often automatic. Let’s get under the bonnet and look at the mechanics.
This is a theme we are developing
James and I have found common interest in it
Our intern is now in it too
Glad to hear that you’re continuing to feel better. I can understand people feeling a touch of information overload, but I think spreading uploads across the day and introducing some new ideas/articles is a good strategy that can help keep folk engaged as well as well as catering to differing interests and media formats.
Of the new strands that you’ve mentioned this morning, I’m particularly intrigued by the “Politics of Care” and “what’s gone wrong” series.
So am I, especially as I am only a participant, not the sole driver.
I like the plan for news analysis early, reflective/constructive content later. Criticism is not my aim when I mention output volume, but reflecting on my early days of reading and watching, some navigational tips for novices seem a good idea.
Thank you
Do not overwork yourself as I would rather have one article a day than 6 articles today then no at articles at all going forward for the future.
As Jacqueline puts it, asking me not to write would be like asking me not to breathe. She thinks I could fairly say “I write, therefore I am”.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think the volume is the problem it might look like. I don’t have the energy to read, watch and listen to everything you put out in a day, and I don’t try to. I pick the one or two things that speak to me most, and I suspect most people do the same. We won’t all pick the same ones, which is rather the point. What looks like a lot going out each day is really a wide table people help themselves from. Nobody needs to take all of it for it to be worth having. So from here it isn’t overwhelm, it’s choice, and I’d take a full table over a sparse one any day. I reference a lot of what you write about and share with others because it’s priceless.
Thanks
My argument is that no-one ever reads anything in a newspaper. So what? That does not invalidate the bits they do want to read.
I appreciate your comment
In a word – yes.
Thanks
As FTF changes (I like the proposals), I think there should be a regular item ?every 2 months? for new arrivals, on how it all works. Archiving and search/index/glossary are all improving – but do people know that, or how to use them? I didn’t notice “categories” till it was pointed out in a post because I don’t visit the “red zone” very often (my bad!). KUTGW!
The article could be called “new here? How to make the most of the site” or somethig similar,and would need revising each time it came out.
I like it….
On my list to do….
I am definitely one of those suffering from overload! I have only taken an active interest in economics in the last six months or so having spent a lifetime working in rather different fields.
My problem: how to learn about economics without having to plough through traditional text books which are all wrong? Watching your videos, Richard, and now reading your blog, have provided my single most-used learning resource. But trying to work my way through years of blog posts and/or videos is not perhaps the easiest way to learn. Not because the material isn’t good, but I guess it wasn’t conceived to meet my particular need.
An example: I recently downloaded (and made a donation!) your MMT Sourcebook. You explain that it’s not intended to be read as a book. But I have so much catching up to do, that is exactly what I’m doing. Result: much repetition (not necessarily bad, but it takes time) and quite a lot of confusion because (I guess) I’m trying to plug too many holes in my knowledge all at once.
What, then? If I could have a wish it would be for a single coherent resource which explains all of economics in your terms Richard, upon which you could then elaborate the politics of care and economics of hope. Not much to ask for, I know… (I’ll get my coat)
This is where the View On series will fill the gap
It will be big….and each is effectively a chapter