Ian Gray

@ig303.bsky.social did:plc:jkbpipf2zyczjdpcfwtbylwe

Dog lover, Python fan, empiricist, liberal, republican (uk kind), evangelical atheist.

Sur Bluesky depuis le 29 novembre 2023

Résumé

Ian Gray (@ig303.bsky.social) est sur Bluesky depuis le 29 novembre 2023. Le compte a 143 abonnés, suit 166 comptes et a publié 752 posts.

Les meilleurs jours où les posts de ce compte sont entrés dans le top quotidien de Debya.

Ce compte n’est encore apparu dans aucun classement quotidien.

J’aime publics du réseau Bluesky.

Dan Kaszeta FRHistS@dankaszeta.bsky.social02/11/2026 19:25
This
Voir le post
Jonathan Portes@jdportes.bsky.social02/11/2026 08:02
You are "allowed" to use whatever your editors allow you to use. If you are fine with the fact that literally *every serious economist/welfare expert" who reads this (as well as your FT colleagues) think that this is simply the wrong chart and that you are torching your credibility, then ok..
Voir le post
Jonathan Portes@jdportes.bsky.social01/11/2026 18:13
1. As pretty much everyone else has told you, it is just absolutely inexcusable to use a real terms chart as your *headline* to illustrate welfare spending over multiple decades (just as it would be if it were tax revenue, debt, or NHS spending). This should not need explaining to an FT journalist.
Voir le post
Jonathan Portes@jdportes.bsky.social01/11/2026 16:47
In addition to this absurd chart, the article is full of Daily Mail/CSJ tropes (confusing "benefits" with all state spending, talking about "work incentives" while ignoring fact PIP is non-means tested, etc, etc). Inexcusable from FT.
Voir le post
George Potter 🔶@georgepotter.bsky.social01/11/2026 16:28
Lmao, you're accusing me of "getting triggered". What are you, a 12 year old edgelord? Grow up. And by the way, I did just engage with your arguments, by pointing out they're predicated on a misleading depiction of the actual data.
Voir le post

Sur Bluesky, les blocages sont publics.