The Long Ago Times

Do you buy printer paper in bulk? Of course not! You use it, what? Like twice a month?

But, when you do run out, get it cheap and fast with today’s sponsor: A ream of printer paper from Amazon! 🎉

Amazon Affiliate Link

LONDON, February 18th, 1824 — This year marks a commendable effort towards demystifying the enigma of public accounts through the unveiling of a streamlined balance sheet detailing income and expenditures. The tenure of the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer, while possibly marked by good intentions, was primarily characterized by a penchant for complicating financial reports to the point of obfuscation. Despite the lingering shadow of his convoluted approach in the current documents, the shift towards a more transparent system sparks optimism for enhanced clarity and accuracy in future renditions.

However, the initial segment of this new balance sheet scarcely achieves the goal of intelligibility. It attempts to present “An account of the net public income, etc., after deducting the expenditures covered by various revenue departments, alongside the actual cash disbursements, excluding funds allocated towards the settlement of both funded and unfunded debt.” The rationale behind excluding expenditures related to debt redemption from the financial outflows remains puzzling.

A glaring example of the previous administration’s penchant for financial obfuscation manifests in the treatment of “military and naval pensions.” These, as may be recalled, were restructured under a specific act by the current Monarch. The process involves the government disbursing two and a half million pounds to trustees for these pensions, subsequently claiming credit for receiving over four and a half million pounds back. This maneuver ostensibly generates a fictitious surplus of two million pounds in the government’s favor, a figure that, upon honest accounting considering the new liabilities introduced by the Long Annuities, should rightfully be borne by the National Treasury.

Regarding the civil list, reported at £1,0570.00, and the separate accounting for judiciary officers, questions arise about the comprehensiveness of this figure excluding judges’ salaries. It’s disheartening to note the paltry sum of less than twenty-five thousand pounds garnered from the lottery, a venture continued despite its minimal fiscal contribution and substantial societal detriment.

The balance sheet posits our income at £376,730 against expenditures of £509,620, purportedly yielding a favorable discrepancy of £67,109. It is the collective hope that future accounts will not only simplify in presentation but also embody the fiscal restraint that invariably instills simplicity in both private and public financial stewardship.

⁂

The content on this website is for entertainment purposes only.
Much of it has not been thoroughly reviewed by humans,
although we do get a blast from reading it ourselves.
But it should absolutely not be cited
as a source for anything other than itself.

We use OpenAI’s GPT-4 API to extract text
from the public-domain archive of The Times,
and rewrite this to contemporary standards.
Graphics are also largely AI-generated.

This website is supported by advertising and donations!
Please consider supporting today’s sponsor,
a ream of printer paper from Amazon,
by clicking here to learn more.
Please also consider making a donation here—
we get so excited every time we hear the bell ding,
and there’s no donation too small!