{"id":793,"date":"2017-10-10T10:51:49","date_gmt":"2017-10-10T09:51:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/?p=793"},"modified":"2017-10-13T09:34:28","modified_gmt":"2017-10-13T08:34:28","slug":"the-affordability-of-basic-income-a-radical-heterodox-economics-view","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/2017\/10\/10\/the-affordability-of-basic-income-a-radical-heterodox-economics-view\/","title":{"rendered":"The Affordability of Basic Income. A radical heterodox economics view."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>By <a href=\"http:\/\/www.philosophyoftechnology.com\">Geoff Crocker<\/a>, a professional economist writing on technology at <a href=\"http:\/\/www.philosophyoftechnology.com\">www.philosophyoftechnology.com<\/a> and contributor to Basic Income Earth Network, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.basicincome.org\">www.basicincome.org<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>1 Introduction \u2013 affordability as the prime objection to basic income<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The most prominent objection to Basic Income in public debate is its affordability. This objection was key in the Swiss referendum of June 2016 and in TV debate of the 2015 UK Green Party election manifesto. Basic Income is a major macroeconomic proposal, and needs to be presented within a comprehensive macroeconomic resolution.<\/p>\n<p>Basic Income advocates largely argue within the confines of financial orthodoxy which requires balanced budgets (see Martinelli<sup>4<\/sup>, van Parijs and Vanderborght<sup>5<\/sup>, Reed and Lansley<sup>6<\/sup>, Standing<sup>7<\/sup>). Their Basic Income proposals therefore require to be funded by tax increases or other spending cuts, and thus become tightly constrained.<\/p>\n<p>This blog presents a more radical proposal. Its argument is that<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>advanced technology economies increase the output\/wage ratio<\/li>\n<li>this reduces the demand\/output ratio, creating demand deficiency<\/li>\n<li>it also reallocates income from wages and benefits to shareholder dividends, raising inequality<\/li>\n<li>this makes Basic Income essential to maintain effective macroeconomic demand<\/li>\n<li>it also makes Basic Income a policy tool to reduce inequality<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>A radical heterodox corollary of this argument which crucially demonstrates the affordability of basic income is that<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>advanced technology economies render fiscal deficit inevitable<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This hypothesis is tested within Popperian methodology, by deriving its empirical implications and testing these against empirical data. The blog shows that the data which is available supports and confirms the empirical implications of the hypothesis and thus tends to verify rather than refute the hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>The conclusion is therefore that Basic Income is an economic necessity, correctly and inevitably funded by \u2018Overt Money Funding\u2019 or \u2018helicopter money\u2019 ie an annual deficit which is simply written off, as current recurring deficits essentially are written off to ever ascending but entirely notional national debt.\u00a0 An outline of the heterodox theory of money which is necessary for this conclusion is then presented.<\/p>\n<p>This offers a radical Basic Income proposal which avoids the affordability objection of neo-classical financial orthodoxy, thus creating scope for a far more realistic level of basic income.<\/p>\n<p><strong>2 Hypothesis<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In a thought experiment where<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>a machine is plugged into earth to produce all output GDP goods and services<\/li>\n<li>government issues annual new vouchers to distribute the output<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>then it follows that<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>100% of GDP becomes unearned or basic income<\/li>\n<li>100% of GDP becomes \u2018financial\u2019 deficit<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The nuanced hypothesis from this thought experiment is that<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>in high technology, high productivity economies<\/li>\n<li>an element of unearned or basic income is an economic necessity to sustain demand<\/li>\n<li>an element of government financial deficit is inevitable<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Elements of this hypothesis are famous from Keynes\u2019s treatment which is reviewed in Pecchi<sup>8<\/sup>.<\/p>\n<p>The important conclusion is that, in the real economy, it is output GDP which renders consumption affordable, not government financial balances. This is also true for Basic Income which is rendered affordable by output GDP, not government financial balances which themselves derive their value, as does money in general, from output GDP.<\/p>\n<p><strong>3 Testing the hypothesis against empirical data<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The ideal empirical test for the hypothesis would be to run a statistical regression analysis of<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>a measure of technology intensity in the economy, which would be expected to rise<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>vs<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>the output\/wage ratio, which would be expected to rise<\/li>\n<li>the demand\/output ratio, which would be expected to fall<\/li>\n<li>the unearned\/earned income ratio, which would be expected to rise<\/li>\n<li>financial deficit, which would be expected to rise<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Note that unearned income would include pensions, welfare benefits, dividends, consumer credit, and dis-saving. The hypothesis requires these to increase as a proportion of total disposable consumer income as technology increases productivity.<\/p>\n<p>Data to this exact specification is not readily available, and its definition and compilation are part of a proposed research project.<\/p>\n<p>Research of available data sets with the UK Office for National Statistics, OECD et al, does however generate sufficient surrogate data to partially test the hypothesis. This is necessarily reported in an ad-hoc heuristic methodology as a series of data observations from available data, rather than within a comprehensive determinative methodology.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Data observation 1 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>UK real earnings fell from 2008 to 2015 whilst consumption was sustained<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charta.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-814 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charta-300x297.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"865\" height=\"856\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charta-300x297.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charta.png 700w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charta-217x215.png 217w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 865px) 100vw, 865px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Data observation 2 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>UK disposable income per capita fell below output GDP 2005-2016<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartb.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-815 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartb-300x297.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"965\" height=\"955\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartb-300x297.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartb.png 700w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartb-217x215.png 217w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 965px) 100vw, 965px\" \/><\/a><br \/>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Data observation 3 <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>UK aggregate earned income fell continuously relative to consumer expenditure 1948-2016<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>The difference is the rise of unearned income which reached 14% of consumer expenditure by 2016<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartc.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-816 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartc-300x123.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1134\" height=\"465\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartc-300x123.jpg 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartc-768x316.jpg 768w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartc-1024x421.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartc-523x215.jpg 523w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartc.jpg 1097w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1134px) 100vw, 1134px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Source : UK ONS (note that ONS define \u2018Labour income\u2019=wages + self-employed income)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Data observation 4<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>The UK economy has run a deficit for 21 of the last 23 years<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartd.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-817 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartd-300x181.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1167\" height=\"704\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartd-300x181.jpg 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartd-768x464.jpg 768w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartd-356x215.jpg 356w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartd.jpg 975w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1167px) 100vw, 1167px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Source : UK ONS<\/p>\n<p><strong>Data observation 5<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>UK government debt has continually risen 2003-2014 with no adverse effect on the real economy<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charte.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-818 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charte-300x297.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"917\" height=\"908\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charte-300x297.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charte-150x150.png 150w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charte.png 700w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charte-217x215.png 217w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 917px) 100vw, 917px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Data observation 6<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>All G7 economies, with the occasional exception of Canada and Germany, have run a deficit over the last 20 years<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartf.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-819 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartf-300x180.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1193\" height=\"716\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartf-300x180.jpg 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartf-768x460.jpg 768w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartf-359x215.jpg 359w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1193px) 100vw, 1193px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Source : OECD<\/p>\n<p><strong>4 Interim conclusions<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The above data observations all confirm the empirical implications of the Basic Income hypothesis ie that in high tech economies<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Unearned income is an economic necessity<\/li>\n<li>Basic income is a preferable version of unearned income, reducing inequality<\/li>\n<li>Financial deficit is an economic inevitability<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>It is particularly notable that 1995 represents a major turning point in the UK economy when consumer expenditure rose above aggregate wages and self-employed income, requiring various forms of unearned income to sustain consumption.<\/p>\n<p>In 2016, consumer expenditure of \u00a31.22tn was funded by \u00a31.0412tn of labour income and \u00a3294bn of unearned income. Labour income thus met only 86% of consumer expenditure, so that 14% of consumption relied on unearned income.<\/p>\n<p>The following graph shows that the composition of unearned income has changed significantly over the last 20 years. Whilst private pensions and consumer credit accounted for relatively stable shares of unearned income, the notable change has been that<\/p>\n<p>Between 1997 and 2016<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Welfare benefits including state pension have reduced from 41% of unearned income to 32%<\/li>\n<li>Dividend income has increased from 9% to 20% of unearned income<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartg.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-820 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartg-300x182.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1269\" height=\"770\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartg-300x182.jpg 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartg-768x465.jpg 768w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartg-355x215.jpg 355w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/chartg.jpg 981w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1269px) 100vw, 1269px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Wages and benefits have been relatively replaced by dividend income in the UK economy.<\/p>\n<p>This has fuelled inequality as higher income shareholders benefit at the expense of lower income wage earners and benefit recipients.<\/p>\n<p><strong>5 Policy implications<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Major policy implications are derived from this hypothesis and research ie<\/p>\n<p><strong>5.1 Economic crisis policy<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Basic income replacing consumer credit as a component of unearned income would avoid economic crisis eg the 2007 crisis.\u00a0 Basic income creates less inequality than increasing dividends as a source of unearned income.<\/p>\n<p><strong>5.2 Austerity policy<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Recognition of the inevitability of financial deficit renders austerity policy unnecessary. \u00a0Consumer expenditure, basic income, and public sector expenditure are all rendered affordable by output GDP and not by the balanced budgets of financial orthodoxy.<\/p>\n<p><strong>6 Revisiting the theory of money<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The financial orthodoxy which forces balanced fiscal budgets and thereby constrains basic income proposals to very modest levels, is a false premise.<\/p>\n<p>The error results from an accountancy view of the real economy which as Keynes compelling demonstrated is a further causal false premise.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence is that money is wrongly considered to be real, and to have inherent <em>a priori<\/em> value which then determines economic possibility and affordability. Historically, this view was incorporated in the Gold Standard whereby money in circulation was \u2018backed up\u2019 or constrained by gold reserves. The modern form of this error is that money in circulation is required to be balanced by the sale of an equivalent value of government bonds to investors. The reality is that money is virtual and only has value derived from its referral to output GDP (plus the historic accumulation of output GDP as assets, plus the output GDP potentiality value of land and raw materials).<\/p>\n<p>A comparison of these two theories of money is shown in the following diagram<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charth.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-821 alignnone\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charth-300x177.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1322\" height=\"780\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charth-300x177.jpg 300w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charth-768x454.jpg 768w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charth-1024x605.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charth-364x215.jpg 364w, https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/10\/charth.jpg 1240w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1322px) 100vw, 1322px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>7 Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The blog presents a credible consistent model incorporating the economic necessity of unearned income, the superiority of basic income as form of unearned income, the inevitability of financial deficit to fund basic income, and considers the impact on economic crisis management and austerity policy. Initial research of empirical economic data supports the hypothesis of the model. A revised virtual theory of money enables the model intellectually and practically.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>References<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Geoff Crocker \u2018The Economic Necessity of Basic Income\u2019, Centre for Welfare Reform,<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.centreforwelfarereform.org\/library\/by-date\/the-economic-necessity-of-basic-income.html\">www.centreforwelfarereform.org\/library\/by-date\/the-economic-necessity-of-basic-income.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p>2 Geoff Crocker \u2018Keynes, Piketty and Basic Income\u2019, Basic Income Studies (June 2015),<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.degruyter.com\/view\/j\/bis.2015.10.issue-1\/bis-2015-0015\/bis-2015-0015.xml?format=INT\">www.degruyter.com\/view\/j\/bis.2015.10.issue-1\/bis-2015-0015\/bis-2015-0015.xml?format=INT<\/a><\/p>\n<p>3 Geoff Crocker \u2018A Managerial Philosophy of Technology : Technology and Humanity in Symbiosis\u2019 (Palgrave 2012) <a href=\"http:\/\/www.philosophyoftechnology.com\">www.philosophyoftechnology.com<\/a><\/p>\n<p>4 Luke Martinelli \u2018Assessing the Case for a Universal Basic Income in the UK\u2019 University of Bath <a href=\"http:\/\/www.bath.ac.uk\/publications\/assessing-the-case-for-a-universal-basic-income-in-the-uk\">www.bath.ac.uk\/publications\/assessing-the-case-for-a-universal-basic-income-in-the-uk<\/a><\/p>\n<p>5 Philippe van Parijs and Yannick Vanderborght \u2018Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy\u2019, Harvard University Press (May 2017)<\/p>\n<p>6 Howard Reed and Stuart Lansley \u2018Basic Income: An idea whose time has come\u2019, Compass UK (May 2016)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.compassonline.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/05\/UniversalBasicIncomeByCompass-Spreads.pdf\">www.compassonline.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/05\/UniversalBasicIncomeByCompass-Spreads.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<p>7 Guy Standing \u2018Basic Income: And How We Can Make It Happen\u2019, Pelican (May 2017)<\/p>\n<p>8 Lorenzo Pecchi and Gustavo Piga \u2018Revisiting Keynes: Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren\u2019, MIT Press (2008)<\/p>\n<p><em>This blog is the first in a two-part series. The second can be read <a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/2017\/10\/12\/the-current-crisis-in-capitalism-declining-wages\/\">here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By Geoff Crocker, a professional economist writing on technology at www.philosophyoftechnology.com and contributor to Basic Income Earth Network, www.basicincome.org &nbsp; 1 Introduction \u2013 affordability as the prime objection to basic income The most prominent objection to Basic Income in public...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":700,"featured_media":585,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[106,123],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-793","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-basic-income","category-political-ideologies"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2017\/01\/UBIdarkblue-1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/793","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/700"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=793"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/793\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/585"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=793"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=793"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/iprblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=793"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}