Do you want my alternative, semi-serious take on Wednesday's Budget? My brief analysis of the growth figures and George Osborne's new pound coin? Here it is in 60 seconds.
The economy is healing, but we need to cement the recovery by encouraging and supporting our great British businesses. That's why the Chancellor is supporting businesses that are making things and selling them to the world... This was truly a budget for the doers and the makers.
I'll admit it. I'll go on record and say that I wouldn't consider myself to be hardworking. If future employers or future clients are reading this, then I'm sorry, but I'm not going to lie. I am many things, but I am not one of David Cameron's hardworking people...
With the fiscal situation still tight, and a year to go before an election in which the Chancellor will accuse the opposition of fiscal profligacy, it was never likely that this was going to be a particularly exciting budget - and so it proved.
In his budget speech, the Chancellor said that he wanted Britain to have more economic resilience. The economic recovery that his polices are delivering is unlikely to achieve this aim.
After decades of pensions and savings policy being the 'Cinderella' of Treasury priorities - George Osborne today unleashed reforms for the thrifty that are bound to capture the imagination of the very voters on which he now pins his hopes.
Whatever the merits of an overall cap on welfare spending and however it is going to work, it's clear that on its own it's not enough. This debate on welfare and poverty is taking the focus from where it is most needed - helping vulnerable children and their families.
This year's Budget has to create some movement in a positive direction for the many millions of people for whom the past six years have been cumulatively, increasingly difficult. Many people attending foodbanks have jobs. Too often those jobs are insecure, with uncertain hours. Poor people need better base pay, more employment security, more full time rather than part time work.
The Government has no money. Governments don't produce profits. High-net-worth individuals, businesses, pension funds and international wealth funds have the cash. We don't. That's why we must woo them, welcome them, give them a great reason for coming here and encourage them to invest this money in British businesses right now.
This week, in his budget speech, the UK Chancellor will refer to the usual need to reduce expenditure on social welfare and the deficit on public finances. One thing he won't talk about is the amounts spent on corporate welfare and how that is contributing to austerity, income and wealth inequalities, and deteriorating public finances.
George Osborne should focus on three things: improving the UK's start-up environment; making education more entrepreneurial; and boosting the industries with the potential to explode.
The Chancellor's plan to build Britain's first garden city in 100 years in Ebbsfleet has been welcomed by some with open arms. The promise of more homes in the south east is a good thing, but 15,000 new homes barely scratch the surface of the real number of properties needed across the country.
Not only should we question what the Conservative vision of a hard-working society looks like in reality, we should also remember who is evangelising it and why. When it comes to work and family backgrounds the Coalition cabinet could not be more unrepresentative of the run-of-the-mill British family.
If not specifics, then, what will the Chancellor be hoping to achieve with the Budget? He will want to try and convince voters that the economic recovery is bringing some benefits for them, their families and their households...
Next week George Osborne will announce his budget plans, and with the recovery gaining momentum I'm expecting great things. However, if we want to reap the benefits, provisions need to be made for the SMEs who pulled this country through the recession, starting with a targeted cut to the duty on diesel fuel.
General revolt against Ofsted is growing, with schools around the country (and their communities) saying that its processes are not fair or reasonable, its criteria arbitrary, and its inspections incredibly stressful and destructive.