[The Weeping Angel]

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Destabilisation tactics, see also The Guardian.

[Boiler]

I hear the little shit Mason making noises about Starmer's future, or the lack of it...

Polanski. A Farage for the Left; minus the racism, but still with the snobbery.

[Tubby Isaacs]

So Polanski's line is that in a hung parliament, he treats Starmer and Farage the same? I find that pretty ridiculous. Surely his line should be something like "there's lots we don't like, but put this green stuff in, and we'll stop you getting kicked out by an unholy alliance to the likely benefit of Reform". Then again, I don't think green stuff is of much interest to him.

If Burnham did succeed Starmer, and the immigration stuff had reduced boat crossings and asylum applications massively, does Polanski think Burnham would scrap it all? I think that's incredibly unlikely.

This stuff is all easier than doing any proper work. In fairness, he has planned to get some economic advice in from experts rather than YouTube influencers. But how will he react to being told "wealth taxes bring in much less than you think" or "there actually is a problem with printing a load more money, most of the time"? He's going to look a lot more like Starmer than he probably anticipates (albeit with some extra growth from more immigration, but with less growth from less development).

[Tubby Isaacs]

Polanski's smart enough to know that this stuff gets him more publicity than a sensible line on working with Starmer.

He's lead UK story on The Guardian.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Polanski's smart enough to know that this stuff gets him more publicity than a sensible line on working with Starmer.

He's lead UK story on The Guardian.

How amazing...

[Oboogie]

Has anyone explained to Polanski the difference between debt and deficit yet?
I've never heard a politician so economically illiterate, apart from maybe Liz Truss.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I see Zack's got another policy to pay for all the extra spending. Equalizing Capital Gains Tax and income tax rates. For which there's a fair bit to be said, though you'd have to have an inflation allowance. An argument against it is that no country sets the same rates because they are competing for investment.

But let's go with it. Capital Gains Tax in 2024/5 raised £13.3bn. If it were higher but with inflation allowance, what does that raise? Another £8bn, assuming no effect at all (unlikely) on investment?

That's not even paid for abolishing student fees, let alone everything else. Being very approximate, the Greens oppose the taxes Reeves-Starmer have brought in average people. I don't think the wealth tax and the extra CGT get them much past what we're raising in tax already, does it? And god knows how they raise the extra tax needed to pay for investment in water and energy, which I think they want to take off bills.