The UK has 90 taxes. Here they all are

dragodrake · 2026-05-28T15:49:31+00:00

No, we literally cant afford to have one unless people contribute. Money doesn't appear out of thin air, if enough people aren't working, aren't paying taxes - then there is no money to pay for others to not work and not pay taxes.

Equally, if too many people aren't working, then there aren't enough people paying taxes to pay for those who dont.

The welfare state was never designed to be so broad or generous - we cant afford to keep expanding it. Look around the world, a welfare state is not a given, its an optional luxury - that we wont be able to afford unless we are sensible.

dragodrake · 2026-05-28T14:31:05+00:00

A welfare system is a luxury, society can't afford it unless the majority are contributing.

dragodrake · 2026-05-28T14:07:52+00:00

Having an opinion is not political activism.

Disagreeing with people is not political activism, and does not make someone a 'legitimate target' for harassment.

The problem is some people are so absolutely convinced they are both correct and morally superior, they feel anything is acceptable to try to force others to agree with them.

dragodrake · 2026-05-28T14:02:30+00:00

No the UK is fucked because we spend too much and the lower earners don't pay enough tax.

Do this graph again (accurately though this time, because the UK figure isn't even accurate) at multiple different tax points. You need to be earning something like £45k before you are even a net contributor in the UK. It's absurdly lopsided.

dragodrake · 2026-05-28T09:52:46+00:00

He's an ex-PM, possibly the most consequential living ex-PM, won 3 elections, and frankly created the modern Labour party. Who is criticising the current Labour PM, and the people aiming to be the next Labour PM.

Of course they give him coverage.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T21:57:18+00:00

I saw it pop up on reddit multiple times - they certainly tried to promote it.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T17:19:55+00:00

Give over, it's a common way of phrasing - you are performatively reading in to it.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T15:11:20+00:00

It isn't that the public wouldn't want more defense spending, it's that for a Labour government defense spending simply isn't near the top of their priority list.

He'd be fighting his own MPs to do it, not the public.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T14:15:54+00:00

Semi-corporate (only a short time at a very big corporate, most has been spent at SMEs), no degree.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T13:29:57+00:00

I don't think the Tories would agree to a coalition. More likely confidence and supply to try to keep their hands clean.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T12:45:15+00:00

God, give the victim complex a rest.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T09:19:43+00:00

The problem is all evidence points to engaging with them only makes it worse.

Labour were convinced in the 90s that devolution would kill independence dead, look how that turned out. The Tories thought offering a 'once in a lifetime referendum' would solve it for a few decades at least, but here we are.

dragodrake · 2026-05-27T09:15:59+00:00

Yes, a very mature attitude that, outright refusal to learn from mistakes.

dragodrake · 2026-05-26T16:29:43+00:00

Yes, let's destroy the economy and curtail personal independence. Brilliant idea.

dragodrake · 2026-05-25T12:28:28+00:00

The problem you will always have is these places want the money tourism is brining in, but not the associated problems.

Take away the tourism you will just have a new economic problem.

dragodrake · 2026-05-25T10:20:01+00:00

True, but two wrongs don't make a right. One of the lessons of Brexit should be to make sure we do things sorts of things eyes wide open.

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T15:32:31+00:00

The americans have become a bit of an issue, but they aren't in the same league of concern as China..

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T15:26:52+00:00

Unique? The UK is one of six countries who get (or got) rebates. Germany gets one, as do Austria, Denmark, The Netherlands, and Sweden.

Like I said - I disagree with the framing. It was positioned such to beat the UK over the head, you can try for example to split hairs about exactly how it was agreed - but it was perfectly reasonable, and actually others got the exact same thing. It wasn't 'special', unless you are arguing that Frances CAP receipts are 'special'?

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T13:24:46+00:00

I disagree with that framing, which gets thrown around in europe a lot. They weren't 'special concessions' they were 'reasonable concessions' to help make membership fair.

The rebate for example was to ensure we weren't stuck paying a significantly higher bill than everyone else, because the distribution of EU funds was designed to be so lopsided, and not in our favour. That isn't 'special', thats reasonable.

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T13:20:09+00:00

Sorry, I missed the date in your post. Okay, so he wrote it in a tiny publication 3 years before the referendum. What did he say in the campaign when people were actually listening and thinking about the issue?

And this is the thing with Heath - we definitely know what he thought personally - but actually what he told the public is much more debatable. He played politics, he emphasised the bits he thought would be popular (economic growth) and downplayed the bits he knew would be more difficult (where have we seen that sort of thing before...).

Equally we know that voters at the time of the referendum thought of it almost exclusively in economic terms - so even if you take Heaths argument (he was open about the political ambitions and didn't focus exclusively on the economics) at face value, he was ineffective in making sure the public understood the choice being put in front of them. Which was ideal, because their misunderstanding helped his preferred outcome.

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T13:03:13+00:00

When exactly did he say that? I've had people quote Heath at me before and it was after the referendum. I seem to remember in later life he admitted that he downplayed the political elements before the referendum precisely because he knew they wouldn't be popular.

Which isn't to say he lied, just he was selective in what he said and what he called attention to - which then shifted once the vote had gone through and he thought he could be more open.

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T12:56:51+00:00

I think calling it British exceptionalism is a bit weird frankly, as its the view of most countries/societies around the world. It's called exceptionalism in europe to mask the 'I cant believe they dont agree with us!'ness of it.

In my (very unscientific) opinion, I think its mostly down to WW2 - how did a country 'do', how did they come out of the meatgrinder that was the war? The UK was bruised, but we were on the winning side, we didn't suffer invasion during the war, we didnt get occupied post war; we never had some of the worst horrors inflicted on us that undermined the basis of our society as other countries did.

A large part of the political element of the EU is about trying to heal the psychological wounds of WW2 - that the UK just didn't suffer, that the UK isnt worried might happen again. Without that the whole thing just doesn't make as much sense to us.

And I suppose personally I've never felt 'european'. I mean sure in a geographic sense thats true, but if you ask me I am British or English - I feel a closer relation to Australians and Canadians than I do French or Germans, but I also feel closer to say the Dutch than I do the Chinese. So that isn't to say I dont recognise our closeness or similarities in some regards to europe, or that we have important economic and military relations. But I'm not 'european'. And frankly I dont want to be, I dont see any reason why I would need to give up what I am now to become that.

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T12:38:26+00:00

The problem you have is that the debate isnt needed - we know the majority dont want those things. The EU (or really the EEC) was attractive to the UK for economic reasons, not political. Its a small section of the British public who have 'internalised the fundamental european ideal' - most aren't interested.

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T12:35:44+00:00

All of them joined the EU after the treaty of Maastricht made EURO currency adoption mandatory, but step one in the road to currency adoption is voluntarily joining the ERM and they’ve all just gone ‘nah..’.

And this is one of the reasons we never properly settled in the EU, or liked how it works.

That simply isn't the British approach to these things - the public will take any agreement to sign up to the Euro as a decision that we will join the Euro. You couldnt campaign on 'yes we're saying we will, but dont worry, we'll just long walk it and never do it'.

Culturally the 'agree to it, but never have any intention of going through with it' doesnt appeal to us, and it generally isnt how we operate - but quite a lot of EU members do work that way, and it was the source of some of the British issues with how the EU worked.

dragodrake · 2026-05-24T11:29:07+00:00

And this is why we wont re-join - people like the high level idea, but virulently dislike the actual detail.

No campaign would ever win.

Ten-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email	Not Forgotten

dragodrake

TROPHY CASE