BenjiW

I've been on 70% of the major marches through London since the conflict began. They have all been peaceful, broadly attended by all faiths, and obviously vocipherously against the Israeli government. The common interest is humanity, love, peace and support, and that is practiced by the majority of activists. You'll always get some bad apples, no matter the context and demographic, and I know it's highly tempting to draw broader conclusions from them. But the reality is not as you've shared. Come join a march and you'll see how wonderful and supportive these things are ❤️

@HespeChris34466 @MichaelRosenYes @AWumman @DPJHodges I can see you are going to keep denying reality so frankly, you can go to hell. I could post some of the antisemitism I see on this site everyday, but you’d probably make excuses for that too. Also, I don’t want to upset more people. Muted.

One thing on the pro-Palestine marches. If you accept they directly intimidate the Jewish community (which they do) then you must also acknowledge the Unite the Kingdom rallies have precisely the same effect on Muslim and other minority communities. We ban both, or neither.

@ZiaYusufUK You guys are sick cunts. Go fuck yourself, and your facistic supporters.

Today we announce a new policy: In order to deport all illegal migrants in Britain, Reform will need to detain tens of thousands at a time. Migrants will not be able to leave these detention centres, and each will be held there a couple of weeks before being deported. So here’s our promise: A Reform government will not put any migrant detention facilities in any constituency with a Reform MP. Nor will we put them where Reform controls the council. And of the remaining areas, we will prioritise Green controlled parliamentary constituencies and Green controlled councils to locate the detention centres. Put simply, if you vote in a Reform council or Reform MP, we guarantee you won’t have a detention centre near you. If you vote Green, there’s a good chance you will. This is an important exercise in democratic consent, not just for our mass deportation policy, but for where the detention centres are placed. Given @ZackPolanski openly advocates for open borders, I look forward to their warm embrace of this policy. votegreengetillegals.com

@awake_canadian @PeterMcCormack If that's the case then no collateral use case either. If an asset has value and you can take a loan out against it (which predictably, is also tax free) then you can pay an amount of tax on it.

@BWAProject @PeterMcCormack How do you pay taxes on unrealized gains? 99 percent of wealth is held in assets, most are digital. What is your plan? Make them forced sellers, what do you think this does to markets? Just makes everyone poorer.

We live in a permanent state of socialism - for the rich. Yes and this is the irony for socialists. Our financial system is a system which extracts upwards through inflation and purchasing power. As more money is created > money loses purchasing power > assets gain purchasing power > wage earners get poorer as wages don’t keep up > asset holders get wealthier as asset values increase too. Further, the rich have better access to buy more assets with the newly created money. How do I know this? I am an asset holder, I benefit, I’m telling you because I think it’s vile. No party has made any attempt to deal with this. Why? To deal with this means not deficit spending, which means balancing the books, which means being honest with the public, which means not making false promises to win votes. It is a machine of lying and corruption to win power. If you want a fairer society, inflation would be your number one enemy. Everything else is theatre - tax the rich is theatre, billionaire whinging is theatre. The government loves inflation as they are in so much debt it wipes it away for them. The rich love inflation as it makes the wealthier. Everyone else should treat it like the plague. Ending inflation is the best way to reduce the growing wealth divide. If we don’t, our society will continue to hollow out and your life will get harder. Stop voting for your own misery.

@BitcoinMicropig @PeterMcCormack @WFC_Will He is exceptional, I agree. But he has too much now.

@BWAProject @PeterMcCormack @WFC_Will Musk has been an incredible force for good.

After an afternoon of arguing with socialists, here it is... These people are impossibly and dangerously stupid. They are making up policies as they go which will cause nothing but economic destruction. It is evident when arguing with them they have little to no understanding of the reality of economics and their ideas come from envy. They are predators. But... this was caused by the state itself: 1. Allowing leftism to take over the institutions 2. Buidling an education system with baked in Marxism 3. Failing to control inflation We are in very dangerous times.

Taxing him *a little more*. He won't feel it, he won't miss it, and it won't disincentivise him. I agree he's a great asset for the world, but one man doesn't need hundreds of billions/trillions when child poverty in western nations is also rising. Musk is a great example to use though. In the most kleptocratic way possible, he used his procured platform and wealth to lobby and promote a government who is now invading, stealing, kidnapping and terrorising the entire planet. Is that a good thing? Is that good concetration of wealth and power? I'd also argue that it's this exact problem - concentration of wealth - that has created the monetary policy you despise. What better way to line your pockets than to lobby and create tax loopholes, forcing borrowing and forcing asset inflation. Governments are in the pockets of the capital owners around the world, and they've created the perfect system to swallow everything. I repeat again. The problem is concentration of wealth.

I don't see the problem with 48% of wealth being concentrated among 1000 people. The alternative is to force ie. Musk to dump TSLA stock and crash its price which would cost ordinary investors lots of money. He is proven to be a great capital allocator, what is the big problem with letting him allocate capital? Taxing him won't make poor people any better off in the long run. They will just spend the money, badly in many cases, and remain poor. At which point you would force Musk to dump even more stock and crash the price again, to divvy more money to the people who are still poor, and still make poor economic decisions.

But you and I both know we're not talking about normal income inequality here; we're talking about 48% of global wealth belonging to 1000 people. That will only get worse and will corrupt every well-intentioned system implemented going forward unless it is redistributed fiscally. And redistributing a portion won't affect the health of wealth generators who have more dormant capital sat on balance sheets than ever before. It would amplify discretionary spend though, and that's not only good for labourers and asset owners alike, but compounds tax take.

We can't alleviate poverty by printing more money. That just creates more poverty through inflation. The additional support comes from higher prices incentivising the market to provide solutions. Income inequality is not in itself a social wrong. It's just the corollary of freedom versus authoritarianism. The key is to maintain the health of the wealth generating economy, not to attempt vainly to redistribute wealth to everyone who has failed to offer value. Much harder to erode democratic structures using bitcoin than fiat. Ditto wars. Hard to do these things if you eventually run out of money which you can't print. In fact if the Geneva Convention made printing fiat currency a war crime punishable by death there would be far less war in general. Far shorter, more contained wars, quicker truces, more demilitarised zones, more serious peace talks. We don't need to solve human nature - capitalism already works very well with it. We just need hard money in combination with it. The less state involvement the better as proven again and again all over the world since the year dot.

I totally agree it's a problem, although we wouldn't fully understand what problems a fixed money supply would introduce until we started using it - for example, during times of economic stress e.g. covid, where would the additional support come from? Would folks not in work just die? And let's be honest - even if money was sound, capital still begets capital, power concentrates, so without fiscal redistribution we would still have rampant income inequality and erosion of democratic structures. You can't solve human nature with sats. You can already see the big capital players starting to hoard them - the way you acknowledge and regulate that is fiscally.

The biggest problem is having a private money system inflicted on the general population, ie fiat money, much much more than the tax rates of rich people. If there was a neutral money system the need for redistribution would be much lower as the wealthy would not be able to inflict their cantillon privilege on the poor. Capitalism is great: fiat money is terrible.

@PeterMcCormack He's already said there would be supprt for smaller businesses. Will you apologise for misleading everyone?

If you want people to earn £15 an hour then: - Remove VAT - Remove business rates - Remove NI - Reduce energy costs - Reduce regulatory burden Your lack of understand of basic economics is astounding.

@PeterMcCormack @Heccles94 @ZackPolanski So basically you've misinterpreted the impact ot was going to have on small businesses, Peter. You going to apologise or just try to reframe the argument?

@Heccles94 @ZackPolanski Everything he wants is paid for taxing the mega rich. Has anyone done the numbers yet?

On #BBCLaurak today @ZackPolanski defends the £15 minimum wage explaining how he would reduce the tax burden for small business by taxing the mega rich.

@BitcoinMicropig @PeterMcCormack @WFC_Will Not a bad shout - you could abolish it with government spending less or rich people paying more tax as a share of their income. Which rich person was it that famously said they pay less tax than their secretary? Structures around taxing capital have to change.

@BWAProject @PeterMcCormack @WFC_Will Why not just abolish the debasement curve? Inflation is just a mechanism for rich people to steal from the poor.

@PeterMcCormack Incentives work in the same way.

Absolutie arguments either way are silly, but there's obviously a strong argument to reward your staff in the capital structure of the business - just a few small examples around the world like nVidia, Accenture etc. Probably a nice happy medium where you reward them a slice of the cake, they're highly incentivised, but you're still taking a high portion of the gains?

Here is another stupid take by a silly little socialist. They are two separate businesses. I don't take a wage from the coffee shop despite owning and operating it at the senior level. There is no money left to pay me. I do it out of love. The costs of the podcast are paid out of the profits of the podcast, which is a good little business. But the interesting point here is that he thinks all the profit being generated by the workers should go to them. But the silly little socialists can't fathom the following: 1. I took the risk to open the coffee shop - the £120k refurb, the 10 year lease, the business plan and the risk. My reward for the risk if the profits if it works, which I can share with the staff if I choose. 2. But even if we take the silly little socialist mildly seriously (we shouldn't, he's a dumb dumb), if the business fails and is losing money, should we blame the workers and should it be deducted from their salary? This is why these silly little revolutionaries should not be taken seriously. Firstly they don't understand economics, second they are fundamentally stupid, third their model is based on envy, fourth they have no answer to the coordination problem. I could go on, probably not worth it as you can't reason with silly little socialists.

@cmwoodward @PeterMcCormack @WFC_Will Go on...

@BWAProject @PeterMcCormack @WFC_Will Just think one order of consequence higher. You can do it.

McCormack at it again. If the monetary supply is expanding and pounds are worth less, people should get inflationary pay rises to keep up with that debasement curve, in the same way your business prices go up to reflect that curve, and in the same way your asset portfolio goes up to reflect that curve. You simply can't argue this point and not back a minimal payrise for labourers. You just want to have your cake and eat it mate.

@WFC_Will You haven’t run a business have you?

Don't know how else to say that the state is part of the establishment. If they were authentically interested in the well-being of their populace, they wouldn't print them into servitude. This is just a really elaborate, almost invisible, form of fuedalism. You can all collectively pount the finger at the government, but it's concentration of capital that's the issue.

@BWAProject @PeterMcCormack But all of that is facilitated by the state. It COULD enforce rules.

The majority of your problems are financial. Those financial problems are primarily caused by the state. A smaller state will fix a lot of those problems. You will keep voting for a bigger state. Your problems will get worse.

Why do governments run deficits? If rich people know deficits pump their asset portfolio, what incentive do they have to a) pay tax or b) lobby for a different policy approach? They have devised the perfect system of swallowing everything - buy assets, dont pay tax, lobby government, monetary policy enriches even further. Rinse repeat. You're quite literally not understanding your own arguments here. The problem is concentration of wealth; the solution is to fiscally redistirbute it and prevent it from happening. If we dont fo this, your beloved system will crash everyone out and heads will roll. That's what history teaches us.

The largest wealth tax would be to end inflation. People discuss wealth taxes of 1-2% yet the rich gain 7-12% through asset inflation. They can then leverage these assets to buy more assets. This would also benefit the poor and lower middle class who see prices rise by the same amount while their wages don’t keep up. It’s the easy and obvious solution but the peasants will vote for more of the same. They won’t fix this.

@ErnestMillerish @PeterMcCormack Also socialists: -Concentrated capital concentrates power, and corrupts systems of politics and monetary policy, leading to inflationary economics for fiat earners and the exacerbation of income inequality.

@PeterMcCormack I'm aghast. A gen x Englishman using the word 'math'. Unacceptable.

Trying to summarise the whinging socialists: - Workers create the wealth - I don’t want to work 40 hours a week - My rent is to expensive, fix it - Reduce my energy bills - I can’t afford my oat caramel frappe - Company owners are evil - Vote Green’s This is a math problem.

@PeterMcCormack @biglyy Wait a minute, so you're saying there's no profiteering going on, just passed through cost increases? What world you living in, bruh?

@biglyy Costs have gone up for your landlord too. This is the fault of the government, not your landlord.

Can we ban the government from making decisions.