Grandaddy Mac

Here’s the straight, evidence‑based answer. No, the claim is not supported by the best available economic evidence. Multiple independent analyses (CEPR, ECB, OBR) show clear, measurable Brexit‑related losses to UK GDP, trade, investment, and productivity. The UK has not outperformed comparable economies once you adjust for counterfactuals — i.e., where GDP would have been without Brexit. Over the last decade, global shocks have hurt all advanced economies, but Brexit has imposed an additional, persistent drag on the UK. Best estimates suggest Brexit has left UK GDP several percentage points lower than it would otherwise have been, accounting for a substantial share but not all of the UK’s stagnation relative to comparable countries. cepr.org/voxeu/columns/… obr.uk/forecasts-in-d…

@Iain_L Saying they’re the same because both are progressive ignores the actual outcomes. Scotland’s shifts more of the burden to higher earners. That’s literally what “more progressive” means. A small differences across millions of taxpayers = a meaningful policy difference.

Sad to see that some Scots have been conned into believing that the tax system in Scotland is actually different to the tax system in the rest of the U.K., thanks simply to a bit of tinkering with bands. Mac, the systems are both progressive.

@BenGrahamUK It’s not one government, a lot of these companies were already struggling long before Labour came to power. It’s a pile-up of rising costs, weak spending, (cost of living crisis) and long-term high street decline (Shopping habits). Blaming one thing or party is just lazy.

All these companies have formally entered administration, insolvency, or equivalent restructuring since Labour came into power: • Ted Baker • The Body Shop UK • Carpetright • Homebase • Claire’s UK • Play Music Today • Homes Direct 365 • Russell & Bromley • ISG • Ardmore Construction • Denby Pottery • Speciality Steel UK • Westbridge Furniture • Belfield Leisure • Rekom UK • Fusion Lifestyle

@Iain_L It’s called progressive taxation, and we get huge benefits for it all the while the poorest in society pay the least, unlike the rest of the UK. Feel free to move down south if you’re not happy. as the majority of the Scottish electorate prefer living in a fairer country.

Says the man who ensures hardworking Scots pay higher and higher taxes in order to fund his largesse and election bribes.

@Malcolm_Offord ifs.org.uk/articles/initi… Reform’s tax plans are ‘not credible’, the self-funding idea is ‘a mirage’, and the sums are ‘unserious at best’. That’s not politics, that’s one of the UK’s most respected independent economists calling it out for what it is.

My ambition for Scotland is to restore the fundamental incentive to work, allowing people to earn higher incomes, and to build wealth for themselves, their families, and communities. That’s why we plan to cut Scottish income taxes below England's, making it the best place in the UK to live and work. But just as important is removing the complex cliff edges in the system, which are stifling all incentive to work and so are harming public services too. For example, someone looking after a loved one at home and receiving both the Carer Support Payment and Scottish Carer Supplement while doing a part-time job, if their wages rise above £10,608 per year will suddenly lose £5,100 in benefits withdrawn. Or take a police sergeant with children. If they or their partner earns above £60k, they start seeing their child benefit clawed back, and when working overtime end up keeping less than half of every extra pound they earn. Or take a doctor who still has a student maintenance loan to repay, who gets a raise above £100k. Suddenly, for every extra £1 they earn they get to take home less than 22p – before even taking into account their pension contributions. If they have a working partner and nursery-age children, then taking the raise actually makes them worse off by thousands of pounds, because tax-free childcare is suddenly withdrawn. With punishing cliff edges like these, is it any wonder that GP practices close their lists, experienced doctors retire early, dentists reduce NHS work, schools struggle to hire, and hospitals struggle to fill shifts, leaving wards understaffed and theatres empty despite long waiting lists? Fundamental to any workforce plan for fixing our public sector is getting the incentives right, and ensuring that workers have more money in their pockets at the end of a shift. Making sure that workers are rewarded is the most important lever we can pull to improve hiring, retention, and morale. Otherwise we’d be stuck with the same old story we've seen for years: throwing more funding at public sector raises, raising taxes to pay for it, and so taxing it back off those very same workers again while failing to fix the underlying problem. In the meantime, the private sector bears the burden, and faces many of the same productivity problems. A Reform government in Scotland will do everything it can with devolved powers to smooth away these damaging cliff edges as quickly as possible, so that earning an extra £1 always means keeping at least 50p of it. We will do everything we can to ensure that work always pays, and that you’re always rewarded for working an extra shift. For a Scotland that respects and rewards work, the only choice is Reform UK.

@DShamen @BigBearKentlaar Makes two of us mate.

@Grandaddy_Mac @BigBearKentlaar I certainly did. And I admit I was a prick at the time and grew out of it thankfully.

The world finally seeing Littler for the prick of a human he is. I don’t care if he’s a teenager, his attitude is revolting. Money and fame really can go to your head.

@ret_ward Lead the way and set an example while our contribution is 1% of global emission… all the while increasing importing the fossil fuels we need and making many people redundant in the process as mature assets/field’s close… a balanced, common sense approach is needed here.

This is nonsense. Even if the U.K. reaches net zero alone it would not stop climate change impacts in the U.K. The U.K. needs to be part of a global effort to reach net zero, and setting an example by leaving our remaining expensive North Sea reserves in the ground.

@ret_ward Agreed, but surely you must recognise the UK is still massively reliant on fossil fuels due to a lack of investment in renewables, and the high paid jobs that should come with the just transition aren’t currently there. We’re simply not ready. But agree more should be done.

For the umpteenth time, the goal is global net zero. The U.K. should contribute by cutting its production and consumption of fossil fuels.

@DShamen @BigBearKentlaar I hear ya, and you’re probably not wrong. I guess because I’m closer to 50 than 40 I recognise he’s a young lad. And most of us acted inappropriately at that age.

@Grandaddy_Mac @BigBearKentlaar If someone in your local boozer behaved like that during a game of pool or darts, most people would think he was a prick.

@ret_ward That’s not true at all, some yes, but most no. We just recognise that the UK is currently still very reliant on Fossil fuels, hasn’t invested properly in renewables, so the well paid jobs aren’t there for us North Sea workers to transition to, and the grid isn’t ready.

Let’s be completely honest. Those calling for more drilling in the North Sea do not accept climate science and the need to reach net zero. They do not accept reality.

@BareLeft It does, it protects jobs, increasing/maintaining tax receipts, and reduces import costs. Unfortunately successive UK gov’s haven’t adequately invested in renewables, or the grid, therefore the uk is currently still very reliant on fossil fuels.

The Jackdaw gas field is owned by Shell, and the yields will be sold at open market prices. Unless there's an arrangement that gives the UK first dibs on gas at a preferential price, this doesn't actually solve anything. Total capitulation to the fossil fuel lobby.

@ZackPolanski They’re taking the common sense approach here. While I understand and respect your hard line view, the UK and our effect on the climate is a tiny drop in the ocean. Until our reliance is reduced and the grid improved we need to utilize our own resources, protecting jobs.

The IEA is v clear. No new Oil & Gas exploration if we're to meet climate targets & mitigate worst effects of climate crisis. My party committed to good jobs to last a lifetime, a safe climate & permanently lower bills. Labour? Less clear by the day. theguardian.com/environment/20…

@ZackPolanski Ok but the fact is currently that the well paid jobs simply aren’t there yet for us North Sea workers to transition to, and the UK is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels. Not doing this would be reckless for jobs and energy security.

If we want secure jobs, a safe climate for the future & true energy independence the only route is renewables. We know it works, it lower bills and makes us safe from energy shocks. We just need politicians brave enough to stand up to oil & gas lobby & their mates in Reform.

A huge betrayal. Won't lower bills. Won't give us more energy security. Won't insulate from price shocks. And sends a clear message to the world that we are backing new oil and gas drilling.

@ZackPolanski Not a betrayal, common sense, no It won’t cut bills without this it will cost jobs & increase imports as the UK is still heavily dependant on fossil fuels. The answer’s is a managed transition, protecting jobs, with big investment in renewables & the grid as we go.

@CarolineLucas It won’t cut bills as it’s sold on global markets. But without this it will cost jobs or increase imports as the UK is still heavily dependant on fossil fuels. The answer’s is a managed transition, protecting jobs, with big investment in renewables & the grid.

A terrible decision, and one which will do huge damage to the Government's climate credentials. As Ed knows, this drilling won't lower bills, but instead it sends a clear message that Britain won't be a world leader on ending oil and gas exploitation

@RussellFindlay1 The SNP didn’t vote against supporting the industry, they just didn’t support the Tory motion because it’s tied to the failed current windfall tax system (EPL) The (OGPM) would protect jobs and investment better long term in the industry, which is exactly what the SNP support.

SNP spin warning ⚠️ John Swinney's trying to dupe North Sea workers by hinting that he now backs oil and gas. But his MPs refused to back our bid to get Britain drilling again.

@CarolineLucas I have a lot of respect for you, but more North Sea drilling won’t cut or increase bills as it’s sold on global markets. And pretending we can just switch it off overnight without costing jobs or increasing imports is just as daft. The answer’s a managed transition, not slogans.

More drilling in the North Sea would be a catastrophic mistake for Labour - locking us into high bills, and betraying their climate ambitions

@Timbre_Calibre @arsenalbabe_ What… so you are saying ignore all the underlying metrics and stats that show he’s an average player and underperforming because… you feel there’s more to stats? 🤷🏼‍♂️ How can I argue with that. You win!

@Grandaddy_Mac @arsenalbabe_ Football is beyond stats, bro. Stats here, stats there..... Every little thing, stats. That's why football had become so plastic. Stats is a minute part of the game.

When Darwin Núñez arrived at Liverpool after tearing it up at Benfica with 34 goals in 41 games, nobody questioned Jurgen Klopp’s philosophy. Nobody blamed Klopp. Nobody said Mohamed Salah was too selfish. Nobody claimed the system was broken. Núñez scored 15 goals in 42 games in his first season at Liverpool. It wasn’t anyone’s fault. He was simply called a flop. That was reasonable. Now look at Viktor Gyökeres. He scored 54 goals in 52 games at Sporting Lisbon last season. Now in his first season at Arsenal he scored 16 goals in 42 games so far. Almost the exact same numbers as Núñez and suddenly the world is on fire. Arteta is clueless. Saka should pass more. The Arsenal system is broken. The signing is a disaster. Where was this energy when Liverpool had the same situation with Núñez? Gyökeres’ replacement at Sporting, Luís Suárez, is already averaging a goal per game. This is because the Portuguese league is not the Premier League. Goals in Liga Portugal carry 1.5 points in UEFA models, while goals in the top five leagues carry 2. The gap is real and well documented. That is why Gyökeres won the Gerd Müller award but Mbappé with fewer goals won the European Golden Boot. So why are Arsenal fans holding Gyökeres to Sporting standards in the toughest league in the world? It’s because some thought he would come in and instantly score 20 or more league goals, forgetting that this is the premier league. I see him doing better next season, especially after winning the league title this year.

@englishtoneb @resfoundation Those are standard ways economists measure performance — and they all point the same way. So what data are you using to say we haven’t underperformed? Please enlighten us…

@englishtoneb @resfoundation On which metric? Because trade, investment and productivity all say otherwise? • Trade intensity (ONS) — down vs comparable economies • Business investment (ONS/BoE) — weaker since 2016 vs peers • Productivity growth — lagging comparable economies

Brexit has likely done more economic damage than feared. Recent evidence suggests the economic cost of Brexit may be approaching twice the 4% impact assumed by the OBR. The Chancellor has signalled a shift in approach to EU trade, but the effect will depend on how far the govt goes on alignement.