when the prime minister and the monarch agree that the PM takes all the credit for murdering lots of kids, the prime minister gets a knighthood. (tony blair) - chasing the peerages.

When they disagree, they get a big dose of massive character assassination (Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbin)

Or just dead (David Kelly).

Discussed in detail during the non public weekly meetings between the PM and head of state.

> They promised 2 things that are guaranteed to increase immigration

> A points-based system, you can find articles talking about how this increases immigration

Firstly, I don't think they actually introduced one of those, did they? And secondly, how is that guaranteed to increase immigration?

The UK media and some of politicians at the time were all talking about an Australian-style points system. As someone pretty intimately acquainted with the Australian system, people (including ex-PM Teresa May) didn't seem to understand that under the Australian system -

- The government sets a minimum number of points under which you won't even be considered.

- The government set a maximum number of visas they will grant under the scheme each year

- The people with the best points are invited to apply for those visas

So with this setup the 'paper' minimum might be 65 points, but the effective threshhold is often 95 points to actually be invited to apply.

Yet in the UK the picture was painted as if you set a points threshhold and that's it, anyone with more than that gets a visa and you can't possibly control the numbers. It seemed like a total misunderstanding of the scheme.

They also said things like "And Australia has proportionally even higher migration than the UK under that scheme!", which is true, but again that's because the government has decided to set the amounts of visas at that level and sets them higher or lower, or adjusts which skills get more points, according to perceived need for skilled people. Aus has higher migration under their points scheme as a choice. The UK could have chosen to limit skilled visas under a similar program to a much lower level.

As far as I could tell, all of the articles and talking points at the time entirely ignored this.

> In fact, the Tories did NOT promise to reduce immigration.

In fact they did. They promised to reduce immigration. They did the opposite of what you just said.

Their 2019 manifesto said "There will be fewer lower-skilled migrants and overall numbers will come down."

Source: PDF linked on https://conservativehome.com/2019/12/06/read-the-conservativ...

All of those are true but I promise you that the median conservative voter can forgive all of those far sooner than they’ll forgive the Boriswave.

>These policies actively restrict freedoms by removing the freedom of choice from consumers. They introduce deadweight loss and moral hazard.

relate every part of this sentence to the previous sentence

> My experience is that most progressive causes want to redistribute income from high earners to low earners. Policies such as government supported housing, daycare, support this.

Oh absolutely. This is the way to make a more fair and balanced society.

If the US doesn't want that, fine but it is of course also the reason for the no-go areas/ghettos, the amount of violent crime etc. Because people who are in the lowest class and have no upward mobility will tend to spiral away in crime, because that does pay.

> These policies actively restrict freedoms by removing the freedom of choice from consumers. They introduce deadweight loss and moral hazard.

We don't believe in unrestricted free-market capitalism anyway.

> My experience is that most progressive causes want to redistribute income from high earners to low earners.

> These policies actively restrict freedoms by removing the freedom of choice from consumers.

Moreover despite all the constant pearl clutching about "systemic imbalances in resources between whites and People of Color" from the progressive left, you will find that most of these policies actually transfer wealth from the middle and upper-middle class ethnic minority demographics to rich white nepotists in the government.

If progressives were actually serious about correcting racial wealth disparities, we would implement a taxation scheme that taxes whites more heavily, and ethnic minorities less so, based on some metric of the overall injustices visited upon them.

Instead, the instant an ethnic minority gets a leg up on the system all the crabs in the progressive bucket demand that he get pulled back down. The words and slogans about "equity" are just hymnal responses that the white progressive uses to absolve themselves of all responsibility and accountability, since after accepting the Code of Conduct and the DEI statement they've already been "born again" out of the original sins of implicit bias and racism.