The reality check UK

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@zarahussain999 Even when a gang of migrant thugs savagely attack someone, you still think they are the victims….

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

Tried and failed many times. All it does it push investment and entrepreneurship out of the country. The economy tanks due to lack of investment and ironically governments collect less tax because the economy is smaller and capital flees the country. That’s why most places that have tried it rapidly reversed the policy.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@lilysnotepad Are you suggesting that Elon doesn’t pay his workers very big salaries?

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

Hi Owen, the US has greater wealth inequality than many comparable countries, yet also some of the world’s highest average wages. If inequality necessarily harms ordinary workers, how do you explain that? Could the incentives that create exceptional wealth also raise productivity, investment and wages more broadly? Or is that too much nuance for you?

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@Anna1431018 Why is supply and demand so difficult for liberals to get their heads around.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@ZackPolanski Too right Zack. Diversity is our strength

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@tamosats @garyseconomics Because Gary’s ideas are exclusively for economically illiterate morons who couldn’t string a coherent arguement together if they wanted to.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@LBC @lewis_goodall Can you have a democracy when leftists control all social media and brutally censor anyone who leans right. Elon levelled the playing field and you can’t handle it.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@EmmaOBaillie @MichaelAArouet You’ve missed the point entirely. Inflation means your £1000 of savings is actually worth less every year even if the number doesn’t change. Inflation is literally a hidden tax on your savings….

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@glimmande @MichaelAArouet It’s not a zero sum game. Lower taxes create growth that lifts everyone up. Continued growth eventually means more tax revenue. The government should be spending less so it doesn’t need to tax either capital or income more.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@Paddystinian The irony of calling people fascists while literally stalking and threatening them because they don’t share your political views.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

Such a stupid take.

Think about the logic of what you’re saying. If you could tax people on unrealised gains all business owners would lose their companies within a few years.

Think of it this way, imagine they had to pay 20% annually on unrealised gains.
year 0 - company worth nothing, owner has 1000 shares
Year 1 - company grows and owner has £100k of shares - owner has to sell 200 shares to pay a £20k tax
Year 2- company grows and owners shares are worth £500k - owner has to sell 160 shares worth £100k to pay the 20% tax
Year 3 - company grows and owners shares are worth £1million - owner sells 128 shares to pay £200k of tax

It’s been just 3 years and the owner has already had to sell 488 of his 1000 shares.

By year end of year 4 if the company grows again he will own less than half of his company.

This retarded model of taxing unrealised gains ultimately leads to the end of private ownership of anything. The government will have all the money and all the shares because they are the only ones who can afford to keep buying them up with the money they rob from the owners in taxes.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

Money is only valuable because of what it can buy. If you divide a billionaire’s wealth among everyone, you haven’t created a single extra house, car, doctor, meal or unit of energy. You’ve just given people more money to compete for the same limited supply. So prices would rise rapidly until everyone feels no richer than they were before.

Not only that, by capping wealth you remove the incentives for entrepreneurs to keep building. Ironically this means less goods and services to buy so everyone in real terms would become poorer.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@pippaisright @harrow_council Should be sent to jail for threatening and then immediately deported after his sentence

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@HonestHalo The harder Labour fails, the louder its bootlickers lie about its success.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

The poster clearly does not understand what their own data shows. They are taking broad disparity statistics and drawing causal conclusions that the statistics simply cannot support.

Stop and search figures, use-of-force rates, Lammy and Macpherson show unequal outcomes and unequal exposure to the justice system. They do not prove why those disparities exist, or that white people cannot be disadvantaged in comparable police encounters.

A simple example shows the problem. If one area has enough violent crime to trigger a stop-and-search operation while another does not, most searches will happen in the first area. If that area is disproportionately minority, the data will show a racial disparity even if officers are applying the same operational threshold to everyone.

The real question is not “which group is searched more overall?” It is whether different racial groups are treated differently in the same type of incident, with the same threat level, behaviour, location, offence type and available information.

That is why more controlled studies matter. In the US, despite widespread belief that Black suspects are discriminated against in police shootings, Harvard economist Roland Fryer found that the data did not reflect that claim once relevant controls were applied. In officer-involved shootings, he found no racial difference after controls. In some specifications, the results were less favourable to white suspects. Fryer reportedly found that result shocking.

So no, this post has not disproved anti-white bias. It has cited broad disparity statistics and pretended they settle a much narrower causal question.

That matters in Henry Nowak’s case because UK policing now explicitly prioritises hate crime and vulnerability-based frameworks, much of which is framed around protecting minority groups from majority hostility. If that training affects how officers interpret unclear confrontations, then it is entirely conceivable that a white victim could be disbelieved or deprioritised. The post has not shown that race had “nothing to do with it.” It has simply asserted that conclusion.

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@TheRealJamieKay It’s called “Per-capita”

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@RichardHanania This is a low IQ comment. Brexit had nothing to do with net migration increasing, the tories could have reduced migration but chose the opposite intentionally. That is why they lost the last election so badly, because they are viewed by many on the right as traitors

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@narindertweets Please try thinking deeper than 1 level. Even if it was true foreign labour got minimum wage as a minimum. It still suppresses wages by increasing the supply of labour willing to work for minimum wage. Without those foreign workers employers would have to pay more than minimum

[The reality check UK @RealityCheckUK1]

@llewellynsteven @JulienPasteur1 @garyseconomics The problems you identify are all real. But the policies you promote would only make them worse. The reason so many require support in the first place is a dying economy killed by over-taxation and welfare spending