The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1290

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 6, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:33:09

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1290

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Loadseaters, episode 1290 for the 5th of November 2025.
	It's the 6th.
	Is it?
	Yeah.
	My God, so it is.
	It was the wrong date on it.
	Of course it was.
	That was my fault.
	I wrote it yesterday.
	Yes, it's his fault.
	You did that just to trip me up today.
	I did, I'm sorry.
	Right.
	I won't forget this.
	Anyway, joining me today is Firas, Josh, and first-time guest on the show, Protocranos, Peter North.
	Thank you for joining us, sir.
	Nice to be here.
	Wonderful to have you.
	Today, we're all going to talk about basically New York being conquered.
	We're then going to talk about policing in Britain, and we're then going to talk about Britain's economy breaking as well.
	So the general theme of today seems to be collapse and chaos.
	What a twist.
	So with all that said, shall we get to the first segment?
	So, as we know, Zoram Mamdani has won.
	He is now mayor-elect of New York City.
	How are we all feeling about this?
	Are we as excited as New Yorkers appear to be?
	Disappointed, but not surprised, I think.
	Yes.
	He seemed to be a clear frontrunner.
	And given the demographic change in New York, I'm not necessarily surprised that it's gone that way.
	He basically advertised himself as, you know, those white people with all the stuff.
	I'm the guy who's going to give you their stuff.
	And it turns out people like to vote for that if they want to steal white people's stuff.
	Yes.
	And it turns out that many in New York do these days.
	I will also just say before we actually get into the results, there was a tremendous amount of cope online from the right wing when it came to this particular election.
	There seemed to be just an incoherent mess of gotyas and they all just fell totally flat.
	Because one, of course, this is a left that is mostly foreign and doesn't accept the America-specific claims against communism or Marxist-Leninism or jihadism or any of these sorts of things.
	They don't care.
	They're third worldists.
	But second of all, just the fact that you also had this area where they were saying, oh, Cuomo's gaining, Cuomo's gaining.
	No, not really.
	Firstly, Cuomo wasn't gaining.
	No.
	Secondly, Cuomo isn't their guy.
	No.
	And thirdly, if you've imported the voter, the voters, is it really an election?
	And this is a real point that, look, guys, you're changing your countries too much, and you're not going to recover from it if you don't do something about it soon.
	I think it's also difficult to be enthusiastic for Cuomo because didn't he move lots of COVID patients into nursing homes or something like that?
	Oh, yeah, he was literally draconian.
	He was draconian, he was a grandma killer, and it was very obvious that the policy was, how can we reduce the pension cost?
	Oh, let's give them COVID.
	It was very cynical.
	It was extremely cynical, for Cuomo.
	Yeah, deeply.
	And so here we have the result.
	And as you can see, it was a clear victory of 50% for Mamdani and 41 for Cuomo.
	And what's more as well, even if Curtis Slee were here had dropped out, that difference, if you add them together, would still not have supplanted Mamdani.
	This was a firm victory.
	And what's more as well, some people were saying, oh, well, at least in Minneapolis, that Somalian guy didn't win.
	Well, not this year.
	but on current trends he will it really is simply a matter of got haunting physiognomy as well that that guy Diabolical.
	Genuinely scary.
	Yeah.
	So we should start talking about some of the actual and also just one in every single district as well.
	There was not a single outlier in Manhattan, Queens, the Bronx, the rest of them.
	And so we had 57% of the black vote for Mamdani.
	We had 52% of the Hispanic vote.
	We had 62% of the general Asian vote.
	I wonder how that would be split between East and West Asian.
	Yeah, I am curious about that myself, but don't seem to have that distinction so far.
	And then 51% of other miscellaneous, basically just non-white voters as well.
	And what's more as well, you can always trust the women to come out and elect the far-left lunatic.
	So that's really what we're dealing with here.
	This is the breakdown.
	And the fact of the matter is as well, that you also have the fact that you can always trust Navara media to analyze their own victories incorrectly.
	Because as they say here, by rejecting identity politics and embracing class solidarity, basically Mamdani was able to win.
	Well, as you've already pointed out, Josh, this has nothing to do with class whatsoever.
	I'm sure that the very term working class was not really in the lexicon of many of the third worlders who've arrived here, right?
	It's a very Western view of society.
	It's a very, ironically enough, for Navarra media, a very British way of looking at it.
	Like, we tend to view things through class a lot more than they do in America.
	And generally speaking, middle class is considered quite a broad church.
	So it's not nearly as divisive a thing in people's perception as they claim it to be.
	Right.
	And what's more as well, you can see here that this was another one going around.
	Oh, we can't elect a Muslim.
	Don't you all remember 9-11?
	Well, it's not amnesia, right?
	It's the fact that those people who were there on the ground in 9-11 are not so much there now as you have from this statistic that Leo provides, when you look at the people who were voting for Mamdani, for many of them, oh, I was here 10 years plus, but not born here, 54%, 10 years or less, 82%, right?
	So it's just pure demographic replacement to rig the system entirely in the same way that it's basically become in London now under Sadiq Khan.
	On the 9-11 point, I have to keep repeating this.
	The biggest shock for the Middle East after 9-11 was that there were no mass expulsions of Muslims.
	Had it happened the other way around somehow, the sort of reaction from the region would have been just genocidal ethnic cleansing.
	And people who could afford it, who were Muslims in New York, immediately left because they expected to just be rounded up randomly.
	That was the expectation.
	So the idea that after all of this, you get this kind of immigration that allows for this sort of transformation is a shock to the Muslims themselves.
	And the other point is, when did Mamdani reject identity politics?
	His whole campaign was that I eat with my hands and that's who I am and this is my identity.
	Right.
	I mean, his campaign was may as well have been, I eat with my hands and I'm brown vote for me.
	Yes.
	So.
	Absolutely.
	So let's just listen to him speak here for just a second about the people he has to thank for the victory.
	I speak of Yemeni Bodega owners and Mexican habuelas.
	Senegalese taxi drivers and Uzbek nurses.
	Trinidadian line cooks and Ethiopian aunties Yes, aunties
	So the point is of course this is a victory for the immigrants but not even just immigrants not the Irish ones not even the Italian ones not the European immigrants specifically the third world triumph over New York and I remember growing up and you know because you had a whole number of films coming out in the late 90s and early 2000s where New York was basically like the greatest city in the world.
	Yep, right.
	I thought you're going to bring up gangs of New York.
	Oh, I should.
	I keep seeing that going about.
	I really need to watch that film, don't I?
	Great film, yeah.
	Yeah, okay.
	And long since are those days.
	But we also have here as well the fact that really, very much in the way that Trump on the right set himself up as someone against the establishment, was able to frame it in that way.
	You add the exact same thing with Mandani here.
	When you've got Trump saying, vote Cuomo to keep this guy out, it makes, it gives across the perception that the entire system is against this guy, that he is the one that those big bad billionaires and nasty elites don't want you to vote for.
	So vote for him.
	Of course, this isn't actually the case where you have, sorry, I was just going to say, yeah, here.
	Obviously, Alex Soros, son of George, Open Foundation, World Economic Forum, all that, just globalism, right?
	And so he does have billionaire backers.
	Most people do.
	They all have some sort of elite backing.
	He did keep this one very, very quiet, I will grant you, but that doesn't take away the fact that it is still there.
	And what's more as well, we raise the point that Alex Soros' wife is literally the chief of staff for Hillary Clinton.
	So this is not so detached from the swamp as Zoran would perhaps like to make out.
	And then I just wanted to go back to this part as well, because there was another angle in this entire thing as well, which was that there was a great amount of push from the Republican side to really paint Zoran as someone who was just a raging anti-Semite.
	And I'm not saying whether you can or can't make that case.
	What I am saying is that actually a large proportion of Jews in New York did also come out to vote for him.
	And these are obviously Jews who are more of the anti-Zionist ilk, but they are still a faction within New York itself.
	And so really the point is, every single time that the Republicans or the right had something to throw at this guy, there was always something to throw back the other way.
	And fundamentally, none of the attacks that the Republicans stuck on this guy worked.
	No.
	None whatsoever.
	If they were addressed to a different audience.
	Right.
	Right.
	Like when Laura Luma here says, oh, just never congratulate a jihadi.
	It's like, yeah, but his wife looks like this, right?
	The whole meme about, like, they're going to put a burqa on the Statue of Liberty and everything.
	It just makes you...
	I mean, it's funny.
	I'm not saying it's not funny, but it makes you look ridiculous.
	It makes you look like you don't have a grasp on the situation, like you don't understand the reality, the true nature of what this guy is.
	I think if someone is that left-wing, ideologically, it's very difficult for them to be a devout Muslim at the same time.
	The two things are sort of at odds with one another, but are politically convenient when they're married together.
	That was a big sigh for that.
	They don't make the case for it properly.
	They don't explain that the Muslim Brotherhood has been writing since the 1990s that their intention is to ally with elements within the United States that are subversive and destructive.
	And that requires a new jurisprudence to permit Muslims to ally with people who they find distasteful.
	So you see it here with Muhaddin Ali and what's his name, Zach Polanski.
	They don't understand that this is a deliberate plague on the part of the more hardline Muslims.
	And this is why the Somali community, which is socially extremely conservative, will still support a pro-degeneracy candidate like Ilhan Omar.
	They don't look into their minds.
	They don't try to understand them.
	They don't try to read them properly.
	So that he is pro-these jihadi guys is true.
	That he himself is a jihadi is not.
	But he is an instrument.
	And he is an instrument of the Muslim far right as he is of the general far left.
	And that's what gets missed in this kind of discussion.
	It advances simultaneously all of the minority, well, say minority, but you know, majority at this point, but the minoritarian causes and none of them at the same time, none and all.
	Because even though Mamdani is broad enough to appeal to every single one of them, but in a very general way, but it still emboldens them in their own particular way, as we see here with the Muslims in New York basically saying, we're done hiding, we're done.
	This is a correct religion.
	This is a religion that all of humanity needs to be part of Islam.
	And we will not stop until it enters every home.
	Right?
	Absolutely.
	It emboldens this.
	So NYPD, the New York Police Department, runs one of the best counter-terrorism centers in the world because New York is a financial center and is a very cosmopolitan place.
	And so a lot of global terrorism intersects there.
	You can imagine what this guy is going to do to their funding and to their ability to actually push back on jihadism.
	And that was a key part of their role.
	They would work with the FBI, they would work with the Met Police, they would work with MI5 and MI6.
	This was a big part of the NYPD counterterrorism department.
	And with that being under the control of somebody like that, well, yeah, of course these guys are happy.
	Of course they're happy.
	This is a genuine victory.
	It means a lot less police attention.
	It means a lot less resources dedicated to them because the budget of the New York Police Department is in the billions.
	And the counter-terrorism department does have a very substantial share of that.
	What do you think, Pete, about all of this?
	Well, I'm not a follower of American politics.
	And I do think that if the average political nerd in Britain knew even a tenth about their own local politics is what they do in terms of American local politics, we might actually be getting somewhere.
	But I think there's always, anytime there's a victory like this, there's always this outpouring of histrionics.
	Oh, he's a jihadi, communist, blah, blah, blah.
	And you still have to recall that this is still a Western democracy with the leaden bureaucracy that goes with it.
	And this guy, whatever he said he's going to do that frightens the right, witless, you know, rent controls, he's not going to be able to do even a tenth of that.
	And we've just had Boris Johnson falling out of, and the Tories falling out of the office, out of office for having accomplished nothing in their years in office, having squandered a massive majority.
	Well, we're going to see the left deserting labor for similar reasons.
	You know, you've got over a hundred majority.
	Why weren't you passing any laws?
	Why do you just sit there decaying, not doing anything?
	Well, and I think if reform wins the next general election, we will see the exact same dynamic.
	We will see this political and bureaucratic paralysis.
	And I don't think that's confined just to Britain.
	I think, you know, Trump's first term.
	And even though, you know, Trump's making a lot of splashed headlines with ICE rates, he's still not deporting anywhere close to the numbers that the right generally believes.
	And so you take away the hyperbole and you take away the, you know, some people are rubbing their hands with glee at all the images of ICE raids.
	There's just a fraction of the enforcement that's actually necessary.
	That just isn't happening.
	So the drama and the histrionics, I just can't get excited about it because these people, they're going to come to office and have to get down to the real business of governing.
	They were talking about rent controls.
	Well, he's only going to be able to affect state-provided properties.
	He can't start interfering because there's local laws, federal laws.
	Anything this guy thinks he can do, he's the mayor.
	He's not the king.
	He doesn't have magic wands, and you can't...
	And this is my problem with the writer at the minute.
	Especially the restorationists talking about their great restoration bill.
	We're going to come in and we're going to wave a parliamentary magic wand and things are going to happen.
	No, they're not.
	They're just not going to happen.
	And just because you pass a law, if you haven't got the enforcement mechanisms to go and implement those laws, then nothing happens.
	And this is right across the West.
	We've got politicians fighting hard, pouring vast amounts of money into getting elected, to sit behind the control panel and they start pulling levers to discover they're not actually attached to anything.
	Yeah, it's a great point.
	Yes, indeed.
	And that is really, I'll just say it now before we go on.
	One of the things that really is obviously going to be most interesting to see about Mandani's victory is just how hard Washington fights him.
	Because Mandani talks of Trump-proofing New York, right?
	Taking the fight to NAGA, basically making this citadel with a moat around it so that the evil bigots can't get into the castle.
	But obviously, the federal government is the higher power of these two things, without question.
	So control the FBI, CIA.
	Right.
	So I don't know what quite he expects to manage to do against those.
	It's all rhetoric.
	It's all rhetoric.
	Of course it's all rhetoric.
	Symbolic victory, but all of big victories are purely symbolic.
	Even Trump, the first and second time.
	We're not actually getting closer to where we need to get to.
	And so you have here, of course, people being very, very happy about this.
	Sharia law starts now, absolutely.
	Anyone here a fan of Sharia law?
	Do you think these women would actually be fans of it themselves if they were on the receiving end of it?
	Not with that much hair out and makeup on.
	I don't think really that would go down particularly well.
	My comment on this was that under Sharia law, they could both be sold.
	And that would be genuinely permissible.
	So they have no idea what the hell they're talking about.
	These people are just stupid.
	And this is obviously just the true heart of it all.
	Mamdani's win is proof of concept of how to fight fascism.
	Fascists want everybody to be the same.
	They celebrate conformity, uniformity, sameness, hierarchy.
	The entire Mamdani campaign was a love letter to diversity.
	What she terms fascism, I would just simply term particularism, right?
	The particular character of the United States as it was created by Europeans over many, many centuries.
	And she's come in and all these foreigners have come in and gone, my God, we don't see ourselves reflected in this.
	This is fascism, right?
	And now, so all of a sudden we have to take that away from them.
	That the men who died building the skyscrapers across Manhattan in the 1920s, the people who actually colonized land in the first place, made it a place where these people even thought to go in the first place, right?
	That's the point.
	There wouldn't be a New York without the people that Mamdani basically sets himself against.
	I find it really annoying when fascism gets brought up in America because it's a political system that's probably most inoculated against it because of the degree of the separation of powers.
	Even if Donald Trump was a secret evil fascist and did everything in his power to accumulate as much power as possible and wield it like a tyrant, he probably still wouldn't have as much power over America as the average British prime minister.
	And if you look at it from that perspective, it's just pathetic.
	It's just like you're obviously just neurotic and a weirdo and you're sensationalizing it because it's not a problem in the United States at all.
	It's just used as a slur, isn't it?
	But the thing is as well that Mamdani's victory, certainly for the people who voted him in New York, it will basically serve their pathologies and it will embolden them to think, my God, we're right and we won by being right.
	And so it's a total validation of everything we believe, everything, all this just nonsense about how Trump's a fascist and all the things that you're saying.
	They will see it as total validation.
	To Pete's point, everybody feels validated whenever they gain a symbolic victory.
	Yes.
	Nobody actually achieves anything because the system itself as a system is broken.
	And I won, I didn't get anything that I wanted.
	The political system doesn't work.
	Well, what's the alternative to politics?
	Violence.
	So this is important, but for reasons that these people don't understand.
	I remember the morning after the referendum, and I'd been campaigning full-time for a long time for a referendum and even ran my own little tiny campaign.
	And I'd looked at the mechanics of regulation and international trade in a very intimate level of detail.
	And so while there was this following day, jubilation about, yay, we're leaving the EU, we can do all these things.
	And I'm sitting there thinking, no, none of this is going to happen.
	And I acquired this reputation for being just a horrible grump because I'm always reigning on everybody's parade.
	But, you know, the Tories coming in saying, oh, we're going to massively deregulate.
	No, you're not, because these things do need to be regulated.
	They're based on international standards.
	And even talking about, oh, there was a story just recently about headlights on cars being too bright.
	Oh, we're going to do something about that.
	No, you're not, because these are international standards.
	We don't have an auto industry and it's all set by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.
	This body that nobody's heard of, but is responsible for 90% of automotive regulations.
	So Parliament can pass all the dikts it likes, but it can't force Mercedes to change its procedures and what it's going to sell on UK markets.
	And so much is beyond the gift of politicians.
	And this is it.
	They don't control half the things they think they do.
	That's very true, yeah.
	It is.
	But that doesn't stop them from believing that it's true.
	And so now what we're going to have are foreigners like this woman basically coming to New York for the Gibbs.
	And obviously those people who are millionaires who are or even just successful basically fleeing from New York to other states as well.
	And no doubt as well that when Mamdani does put through some of the policies that he wants to implement and as a result New York is made more dangerous, less harmonious, even than it is now, these immigrants who voted him in are not going to go back to their own countries when New York fails.
	They're going to go to the next American city and the next American city and so on and so forth.
	Because really this is a victory for people like these are four horsemen of the apocalypse here.
	Obviously you've got Hassan Pika and Mehdi Hassan, the great American thought leader, Mehdi Hassan.
	Don't even know how I said that with a straight face.
	Yeah, and the dog shocker.
	And obviously they're all very, very proud of themselves.
	But as you can see here, exactly to your point, Peter, about the fact that actually, okay, well, now I'm mayor-elect and I actually have to, I'm not just like an outside activist saying, oh, I want this communist thing and this communist thing now that I'm actually in power.
	Can I do these things?
	And already you can see here basically backtracking on the defunding the police thing.
	And he's also said as well, oh, and by the way, keep funding us, because especially if the Trump, if Washington obviously aren't giving them funds for New York, then obviously the money is going to dry up very quickly.
	And if all the billionaires leave, who they've basically declared the enemy, then where on earth are they going to get the funds for all of these social programs?
	Doesn't seem to matter in the slightest, to be honest.
	Because on the one hand, it doesn't really matter how successful the communism is.
	What matters is that they got revenge on Whitey, right?
	Is really what it all comes down to at the end of the day.
	Because as he says here, New York will remain a city of immigrants, a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants, and as of tonight, led by an immigrant.
	Wasn't built by these people.
	I can tell you that.
	Because this really is what made New York, right?
	All the people that they hate, right?
	They act as if New York didn't exist before.
	There was just a ready-made city for them to come and take over.
	When the Dutch arrived, it just sprung out of the ground.
	Yeah.
	When they dredged up the soil.
	Skyscrapers just emerged out of the sludge.
	New Amsterdam.
	I mean, hell, you know, I know we literally renamed it, but even the British will give more credit to a Dutch for a lack of what they actually did to build the foundations of New York.
	They are the experts of dredging swamps.
	I mean, you've got to give it through.
	You do.
	That's true.
	So, just conscious of time.
	So, yeah, we'll basically end it there.
	But this is a victory for the third world in New York.
	And ultimately, if Washington aren't willing to address the crisis of legal immigration and the natural consequences that it will lead to, then this is the fate of every single city in America.
	And by extension, your entire country.
	So you can talk about being America first, but if you can't even identify which of the people in your cities are loyal Americans and which ones are simply third world grifters and chances, then, well, you're coming up to 250 years of your independence, America.
	You won't be having another 250 if you don't get on top of this.
	All right, I'll just quickly read through the chats.
	Thank you.
	I've got that's a random name says, also, women voting is gay.
	Discuss in the comments.
	Highbrow analysis there.
	That's a random name also says, My real issue with Zoran's election is the simple fact that an immigrant was even allowed to run for office.
	And I say this as an immigrant myself, a fueda.
	Yeah, there is something really ridiculous about the fact that the president can be has to be born in America because there is an implication in that rule that really only someone born in the country can be trusted to govern it.
	But every single other office, political office in America is just fine for a foreigner to take over.
	And Margarita Afternoon says, Greeting from the southern USA.
	I love you guys and appreciate your commentary.
	Well, thank you very much.
	It's very nice.
	Thank you.
	I hope you're enjoying a margarita in the southern sun.
	And I hope I am soon as well.
	On YouTube, got Turi says, here is an incomplete list of socialist atrocities.
	Deepening group incident, Tiananmen Square, Holocaust, USSR, Great Purge.
	Yeah, there have been a few of them.
	They do stack up.
	A holiday more as well.
	Just throw that one in there.
	Yeah.
	Big takeaways from these elections is that Democrats will vote for whoever will smash traditionalist America.
	Mamdani or Joe Biden's Husk.
	It doesn't matter.
	New York is done.
	What a tragedy.
	It's not even that because the Democrats, generally speaking, were behind Cuomo.
	It is a genuine insurgency of foreigners.
	They don't even identify with the Democrat Party in this instance.
	It's something new and even more malicious than the Democrats.
	Dare I say that?
	Got Gimli says, according to some sources, nearly 2 million people want to leave New York, which could mean 90% of tax revenue.
	I need a bigger popcorn bucket.
	Yeah, and I get no satisfaction out of seeing New York collapsing.
	I don't, right?
	I don't.
	It's an iconic city and it deserves to be preserved.
	I'm going to assume you guys have seen The Wire where Tommy Carchetti comes in and he's making all the promises to the police force and then he comes in to find that there's this massive deficit in education that has been kept secret from him.
	Well, of course, we're going to see the exact same dynamic once you start seeing the exodus of people who know exactly how this is going to pan out.
	Most of the tax base goes with it.
	Then you find yourself having to pay for things you didn't think you'd have to pay for out of other budgets.
	And then again, all the things that you promised you were going to do, you don't get done, and you're turfed out on your era at the next election.
	So we've also got in multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance to your economic interests and social interests.
	You vote in accordance with racing religion, says Lee Kuang Yu.
	Wise man.
	Yeah.
	On my first comment, I see gens will probably unleash their anger.
	Is what I have been seeing lately is true.
	It could be quite scary when they feel like everyone like Trump is too soft and weak.
	New York will finally live up to the escape from New York hellscape.
	Build a wall.
	And then good day.
	I hope you guys are doing well.
	I would really love to get your opinion on the video.
	Gen Z from Liberal to Far Right by the right-wing coalition.
	I'm worried Gen Z are going to reject us.
	Like the left, a review is good.
	I'll check it out.
	All right.
	Over to you, Josh.
	May I have my equipment thing?
	It's too far away.
	Okay, sure.
	It's rude to just grab it in front of you, isn't it?
	Please, this podcast, we have good manners mostly.
	With manners maxing here, folks.
	So in Britain another foreign criminal has been released by mistake.
	I never thought I would say that sentence and allow us to refresh our memory about the first one because it wasn't that long ago and I just want to bring this up to highlight just how absurd the situation is now that it has happened again.
	So this guy, what is his name?
	Hadush Kibatu, had been in the country eight days after arriving on a small boat before he tried to kiss a 14-year-old girl.
	He also, and this is from the time when he got sentenced, only got 12 months in prison for this for some reason.
	Whereas people in Epping who were charged with violent disorder despite not actually attacking anyone, just some light property damage, got about two years each.
	Interesting, isn't it, that these people who didn't actually harm an individual get two years in prison, whereas the boat migrant who arrived and tried to kiss a 14-year-old girl gets 12 months.
	It seems like an inversion of justice, in my opinion.
	So he was mistakenly released from prison and a major manhunt was declared.
	And the funniest thing about this, and something that people didn't pick up on, which I'm glad someone at least noticed, was that he has a very low mental age.
	He couldn't speak English and he probably didn't even understand that there was a manhunt going on.
	I did consider that fact.
	He's qualified to be foreign secretary then.
	He is, yeah.
	Also, he specifically wanted, look, Kabatu's lawyer said he wanted to be deported after serving his time in prison.
	The man who wanted to be deported was accidentally released back into the population.
	It's just like, oh.
	It's like the brass eye thing of this is the one thing we didn't want to happen.
	Although, you know, maybe the state probably did a little bit.
	So he was seen wandering about.
	Here he was in a, I believe it was Dolston Square library in Hackney, just sort of milling around.
	Also, apparently, after he left the prison, he was sort of just milling around outside of the prison.
	And then he asked a delivery driver, what should I do?
	He told me he had been deported.
	Prison staff were saying he had to go on a train to get to the destination.
	And so the delivery driver instructed him where to go to get the train because he was hanging around outside the prison for an hour and a half, just not knowing what to do.
	And he was seen walking around the street in his full prison garb with a plastic bag of his possessions.
	But part of the problem with that, of course, is that we've got to the point now where prison guard basically looks like everyday attire in Britain.
	It does.
	Someone could wear that and you're like, oh, he's just out for a stroll.
	To be fair, I do automatically assume that people in tracksuits belong in prison.
	So it's nothing to me.
	I'm not losing the snot allegations anytime soon.
	And then he boarded a train to London, which these are a little bit out of order because he then was seen in the library.
	Here he was.
	Also, interesting, he managed to acquire an avocado tote bag, very stylish.
	He lost his plastic bag of possessions and then somehow managed to find his way to other things.
	Still wearing his prison tracksuit though.
	And it was sort of like I saw it compared to Mr. Bean style antics where the police and the authorities were after him and through no cunning and wile of his own, he's just outwitting them, constantly outmaneuvering them, even though there was a national manhunt.
	Without trying.
	Without even trying.
	And this is a man with the mind of a child, doesn't speak the native language, and wants to be deported.
	There's a film in this, isn't there?
	There is a film in this.
	So, well, here's the library one again.
	And then they finally detained him thanks to information received from the public.
	I'm amazed they actually followed up on it, to be honest.
	And he also got paid £500 before they sent him on his way, which this is a quote from his victim.
	He got paid £500 when I got home.
	I just cried because I felt like he got paid for what he had done to me.
	With the words of the 14-year-old victim that he sexually assaulted.
	Just horrifying.
	£500 is around a year's salary in Ethiopia, by the way.
	So he got given a year's salary to be a sex offender.
	Yes.
	And got sent home packing after having a little adventure around England for a couple of weeks.
	Like, this is absurd.
	An absurd incentive to place on people doing this sort of thing.
	It's like, come here, commit awful crimes, and we'll pay you to go away.
	The Daingale didn't work.
	Hate to break it to you.
	Yes, they announced that they deported him overnight.
	This is Border Security Minister saying it on LBC.
	So interesting that they can do that when he causes an embarrassment to the political system, isn't it?
	Immediately they can get shot of him.
	And of course, the absurdity of this was memed.
	There's been a walking tour pub crawl of his route created.
	14 stops there.
	As well as this one that I liked particularly.
	500 quid in his pocket.
	He could probably have two pints on that crawl as well.
	He probably could, yeah.
	Connolly Druckburg released this in time for Halloween, so I hope at least some of you dressed up as him for Halloween.
	It would be very scary to see someone dressed like this on the street.
	I know that much.
	But the unfortunate thing is that Lamy is the one that's responsible for preventing this from happening again.
	And he announced that checks are to be enhanced because, you know, this is a terrible mistake and it's not a symptom of a failing political system.
	It's just a clerical error or something.
	A bullet.
	It was, yes.
	But he's got these really, really strong checks in place and it will never happen again.
	And it is definitely not going to happen.
	But may I remind everyone who David Lamy is?
	This man.
	Man who thinks that Henry VII succeeded Henry VIII, that Marie Antoinette won a Nobel Prize and Red Leicester is a blue cheese.
	And this is one of the most insane clips I've ever seen in my life.
	If you were to try to write that into a comedy show, nobody would believe you.
	He didn't get a single question, right?
	Did he?
	Not one.
	He got eight.
	He got eight in his specialist subject, which is Muhammad Ali.
	Right.
	Okay.
	I hadn't seen that bit.
	Another foreigner.
	Yeah.
	But if you wrote into something like that, not only that he got all of this wrong, but that he proceeded afterwards to become foreign secretary and then justice secretary.
	And then deputy prime minister.
	And deputy prime minister.
	Nobody would believe you.
	In fairness to Lamy, though, not that there's any reason we should be fair, but this could have happened under any justice minister because of how decrepit the institutions are.
	And this is part of a three decade long trend towards privatization of the prison system.
	And every function that should be a ring-fenced function of the state, i.e. the state deciding who can be released onto our streets, you would at one time have a uniformed prison governor, but you don't have that.
	Now you have managing directors in suits and all kinds of circo officials and lots of the different probation functions have been farmed out.
	These are things that should inherently be part of the justice system.
	The courts and the prison system should all be under the same roof with the same level of military level accountability.
	Where if something goes on like this, then in order for it to have happened, it would have had to have been signed off by a uniformed prison governor.
	And they would, in that instance, expect to lose their pension and be turfed out.
	And that's the accountability that's been missing.
	But with the modern circo state, things like this happen.
	The people responsible still take 200 grand a year away and a nice cushy pension.
	We've deleted any kind of accountability.
	If you haven't yet had Ian Aitchison on, he's the prisons guy that reform are listening to and certainly Generic's listening to him.
	And he said, you know, one of the very recently he said one of the key changes you could make is to put the prison bosses back in uniform so that they're part of the system.
	They are part of the command structure.
	They're wearing the uniform.
	They're proud of it and it actually means something.
	But if you stood there in a short shirt and combat casuals with your Serco name badge as a mid-ranking functionary, you don't feel that same sense of belonging and pride and belief that what you do is part of society and means something.
	It's actually just a job.
	And once you made it just a job, you downgraded it and these are dangerous jobs.
	You're dealing with dangerous people.
	You're going to work.
	You're put at risk for mediocre pay.
	Nobody wants to do that.
	And guess what?
	You're increasingly looking for overseas immigrants to act as prison guards.
	And this is a total distortion of the system because it should be us, British people, guarding the prisoners, deciding who can go back.
	So we need to basically scrub the prison system, start from scratch and rebuild it along the lines of where it was.
	Because of all the things to be privatised and run like a business, you know, I'm in favour of that for things like healthcare.
	You know, I hate the NHS and want it destroyed.
	But for prisons, that's one of the areas where I'm just like, obviously this should be in the hands of the state.
	And the only sense it should be run like a business is in the sense that maybe the prisoners should be made to do work as part of their imprisonment to at least pay for their own upkeep or something like that.
	But the state should be doing it, not a private company.
	Because there was a quasi-military structure to the prison service, it had its own military discipline and as a result was able to impose that discipline on prisoners.
	And so the uniform in itself was an authority.
	So you didn't have to be a strong, bulky man.
	You just had to walk on the wing in that uniform.
	And the subtext of that uniform is: if you try, you die.
	Your life will be, if you so much as put a finger on anyone wearing that uniform, your life is miserable for the rest of your stay.
	And that is how you impose discipline on the wing.
	That is how you cultivate good behavior.
	And as soon as we lost that uniform, we lost the authority.
	And as I say, you know, any uniform is just a work suit unless it's got the crown emblem because that emblem means something.
	And the moment we take away that, they lose their authority of the crown and the state.
	I very much agree.
	Yeah, it's the HRification of everything.
	It's the commercialization of everything.
	It's the idea that the state is by definition incompetent and the private sector is by definition better.
	The state doesn't have particular responsibilities of service and duty and honor, most importantly.
	If you honor a uniform, the honor of the uniform demands that transgressions be punished properly.
	Well, the same applies to the police, as you've seen them becoming more slovenly, wearing paramilitary gear and bright yellow vests.
	And, you know, people used to mock that dome hat, but you took it seriously because it meant something.
	It was a long period of tradition of the police's own authority wrapped up in that tradition.
	And so as soon as you civilianize that force and how it appears, it loses its inherent authority.
	So not only are you losing discipline in the prisons, you're losing it on the streets as well.
	So returning to the topic of incompetence and David Lamy, may I remind everyone of his perception abilities, his ability to spot things.
	Oh, there's a mouse.
	We haven't seen a police while I've been here, and I've been here for a little while now.
	People are frightened.
	So who thinks that his solution is going to solve the problem?
	Obviously, it's not.
	And of course, it's all talk.
	And even if he had the best one in the world and was as competent as could be, the system is so broken that he couldn't do it anyway.
	So there's no point even claiming that he could.
	And so this has resulted in this.
	Wandsworth prison manhunt latest.
	Prisoner found three days after accidental release, but another on the loose.
	So that's talking about the Kabatu guy.
	So the 24-year-old Algerian national was released in error on October 29th, just days after sex offender migrant Hadish Kabatu was wrongly freed from H ⁇ P Chelmsford.
	Met police spokesperson said shortly after 1 p.m. on Tuesday, the 4th of November, interesting that difference of dates there.
	So he was released in error on the 29th of October, and then the police were notified on the 4th of November.
	Five days later, five, six days later, right?
	The Met was informed by the prison service that a prisoner had been released in error.
	And the BBC has also reported that he's not an asylum seeker this time.
	So GB News reporting says the prisoner was serving time for trespassing with the intent to steal.
	So they've released a thief.
	And he is also believed to have previously committed sexual offences.
	Oh, great.
	So another sex offender released accidentally.
	Just keeps on happening.
	Just want to make a point about Algerians.
	Okay.
	Algerian football fans are the only ones I know of in the Middle East who chant regularly, We Are Your Sons Bin Laden.
	What exactly does that mean?
	That we are the heirs of bin Laden and we want to do what he did.
	They particularly did they go to the football matches.
	That's not the message there.
	Oh, I see.
	That's not exactly the message there.
	No.
	Are they particularly bitter for French colonialism?
	Is that why they're just bitter?
	Like the Moroccans and the Libyans think that the Algerians are absolutely nuts.
	And they know because they live next door.
	The Tunisians hate everybody around them because they're the most civilized people in North Africa.
	But they are also the ones who sent the most per capita people to fight for Islamic State.
	So there's that other dynamic.
	Clear out the riffraff.
	Yes.
	So the level of understanding that people have when they advocate for these societies is non-existent.
	They don't understand these societies.
	They don't understand how these communities work, what they think, what the average person of theirs thinks.
	And you see this endless talk about, oh, his rights, his rights.
	Guys, you have no idea what you're talking about.
	We don't need rights for criminals.
	You surrender your rights as soon as you have committed a crime.
	Especially if you're from abroad, then you have absolutely no claim to even regaining them in the first place.
	So this is what the guy looks like.
	He's called Brahim Kadour Sharif, I think.
	And apparently he's got links to Tower Hamlets.
	What a turn of events.
	I mean, Columbia shocked, and also is known to frequent the Westminster area.
	He might be in a Labour, you know, might be working for a Labour MP, I imagine.
	And the thing is, there's also another one on top of this.
	It wasn't just...
	The three.
	It's actually three, yeah.
	So they're appealing to help find 35-year-old William Smith, not a foreign person this time.
	Goes by the name Billy.
	That's what he looks like.
	If you see him, obviously contact the police.
	But he is known for fraud offences and not sexual assault.
	Well, that's nice.
	I mean, so he's just going to defraud you rather than sexually assault you.
	Wonderful.
	And the unfortunate thing is that all of this was going on whilst David Lamy was in Prime Minister's questions, answering the questions, when he proudly proclaimed that I am the first black man to answer Prime Minister's questions, as if who cares.
	But whilst he was the first black man in Prime Minister's questions, he failed to answer five times whether no other asylum-seeking offender had accidentally been released from prison, and he just ignored it.
	And in fact, he said he's looking forward to being up against Robert Jenrick next week, suggesting that he's being given a hard time.
	So I'm going to play this a little bit.
	The public are extremely concerned about what happened in the Kabatu case.
	They want to know there won't be a repeat.
	So I'm putting to him a very clear question about his responsibilities.
	I repeat, can he reassure the House that since Kabatu was released, no other asylum-seeking offender has been accidentally let out of prison?
	Can he answer the question?
	Deputy Prime Minister.
	Mr. Speaker.
	Mr. Speaker, I'm looking forward to being up against the member for Newark next time.
	In 25 years in this House, I've not witnessed a more shameful spectacle, frankly, than what the party opposite left in our justice system.
	Their criminal negligence on his watch as a former justice minister.
	So he's not actually wrong there, that the Tories did do a terrible job.
	However, he still didn't answer the question for five times.
	And in fact, two people had been released.
	Probably knew about it at this point as the person in government ultimately responsible for it.
	And if it reached the press, it's probably reached his desk.
	And that's probably why he refused to answer it five times in a row.
	And it's interesting as a lack of transparency.
	But as we've addressed today, there are so many problems here to fix this sort of thing.
	And it is truly an absurdity that could be made into some sort of comedy film that we just keep on releasing sex offenders into the general population by mistake.
	And that even if we do catch someone for a crime and prosecute them and send them to prison, which is quite unlikely these days, they run the risk of just being released.
	You have to remember that.
	And given £500, only 5%, I think, of total violent crime ends in some kind of prosecution or something like that.
	Exactly.
	So the level of broken capacity is beyond anybody's imagination.
	And it is therefore reasonable to expect that if they can't actually catch anyone, there's a good chance that they can't actually keep anyone.
	The whole policing system is on its knees.
	And it's very obvious that they're losing control.
	They have lost control, rather.
	We don't really have a justice system anymore.
	Then you get into the question of why haven't there been extra prisons built?
	And then you bump into all the planning and the natural NIMBY tendency.
	So there hasn't been any that I know of.
	I don't think there's been any serious attempt to expand the prison estate.
	But if they did, we'd have the same story that we've got with every other important piece of infrastructure where we spend billions on consultation to end up with nothing.
	Yet you look at what was achieved in a very short time at Camp Bastion.
	Give it to the MOD to do.
	Because if there's one thing they can do quite quickly and cost-effectively is temporary structures surrounded by a militarized perimeter.
	This is the one thing that they're good at.
	So give the job to them.
	Because you look at Full Sutton in North Yorkshire and there's a prison in Wakefield.
	They're built on old RAF bases and there's plenty of room for expansion.
	So, you know, the most dangerous ones have to go inside the walls, but you could, if there were the political will, you could provide that extra capacity in under six months.
	But again, there are answers.
	Anything you look at, any single problem you look at right now, there are interim solutions and there are long-term solutions, but the political will is simply not there.
	And then you've got the other part of it.
	Everybody's tuning in for this Punch and Judy PMQ nonsense.
	But the real business of holding the system to account is in select committee meetings and they've died a death.
	When was the last time you tuned in to watch a select committee meeting?
	I think probably the last major one was around the time of Brexit, the trade committee meetings.
	There was a lot of public attention on that.
	But the daily grind of politics happens in the back rooms.
	You can't get the people to take an interest in it and you can't get MPs to take an interest in it.
	And so this is one of the things that I keep hearing on the right.
	Oh, we're going to abolish all these quangos because of this, this and that reason.
	It's like, well, we could solve that tomorrow because parliamentary select committees have the power to drag people in, grill them, embarrass them, even recommend to the minister that these people are fired.
	But who's actually doing this?
	Hardly anyone.
	So yes, the UK is in a very absurd state and there is a lot to be done, but it can be done with the right political will.
	Right.
	Thank you.
	I'm sorry, but the more I listen, the more I feel like we're going to see the reincarnation of the...
	I can't read that.
	Dear, dear.
	It's like Forrest Gump run had a run.
	Well, he didn't have to run.
	He'd ambled gently and slowly.
	I also like that he ran into other immigrants and just started having conversations on the street quite often, it seemed.
	Didn't need spink English after all.
	It's actually a hybrid of Forrest Gump and The Truman show.
	And that would be an Oscar-winning film, and I'm claiming my rights to that idea right now.
	We'll get it made.
	If you massively up your donations audience, we can make that film.
	How many of the social posters have been released by mistake?
	Well, the thing is, the social posters probably have a conscience and some respect for the law of the country.
	Are you sure you should be releasing me?
	So have we read these rumble ones?
	The police should put more energy as resources into finding Smith than S assaulters.
	Would put more, sorry.
	And I wouldn't be surprised, to be honest, and it'd probably be easier to find as well because it would be cooperative.
	Exactly.
	People don't want to live amongst fraudsters, whereas in foreign communities, they're more than happy to cover up for their own rapists and the like.
	And I saw left-wingers on Twitter talking about that kid, teenager, who was sexually assaulting young children.
	Like, no right-wingers have condemned it, and most of the people online said he deserves the death penalty.
	And then there was a picture of his house that had child rapists spray-painted on the front.
	I don't recall any Pakistani grooming gang house having that painted over their house.
	No, it didn't really happen, did it?
	And shall we talk about Rachel Reeves?
	Of course.
	Yes.
	I'm sorry.
	We must.
	A co-op.
	Go for a cigarette.
	Yeah, don't worry.
	This is just as depressing.
	Rachel Reeves, for the first time, as far as the media is concerned, had a lengthy press conference on Tuesday where she seemed to be laying the groundwork or managing public expectations for the coming budget, which is due to come out on the 26th of November.
	And she's saying that she wants to reduce the cost of living, reduce the debt, reduce NHS waiting times.
	These are supposedly her priorities.
	But the messaging from her is very clearly that there are going to be higher taxes.
	And maybe, maybe, maybe some reduction in welfare spending.
	Although Labour did attempt that a few months ago.
	And the backbenchers absolutely revolted and said they were having none of it.
	So it was pretty much a failure.
	Let's see if she tries again.
	But the messaging from Reeves is very much that it is going to be higher taxes.
	Andrew Marr here sort of interviews her and tries to discuss this with her.
	And, you know, the questions are pretty direct.
	Which taxes are you going to raise?
	And by how much and so on.
	And is that what you're saying?
	But she tried her best to avoid giving any clear and concrete answers because the budget is not due yet.
	but the expectation is that there's going to be a lot more taxation.
	Now, this is being driven by the idea that there's been a decline in productivity.
	And the allies of Rachel Reeves are saying that what she should be doing is ignore what she had said after the 2024 budget, which is that the 40 billion in tax rises that had happened in 2024 were a one-off, they're not going to happen again, et cetera, et cetera.
	And that she needs to simply take the hit and increase taxes by another £26 billion.
	Their view is that this must happen, but Labour's concern is that if they break this manifesto promise that clearly, because it was promised in their manifesto that they would not increase taxes on working people, that they would not raise VAT, that they would not do any of this stuff, it is going to backfire even more catastrophically and the Labour Party would become even more unpopular.
	Is that even possible at this point?
	Kiostama is less popular than Prince Andrew.
	I don't know what to say about that.
	I don't know what to say about that.
	I'm not going to say nothing.
	It doesn't surprise me, to be honest.
	Yeah, yeah.
	The past tax rises fell very much on businesses and businesses were screaming as a result.
	And we saw layoffs and we saw just a contraction in hiring and everything of that sort.
	But it looks like it's going to get worse because the view from the left is that Rachel Reeves's last budget simply didn't go far enough in terms of taxing the rich.
	And that what is required is more taxation on the highest earners whose upper rate of tax is already 45%.
	So basically, you know, you're working half the week for the government and half the week for your family.
	And that what's still needed there is even bigger taxation.
	And that's the way to restart growth because under Reeves' projections, there's going to be maybe 1% to 2% growth at most in Britain.
	This, weirdly enough, puts Britain at near the top of the G7, but that only shows you the abysmal state of the G7 because the Chinese are still growing at 4% or 5%.
	Well, it's like winning a race and you're against people with one leg.
	Is that really much of an achievement?
	And of course, this is raising taxes on things like business and rich people in particular is especially dangerous in Britain compared to any other country because a significant portion of our economy is predicated on financial services.
	And ideally, you want to keep these people in the country because they spend money, because they've got lots of it.
	And if you mess with this, one of the main perks of the British economy, which is our financial sector, is impeded.
	And then what do we have to compete with?
	We're just a decaying island of former industry that is very expensive to live in, expensive energy, high cost of living, high crime rate.
	There's no incentive for a business to move here.
	And so you lose the one asset we actually had.
	So I would firstly violently agree with you.
	And secondly, make two additional points.
	The first one is that the problem with a heavily financialized economy is that it's extremely mobile.
	Financial, well, you can't impose capital controls in Britain because that would collapse the insurance industry and the banking industry, which are the two pillars of the city.
	And without the contributions of the city to taxation, it sort of vaporizes.
	I do insult London quite a lot, but I do have to admit that it is a net financial contributor to a significant degree to the rest of the country.
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	It's a massive contributor.
	And so, given that the financial economy is very mobile, these are people who can easily move to Dubai or Singapore or New York or Milan and so on.
	We've already seen the biggest exodus of millionaires and billionaires second only to China.
	So, this is a bad state to be in to begin with.
	But then there's something called the Laffer curve, which is something that's been known for many, many decades now.
	And it explains that there is a point which, after which, if you raise more taxes, revenue declines because you're taxing people too much to the extent that they either leave or stop working or are otherwise disincentivized.
	And therefore, you do not extract any more revenue with more taxation.
	There's a limit on how much taxation you can impose.
	It's one of the most robust, demonstrable economic effects as well.
	There are so many examples of this.
	Yes.
	And what Rachel from Accounts has never seen this curve.
	She's not even from Accounts, she's from IT support.
	Yeah, apparently.
	And there is a discussion over the precise shape of the Laffer curve and how does it lean and to what extent does it lean.
	But the point that is clearly expressed is that there is a threshold beyond which raising taxes more has a negative impact on revenues.
	But if you are only committed to a tax and spend policy as opposed to a reduction in spending and a reduction in taxation, you simply can't acknowledge this.
	And you therefore end up in this doom loop of more and more taxation, less revenue, more taxation, less revenue, until you break the system completely.
	And there's an additional point here as well that I've been screaming from the rooftops my entire career with reckless abandon that the more money you have, the easier it is to grow money.
	People understand this from a personal individual perspective.
	The more money you have, the easier it is to make more money at a higher rate.
	But when it comes to a country, all of a sudden this principle disappears, but it's not true.
	It's a mathematical, provable truth that the more of something you have, the quicker it can grow, right?
	This is the parable of the talents.
	This is expressed perfectly in the New Testament in the parable of the talents.
	And it's a well-known fact and it's not debatable, I think.
	So you're absolutely correct.
	I agree with you completely.
	And just to add one small additional thing: the fact that we have such low growth compared to places like China, we should be outgrowing China with the state of development of our economy.
	This 1 or 2% is unacceptable.
	It's being suppressed by government policy ultimately.
	The countries with the most money should be growing the quickest, not the other way around.
	And this is a key point: that government policy is a drag on growth.
	So the reason that this new fiscal black hole emerged is because the OBR is expecting productivity in Britain to decline.
	They are saying that there is going to be a 0.3% decline in productivity compared to their expectations.
	Lower productivity means a smaller economy, means less tax revenues, means the need to raise taxes as far as Reeves is concerned.
	Although the counterintuitive and correct conclusion is that what's required is a reduction in taxes.
	But there are reasons for this.
	And I want to try to go over them briefly, if you would allow me.
	Oh, I think this one is not.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Steeper productivity cut of more than 20 billion.
	Tax raise is more likely.
	The Treasury's forecast is preparing a steeper than anticipated cut to productivity for the next five years, according to The Guardian, quoting the Office of Budget Responsibility.
	And Reeves is understood to be furious that the OBR has chosen her second budget to downgrain the figure, which indicates how effectively workers can do their jobs and underpins forecast of economic growth.
	She's angry with the OBR, but she still wants the OBR to sort of be the ultimate metric here.
	Why is productivity falling?
	Or why is the economy declining?
	Well, one reason is because nobody wants to hire in Britain and to invest in Britain.
	The other reason is Ed Miliband, of course.
	The other reason is obviously Ed Miliband.
	Absolutely.
	And the reason they don't want to invest is because of new regulations that are constantly being imposed, including this new employment rights bill that was the zombie of Angela Rayner still haunting the current government.
	And under this thing, what is going to happen is that companies will have to be held to account for things like gender pay gaps and ethnic pay gaps.
	And so if you begin with the proposition that generally the African continent has less skills than the European continent, and therefore workers of African descent command less pay than workers of European descent, that is a gap that must be addressed by the legislation.
	And while it isn't clear how much this is going to be enforced in this current bill, the government is constantly making it clear that they're going to enforce more and more of this.
	And in case you were wondering, this was the reason why Birmingham Council went bankrupt, because they were found to be paying different kinds of staff unequally.
	But this is the kind of thing that's also hits Next, and Tesco and a bunch of other employers, where they were found that in some jobs they had 60% women and in others they had 47% women.
	And in the jobs that were 60% women, which were the storefront jobs, people were on average paid less than warehouse jobs that are more dangerous, more difficult, more onerous in more difficult conditions.
	And more skilled, because you need to use things like forklifts, which you need training for.
	Exactly.
	These guys were getting a higher pay, but the courts decided that the work was of equal value.
	So they decided to just gut the mechanism of the market.
	I mean, the one thing that the market works at best is setting prices.
	And they decided to completely gut that.
	And then they did the same with the renters' bill that they just passed, again gutting the market and restricting housing supply.
	And they are saying that they're going to keep on doing this to focus more and more on ethnicity.
	This is making Britain uninvestable.
	And when a country becomes uninvestable, you get less capital.
	And if you get less capital, you get less productivity.
	Because what raises workers' productivity is more capital spending.
	And it's also suggesting that it's being done at a sort of catastrophic rate that productivity is actually falling.
	Because, of course, productivity should naturally be increasing by merit of technological innovation that's happening all the time in the background.
	So if a government hypothetically did nothing whatsoever, it would be going up.
	So they actually have to be intervening to be making it worse for that to happen in the future.
	Which they are, actively.
	Because they are ideologically pre-disposed to intervening.
	Yes, they can't help themselves.
	And if Raynor's bill gets passed, something between a quarter and a third of all employers will be making redundancies and sacking workers.
	Meaning that there will be more people on the dole, on welfare, etc.
	Meaning an even bigger decline in productivity.
	And so Rachel doesn't seem to understand this, unfortunately.
	But this is also happening at a time when FDI in the UK is falling.
	It's still the second highest in Europe, but this is the seventh year in a row where Europe has sort of had declining FDI in general.
	So second-order effects of this preys on my mind, because as you see this contraction, the kind of frivolous spending with disposable income that many of us are predisposed towards, that's what's sustaining the large service industries, which are primarily made up of migrants.
	And once you start seeing families cutting back on Ubers, deliveries and all the rest of it, you see a contraction of that.
	And then you have a surplus of redundant foreign males on our city streets.
	And they are going to turn to crime.
	And more so, you presumably saw that report about the BBC report yesterday, the structural fraud on our high streets.
	We are going to have to police that and we're going to have to police more of it all the time.
	But it's just going to explode to beyond even an enhanced trading standards and all of those local authority inspections.
	They're not going to be able to handle the workload.
	So this is civil disorder edging into low-level civil war territory on a long enough timeline if this goes on for a long time.
	And it will, because we are now starting to put high energy prices are now structural.
	If this latest round of renewable subsidies gets embedded in, that's it.
	Probably not in my lifetime.
	Will we ever see a return to reasonable energy prices?
	And then your productive economy wiped out.
	On top of this, mortgage rates are going to go up more and more.
	People aren't going to be able to afford their homes, increase in homelessness and things like that.
	Sorry, Dude, carry on.
	Absolutely correct.
	Absolutely correct.
	World FDI is declining.
	And this is going to be made worse by Trump insisting that FDI must come to America.
	So any spare capital that you have must go to the United States.
	It's still the safest investment in the world because it's the biggest market and the greatest military power, you know, with some question marks.
	And so this decline is structural, but Britain is offering nothing against it and is offering nothing to address it.
	And FDI keeps on going down to Britain.
	In fact, there's a difference in perception on each side of the Atlantic that, or at least it seems to be, that the Americans clearly understand that you need to compete with Europe economically, which is actually fine.
	You know, we're political and military allies, but you economically compete with one another in sort of a friendly sense.
	And whereas Britain in particular seems to just forget that, yes, we've got to compete with the US as an economy.
	So what they're doing is important to inform our policy.
	We might live on an island, but we don't actually live in economic isolation.
	And so it's important to pay attention to what's going on around you, capitalise on things in Europe.
	Like the Irish were able to create a tax haven and become very wealthy out of it.
	Why didn't we do that?
	Why do we allow Ireland, which is a much smaller country?
	And, you know, obviously I want you to do well and have nothing but best wishes for you.
	But we miss that opportunity because we're not paying attention.
	And to give an idea of how bad things are on the FDI front, it was almost 23 billion in 2022.
	By 2023, it had gone down to 1.3 billion.
	And this is before labor took power.
	And now with these new regulations, the country is becoming even more uninvestable.
	The other thing that's keeping productivity down is very obviously immigration.
	If you have labor and capital, they need to work together.
	You raise the amount of capital, the value that comes from labor increases.
	If the alternative is to flood the economy with low-skill migration, like healthcare workers, like supermarket checkout staff, like deliveroo drivers, et cetera, et cetera, this is not going to add to productivity in any way.
	And at the end of the day, the cost to the taxpayer is going to be much higher because the Danes have actually studied this and they found that people from Middle East, Africa, Pakistan, Turkey, etc., they cost the Treasury more than they contribute.
	And this isn't changing anytime soon.
	And so when you bring in low-skilled immigration, there is less incentive to invest in capital and productivity goes down.
	So when Rachel says that she's angry with the OBR for this forecast, she should be angry with herself and her cabinet for the policies that they and the Tories have been pursuing.
	Yeah.
	A lot of low-skilled immigration, of course, being crime syndicates and, you know, wherever low-skilled immigration goes, you find crime with it.
	But it's all geared towards the family unit funneling money back to their home country.
	So it's an outflow of exactly.
	I saw a speech by Rupert Lowe in Parliament the other day where he said, can we have some actual statistics, please, from the government, basically, on a breakdown of tax contributions by nationality?
	And the spokesman for the government basically replied and said, oh, we all pay, we all contribute, we're all, you know, it's like, we're not.
	And everyone knows it.
	Not just that.
	He managed to harangue the government enough to release the figures on a breakdown by ethnic group.
	And you see that the percentage of whites who are not contributing is maybe 26.7%, which it's an aging economy.
	It's a problem.
	It's a big number.
	But when it comes to Africa and Asia, it's just not comparable.
	It's 40%.
	And so when you bring more of the same here, you must expect the same result.
	Things aren't going to magically change.
	You'll get a genius like David Lamy every once in a while who must be in cabinet because he's so brilliant.
	But aside from the high-paid earners like Mr. Lamy, you're not going to get very much.
	And so there is this unrealism when it comes to immigration and productivity.
	And then Rachel gets angry with the OBR.
	And it's just not based on anything thoughtful or intelligent.
	These people are genuinely dumb.
	Their ideology rejects any kind of acceptance of how the world works.
	And even somebody like Larry Fink has acknowledged that countries with more xenophobic immigration policies are going to have a higher standard of living.
	This is Larry Fink of Backrock.
	This is the WEF guy.
	This is as establishment as it gets.
	And that's what he's saying.
	Who do you think is smarter?
	Rachel Rees or Larry Fink?
	It's the worst time in human history to bring in mass immigration.
	Not that there's ever a good time, but things are becoming more automated.
	There's less and less need for a large workforce than ever.
	Presumably, things should be getting more efficient.
	At least that's the historic trajectory.
	And so where's the need to grow your population, basically?
	Yep.
	Especially from abroad, from savage countries that will cause so many problems.
	And now, thanks to nice Mr. Ed Miliband, Britain has the highest energy costs in all of the G7.
	Everybody's racing to re-establish industrial capacity.
	Everybody's realized that transporting industry to China and to cartel run Mexico was an insane idea and that industry needs to be brought back home.
	Well, what does industry need more than anything?
	Cheap energy.
	You cannot have prosperity without cheap food and cheap energy.
	These are the basics of prosperity.
	If you have cheap food and cheap energy and a talented population, which Britain obviously has, you will have very good economic growth.
	It is that simple.
	It is that simple.
	But they refuse to acknowledge this.
	And instead, they're blaming the energy companies for making too much money.
	Well, how do they end up doing that?
	You subsidize the daylight out of green energy, made everybody else pay for it, and now they want to subsidize the biggest consumers of energy, which are the industrial sector.
	How about no subsidies either way and use coal and natural gas?
	We got plenty of it.
	Well, at least oil and natural gas.
	And real growth in GDP per capita stopped when Britain stopped being a net energy exporter.
	If you're not producing energy in excess, so much so that you can sell some of it abroad, you are not making money.
	I mean, look at what the Norwegians did with their access to the North Sea oil fields.
	They've got a sovereign wealth fund, which is the equivalent of $200,000 per citizen.
	Yes.
	So they can basically pay for every citizen's retirement quite handily and then some.
	And they can use all of that money to basically take care of the money.
	I have to make another point here.
	The Green Loons insist on using Norway as an example because Norway has green energy.
	But Norway has green hydro energy from water, not from windmills and not from freaking solar panels in Northern Europe.
	Well, the other component of this is we've invested heavily in wind.
	And the original ideology was the vehicle-to-grid system where when we had a glut of wind energy, that would all go towards charging up batteries.
	And then when the wind drops off, then the grid would suck out juice from those batteries, including EVs.
	And so EVs are a major component of this grand utopian ideal.
	But they didn't bank on the fact that nobody actually wants one.
	And so this is something else.
	It's a compelled economy.
	They've got a utopian ideal of how things are supposed to work.
	And in order for anything to actually work, it would require these people to re-evaluate all of their basic assumptions about how things actually work in the real world.
	And they're never going to do that.
	These are utopian idealists and they just live in a fantasy world of their own.
	And it doesn't matter what the signals are telling them.
	They are surrounded by lobbyists from the green industries, from all the wind producers telling them, oh no, wind is nine times cheaper.
	And of course, we know it isn't.
	There's the system costs to take into account.
	Please don't get angry.
	But now they've decided that they need to tax EV drivers.
	And impose more taxes on them because there is a budget shortfall because they're not collecting enough money from fuel duty since people have adapted EVs or have adopted EVs.
	So not only do they have this utopian vision, they don't understand any of the second order consequences of their own vision.
	They're trying to impose it by fiat.
	Then it fails.
	Then they try to tinker with the tax system again to see maybe this time it will work.
	Well, of course, pivoting as well to the road charging tax rather overlooks that everything now is getting so expensive and incomes are declining that nobody's going to be going anywhere anyway.
	The only easy way to live is to work from home, work on the internet, and just simply not go anywhere.
	It's not even as if you could go to the bottom of the village to have a pint in the local pub because they've shut the pub and even if they hadn't, well, a pint's 10 quid anyway.
	So nobody's going to be doing that spending.
	This is how you just get complete seizure of your wider economy.
	They are simply stifling the economy.
	And that is because they are spending 45p out of every pound that is spent in the British economy.
	Basically, they're stupid and they hate us.
	And spending it on nonsense.
	And spending it on absolute nonsense.
	They're not getting results for the spending that they have because they are incompetent and they are stupid and they hate their own people.
	And it's insane.
	If 45% of your GDP is government spending, you're basically halfway to full-blown communism, then, aren't you?
	Yes.
	It means that all of us collectively are literally working two and a half days a week for the government and two and a half days a week for ourselves.
	So two and a half days of my week are spent to serve Rachel Reeves and then two and a half days are for my family.
	In the ancient world, we would be called slaves.
	Yes.
	I think in Exodus, it was a fifth that Joseph took from the Egyptians and it was considered insane and extortionate.
	If I remember correctly.
	So this is biblically bad.
	I think what you're also going to see is an increasing number of people opting for cash in hand jobs or just under the tax threshold and being actually conscious to get their expenses right down.
	Yes.
	Become a contractor, perhaps.
	Like a certain ex-lotus eater.
	Oh, yes.
	What could that be?
	So basically people are just opting out of paying tax.
	And then when you've got Rachel Reeves saying, oh, we must all do our bit.
	Well, F you, lady.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	What is this shared endeavor I'm supposed to be contributing towards?
	I'm not on this particular bus.
	And the best way to not give government any money is to not earn any.
	And if you can somehow get your expenses below a certain threshold, which is possible still, then you don't have to give any money to this lady, which I certainly wouldn't.
	So that's a consolation if you're poor and watching this.
	At least you're not giving the government money.
	And we're all joining you.
	88 companies delisted from Britain in 2024.
	And they're warning Reeves that if she goes ahead with these tax rises, this is going to hit everything that still exists in the UK.
	And everybody's telling her this, but no, she's going to insist on it.
	She's not going to change her mind.
	The fallout of, don't forget that all of Europe has decided to self-implode as well.
	This is the suicidal continent, and that is going to have consequences for Britain.
	trade partners what what you want to keep in mind is that um france spain and to a lesser extent and these days italy as well as britain are all on the brink of a financial disaster nobody can bail out an economy of that size and if there's a disaster in one of them it is going to be contagious and it is going to spread the to the others because the bond markets move in a certain direction And so even if Reeves manages this well,
	there are enormous risks already.
	And she isn't going to manage this well.
	Even Tony Blair is aing that this is a stupid idea.
	The OG socialist is saying that this is a bad idea.
	But they keep on doing it.
	She thinks she can defy the Dark Lord, does she?
	I genuinely believe that Tony Blair probably could navigate this a little bit better, to be honest.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And the deputy leader of the Labour Party is celebrating Zoran Mandani.
	Yes.
	Because she wants more socialism.
	I'm sure she does.
	You know, for just one day in my life, it would be great to live on a continent that wasn't suicidal.
	Just one day.
	Yeah.
	You can move to Antarctica if you want.
	Penguins would be less stabby than some of the company around here.
	The good news is, and I want to try to end with some good news.
	Oh, thanks, Vera.
	Is that if this does go tits up, there's no way that Kirstarmer can escape the blame.
	He can't do what other prime ministers have done and simply sack the Chancellor because he pretty much took control of economic policy and seized a bunch of people who were working in Treasury and put them in number 10.
	So he cannot, under any conditions, say, no, no, no, no, no, it wasn't me.
	And so maybe, maybe the May election changes things.
	The bad news is that Ed Miliband is being spoken about as a possible successor.
	I've heard this.
	Second time.
	Yeah.
	It didn't exactly work out for him the first time around.
	Maybe he can beat Listras.
	Let's see.
	George says, wait until they start taxing bicycles too.
	It wouldn't surprise me.
	Yeah.
	It wouldn't surprise me.
	All right, well, for the sake of time, we'll head over to the...
	Do we have video comments today, Harry?
	Well, we don't.
	Oh, we don't?
	Oh, right.
	Well, that makes things a lot simple then, doesn't it?
	For the sake of time.
	All right.
	I'll just go through a few comments from my segment.
	And we've got Omar Awad who says, it's mad when any country allows any foreigner to hold political influence, let alone voting or office.
	Yeah, the fact that you're able to just turn up in New York and basically be given voting.
	You're voting in less than five years for another person who wasn't born in the United States.
	It was a propositional nation for Christian Europeans.
	It wasn't a propositional nation for everybody.
	There is one YouTube chat that we missed there.
	Isn't this why societies that relied on slaves eventually stagnated compared to places that didn't use slaves?
	A good example is the north and south of the USA, which I agree.
	Yeah, is a good example.
	And the north beat the south because of their industrialization.
	Yep.
	Although, you know, the south had the moral victory, in my opinion.
	Walden Quister Hector says, if Trump wins his birthright citizenship case at the Supreme Court, it will crater a lot of illegal immigration.
	What the right fails to understand is how to use a victory, not just achieve one.
	Correct.
	Well, that's true, but I don't know.
	I don't have a tremendous amount of confidence that the deportations will really ramp up during Trump's this second administration.
	I feel like it will be something for the next one to address as well.
	And on and on it goes, really.
	I hope you're right, Rex, but I'm not as optimistic.
	Anyway, do you want to go from yours, Josh?
	Sure.
	Kevin Fox says Circo seems to run the same way G4S runs, 25 managers for every security officer.
	That way leads to chaos because being managerial types, no one wants to make the decisions.
	So either nothing gets done or someone gets fed up of waiting for a straight answer and just goes ahead and chucks the guy out.
	That is very, very true.
	And White Rider says he has links to Tower Hamlets, has the same vibers, has links to al-Qaeda, and for good reason.
	You're not too wrong.
	I actually went to a mosque once in Tower Hamlets.
	I got invited to debate whether Islam and liberalism are compatible, to which I said no, obviously.
	To a crowd of Muslims that applauded it.
	Of course.
	Of course.
	And I was just like, if you want to practice Islam, it's probably better you go home because this country is bad enough for us natives, let alone you lot.
	But they like that for some reason.
	Oh, wow.
	And one more, Lord Inquisitor Hector Rex says, Starma's one prisoner in, one prisoner out seems to be working a treat.
	Oh, dear, yes.
	Yeah.
	I'm just going to read one comment from Daniel Butchers.
	In the last four years, minimum wage has gone up by 30%.
	Four years ago, I started as a cabinet maker, furniture maker that is, with zero experience.
	And coming from an office job, I was about 17% above minimum wage.
	After two years' experience, a year-long extensive, intensive course, and a year working for myself, I got offered a job that would only just keep me at the same amount above minimum wage as I was two years ago.
	So if this is the reality people face with minimum wage permanently catching up with what work you and a more skilled and stressful work you have, why are people going to bother bettering themselves?
	Absolutely.
	How does productivity increase?
	It's zero incentive.
	It's insane.
	It is.
	I'll just read this honorable mention as well from Laos Simonson and says, remember, remember the 6th of November, the day Luca Johnson got gotten.
	I see no reason why Josh Fern's treason should ever be forgotten.
	It never shall be.
	It never shall be.
	Anyway, Peter, thank you so much for joining us today.
	It's been wonderful to have your contributions.
	Hope you've enjoyed it.
	Ferris, you're going to do an interview as well now, aren't you?
	So watch out for that, ladies and gentlemen.
	Thank you for joining us yourselves, and we'll see you at 1 p.m. tomorrow.

▲