10 things that shocked me about my debate with @garyseconomics 1. He didn’t share any facts. Not one. He wants us to accept his entire philosophy on feels. When presented with data he jumps to “I’m always right betting on the economy”. 2. He didn’t know the difference or distinguish between income and inheritance. He described inheritance as income and wanted to tax it the same as income… even though it’s money that has already been taxed once already! 3. He thinks that Rishi Sunak is worth £700M and it should be taxed now even though this number related to his father in law’s foreign company. In Gary’s world, if you marry the daughter of a wealthy foreign national, the UK Government should be able to seize some of that families money. Also, owning a stake in a technology business was described as “hoarding wealth”. 4. Almost all examples he gives about “wealth” are where he imagines someone owning houses with no debt and no costs of running them and they all make 5% yield clear. In reality, hardly anyone rich owns a large number of debt free houses that spit off 5% “passive income”. Most billionaires own companies that comprise of intangible assets that can be relocated elsewhere. 5. He barely knows the difference between revenue, profit and assets. When I explored how to tax billionaires, his answers jumped between them indiscriminately. 6. He believes the cause of wealth inequality is … wealth inequality. A measurement can not be the cause of that measurement. Other than being born rich, Gary doesn’t acknowledge any underlying causes such as technology or the type of work someone does As playing a role in why people get different financial outcomes in life. 7. He seems to think all jobs should pay the same. A “grime poet” should be earning the same as someone working in finance. There’s no good or bad choices, it’s just unfair that some people end up richer than others. 8. He seems to think the only thing responsible for an affluent middle class from 1950s to 1980s was high taxes on the rich. He doesn’t take anything like labour shortages, massive post-war rebuilding efforts or a baby boom into consolidation. 9. Suggesting people have personal agency (or go—forbid, responsibility) isn’t a topic he’s comfortable with at all. Sharing statistics about the high levels of self-made millionaires doesn’t wash. Gary robs people of agency with his belief that you either have a rich dad or ”99.9% of the time you wont achieve financial security”. 10. The ONLY way to improve the economy is through higher taxes on wealth. He sees no downsides to this and genuinely thinks capital flight isn’t a real Consideration. As much as I respect Gary’s passion and dedication, I feel like he has a very low resolution knowledge of the topic he wants to advise the country on. I feel like it’s just a deep anger about unfairness of outcomes when it comes to money.