I don’t even have the energy to get into how cherry-picked this entire post is. Bad and inaccurate comparisons, false tourism claims, lame tropes, ignoring extreme and amazing progress while pointing at why some numbers may appear how they appear.
That is so sad and even somewhat shocking.
It would be if it were a meaningful comparison, but it isn't. The comparison shouldn't be about the GDP per capita etc, but the life that gets you in the country you live - and there it fails.
So no, neither of them has a plan, but that doesn’t really matter because neither of them will be running the country after the election either. It’s a bielection for a single seat. Running the country will be down to the new Labour PM and his team. As such the rest of your post is fairly irrelevant.
From The Atlantic: "The [UK's] output per person is now only just above that of Mississippi, America’s poorest state - and that slight lead is only achieved thanks to London. Outside the capital, in places where tourists do not visit, living standards fall well below Mississippi’s"
This is what happens when you import low-skilled migrants (and their extended families) who are a net drain on the economy.
I think they're also against Net Zero, which is causing all the high energy costs.
Clean, renewable power is a way out of the mess.
Wholesale electricity costs make up 28.7% of the bill
Carbon taxes make up 6.4%
[0] https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...
"Prior to 2006, the margin between retail and wholesale electricity prices was broadly stable at 3.88 – 4.79 p/kWh with an average of 4.23 p/kWh (2006 money). Had this margin been maintained in the subsequent years ie the costs of the energy transition not been added to bills, households would have saved £130 billion in 2006 money (£218 billion in today’s money). In contrast, some estimates suggest that the UK spent an additional £75 billion as a result of the 2021-23 gas crisis.
So despite what people say about high gas prices being responsible for high electricity prices, this was only true for late 2021-23 – for most of the past 25 years, something other than gas prices has been driving electricity prices higher."
https://watt-logic.com/2025/05/19/new-report-the-true-afford...
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/kemi-badenoch-says-tory-hopefu...
If anything, the past 16 years has taught me personally that everyone in the UK wants change - too much change possibly.
The UK was the first G7/G20 to cut carbon emissions by 50%, we just ranked [0] 3rd globally large in part to setting up for the future with green energy.
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/jul/08/climate-...
But he hasn't been there for very many of the last 16 years.
1) https://observer.co.uk/news/politics/article/miliband-bids-t...
>>Clean, renewable power is a way out of the mess.
Yes, can't wait until it exists.
Because of the marginal energy pricing scheme in use, which pays for all generation as if it were the most expensive. That and taxes etc. The UK energy market needs reform, blaming the Net Zero effort is ... well it's just wrong.
But essentially there no countries with high renewables and low energy cost: https://nypost.com/2025/05/07/opinion/cheap-solar-and-wind-i...
After the publication of The Skeptical Environmentalist, Lomborg was formally accused of scientific dishonesty by a group of environmental scientists, who brought a total of three complaints against him to the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD), a body under Denmark's Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MSTI).
In January 2003, the DCSD released a ruling that sent a mixed message, finding the book to be scientifically dishonest through misrepresentation of scientific facts, but Lomborg himself not guilty due to his lack of expertise in the fields in question.
~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborgie. He skated on a dishonesty charge as he was deemed to be to inept to know just how badly he was misrepresenting data.
To be honest I thought he'd faded away, but it's interesting to see his shit still being dragged up to rot in the sun again.
He actually thinks global warming is happening and man made. He just demonstrates that the cure in some cases is worse than the disease.
Top of the list is probably the problem that most of the renewables are generated in Scotland while demand growth is in England, especially around London. Getting electricity across the country requires power lines. However, NIMBYs are holding the entire country hostage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2n76244x5o
In order to avoid opposition, there is a new plan: https://www.easterngreenlink1.co.uk/ + https://www.easterngreenlink2.co.uk/ , which will be almost entirely undersea. Almost. NIMBY opposition is focusing on the shore landing points. I believe "grade 2 listed concrete anti-tank cubes" were mentioned at one point, although I can't find that reference.
Once those are built, there should be no more instances where we have to burn gas in the south while curtailing wind in the north. More distributed battery storage is being deployed (again, in the face of NIMBYs).
Anyone who is going to tout nuclear as the solution: you are going to have to deal with even more NIMBYs. Coal? Obviously a non-starter. Gas: there is some argument that you might be able to get more out of North Sea drilling. However, please provide a timescale for that. It's not instant either.
Marginal pricing means that gas sets the price.
At time of writing, gas is only generating 6.9% of the UK's electricity. https://grid.iamkate.com/
Firstly, the Farage/Binface byelection is a result of Farage being investigated for breaking laws designed to stop political corruption. He's called an early local election to "let the people decide". Even if voted in, if he's found accountable for those charges, he'll have to call another election. So all major parties are staying out of this one, but would likely stand in a second. Essentially what I'm saying is, this isn't a normal local election by any means so I wouldn't use it to talk generally about political parties offering to the UK.
I would also urge against using HS2/electricity-prices/Hinkley to make a " therefore the UK is in dire trou me". There all quite different: Hinkely and HS2 are certainly managed and unpopular, but they're individual projects - a lot of the UK issues are caused by much more complex, larger economic problems than government projects being mismanaged.
And then on the energy price, the UK has really expensive energy. One reason for that is because there's a huge amount of invesent in renewables right now, and the investment is paid for by the consumer. I'm not arguing this is necessarily good, but it's a political choice to prioritise more expensive electricity today, with the goal of cheaper / more secure energy tomorrow. It's a lot more complex than just "the UK is cooked because it has expensive energy".
Sorry for the minor essay! I think the UK's economic situation is serious, but also very interesting (it's possibly the most extreme global example of financialisation backfiring), complex and worth understanding!
The article appears to treat nominal GDP per capita as a measure of living standards, which is obviously nonsense. Rather than looking at things like the Human Development Index or World Happiness Report, in both of which the UK outranks the US (incl. all the non-Mississippi states).
Residents consistently reporting higher life satisfaction and happiness likely speaks more to their living standards than non-purchasing power parity adjusted GDP per capita.
It is baffling how a sentence this uninformed made it into the article.
From The Atlantic: "The [UK's] output per person is now only just above that of Mississippi, America’s poorest state - and that slight lead is only achieved thanks to London. Outside the capital, in places where tourists do not visit, living standards fall well below Mississippi’s"[1]
According to the IEA, the UK has the highest industrial electricity prices of the 25 IEA countries reporting data.[2]
Hinkley Point C is routinely described as the most expensive nuclear power station ever built, four times the average for South Korean plants. Guaranteed pricing originally £92.50/MWh (2012 prices), now equivalent to around £133/MWh (2025 prices), inflation-linked for 35 years...[3]
HS2 is consistently ranked as the most expensive high-speed rail on the planet.[4]
[0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006mkw3
[1] How Britain Became as Poor as Mississippi - A case study in self-sabotage https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/07/uk-productivity...
[2] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68da5e91dadf7...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_Point_C_nuclear_power_...
[5] https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/hs2-reset