Zack Polanski’s Insane Economics

Green Party Leader Zack Polanski Challenges Traditional Economic Beliefs

When Green party leader Zack Polanski appeared on the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show in November 2025, he sparked debate by arguing against wealth taxes. His stance that public investment could be achieved through other means rather than taxing the wealthy has drawn attention to his possible alignment with Modern Monetary Theory (MMT).

Polanski’s Views on Public Investment

During the interview, Polanski stated, “This isn’t about creating public investment; we can do that anyway. We don’t need to tax the wealthy to achieve our goals.” This statement caught the attention of economist Christopher Snowdon, who believes there might be a deeper economic theory at play.

Modern Monetary Theory (MMT): A Controversial Economic Framework

Snowdon suggests that Polanski’s statements are indicative of his adherence to MMT. MMT is a controversial economic framework that challenges traditional views on government finances and taxation. According to Snowdon, one of the key beliefs in MMT is that taxes do not primarily fund public spending but serve other purposes.

“Other lefties like Richard Burgon MP have argued for wealth taxes as a means to support public services such as the NHS or remove caps on child benefit,” Snowdon points out. “Polanski’s reluctance to link tax revenue directly with public spending raises questions about his economic ideology.”

Criticisms of MMT and Polanski’s Stance

Snowdon further explores the implications of Polanski’s views by examining another appearance on the show, where he discussed increasing public borrowing. When questioned about the upper limits of bond market tolerance and the existing national debt, Polanski replied that loans from the Bank of England are “money we owe to ourselves” and not a real form of borrowing.

Snowdon notes that this response is a common MMT argument: “One of the hallmarks of an MMT disciple is the strange belief that taxes do not pay for public spending,” he says. Snowdon goes on to explain how politicians often use household budget analogies to make fiscal policy more understandable, but Polanski’s adherence to these unconventional views could undermine public trust in economic policies.

Theoretical vs. Practical Concerns of MMT

While MMT proponents argue that the government can print money and issue new currency without significant risks, Snowdon points out several practical challenges:

• Theory vs. Practice: Snowdon argues that politicians are unlikely to make the necessary spending cuts required to control inflation if they adopt MMT.
• Inflation Concerns: He also highlights that expanding money supply could lead to inflation, which is a risk not fully acknowledged by MMT advocates.

“The idea of a government creating infinite wealth through printing money is appealing,” Snowdon concludes. “However, the reality of economic growth and inflation make such theories impractical.” He emphasizes that while Polanski’s views may appeal to certain segments of the population, they do not align with mainstream economic thinking.

Conclusion

A Warning for Political Leaders

The article raises concerns about the potential influence of MMT on political leaders and their economic policies. Snowdon argues that while a wealth tax might be a bad policy, MMT is “simply nonsense” and could lead to “insane” economic outcomes if applied in practice.

Polanski’s adherence to MMT highlights the need for greater public understanding of economic theories and their practical implications. As Snowdon notes, it is crucial that political leaders understand the complexities of economic policies to avoid leading the country into economic uncertainty.