Saw someone the other day saying Labour is the only party that will acknowledge that trade offs exist, but also that they keep picking the side of the trade off guaranteed to annoy their voters, which seemed like a pithy summary of politics.
EDIT: I see we’re once again failing the simple reading comprehension test.
I mean, again, this is basically the argument of the article. But doesn’t your second sentence contradict your first? You’re acknowledging it would accomplish little on its own and it would need other things with it to make it work!
I see your point (still can’t read the article, so I can’t tell whether that’s the argument hehe).