When I first glanced at the costings behind the Conservative manifesto, I assumed at first there had been some kind of mistake.
I found myself reading and re-reading the document, then comparing it with its Labour counterpart, to make sure I wasn’t seeing things.
It was as if these were two manifestos not for different parties but for two different countries.
But in a sense that’s what they are.
Labour’s manifesto sets out to change the nature of the UK economy with a massive, unapologetic increase in public spending, accompanied by a massive increase in the tax burden.
It sets out to turn Britain into a higher tax country – more like Germany, according to the Resolution Foundation’s Torsten Bell.
The Tory manifesto, on the other hand, barely increases total day-to-day spending at all (though it’s worth saying spending as a percentage of GDP is already closing in on decades-long highs).
The upshot is that for every pound of extra day-to-day spending the Tories are promising, Labour are promising to spend an extra £28.
And that’s before one adds on the cost of providing extra money for women denied state pensions – the so-called WASPI women.
For the past week or so, we in the Sky News Campaign Check team have been examining the various tax and spending plans from each of the other major parties and by now had become accustomed to the size of the numbers we were seeing.
Both Labour and the Lib Dems were promising various policies that would increase day-to-day spending by tens of billions of pounds a year.
Yet glance at the figures accompanying the Tory manifesto and they look utterly tiny.
Most of them cost tens or hundreds of millions of pounds.
By the standards of a £2tn economy, that kind of stuff is loose change.
To give you another illustration of the scale of difference we’re talking about, the entire set of Tory spending plans (just under £3bn extra by 2023/24) add up to less, in terms of the increase in current spending, than one sub-policy of Labour’s education plans (£3.3bn for further education funding).
Now don’t get from this the impression that the Conservative Party is planning to return to austerity, or for that matter to eliminate the government deficit.
Those days have gone and are unlikely to come back any time soon.
This year’s spending round involved a massive increase in day-to-day spending across the state.
You could argue that for some departments the impact of austerity has yet to be reversed.
But the direction of travel is certainly in the direction of more, not less spending.
And nowhere more so than in the field of public investment.
The Tories are still planning to spend as much as £100bn extra on new investment projects – road, rail, new hospitals and so on.
We are certainly back to the 1970s on that front – and while the Lib Dems plan to invest more and the Labour Party more than double the Tories, the differentials are far less stark.
But investment is one thing; current government spending is probably a better reflection of the nature of the state in this country – and the void between the two parties on this key offering has never been wider.
Labour have doubled down on the spending promises in their 2017 manifesto.
The Conservative party appear to have battened down the hatches.
Given the disastrous reception of their 2017 manifesto, perhaps that’s to be expected.
So gone are the pledges to reform social care, to reduce the winter fuel allowance and bring in the so-called dementia tax.
Even the much berated triple lock on pensions stays.
All those promises by the Tory Party to address the intergenerational divide have been forgotten.
But the striking thing about the manifesto is that while they have thrown away their old Osborne/Hammond era fiscal rules and replaced them with new versions that are considerably less strict, the Conservatives have restrained themselves from the splurge that some expected.
The costings document produced alongside the manifesto looked a lot like a Budget, with year-by-year spending and revenue projections much like those produced by the Treasury.
And this is not coincidental: for this, it turns out, was the Budget Sajid Javid wanted to deliver earlier this month – the Budget that was cancelled when the election was called.
Still, if you’d seen the numbers in today’s manifesto in a Budget you would be hard-pressed not to describe them as adding up to a relatively small fiscal event.
Nothing to rock the boat.
The big question is whether this restraint is something voters will welcome or whether they will be tempted by the different country offered up by Mr Corbyn.