I don’t understand how ‘growth’ will help the 4.5m children in poverty

[Decisionsdecisions1]

I’m no economist and would welcome being educated, it’s a genuine question.

There is so much emphasis on ‘growth’, ‘growing the economy’ etc. I don’t understand how that translates into more affordable rents (as housing costs are a prime factor underlying poverty in the UK) or wages keeping up with the rising cost of food, utilities etc or more stable employment (rather than insecure zero hours contracts etc) or more affordable and available childcare (as again this is a key factor in poverty in the UK).

Statistically we know that wealth at the top end (multi millionaires) has increased while the number in poverty has also increased. This suggests only one end of the spectrum is benefiting from growth.

I’d like to hear more about how rents will be controlled, how employment rights can be improved etc. But no one seems to be interested in that. It’s all ‘the UK is open for business’. For what purpose? For whose benefit?

You don't seem to understand. We are already at war with Russia. Do you think we can just ask them not to?

Ah, "growth" the magic word politicians love to throw around as if it’s some automatic cure-all. But let’s cut through the rhetoric. Growth, in the broad economic sense, means more money flowing through the system, but the real question is: who gets their hands on it?

Right now, "growth" often benefits those already sitting at the top. When GDP rises, it doesn’t automatically translate to higher wages, lower rents, or more stable jobs because corporations aren’t in the business of charity, they’re in the business of maximizing profits. If cutting headcount, suppressing wages, or replacing workers with self-checkouts boosts their bottom line, that’s exactly what they’ll do.

So how does growth actually help those in poverty? Only if it’s harnessed correctly. That means:

Stronger employment rights forcing businesses to offer stable contracts and decent pay.

Rent controls and social housing because an overheated housing market only benefits landlords.

Targeted taxation ensuring that the wealth generated at the top is reinvested into public services that help the many, not just the few.

Without those levers in place, economic growth is just a number on a spreadsheet meaningless to the 4.5 million children still living in poverty. And unless policymakers stop treating "the market" like some benevolent force that will eventually "do the right thing," the status quo isn’t changing anytime soon.

Because government needs more money to spend on children in poverty.

We can tax our way out of this. Which is unlikely to work as rich people have freedom and means to leave. Big Businesses also but they are global. Latter isn’t impossible to fix but tricky and the greedier buggers are all in cahoots. Small, medium businesses much easier to target and that just cuts local jobs/ closes local business.

We can stimulate our way out of this (gov prints or borrows money, creates a kind of fake growth). We can’t afford to borrow anymore and this just causes inflation which doesn’t help normal people but can disappear our debt a bit so they do this anyway.

Or we can grow our way out of it. Which is the only real answer because if you want something doing properly it’s better to do it yourself. The people are in complete control of this as long as governments make it possible to do so. Ie. Make an environment where business can thrive.

@noblegiraffe We aren’t.

Naive.