Wealth inequality - we've been fooled

[780539gjg]

I've read loads of threads recently about benefits: cuts, caps etc.It's all over the newspapers too. There's a massive sentiment that austerity is necessary, we can't afford a generous welfare system, benefits should only provide the most basic of needs. Without going into why we seem to accept all this without question, why is there so much focus on how much the poorest people have, and no focus at all on how much the richest have? The product of all the austerity propaganda seems to be that we've forgotten the massive increase in inequality in this country, that only the very richest benefit from.

inequalitybriefing.org/

So people in the middle bitch about the people at the bottom, but no-one seems to notice the people at the top creaming off all the profit. This affects everyone. Living standards of the very poorest and also those in the middle. We should be really angry about this. 20 years ago a professional, like a doctor or teacher, could afford a good family house in London and private education for their children. But wages have stagnated and living costs have rocketed, we're all worse off except for the very wealthiest.

I feel like there's a huge amount of focus on benefits scroungers, immigrants and none on what we can do to stop the gap between rich and middle/poor getting bigger and bigger and bigger. AIBU?

Lumpy I read to the end to find that you had already shared the same experience I had when talking with DMIL about this.

It seems to me that the system of taxes, benefits and services we have is something that makes this country a good place to live. With how averages work out, roughly half the population will be getting more value out of it than they pay in and the other half less value than they pay in.

If people were voting in a rational and self-interested way, I would expect to see a lot more voting for parties that were going to invest in services and benefits, and less in cutting taxes. The fact that we aren't seeing that, makes me share the OP's belief that we collectively have been duped. Or are a lot less self-interested than we might believe.

I'm mystified how so few people noticed that this was a cornerstone of the Labour manifesto this time. They actually said that new Labour had over focused on tackling poverty and hadn't been too casual about tackling inequality and that was what Labour wanted to focus on now. It's such a simple, basic and instinctively right argument that many people agree with, yet somehow Labour's campaign completely failed to get the message across that they wanted to tackle it. Probably because everyone was too busy laughing at ed Miliband eating a bacon sandwich and now Labour MPs are tripping over themselves to say Labour were too harsh on the rich. Depressing.

780 the middle classes may huff and puff about the super rich but not because they actively want a social revolution; they don't.

They would much prefer to return to the status quo where they occupied the middle ground and pretty much ignored the plight of the working classes.

It's not equality of opportunity for everyone they want.

Love the fact that CarolDecker keeps repeating the one third mantra when its been pointed out to her that its not true.

The "hard work" thing is the issue, people genuinely believe that all they have is the product of their endeavors alone (well especially Conservative voting ones) they pay no attention to the good fortune or luck they have in getting to where they are or for the impact that living in a society like this has had on them.

Problem is, there are very few "benefit scroungers" and they cost the economy far last than tax avoidance , but we are directed to focus on them. No one ever contemplates the fact that actually we all need to pay our fair share, the better you have done, the more impact the society you live in has played in your success, you should contribute more.

But that's the whole point. I just don't want to pay more tax on my low income which is half of the £26K tax free benefit limit. I don't want anybody else's money I just want to keep my own. Ed Miliband going on about poverty in his little world of the London elite just so annoyed me. Not once did Labour say they'd lift the lower paid out of tax. No they were too busy talking about spending and I heard one of them say just the other day extend the welfare state. No thanks.

the better you have done, the more impact the society you live in has played in your success, you should contribute more

indeed! there is no self made man

This is probably going to come across as extremely dramatic, but DH and I talk about this a lot, and we both feel this scary sense that those at the very, very top really could care less what happens to the very, very bottom. I really don't think they'd care if those at the bottom died out, due to hunger, health problems that aren't fixed quick enough through the dismantled NHS, etc. It's frightening.

This is conspiracy theory territory, and I will don my tinfoil hat now, but population control is the only thing they have left to worry about.

Charis1 - you are right. Those poorer than us would be sickened by what we waste. I am sometimes myself. Water, food, energy to name but three.

As for Tory voters being over 50 - yes probably. And the 18 - 25's were less likely to vote at all. But there is so little choice. And the North voted Labour and the South voted Tory - to get the best they could for themselves.

Neither of the big two parties offered anything I really wanted to see in place. I was dead against some of the Tory policies and some of the Labour policies. No-one could really see a vision of a whole society - how could they? So people voted on the basis of one or two ideas that they thought would benefit them personally. Sale of Council houses, no mansion tax, EU referendum, higher public spending, benefit caps, fixed rent terms - etc.

But yes the point of this thread was to look at how the distraction of the "undeserving poor" has been used to hide the overall inequality.

I find it quite incredible that anyone could distrust Ed Miliband talking about poverty because he is from north London and then elect David Cameron to take care of the interests of the poorly paid. What experience do you think Cameron has that enables him to empathise with the low paid that Miliband doesn't?

?They may not care about individuals or the discrepancy of wealth and incomes but those at the top of the pyramid would not be there without those underneath them, they need a pool of workers to siphon from?

LeatherTrousers - I don't think it is a conspiracy theory- I think that you probably have a point.

Right, now, not being one of the super rich, (and of course I'd love to be - wouldn't most of us want the freedom that comes with that? And there is an obstacle to inequality right there), I need to go and do some work!!

Presume people voted tory because they feel they have a chance of making their way to the upper echelons of society and so it seems rational to vote for a government that will create / maintain a system where the lucky few get all the loot.

As pointed out a society with a long tail is unstable compared to one with a large section of middle classes.
It only takes a few too many 'let them eat cake' remarks for unrest to take root.
Those at the top need some way of dividing the masses against each other to distract them, voila the 'underclass' the feckless and undeserving poor as distinct from the hardworking poor.

Benefit scroungers are performing an essential ?service for the elites

Back for a break - of course I meant "obstacle to equality".

There was a "what if I won the lottery" thread here recently and the majority of posters wanted the same thing: a secure home, an easier life for themselves and their families, education for their kids a chance to a bit for those who had less. Interesting. For many they will have to win the lottery to get that.

YANBU.

I have just returned from a weekend home to pack up my dads house. Sounds glamorous but it was a very hard trip with DD. There are a couple of things that stuck out on this visit, namely that the current system of first past the post does not work. Tories are making unilateral decisions that don't reflect the wishes of the people who voted. Imagine the difference if you had PR and the decisions that would be made.

Secondly, I think there has been a conscious effort to make people reliant on the state. It enables the new leaders to control people. It is absolute insanity that a small 2 bed flat in Chester is £600 a month. 5 years ago those flats were £300 a month if they were pristine. Those who don't qualify for HB are living in house shares paying £120 a week for a couple.

I might be from a privileged background but it is crystal clear that with the low level of income in the north west there is no way for a young couple to get a descent start with the expenses they face. No wonder they all want to leave and ask me a million and one questions about how to get qualified so they can move to Canada/ Australia/ NZ. It also enraged me to hear of a housing association employee tell me herself that her employer sent her to Uganda to volunteer for a month. They were fully paid and accrued holiday leave during this time. No bloody wonder their rents are so high. Those jollies should be self funded. By all means go but it should NOT be funded by the taxpayer.

This last trip did give me ammunition to push our planning board to give permission for me to build my low income housing units. I just can't believe I was turned down given the obvious shortage of affordable housing for all. My proposed rent per 3 bed unit was £350 a month with a 4 bed unit for £400 a month. The development comes with a community garden, small play area and veggie growing area. Each unit gets one parking spot too. Those rents are 30% of average wages in the area, which IMO/IME is affordable.

I think it's partly because the left, my left, has been doing a very poor job of opposing Cameron and Osborne. We've never had a proper socialist party, so the Labour Party, under Atlee and Wilson have had to make do in its place. Kinnock would have too, given the chance. Tony Blair was a Tory posing as a Labour leader and Gordon Brown didn't get a chance to do anything. So, we haven't really had an influential left wing leader for a couple of generations. It's not all that surprising that London has been sold to Chinese developers, soup kitchens are back and we're edging towards a wealth threshold to be eligible to vote, except we'll just call the disenfranchised non-engaged rather than politically excluded.

I find it interesting, but not surpassing, that this thread has taken a turn towards discussions of income tax. These conversations do so often. But income tax is not the problem, it is not income tax which moves money into the hands of the rich. I'm much more worried about tax breaks for corporations, such as the millions given to companies like Disney as tax incentives to film here (Google it) or tax avoidance basically allowed for big companies such as Amazon, who make most of their money here but pretend they're based elsewhere to avoid tax. They get more money in free tax handouts than they pay in (again, look it up) This is where the system seems so wrong. If we gathered up all this money which should be kept in the pot, the NHS would be fine, the education system would be fine. Payouts for benefits are not the problem, but neither is income tax. If we brought in money in more sensible ways, and stopped wasting in ridiculous ways (I'm sure Disney would be fine without our tax money!) we could probably lower flipping income tax.

Surprising* of course

is a very good TED talk called, "Does money make you mean?"

Come on the Disney tax your alluding to isnt anything new or particularly Tory.

Did you have any issue with films like Love Actually or Bridget Jones having the same tax breaks.

It is a British film.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22491025

As for the other stuff are you aware of the Goolge Tax that was introduced also the recent measures around shifting profits overseas which is just getting bedded in?

YANBU. I live in London and I am puzzled that many Londoners born and bred don't seem to care that the city is being sold off in ways that enable the rich to get richer, while people who have lived here for years are being shoved out. The thing I wonder is - will every part of the UK become like that?

Many things in this question puzzle me, but one thing I do think is that no mainstream political party is addressing it. I've often wondered why there isn't a 99% party! Perhaps the 1% are so good at hiding their machinations that the different elements of the 99% don't realise how much we have in common?

Some compelling arguments here IMO.

How can the UK be a Utopia when we have a million people needing foodbanks?

Jassy, thank you for your post. I tried looking up figures last night but was too tired to see.

You're very welcome. MN has led me to hone my ONS skills, because some of the nonsense you read on here benefits from the bright light of facts.

Curiously seems to piss a lot of people off...

Butterfly, what I don't get is that people outside London seem very comfortable saying 'oh, that's just a London problem'. Seeming to ignore that if its getting worse in London (as it is, objectively), it will spill over elsewhere.

The narrative has already shifted to 'London and the South East' from 'London'. People are just wilfully blind.