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?

Agree 100%. It's terrifying.

people in the UK on benefits are in the top 1% of earners globally

Yes, and what does that say about wealth distribution world-wide??
It is shocking and will come to bite us (the rich West) in the bum soon, I fear.

OP, YADDDNBU

I love how the alternative to our current position is given as communism / marxism. As opposed to - just for example - Danish style social democracy.

One slightly positive thing - I think it's optimistic the amount of discussion about inequality in the FT, for example, and also the fact that Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century has been so much read and discussed. I think the 1% are at the least aware that there is a tipping point where the mass will no longer accept growing inequality.

justanotherlurker never said it was Tory, don't know why you'd think I did? And yes I do think there's a difference with foreign companies getting tax breaks rather than those who reside and also pay tax here. But to be honest if it's supposed to be a capitalist system where companies do their own thing, why are any of them getting incentives from the government to do what they want to do? Don't care if it's Bridget Jones or not, why are companies getting tax money to make movies when there apparently isn't enough money to build houses for people to actually live in? I know which I'd choose.

China is communist in name only, Plurail, apart from the fact that communism is not the only alternative to rampant capitalism.

I don't think people outside London see it as just a London problem at all. Accommodation costs in London are a huge barrier to social mobility for people with limited work opportunities in peripheral regions. It makes it impossible for people to move to London from poorer regions as they can't afford initial housing costs. It reinforces the London elite in politics, because people can't afford to go to London to do the internships etc. that are virtually guaranteed. It means huge problems, for example for skilled manual workers who might previously have gone to London for a few years, and it increases the wealth gap between London and the south east and everywhere else. These are things people outside London care about very much.

Denmark has much to offer but it's hardly utopia either.

It has the highest level of private debt in the world and the highest cancer rates in Europe.

It is also has the fourth largest Eco footprint in the world ( per capita). Worse than the nasty ol' USA.

And a lot of their public services are privatised.

Absolutely, WordFactory. There's lots of things good and bad about Denmark (and indeed Scandinavia in general - I actually meant to write Scandi-style social democracy, but had a brain fail).

But they unquestionably have a different base model to Anglo-American style capitalism, that is equally unquestionably not communism.

Soloman, that's a really refreshing perspective but unfortunately not one often seen on MN, particularly when housing costs/cost of living are discussed.

If you think about it it is absolutely infuriating ??
Best not to think about it
That's what they want you to do

Well it's a start op.

A shame that you weren't informed jus a few weeks ago, since we've only just had an election that could have changed things. But thank goodness you're seeing the light now and can help push for change next time.

For the record, talking about the election, let's not forget that only 25% or so of Brits actually voted for this new tory government. We're not all bad. I don't think many more actually woukd support it, the problem is the lack of a high-level real, uncompromised left option which has disheartened amd confused so many. There were many interesting discrepancies between vote percentage gains and seat percentage gains that proved the whole system is broken to me.

Why don't you get on over to the equality trust website and click the sign-up for our newsletter button at the top. I could try and copy the one they've just sent round but it would be very long.

paperdoll companies get money to make films in the UK, because they then employ UK people and suppport the UK economy - overall it is a net benefit.

longtimelurker I never mentioned the one third - twas someone else.

In the UK, the top 1% of earners, 420,000 people earn an average of £155k, there are not lots of people earnings millions.

There has been an increase in the number of wealthy people in the UK as they have moved here, but are making thier money overseas. These are individuals who skew the statistics.

Apologies for the patronising. Some people were certainly fooled. Hopefully it will become increasingly obvious now and the left will regain its identity and a new sense of purpose. Hopefully before the riots start. I'm not convinced this government will last the full term.

I think one of the huge errors Ed Milliband made during the election was conflating higher rate tax payers with 'millionaires' and 'bankers'.

WanttoBSupermum Re. the HA trip, it doesnt surprise me in the least.

Meanwhile they use the cheapest cowboys possible to do things like gas safety checks. Several no shows in a row , malicious letters blaming the no show on the tenant saying it was the tenant who wouldnt let them in, works that cause a flood , rudeness incompetence etc.

And part of the problem is the way social housing tenants are viewed. Looked down on because they are not owner occupiers , therefore sub contracters think they can talk to you and treat you like you are shit on their shoe.

JassyRadlett - that's interesting. I do find that most people fear the problems will spill out or recognise that to some extent they have already.

That's really refreshing. Maybe I just need to step away from the MN bubble.

Jassy, I'm new to MN so can't comment on that. IRL I know lots of people are worried about what is happening but feel they have no voice because no party wants to address it. I think there is also a view that the pendulum swings too far each time and we just happen to be on this side of it now, and in 40 years we might be back on the other side. It annoys me too because I think the pendulum should be better controlled by politicians but frankly it seems to me that they are often about 20 years out of date.

Carol, don't gothet that the top of the income tax statistics are not an accurate reflection of income reality - thousands disappear (or swell the lower percentiles) due to tax planning avoidance schemes that are not available to those at lower incomes. The 120,000 non doms are of course part of this.

There was the HSBC scheme That reduced one of their client's tax bill from £1.4 million to under £10k - much less tax than I pay. The financial sector makes millions from these schemes, according to the PAC - which makes one speculate how much more must be missing from the HMRC bank account. HMRC admits their own figures are shaky.

In any case - looking at the income levels of those in the top income ranges of income tax payers doesn't give an accurate picture of the numbers of very high earners.

Gothet?? Forget!!

I have a random playlist on and in a bizarre coincidence, as I was nodding away at Jessy's comments on tax avoidance, World Party "Ship of Fools" started playing! and the lyrics fit right in
www.metrolyrics.com/ship-of-fools-lyrics-world-party.html

I'm going to download that now.

Jassy My number was top 1% of earners, not the top taxpayers. There is not that many earning that much at the top.

I suppose a big problem is that historically and culturally we are a society that is comfortable with heirarchy. There is no large-scale agitation for change that would lead us to become, for example, a scandi-style social democracy. We're all fundamentally quite conservative, which is why "left-wing" parties have to occupy the centre ground. Perhaps the Tory wrecking ball will polarise things a bit in the next five years though.

Where are the figures from? The 1% discussed elsewhere on this thread comes from the income tax statistics.

Can you share the source/basis of the figures you're using, please?

In any case, the point still stands -very high earners often mask their true earnings.