Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To not understand why so many people view the wealth of others as public property

531 replies

FrogspawnSmoothie · 09/08/2020 06:08

I've been noticing a lot of posts lately saying things like 'we need to sort out the wealth divide' etc and calling for the wealthy to pay for xyz 'because they can afford to', and I must say I've never quite shared this mentality.

I can see why people start to think this way when we're constantly told things like '99% of the nation's wealth is owned by 1% of the population', making it sound like they're hoarding resources. But the thing is, it's not a tin of biscuits given to the population which is now being hoarded by a few greedy chubsters. It may well have been foreign investment, for instance, which wasn't otherwise going to be invested in a UK business to then benefit the economy through taxes as it does. I go to work and earn my income, and that money is mine - I imagine most people would consider their paycheck to be their own.

I think of it like two farmers. One innovates in his processes and works out how to grow more apples with the same resources. He then reinvests his extra profit into better equipment and buys more land. Eventually, he owns 75% of the apples in the town, despite being only one of many farmers. I'm not convinced he now needs to start giving his apples to the other disgruntled farmers who envy his wealth, especially as he's now paying much more tax.

I'll admit it's a pretty simplistic way of looking at it (I'm no economist) but I'm not convinced that all the people moaning about the rich have given it a particularly nuanced consideration either. I was listening to some prat of a manbunned barista banging on about socialism and 'redistribution of wealth' in Costa today, and gotta admit I just thought to myself 'sounds like you should've worked harder at school, mate.' 🤷‍♀️

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Leaannb · 09/08/2020 16:36

@zoemum2006

I'm all for people working hard and making a success out of their life but that often isn't what is truly happening.

a) People should be taxed fairly. A billionaire shouldn't be paying 10% tax when a nurse pays 30% of their income.

b) Too many people get life handed to them on a silver plate, while others have no chances at all.

Economic systems (like QE and inherited property) have seen a vast divergence in equality without any hard graft being done.

I should not be paying 35 % as a CRNA and business owner working my as s off while other people pay 0% plus thousands back at the end of the year in a refund while working minimally,getting housing benefits,daycare benefits,food benefits etc just because they can.
Guylan · 09/08/2020 16:40

Wealth inequality has been growing steadily again since the 1980’s, I don’t think such huge gaps produces the best functioning societies. Regarding your comments on business investment, the current economic system does not encourage business to invest significantly back into the company but to cream off a lot of the profits for shareholders and owners. Much of which is then kept in offshore tax bank accounts avoiding going into the nation’s coffers. The promise of trickle down economics with the neoliberal reforms Thatcher started has not happened.

From chapter 10 from a report by IPPR on growing wealth inequality in the UK since the 1980s.

“ The total wealth of households and individuals in Great Britain is estimated at £12.8 trillion. It is very unevenly distributed. The wealthiest 10 per cent of households own more than 900 times the wealth of the poorest 10 per cent, and five times more than the entire bottom half of all households combined. Wealth is much more unequally distrib- uted than income: whereas the median income in the top 10 per cent is around seven times the median income in the bottom 10 per cent, the median wealth of the top 10 per cent is 315 times the median in the bottom 10 per cent.

Perhaps the starkest aspect of wealth inequality today is generational. In the first half of the twentieth century, wealth tended to cascade down the generations: each generation had more wealth than the previous one. But every generation since the postwar ‘baby boom- ers’ has had less wealth than the generation before them had at the same age. People born in the 1980s had just a third of the property wealth at age 28 of those born in the 1970s

Wealth inequality fell for most of the twentieth century, as economic growth allowed lower income groups to accumulate savings and buy homes. But since the 1980s, inequality has been rising again in almost all developed economies. As the rate of return on financial assets and property has exceeded the growth rate of economies as a whole, those with greater wealth have pulled even further ahead of those dependent primarily on their earnings from work.

In the UK, the largest single driver of rising wealth inequality has been rising land and property prices, which for two decades have grown far faster than earnings.

Land and property prices have risen because demand has out- stripped supply. Economic and population growth, particularly in London and the South East, along with a reduction in the average size of households, has increased demand. This has also been stoked by more permissive lending practices by banks and other finan- cial institutions, discussed further in chapter 11.21 Increasing foreign investment in property, much of it speculative, has exacerbated these trends, particularly in London.

Supply, too, has been constrained. Planning and housing policies, including the restrictions which successive governments have placed on local authority house-building, have kept new builds well below the rate needed to match increasing demand.And as we discuss below, a more general failure of public policy to capture the increase in land value which arises when planning permission is given has made house-building much more expensive than it needs to be.

Though rising land and property prices are the principal the principal cause of rising wealth inequality, other factors are also important. Individual ownership of company shares has declined markedly since the 1980s. The wealthiest 10 per cent now own over 60 per cent of the UK’s financial wealth, including stocks and shares.”

www.ippr.org/files/2018-10/cej-final-summary.pdf

Stripesgalore · 09/08/2020 16:41

Daycare benefits pay for care for children who are too young to work, minimally or otherwise.

Bananabread8 · 09/08/2020 16:43

[quote NotMyTimes]@Bananabread8

Exactly! Poor money management and a sense of entitlement.

I'm not saying that OP's simplification is completely right. But I am saying their are plenty of chancers.

Sure he works hard, no one can deny that, but he only works hard at what he wants to. So when he complains that hard work isn't translating to money he's not wrong. But equally if he put the same hard work into something else it would make him plenty.

Sure rent is extortionate in the south where we live and paying it is hindering him from saving for a house. But he chose to move out and rent over saving. Sure he'd have to give up some independence but that's a sacrifice plenty of us make so we can save and then have our own houses and live independently later but without the dead rent money.

I'm not saying everyone can do this, of course there are some people for whom living with parents isn't feesible of possible but when people like him moan about capitalism and yell about how socialism is the answer it's all really hypocritical. [/quote]
I don’t think OPs post correlates with this example he sound like the minority in these times most people wouldn’t of done that. The majority of people are not going to study music just because he did we can’t base OPs thread of the majority of the population.. also another key point he had wealth from the parents not everyone does.... yet again missing the bigger picture

Devilishpyjamas · 09/08/2020 16:44

Leaannb lives in America, so in a very different society which doesn't really have a safety net (except churches).

Devilishpyjamas · 09/08/2020 16:46

It's not somewhere I'd ever choose to live tbh

Frankel1 · 09/08/2020 16:47

There are a lot of champagne socialists around who talk the talk but don't walk the walk when it comes to City careers and children in private schools

I hate the champagne socialist trope

Pinklyx so although comprehensive education for all and removal of selective education is a socialist principal you still think it’s acceptable to describe yourself as a socialist and educate your children privately?

VinylDetective · 09/08/2020 16:48

@Devilishpyjamas

Leaannb lives in America, so in a very different society which doesn't really have a safety net (except churches).
That explains a lot.
Stripesgalore · 09/08/2020 16:54

Is removal of selective education a socialist principle? Cuba has a selective education system.

NotMyTimes · 09/08/2020 16:56

I don’t think OPs post correlates with this example he sound like the minority in these times most people wouldn’t of done that. The majority of people are not going to study music just because he did we can’t base OPs thread of the majority of the population.. also another key point he had wealth from the parents not everyone does.... yet again missing the bigger picture*

I'm perfectly aware it's the minority. As I said in my post it's one specific example. I was referring to OP's distain or 'green haired, man bun, lots of piercings'. And pointing out that most of the 'socialists' who shout loudest about the rich being evil (rather than engaging in critical discussion and actually trying to come up with workable solutions) are hypocrites. And these are the ones who rightly get on people nerves.

He might be the minority but this minority is still very large and very vocal and gives a bad name to people actually advocating for more welfare and equality. People like him are the ones shouting online that we should take money from the rich. Most people are much more rational and looking at more tax but not just feelings entitled to large chunks of other people's money just because they have a lot.

I have no problem with people coming from money believing in socialism but when they do it because they've made poor choices and now want bailing out of these and try to hide it behind the guise of 'working hard doesn't always work' it can be annoying and is very hypocritical.

I'm not missing the point or the bigger picture, as I said I don't have a solution, but merely pointing out I get where the OP's coming from that some people feel entitles to others money when they really shouldn't.

Pumperthepumper · 09/08/2020 16:57

@Devilishpyjamas

Leaannb lives in America, so in a very different society which doesn't really have a safety net (except churches).
Ah, that explains the death penalty thing for the poor after five years.
Guylan · 09/08/2020 16:59

Two more pages from the chapter I quoted above

To not understand why so many people view the wealth of others as public property
To not understand why so many people view the wealth of others as public property
Frankel1 · 09/08/2020 17:03

There are a lot of champagne socialists around who talk the talk but don't walk the walk when it comes to City careers and children in private schools

I hate the champagne socialist trope

Pinklynx comprehensive education for all and the removal of selective schools are a basic tenet of socialism. Surely anyone who claims to be a socialist shouldn’t educate their children privately?

Frankel1 · 09/08/2020 17:04

Sorry I don’t know how that happened - ignore repeated post

bloopie · 09/08/2020 17:06

Leaannb lives in America

that makes sense

Leaannb · 09/08/2020 17:07

@Pumperthejumper...I never said to give them a death sentence. I said it's time for them to sink or swim. It's ridiculous to.expect hard working people to subsidize your poor decisions for the rest of your life. Use that 5 years to get an education,to get a job to save and to improve yourself. That's plenty of time

Leaannb · 09/08/2020 17:08

@bloopie

Leaannb lives in America

that makes sense

Only half the year. The other half I live in Wales
bloopie · 09/08/2020 17:08

Make America Great Again @Leaannb 🙄

Pumperthepumper · 09/08/2020 17:10

[quote Leaannb]@Pumperthejumper...I never said to give them a death sentence. I said it's time for them to sink or swim. It's ridiculous to.expect hard working people to subsidize your poor decisions for the rest of your life. Use that 5 years to get an education,to get a job to save and to improve yourself. That's plenty of time[/quote]
What if they don’t though? Why can’t you answer? Too lazy?

biddybird · 09/08/2020 17:11

Haven't rtft but if you earn more than £25K then you are part of the 1%… globally.

VinylDetective · 09/08/2020 17:11

[quote Leaannb]@Pumperthejumper...I never said to give them a death sentence. I said it's time for them to sink or swim. It's ridiculous to.expect hard working people to subsidize your poor decisions for the rest of your life. Use that 5 years to get an education,to get a job to save and to improve yourself. That's plenty of time[/quote]
So, if they sink, what happens to them?

Leaannb · 09/08/2020 17:11

@Devilishpyjamas

Leaannb lives in America, so in a very different society which doesn't really have a safety net (except churches).
Except that we do. We have federally funded subsidized housing,state subsidized food,health and daycare and even college tuition assistance for the poor.....I'm saying there should be more of it for a set amount t of time. .....BTW...I also live in Wales for part of the year. Enough to have to pay taxes on both countries
Leaannb · 09/08/2020 17:13

@VinylDetective they need to figure it out. Welfare benefits should not be life long. It most definitely shouldn't be generational meaning that their entire families stay on welfare forever which is happening in the States and in the UK

Mrsheepie · 09/08/2020 17:13

Baa Humbug!

To not understand why so many people view the wealth of others as public property
Pumperthepumper · 09/08/2020 17:14

So, if they sink, what happens to them?

They starve to death, alongside their children. That’s a much better system isn’t it?