Quantcast
Inequality - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
AngryofTuebrook

Inequality

Recommended Posts

It's getting silly now, isn't it.

 

http://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-2ebc-Shameful-wealth-gap-grows-by-a-third#.Vnch6raLRp9

The richest 10% of households have over 900 times the wealth of the poorest 10%.

 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/high-pay-centre-ftse-100-ceo-pay-versus-average-salary-2015-8

Chief Executives are paying themselves 183 times the salary of their average workers.  (Not their lowest paid ones - their average earners.)

 

In the last few years there's been a welter of research into the damaging effects of rampant inequality, yet you're still liable to be portrayed as some kind of dangerous subversive or Commie dinosaur if you suggest doing something to remedy it.

 

Strange days.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The distribution of wealth in this country is a fucking disgrace and it's getting worse all the time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/inequality-richest-one-per-cent-have-as-much-wealth-as-the-poorest-57-per-cent-combined-a6779201.html

 

The economic disparities of modern Britain have been put on stark display, as official statistics revealed that the nation’s already-yawning wealth gap has widened still further over the past two years. 

 

The richest 1 per cent of the population have as much wealth as the poorest 57 per cent combined, according to Office for National Statistics figures. The agency also found overall wealth inequality has increased since 2012, mainly thanks to the soaring price of housing in the South-east of England and London.

 

The news came just 24 hours after the head of the Government’s Child Poverty watchdog, Alan Milburn, warned that Britain is in danger of becoming an “ever-more divided” society, making a mockery of David Cameron’s “One Nation” rhetoric.

The fresh evidence of economic polarisation also coincides with the revelation by The Independent that the Chancellor, George Osborne, has stepped up his private meetings with representatives of the UK’s big banks since the general election, amid a rising tide of concern that the banking lobby is again exerting an undue influence over government policy, just as it did before the 2008 financial crisis.

The image of a divided Britain was accentuated by the closure of Britain’s last deep coal mine, in North Yorkshire, putting 450 miners out of work. As recently as the 1970s, more than 250,000 were employed in pits that were a focal point for communities across Wales, the Midlands and the North of England.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish enough people gave a fuck.

Everybody I know is too busy (like me and the mrs) treading water.

 

However, something's going down in Finland.

 

It wont be enough but it's a start.

When and until, the burden of tax is redistributed properly, there will be no equality.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you're still liable to be portrayed as some kind of dangerous subversive or Commie dinosaur if you suggest doing something to remedy it.

I should think that largely depends on the suggested remedy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting thing is that it's a subject that exposes people who genuinely support an idea of capitalism providing prosperity and those pretending to (but actually see it as a vehicle for control and wealth concentration). Given that inequality is actually quite a bad thing for a (theoretical) well functioning capitalist society, what with it totally fucking up spending, investment, production, demand and whatnot.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should think that largely depends on the suggested remedy.

The obvious one, recommended by serious economists, involves progressive taxation to fund benefits and public services.

 

Something like the approach favoured by that threat to everyone's security, Mr Corbyn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have progressive taxation in this country. I don't think anyone seriously argues against it.

 

What I've never been convinced of is that expanding the Robin Hood style robbing of the rich to give to the poor is more desirable than using that finance to increase equality of opportunity.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have progressive taxation in this country. I don't think anyone seriously argues against it.

Have you had a bang on the head?

 

Plenty of people argue against the current system despite the fact it's so progressive that inequality of wealth (and therefore power and influence) continues to increase.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have progressive taxation in this country. I don't think anyone seriously argues against it.

 

What I've never been convinced of is that expanding the Robin Hood style robbing of the rich to give to the poor is more desirable than using that finance to increase equality of opportunity.

Chootokkinbout?

 

What do you mean by "equality of opportunity" and how do you propose achieving it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chootokkinbout?

 

What do you mean by "equality of opportunity" and how do you propose achieving it?

 

Banning all private education would be a good start. 

 

Can only assume Stronts would be in favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of people argue against the current system

I can't say I've heard many calls recently for an end to progressive taxation, but I'm open to be persuaded by evidence.

 

despite the fact it's so progressive that inequality of wealth (and therefore power and influence) continues to increase.

Some folk might take that as evidence that simple wealth redistribution isn't functioning as it's supposed to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I've heard many calls recently for an end to progressive taxation, but I'm open to be persuaded by evidence.

 

 

Some folk might take that as evidence that simple wealth redistribution isn't functioning as it's supposed to...

Other folk would see the obvious fact that wealth redistribution is being pushed in the wrong direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chootokkinbout?

 

What do you mean by "equality of opportunity" and how do you propose achieving it?

 

What do you mean what do I mean? Have you missed a decade of my posts or something?

 

To this day, the biggest factor in whether a person is successful or not is how successful their parents were. Do we really think the likes of Paris Hilton would be a multimillionaire businesswoman if she was born into poverty? Clearly not.

 

Equality of opportunity means giving people who come from less well off backgrounds the means to compete on a more level playing field with those from better off backgrounds so that everyone succeeds on their own merits rather than the wealth of their forebears.

 

Nobody pretends it's easy to achieve, but the pupil premium, extra educational funding for poorer pupils, has been having some minor effect in improving outcomes among deprived pupils. I would like to see more schemes like that.

 

All the research shows that you need to intervene early in a child's education if you want to narrow the attainment gap between the poor and the wealthy, which is why pupil premium was preferred by the L** D**s over tuition fee cuts for middle class students.

 

Obviously the fate of the L** D**s proves that the argument for investing in a pupil's early years rather than their boozing years is one that hasn't yet been successfully sold to the public.

 

Banning all private education would be a good start. 

 

Can only assume Stronts would be in favour.

I'd prefer to provide greater equality of opportunity by improving the education of the less well off than of hamstringing the more well off, like. Probably because I'm not motivated by a hatred of the wealthy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd prefer to provide greater equality of opportunity by improving the education of the less well off than of hamstringing the more well off, like. Probably because I'm not motivated by a hatred of the wealthy.

 

Yes, I'm sure that'll work tremendously well and having half the front bench of the government all from one school will swiftly become a thing of the past. 

 

You saying that I'm motivated by a "hatred of the wealthy" is a little like me saying you're motivated by a hatred of the poor.

 

The problem with liberalism's "equality of opportunity" is that in practice it is total and utter bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×