US & UK are poor societies with some very rich people.

Excellent post

aeon.co/essays/history-tells-us-where-the-wealth-gap-leads

I have attached an interesting article regarding wealth-gap. It is more US-centric and rather long, but includes some history including UK and France.

To narrow it down to a few sentences, history shows the ever-increasing wealth gap as population grows and labour is cheap. The elite will exploit it until some crisis happens to 'equalize' the gap, usually plague or revolution. Plague will end it by lowering the population therefore increasing the value (and wealth) of the poorer in society; revolution will do it by bringing down the elite.

I admit I have no answers, but do find economics and history interesting. I do know we live in a time were the poorer in society are fairly well off (in first world countries), but the gaps are growing. Perhaps with all us baby-boomers retiring out of the work force, wages will rise and the gap will narrow again somewhat.

Doodledog - good post.

Doodledog, good post.

I'm not sure your author's theory of always works, CanadianGran, although it ought to.

Immediately after the Black Death Parliament passed the Statute of Labourers 1351 which prohibited offering or asking for wages higher than pre-plague. Unsurprisingly, there was a dearth of labour at the time. I imagined this government would do much the same when Covid ended. They talk about inflation rather than starvation, of course.

Daisyanne.. I just read up on this, and it resulted in the peasant's revolt of 1381... I guess the economy will always be based on supply and demand, which includes labour as a commodity.

Of course it is a much different world now, with the labour force being very global. But we are losing quite a bit of skilled labour, part of the reason our health care (and yours) are in such a mess. That and poor planning.

Katie59

“I assume from your post that your are very happy to live in a society where the first proposition is true. That there are a few very rich people and a lot of very poor people.”

Wrong, in the UK there are a few very rich and a lot of very comfortably off that can afford to pay more, so that the poorest can have a better life.
The amount that is spent on alcohol, non essentials and luxuries is staggering and that’s just at the supermarket.

Just go on ignoring what the data tells us if that's what makes you feel comfortable.

Norah

MaizieD "I assume from your post that your are very happy to live in a society where the first proposition is true. That there are a few very rich people and a lot of very poor people."

No. I never said that at all and that's not how we live.

I did ask if you had a proposal. I've not read your solution either, just point the way or paste it to me, please.

Indid post a couple of obvious suggestions quite early on and mentioned how the tax system can be used but it got drowned out by folks insisting that I wanted to deprive the rich of their wealth. And by people who seem in denial about, oblivious to, or comfortable with, the grinding poverty in which a very significant portion of our population live. Acknowledgement of that and an expression of concern would have been reassuring.

MaizieD

Norah

MaizieD "I assume from your post that your are very happy to live in a society where the first proposition is true. That there are a few very rich people and a lot of very poor people."

No. I never said that at all and that's not how we live.

I did ask if you had a proposal. I've not read your solution either, just point the way or paste it to me, please.

Indid post a couple of obvious suggestions quite early on and mentioned how the tax system can be used but it got drowned out by folks insisting that I wanted to deprive the rich of their wealth. And by people who seem in denial about, oblivious to, or comfortable with, the grinding poverty in which a very significant portion of our population live. Acknowledgement of that and an expression of concern would have been reassuring.

MaizieD

We're very uncomfortable with and concerned about "the grinding poverty in which a very significant portion of our population live."

Thus we donate, give time and money to charities.

Raising wages might help as well. But I can't drive that - can you?

U.K. is 6th in terms of largest economies, but is falling down the list ( recently overtaken by India), but this does not mean it’s one of the RICHEST economies( people often make that error), it’s 20th and falling in that list. (Luxembourg is top of richest economies based on wealth per capita). The economy of theUK is declining rapidly relative to neighbour countries this is mirrored in the collapse of health and social care, longer waiting lists, fewer staff, poorer standard of care, savage cuts to public services, increase in poverty.

MaizieD

Katie59

“I assume from your post that your are very happy to live in a society where the first proposition is true. That there are a few very rich people and a lot of very poor people.”

Wrong, in the UK there are a few very rich and a lot of very comfortably off that can afford to pay more, so that the poorest can have a better life.
The amount that is spent on alcohol, non essentials and luxuries is staggering and that’s just at the supermarket.

Just go on ignoring what the data tells us if that's what makes you feel comfortable.

The problem is Maisie that I disagree with your data, the UK is far from the worst country for the wages gap. Bankers are an easy target, they are a very small group which happen to be in the news at present. Caping or taxing them does not make a difference to the economy, although it may be politically popular.

To make a difference a much larger group have to pay more, that is going to be politically unpopular because those with large investments or property, which I am going to define as more than £1m are largely vote Tory for low taxes. I’m going to call that group “Middle England” those that hand their own wealth and influence to their own family, ignoring the needs of the low paid

This group has to pay more, it’s an unpopular viewpoint on Gransnet because it affects many of us, we all want someone, else to pay not us.

It's not my data, Katie59. Did you read the thread or the article I linked to?

This is where the data came from. Do you have alternative sources which contradict it or do you just disagree with it because you don't want it to show what it shows?

Sources: FT analysis of data from Eurostat EU-SILC survey, OECD and UK Family Resources Survey

I think that your conclusion, that everyone tut tuts over the figures but no-one wants to be in the group that pays more is a valid one; no-one thinks that they are rich..

But approaching it from the 'robbing the rich to pay the poor' is not what is needed, is it? Increasing wages and benefits to a level where the recipients can live comfortable lives isn't robbing the rich, is it?

Progressive taxation which limits the power of the rich to accumulate even more wealth isn't robbing the rich, is it? You can't rob them of what they don't have.

Investing public money in education, training, supporting
new enterprises and supporting public services isn't robbing the rich, is it?

(just please don't tell me that all this is funded by taxation. it isn't.)

Katie59

MaizieD

Katie59

“I assume from your post that your are very happy to live in a society where the first proposition is true. That there are a few very rich people and a lot of very poor people.”

Wrong, in the UK there are a few very rich and a lot of very comfortably off that can afford to pay more, so that the poorest can have a better life.
The amount that is spent on alcohol, non essentials and luxuries is staggering and that’s just at the supermarket.

Just go on ignoring what the data tells us if that's what makes you feel comfortable.

The problem is Maisie that I disagree with your data, the UK is far from the worst country for the wages gap. Bankers are an easy target, they are a very small group which happen to be in the news at present. Caping or taxing them does not make a difference to the economy, although it may be politically popular.

To make a difference a much larger group have to pay more, that is going to be politically unpopular because those with large investments or property, which I am going to define as more than £1m are largely vote Tory for low taxes. I’m going to call that group “Middle England” those that hand their own wealth and influence to their own family, ignoring the needs of the low paid

This group has to pay more, it’s an unpopular viewpoint on Gransnet because it affects many of us, we all want someone, else to pay not us.

Katy59
I think you are correct in your comment above.

Norway does, indeed , have a small population. That doesn't mean that the model it uses can't be replicated.

Against the flow of this thread. I would be more than happy to pay more taxation in order to see less poverty. The obsession all political parties in this country seem to have with reducing taxation perplexes me.

I would like to see political parties that address the inequalities in society shows how to reduce them and what the cost of doing them will be. Yes, I know the Labour party has the ideas and policies, but is remarkably shy about telling us how they will raise the money to pay for them. I do not mean all these ideas about 'soaking the rich'. You could ring then dry and the amount you would get would in total be nominal.

I am another in agreement with Katy59. If we want to remove many of the inequalities in our society, then it is a lot of the people on GN who have got to be among those who have to pay for it - and that includes me.

Why do we need to increase taxation to reduce poverty?

I know you always insist that taxation doesn’t fund spending Maisie. What is your suggestion?

make people have better paid boring jobs instead of being happy

Perhaps Katie59 would like to clarify why she disagrees with the data. I've given the data sources. Does she have better ones which tell us something different?

Or perhaps those people who are agreeing with her can supply some alternative data to support their view?

Some people don’t have the opportunity to do what they would enjoy, what would make them happy, they have to do what’s necessary to pay the bills.

don't we all? or do you think you are more special than the rest of us?

Maizie you have yet to show how soaking the rich will provide all the extra money needed.

And to quote an old northern saying ^You get owt for nowt', So how can we pour more money into the NHS, Education, better and more housing, etc etc, not to mention better benefits without finding the money to do so from somewhere?

If you think I enjoyed my work you’re sorely mistaken Jane. I was more than pleased to retire. I’m sure some people are able to do work that they enjoy. Good for them. I have never considered myself to be more special than someone else, vastly inferior to many who have talents that I don’t.

I look forward to your answer to my question Maizie. Genuinely. I don’t know the answer.

Germanshepherdsmum

I know you always insist that taxation doesn’t fund spending Maisie. What is your suggestion?

I've made my suggestions twice already, I'm not doing it again.

Some involve state investment, but state spending comes before taxation. And state spending grows the economy.