Five Shocking Facts About Inequality in Britain – OliverJamesOpinion

There is a general election on the horizon and some bloggers are starting to focus on issues that should be important when it takes place – such as the rise and rise of inequality here in the UK, also known as the birthplace of modern justice. Here’s a quick piece by OliverJamesOpinion that sets the scene:

inequality

1)  The wealthiest 10% of people in Britain own 850 times more than the poorest 10%.

2)  Since 1979, the poorest 10% of people have been getting a smaller and smaller percentage of income (around 3%), while the richest 10% have received more and more each year (around 31%).

3)  The wealthiest 10% in Britain own 41% of income, while the poorest 20% receive only 8% of income.

4)  It is reported that inequality costs the UK £31-£33 billion per year through lost productivity, state benefits and costs to the NHS through poor health.

5)  Since 1986, the top 1% have seen an increase in their earnings of 117%, whereas the bottom 10% have only seen a 47% increase in earnings. The National Minimum Wage would currently be £18.89 if it had kept up with inflation.

britin

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs!

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

8 thoughts on “Five Shocking Facts About Inequality in Britain – OliverJamesOpinion

  1. Ged Hession

    Having no faith at all in governments, I doubt ANY government will address this issue. We live in a world where $TRILLIONS are moved across from one side of the world to the other whilst millions are left out in the cold of the global economic revolution. The worlds’ governments simply stand back in the vain hope it will reap rewards for all.

  2. amnesiaclinic

    Very well-presented information we can all use to bombard our MP’s.

    We need to follow the money and stop this.

    We have to change this – as you say, governments won’t!

    x

    1. Ian Duncan

      Thing is, if you put all this to your local MP you know exactly what he or she will say. If it’s a Conservative, they’ll waffle some warm words about making work pay, getting people off benefits, hard work, achieve, yadda yadda yadda. Labour will give you some wishy-washy hopes for the future without committing to anything whatsoever and the LibDumbs will say, well, anything, really, not that it matters.

      While we have the three big parties wedded to neoliberal economics and FPTP elections this will not change. A Labour government *might* slow down the growth in inequality but nothing fundamental will change.

      This is democratic choice in the UK now and why I haven’t voted since ’97.

      1. Mike Sivier Post author

        Ah – so you’ll be a Friend Of Ol’ Lynton, then – “voting doesn’t change anything”?

  3. Ian Duncan

    Is that some kind of bizarre take on ‘a friend of Dorothy’?

    I neither know nor care what Tory spin doctors say, they are an irrelevance to me as I will never vote for their party or believe a word they say. The point is, while we have only three parties who can win an election and they’re all tied to neoliberal/transatlantic economics, then their is *literally* no point voting for them. All it does is lend legitimacy to an illegitimate process.

    I mean, which genuine Labour supporter could vote for a party that has Ed Balls in charge of the money?

    The modern Labour party is made up of what would have been the more liberal old Tories, Orange Book libdems and apolitical careerist twerps and all with an eye on the main chance.

    Lynton Crosbie has pish all to do with anything. Maybe try Russell Brand, he’s making more sense than any of our supposedly serious political journalists.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      It’s a useful acronym and despite what you say, I think you fit the description – especially where you actually comment on Mr Crosby.

Comments are closed.