Biggest drop in income inequality in 30 years

[????]

...says the ONS.

So the Tories have done more to reduce income inequality than 3 previous Labour governments.

Biggest rise in income in bottom earning 20% of households - driven by minimum wag, raised tax allowances, pension raises locked in

Lowest income raises in top 20% - driven by tax allowances tapered for ?100K+ earners; tighter tax regualtion and removal of child benefit for 40% tax payers.

I thought this fact would be all over my progressive friends social media and the likes of the Guardian - you'd expect Jeremy would be supportive too.

Silence.....

The nasty party and friend of the rich indeed........

[Mick Mac]

The Tories should be ashamed of themselves. I mean, how could they......

[Saffron]

That may in part be an artefacts of just how enormous the equality divide was to start with. In addition, shrinking of the gap hasn't been equal, with a generational gap to the disadvantage of the younger generation actually growing rather than shrinking. :-/

[????]

Gap may have been enormous but is now falling for the first time in 30 years, surely that's a good thing? But not if, you know, "TORY SCUM"

In terms of age that just suggest that generally the younger generations weren't in the bottom 20% of income - at an aggregate overall level your generalisation is true - overall older groups have benefitted most but by default they must have been over represented in the bottom 20%?

Humble pie from Morally Certain progressives will have to be eaten if this socialist trend continues - all that wasted virtue signalling......

[DovertheRoad]

The Blair/Brown government was responsible for some of the biggest tax breaks for the rich in decades (income tax, property taxation policy, corporation tax reductions). Amazing what you can do with spin, minor budget sweeteners for the masses and clever "messaging". An easy base for the Tories to chip away at.

Not sure its news though other than ONS making it official.

[Earl Aelfheah]

So have you got a link to the researc?

[DovertheRoad]

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/householddisposableincomeandinequality/financialyearending2016

[rendelharris]

Statistics driven by rise in pensioner incomes, which is of course very welcome, but the average working age family is still worse off than they were before the crash.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jan/10/uk-inequality-working-people-pensions-ons

In any case, income equality is only one indicator of economic wellbeing and not a particularly good one. If I earn ?50,000 a year and my boss earns ?500,000 a year, if my income drops to ?40,000 and his drops to ?480,000 the inequality between us has lessened by ?10K, but I'm still worse off.

ETA: "Typical working households were ?345 a year worse off than before the economic crisis, according to the ONS in 2016 ? the same as the previous year."

[Loz]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In any case, income equality is only one indicator

> of economic wellbeing and not a particularly good

> one. If I earn ?50,000 a year and my boss earns

> ?500,000 a year, if my income drops to ?40,000 and

> his drops to ?480,000 the inequality between us

> has lessened by ?10K, but I'm still worse off.

That's why inequality dropped quite markedly in the months following the 2008 crash.

But quids' underlying point is correct - that people of certain political leanings harp on about such indices right up to the point where it becomes troublesome to their argument.

[Earl Aelfheah]

UK has a very high level of income inequality compared to other developed countries, but of course it's good news if the gap is reducing. As noted above though, it's not a straight forward picture and of course wealth and income are not the same thing (and if one looks at assets the picture is very different). I also saw today, Oxfam suggesting that the World's eight richest people have same wealth as the poorest 50%.

[rendelharris]

ETA answering Loz not RRR...

Really? I thought from the last line of Quid's OP that he's trying to say that the Tory party aren't the nasty party and friend of the rich? As per above, I've never thought income equality a valid measure of social wellbeing, the man who owns the factory can make a million a year as far as I'm concerned, provided his employees get a proper living wage. Sadly this is rarely the case.

[????]

So, basically, and as expected, middle-class socialists hate the tories more than they like an improvement in equality - quelle surprise

[????]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

I also saw today,

> Oxfam suggesting that the World's eight richest

> people have same wealth as the poorest 50%.

Absolutely nothing to do with this, really, at all None of those 8 are UK citizens. If you earn more then $20 a month there's 2bn people worse off than you globally, given that the average income in the UK is ?24,000 it's a bit hypocritical to point your finger accusatory in the direction of Bill Gates whose given away $30 billion and my suspicion is that he's done far more to alleviate poverty and disease in the world than if that had gone into the US govt coffers as tax take. The problem is poverty and not inequality.

Oxfam and other 'charities' are moving into very political territory that they should move out of IMO - self-righteous middle-class left wing hypocrites who also hate capitalism and no doubt the 'tory Scum" too . Tedious dogma.

[Jules-and-Boo]

I don't get the people who hate the Tories, hate the Leavers and hate Corbyn. Not really sure where they're going or what they want.

Well, they want open EU, open immigration and lower taxes, a healthy NHS and trains to run efficiently (not privatised).

When asking how it all actually works, I don't get a response.

Open to suggestions...

[Earl Aelfheah]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, basically, and as expected, middle-class

> socialists hate the tories more than they like an

> improvement in equality - quelle surprise

Quids, what are you talking about? The most notable thing about this thread, is the unironic, vitriolic, political tribalism, of those railing against vitriolic, political tribalism.

[rendelharris]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, basically, and as expected, middle-class

> socialists hate the tories more than they like an

> improvement in equality - quelle surprise

Would you care to, rather than simply throw playground insults, actually address the point I made, which is that a reduction in income inequality is fairly meaningless as a measure of prosperity - after all if the whole country went bankrupt we'd have perfect income equality - especially in this case where, as the same ONS themselves say, the average working family is still significantly worse off than they were pre-crash.

ETA: "self-righteous middle-class left wing hypocrites who also hate capitalism and no doubt the 'tory Scum" too . Tedious dogma." Not something you're guilty of yourself, of course, in that very sentence.

[JohnL]

Not for Men

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38603722

[JohnL]

and are the 1% even included in this survey ?

"There are caveats around these figures - they are based on surveys, so there is a margin of error, and it is particularly difficult to get survey responses from people at the top of the income distribution."

The 1% are to busy sailing the world to fill in a survey :)

Also surely by just looking at the UK - there is a gap between home owners and non home owners (as shared ownership I'm somewhere in the middle) - if house prices are rising how can non home owners share in any wealth.

OH They're looking at INCOME not WEALTH - as you were

[Earl Aelfheah]

The phrase 'tory scum' is used almost exclusively on this forum, by those complaining about the use of the term 'tory scum'.

[Otta]

My issue with both Cameron's government and now this one is about the destruction of public services.

I admit that personally I'm probably a bit better off, but as a public sector worker, I am seeing real struggles.

But that's all down to the immigrants apparently.

[Jeremy]

I've never really thought of the Tories as the party of the rich, in particular. More, the party of wealth creation (albeit sometimes at too high a cost).. so I think a rise in minimum wage isn't out of line with their general ethos.

[rendelharris]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've never really thought of the Tories as the

> party of the rich, in particular. More, the party

> of wealth creation (albeit sometimes at too high a

> cost).. so I think a rise in minimum wage isn't

> out of line with their general ethos.

The Tories opposed a minimum wage when it was introduced in 1998. They believe in a very specific type of wealth creation, which is wealth creation for business owners, the theory being that this will trickle down to employees. George Osbourne did, last year, introduce his much vaunted living wage, but many companies (B&Q, for example) have counteracted that by slashing overtime and bank holiday pay rates, so that employees will receive the same wage as before or in some cases even less.

Of course I'm just a "self-righteous middle-class left wing hypocrite who also hates capitalism and no doubt the 'tory Scum" too" (it's amazing how many assumptions some people make on no evidence, simply because one happens not to agree with them), so let's let someone else get a word in: "The government?s austerity programme for balancing the books on the backs of the poor and vulnerable is divisive and deeply unfair." Middle class left wing hypocrite, ummm...former Tory leader Ian Duncan Smith.

[Otta]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

but many companies (B&Q, for

> example) have counteracted that by slashing

> overtime and bank holiday pay rates, so that

> employees will receive the same wage as before or

> in some cases even less.

I'm largely on the same side as you politically, but just to pick at something... You say "many companies", and give B&Q as an example. Is there anything to show that it's many companies? Not saying there isn't by the way, just genuinely interested.

[rendelharris]

Fair question Otta: Waitrose have stopped paying extra on Sundays or for overtime for all new employees, Morrisons, Tesco and Wilko have all cut their overtime and Sunday rates, Cafe Nero, John Lewis and Asda have all stopped giving staff a free meal to claw back some of the costs of the minimum wage, a car factory in Wales has stopped paying employees for their thirty minute lunchbreak (something I would have thought was illegal, but apparently not), Carillon, the cleaning company, has cut workers' hours so they earn exactly the same as they did before the living wage...so it's pretty widespread.

Osborne said that companies doing this made him angry, and that they should act within the spirit of the law as well as the letter, but he didn't introduce any measures to stop it.

[Jeremy]

Yeah, employers skirting round living wage was/is disgraceful, but I imagine pretty tough to legislate against retrospectively.