Corbynomics: A Dystopia

ukcarper

Moby wrote: »

Newly published research:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40318284

The problem with all these wealth reports is they need to be shown in a historic contex. Most of ordinary people's wealth will be thier home which for many people is meaningless.

michaels

Moby wrote: »

Newly published research:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40318284

I have accumulated wealth because I spend half as much on day to day living than other people on my income (no meals out, takeaways, foreign holidays, apple products, new cars etc etc). If I now have more wealth than those who spend all their income is it fair that I should give some of my wealth to them?

Fella

michaels wrote: »

I have accumulated wealth because I spend half as much on day to day living than other people on my income (no meals out, takeaways, foreign holidays, apple products, new cars etc etc). If I now have more wealth than those who spend all their income is it fair that I should give some of my wealth to them?

The amusing thing about the people who post these types of reports, is they always think the "rich" should be forced to give their money to the poorest people in their particular country, never simply the poorest people in the world.

The average penniless person in the UK has a fabulous standard of living compared to the average penniless person in Rwanda. But you'll rarely hear the class warriors suggest that the rich (or indeed themselves) should give their money to those people. No, they are furious that they're only "better off than most of the world" & not "better off than ALL of the world". Thus they post with such vitriol & bile & basically waste their lives hating people with more money than them, even though they probably enjoy a standard of living two-thirds of the world can only dream of.

antrobus

ukcarper wrote: »

The problem with all these wealth reports is they need to be shown in a historic contex. Most of ordinary people's wealth will be thier home which for many people is meaningless.

That's basically what the report says. According to Conor D'Arcy, policy analyst at the Resolution Foundation;

"Falling levels of home ownership mean that, having once been a great force in driving down inequality, shifts in who owns what property are now fuelling the wealth gap between rich and poor, while also creating sharp wealth divides between young and old."

Therefore presumably, driving up wealth equality, involves taking steps to increase the level of home ownership.

And it's not entirely meaningless. Everybody dies. Wealth gets inherited unless the b*****s tax it.

michaels

Moby wrote: »

Newly published research:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40318284

After all no one seems to be disputing the fact that income inequality is at its lowest since the early 1980s so the difference in wealth is not as a result of some poeple earning more than others.

No doubt the main factors are spending patterns, pensions and house prices. Pensions and spending are to a large extent choices and even housing equity is often the result of whether someone chooses to prioritise house purchase over a social life and chooses to live with parents or in a dump in order to save or chooses a swish apartment that takes most of their disposable income.

ukcarper

antrobus wrote: »

That's basically what the report says. According to Conor D'Arcy, policy analyst at the Resolution Foundation;

"Falling levels of home ownership mean that, having once been a great force in driving down inequality, shifts in who owns what property are now fuelling the wealth gap between rich and poor, while also creating sharp wealth divides between young and old."

Therefore presumably, driving up wealth equality, involves taking steps to increase the level of home ownership.

And it's not entirely meaningless. Everybody dies. Wealth gets inherited unless the b*****s tax it.

Not entirely but it is possible to be wealthy but struggle with day to day living. Steps do need to be taken to make property more affordable but easier said than done.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

Steps do need to be taken to make property more affordable but easier said than done.

People will always complain

For instance the north east prices on the decade are down 27% in real terms (vs CPI) and Mortgage interest costs are also down 60%!

That means over a 10 year mortgage, in real terms its 40% cheaper to buy a house in the NE now than it was a decade ago!

People will always complain

And its not just the NE its true for the NW, Y&H, WM, EM, Wales, Scotland, NI.....

GreatApe

michaels wrote: »

After all no one seems to be disputing the fact that income inequality is at its lowest since the early 1980s so the difference in wealth is not as a result of some poeple earning more than others.

No doubt the main factors are spending patterns, pensions and house prices. Pensions and spending are to a large extent choices and even housing equity is often the result of whether someone chooses to prioritise house purchase over a social life and chooses to live with parents or in a dump in order to save or chooses a swish apartment that takes most of their disposable income.

What about migration?

In a developed country with low fertility rates wealth is accumulated through the generations and concentrated when women have <2 kids which is the case for uk born Brits

But migrants often have nothing and often have more kids than 'the locals'

So could some of this wealth gap increase be from importing poor migrants who do not have any general wealth?

Also the fact that we measure wealth in £pounds£ will lead to some distortion.
A family living in a mansion in kensington two generations ago compared to the same family living in the same mansion in kensington today are no richer in actual terms (ie the house is exactly the same) but measured in £pounds£ they are far far richer today. Just as we use CPI/RPI to try and look at real terms rather than nominal there really needs to be a type of wealth inflation to take this inflation into account.

GreatApe

Think tank the Resolution Foundation estimates 1% of adults, some 488,000 people, own 14% of the nation's assets - worth about £11 trillion.

That does not seem all that shocking or that bad, it simply stats that the richest 1% of adults have on average £3 million each. But of course within that 1% it will be a vast difference. this is not what they earn each year its their total net assets for the whole lives plus potentially inherited generational wealth

Why is that shocking or a negative, just the premier league teams have an annual wage bill of ~£2 billion spread among about 500 players or an average £4 million a year each. These football stars are within the 1% of the 1%

At the other end of the financial scale, 15% (7.3 million people) either own no assets at all, or are in debt.

The problem is that its not all or nothing, capital is important but so are wages. Someone in theory could earn massive wages and own no assets at all. You read of such stories of famous people or sport stars who earned big wages but end up with no assets. So just looking at assets without looking at income is stupid. Wages of course have a smaller spread than assets. Or I should say 'income' rather than wages as benefits etc count as you can spend them obviously.


And once more I think first gen immigrants are making things look worse than they are for 'the locals'

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

People will always complain

For instance the north east prices on the decade are down 27% in real terms (vs CPI) and Mortgage interest costs are also down 60%!

That means over a 10 year mortgage, in real terms its 40% cheaper to buy a house in the NE now than it was a decade ago!

People will always complain

And its not just the NE its true for the NW, Y&H, WM, EM, Wales, Scotland, NI.....

You keep going on about this but it is largely irrelevant prices are at an all time high in large parts of the country and there are other problems in other parts of the country.

Another point take Y&H a large area and prices vary greatly and the average price is over £200k in a large part of it.