Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription: ground.news/tldr
Could you make a video researching the contradiction between the UK's poverty and lower living-standards, while still being a prime destination for illegal migration? It seems weird to me that people would risk their life crossing the channel, only to end up in a worse economy than the countries they most likely had to cross to get there.
Wealth inequality data is much less reliable than income inequality data because while an individual's income can be tracked by the government through tax payment, it is much harder to measure a person's wealth (it is not clear what counts and wealth and what doesn't) and some countries don't record the data on wealth.
Simply by changing poor tax choices, the UK can radically reduce income, wealth and regional inequalities and take a huge deadweight off our economy. Vested interests don;t want this discussed.
It's funny that when he says "quite how poor the rest of the UK is" a clip from London is used. Even in London there's a huge divide in wealth and income
You can say that about any large town or city. Where do you draw the line. Chelsea is one of the most expensive areas of London but still has poor people.
@@jamieakahenry i saiying economy does not matter. the economy made killed queen elizabeth and the uk collasped becasue of war in ukraine MONEY DOES NOT DO FIX YOUR EVERYDAY JOB OR PAYING AT SCHOOL
@@ganados0 and now those 40 million people are getting a massive shock as they realise that the people in London were right about how much of a cock up it was
It's amazing to see that since the 80s when everything was privatised and taken out of public hands that the wealth/income inequalities really started to show and when thatcher said the banks would keep the UK afloat with no need for industry
@@SK-vg3mw Given the fact that it's had 13 years being absolutely destroyed by the Tories and sabotaged, I'd say they are still holding their own. Imagine it under a government that actually cared
@SK-vg3mw Perhaps you should try traveling to the US and see how much better the NHS is compared to a privatized system, they spend the most per capita in the world on healthcare and end up having tens of millions of people with no insurance and many more that are underinsured and would go bankrupt if they were to get sick or get into an accident.
@@SK-vg3mw in 2010 it was one of the best healthcare providers. Then someone took the power, destroyed the nhs, got Brexshit done, and destroyed the pound.
London is propped up by Russian oligarchs and other forms of dirty money. It’s a cesspool of overpriced housing, corrupt politicians, and rampant crime.
Funnily enough I’ve just come back from the World Athletics in budapest this afternoon and no I can assure you they are still quite some way behind the UK. I talked to a lot of people there, especially taxi drivers and the average wage is about 1200- 1400 $ a month and inflations over 20%. Hungary is still well behind the UK economically.
I would be really interested to see if the fact so much of the UK wealth is held abroad in shell company's makes the UKs wealth look more equal. Wealth is alot easier to hide than income after all.
If that were the case you'd see a far starker skew of mean wealth vs median wealth, which the video (4:21) shows to not be the case. In terms of median wealth the UK is doing far better than the US and Germany and not far off Switzerland, which was quite surprising to me.
The economic models of the UK have exclusively relied upon low education and pay. Damaging the health service, underfunding schools and removing rights are all about keeping poor people working and not thinking.
Because of:- 1. The historic inequalities dating back to Feudal times that Attlee's reforms never dared address 2. The 'rent-based' economic model that Thatcher set up during the 1980's. Something which subsequent administrations have only sought to exacerbate.
@@tomlxyz It's an old term. At the crudest sense, 'The Drawing of Rent' is wealth that is extracted through non-productive means. Best to think of it through examples. Landlordism, privatised utilities (and essential services), excessive dividends, corrupt financial practises, corrupt state contracts. In all such cases, it is not only that wealth is extracted far in excess of the work that has been put in. But that it happens not as a one-off, but continually. Thus creating the 'trickle up' of wealth that is responsible for the inequality shown in the video. The question then becomes, how is this possible?
'The historic inequalities dating back to Feudal times that Attlee's reforms never dared address' Would be interested to know more what you mean by this, I don't think I've ever heard someone mention this before. Inequalities from Feudal times makes sense to me, but how was Attlee involved specifically? Wouldn't that be a failure of multiple British leaders?
@@pm3302the working classes are not mostly immigrants. They make up 90%+ of the population. Only the top few % have enough wealth to have his model work for them.
@@marktaylor6491 i think that's called "economic rent" ("amount of money earned that exceeds that which is economically or socially necessary") Either way, what are some concrete examples that were introduced during Thatcher's time in office?
I get TLDR is focused on short content but this seemed to just serve as a good introduction to the question of UK economic equality rather than actually explain it. I was hoping to see for example which professions/industries pay the most in the South East of the UK (e.g. Finance, Tech, Biotech etc.), concentration of foreign investment in certain industries and locations etc.
I agree, that would be very interesting. A more thorough look at the effect of government policies (and possible future policies) would interest me most.
Some economists have projected that both the U.S. and parts of Europe could slip into a recession for a portion of 2023. A global recession, defined as a contraction in annual global per capita income, is more rare because China and emerging markets often grow faster than more developed economies. Essentially the world economy is considered to be in recession if economic growth falls behind population growth.
It's a delicate season now, so you can do little or nothing on your own. Hence I’ll suggest you get yourself a financial expert that can provide you with valuable financial information and assistance
Very true! I've been able to scale from $50K to $189k in this red season because my Financial Advisor figured out Defensive strategies which help portfolios be less vulnerable to market downturns
My consultant is ‘’Catherine Morrison Evans’’ I found her on a CNBC interview where she was featured and reached out to her afterwards. She has since provide entry and exit points on the securities I focus on. You can look her up online if you care supervision. I basically follow her trade pattern and haven't regretted doing so.
We have to remember that the UK is such an equal society that 0.5% of the population controls 90% of the wealth and assets. As has been said the UK is a group of poor nations with a few exceedingly and obscenely rich people living in them. Poverty it should be explained is not about how much money you earn ; if you cannot afford or you are struggling from month to month to keep a roof over your head,pay for your energy needs or put food on the table you are in poverty and in the UK that is upwards of 30% of the population and is rising
@@pivomanslovensko the issue on wealth relates to government debt. Let’s take one part socialist pensions. They have zero assets. Unfunded means no assets. Working from the last two ONS estimates of the pension debts that is 600,000 per taxpayer. Negative wealth. The state pension puts you in poverty and causes the social care crisis So what if mr average had retired last year but had invested his Ni free of taxes in a low cost FTSE tracker? He would have had a fund of 1.3 million. 40K a year in dividends. So the state has destroyed the wealth of the masses. 650 people have done that
It's more about wanting to do anything than can. The Tories have treated the UK more like Feudalism than anything else, letting the peasants eat scraps and not caring if they die because of it, as they take everything for themselves.
The Tories treat the working poor like that because the working poor just let them do it! The working poor just need to rise up against all this injustice once and for all.😑
Only if you look at per capita, if you look at living standards and HDI, it is way higher than Mississippi. Saying we are like Mississippi is done for shock value. New Zealand and most of Canada would be at the same level, and you don't think they are same living standard as Mississippi right? Exactly..
Yeah but this is probably measured in USD and you need to take into account things like purchasing power parity etc. It's hard to make exact comparisons. Plus, while this is true on income inequality - does that take into account other benefits such as free healthcare? The UK certainly has a lot of issues with regards to inequality, but I think ignoring other benefits is not helping the analysis. I work with Germans who say equivalent insurance costs for what they get with NHS access would cost thousands.
Im 37 and worked my entire life, ive signed on for 2 weeks when i was about 22... ive worked for the government for over a decade and im pivitol to my team, they cant function without me as i do all of their work. I can save maybe £20pm, i am constantly afraid and depressed because of how hard it is just to feed my children, as a single man i get no help. This country is fucked, this government is fucked.
There are people like me who are well off, who are in the top 2% income bracket. You need to change job every few years and try to maximize your salary. That's how I got mine.
I have always tried to work and pay my way but I am one of them guys that is way smarter than I thought I was when I was 18 but at them ages had no encouragement so believed I was dumber after working in all these dead end jobs full of desperate liars and terrible inhumane managers I realised too late now I have no idea where to go I just want money because most jobs are pointless and fake with money I can do what I want I am far from materialistic but unfortunately money controls everything because of are believe in it so I rather have a million in bank than be working Job to pay for a place you didn't chose to live in just Purley the Economics of the country forse you to live there
Levelling up the pockets of oxbridge mates. When will Britain get over the hype of Russell groups? We give power to poets not competent people who build things. Why not hire a software developer? Or someone in construction management. Nah we'll continue to awe at kids that read basic philosophy books with no life experience or outside perspective.
Agreed, but as someone in a Tory town, the levelling up funds are just a vehicle for giving money to Tory supporters, not to benefit the town. Our town is literally worse because of levelling up…
There’s always been a massive wealth divide. Socialist policies have been painted as communism and taxation on high levels of wealth or profit is frowned upon as ‘inappropriate’. Whilst the naming for this hasn’t always been the same, the ideology has been consistent for hundreds of years.
@@iamagi That depends a lot on which country you happen to live in I think. It's also relative: a poor person in the US is sill be better off than a poor person in, say, Sudan. But that doesn't mean the gap between rich and poor in the US is much better. And there's still hundreds of millions who live in abject poverty: acording to the World Bank, about 9.2% of the world, or 719 million people, live on less than $2.15 a day. In the United States, the richest country in the world, 37.9 million people - lived in poverty as of 2021. 47% of the world lives on less than $6.85 per day and 84% live on less than $30 per day.
@@znail4675why though? I'd expect two people doing different jobs to earn different amounts of money. I wouldn't want my salary to be equal to someone who is unemployed for example. Otherwise why would I not just be unemployed?
@@SaintGerbilUK in the 1960s the average corporate executive was paid 20 times what the average worker in their corporation was paid. Now the average corporate executive is paid around 400 times what the average worker is paid. And yet the performance of those companies hasn't gotten any better. Of course different jobs pay different amounts, but when the people in charge of the payrolls mysteriously end up with multiple mansions and yachts and the people doing the work are told that theres just not enough money to pay them enough to pay rent and buy food at the same time theres something wrong with things
This is why I have always said that a nation that is large enough YET they push for a single nucleus of economic activity is doing things WRONG. All you create is rural exodus and extreme competition (which lowers wages) in the capital. London, Paris, Tokyo, ... all are guilty of the same sin.
Agreed, we have similar issue with government focusing on Dublin for decades, only recently did other cities get some focus but it’s still hugely tipped to a city that is over saturated and has diminishing returns on investment.
@@Darren-fm3pe tbh that was true in a lot of ways before brexit, Irish government tended to copy bits from the UK on laws and processes, but it’s becoming less so since brexit as the government pivots more to Scandinavia and French government styles, it’s a bit messy as they haven’t decided exactly who they prefer and they haven’t stopped copying some UK moves but it shows how much soft power was lost by the Tory government in recent years.
@@theBear89451 oh what a brilliant idea I'm sure everyone would love an hours commute in and out of work everyday. Are you sure you aren't 30p Lee in disguise?
The government has really called things more difficult for its citizens, and we can't sit back and bear all the consequences of the bad governance. It's obvious we are headed for hyperinflation,it is always the poor who take the hit.
It's no longer a story that the world is experiencing a global economic downturn, I'm so happy that I've been receiving $64,000 from my $15,000 investment every 8 days
You actually need an expert trader assigned by a registered broker company to help you out. I currently trade expert Mrs Lori Jean. I thought I'm the only one trading with her .
I have also been trading with her, The profits are secured and over a 100% return on investment directly sent to your wallet. I made up to $560,000 in months trading with her.
Maybe Labour should be less of a muppet then. Selling off our gold reserves to pay for their failures. The winter of discontent before. The Tories may be shit, but they are slowly making everything shit, whereas Labour just want to accelerate the downfall.
The English will never distribute enough well they are greedy and self serving by their very nature. They suck all the resources they can put of Scotland with companies listed in England to make it look like we are subsidised by the oppressors to the south.
Even within London the inequality in wealth is crazy. Whilst the average person might get a higher wage for a like for like job elsewhere e.g. retail etc. Its all swallowed up by the high cost of living there. London is a tale of two cities.. where most are house sharing and barely get by
London has some of the worst income inequality in the Western World. So many millionaire investment bankers combined with so many bus drivers who barely scrape by paycheck to paycheck
You don't need "wealth" to live a decent life. You need a steady normal income, a safety net guaranteed by the government, work-life balance, a culturally rich environment, free access to good education, a society without class structures... . Now compare that to the UK. Love from Germany :).
@@ottohashmi Mein Gott, redest du einen Blödsinn, aber was will man von einem Briten erwarten, dessen Horizont nicht über seinen ekelhaften British Breakfast Tellerrand hinausgeht
That comment is so wrong. Because wealth is not just wealth, it opens up opportunities and networks, which in turn gives access to better job opportunities. When you rely on your employment income to get by, all it takes to fall into poverty is to lose your job. Wealth on the other hand is a buffer against such circumstances, and you can invest large chunks of it to generate more income.
Haven't watched it, but it's culture. Starting from the top, the wealthy in the UK are generally less snobbish than wealthy Americans, but they are way more elitist. As someone who hasn't gone to uni, I've been dumped because "my mum doesn't want me dating someone without a degree". I have made friends who have broken through that ceiling, and spending any time among those people it's all about the school you went to, or your university (Oxbridge preferably, if not Durham and Warwick). They are nasty people per se, but there is a level of us and them about them. Then you have the upper middle class, or as I call it the embarrassed middle class. Dad works an executive level job, mum stays at home, kids go to boarding school, grammar school or an outstanding state school in an exclusive area. Likely to vote Labour or Lib Dem, pro-EU, would love to help the poors and believe they understand what poor people need by reading the Guardian and a paper by an academic. Think the ULEZ is an awfully good idea while driving around in a brand new range rover that emits more emissions than a 2015 diesel but is still ULEZ compliant so Dad can park at the station in Esher. One step down and you have the newly middle class. These people have money because they worked for it. Made money back in the 80s and 90s during the tech boom and the dotcom bubble. These are computer programmers, data scientists, IT specialists. They may or may not have degrees, but they know that free markets gave them the opportunity they needed to get on the property ladder and secure a good standard of living. Kids go to state schools, but they have 3 square meals a day and don't need to worry about rent. Then you have the upper working class. These people have secure jobs as team leaders, receptionists, technicians, jobbies and labourers on contruction sites, admin roles in call centers and banks etc, basically anyone who works full time 40 hours a week earning between £12-15 an hour. They live paycheck to paycheck renting their home, can never save enough to buy a place but always has money for football, alcohol and a week in Tenerife. These people lack any ambition in life, getting a good job and moving up the corporate ladder is too much like hard work. So they will amble along in their dead end job, trying to make the most of their miserable existence, mostly with booze, drugs and holidays to Spain. I envy their ignorance. Then you have the lower working class. These people lack education, they may have problems with addictions, they may have abusive relationships, they may be struggling with debt. They work part time gig work like deliveroo, Uber, zero hour contracts. They might work 10-20 hours a week, they constantly miss rent payments. They likely struggle to find employment due to lacking education, or their appearance puts off potential employers. These are the people who choose between heating and eating. Who need their children to have free scchool dinners. These are the people on benefits britain and other poor porn on channel 4. They have largely given up and who can blame them. Reliant on hand outs for everything, it's humiliating and a horrible existence. At the very bottom you have the homeless and undocumented. These are either victims of slavery, trafficking etc. Turning up in the UK with no documents or right to be there, sleeping on the street because if they go to a shelter they willget sent to the police and deported. You have people with addictions who are so far gone that friends and family long since gave up on them. They survive by begging and charity. So once we catagorise people, what next. How do we get a street beggar into Oxbridge. Well you don't, focusing all the money on the poorest in society is a great way to funnel money directly into criminal gangs who exploit those people in the first place. It's pointless targeting the poorest, nothing will come of it. Starting from the top, you break up the elitism. That doesn't mean nationalizing private schools, but it means forcing private schools to take in a certain % of students from state schools on full scholarships. If 10% of Etonians were scouted from state schools, then it wouldn't be a closed loop, and there would be more upwards mobility. Granted only from the middle classes up to the upper class, but social mobility nonetheless. Next we get the upper middle class to check their privilege. That doesn't mean they can't talk on social issues. It means they see the opportunities they had as what they really are. The safe, secure learning environment. The additional paid tutoridge. The friend who has a house in london you can stay in for your work experience in PWC. The second home in France that allowed you to learn French as a native. The nutritional meals at regular set times to schedule your learning around. The access to sports and social clubs that kept you fit and socially active. These are the things poor people need. Not nationalised electricity, or ground source heat pumps. the upper middle represent the greatest amount of accessible wealth in this country. The upper have it locked away in overseas investments and what not. The upper middle are the ones spending in the economy and getting taxed on their income. We need to get them onboard with genuine progressive policies that actually solve problems, not just make them feel happy inside and like they're doing their bit. Next we get the lower middle class. These people should be the inspiration for the working class. Forget footballers and Love Island contestants. It's the self employed electrician, the IT consultant, the civil service project manager, the accountant, the computer programmer. These people with their mortgage free houses, BMW cars, care free lifestyle. Thats what the aspiration should be for the working class. We need to get more working class people to believe that they can also achieve this easy living lifestyle if they actually put their mind to it and stuck with it. Went for that promotion at work with the extra responsibilities. Did that online course on cyber security. Didn't go out drinking because tonight I've got an online lecture on generative learning. That's what we need to be targeting. So the working class, we need to get rid of the crab bucket mentality that is dragging the nation down. Fortunately with social media and the hustler mindset, the grind lifestyle, people are starting to realise that working hard is not just rewarding but can be fun as well. I worry that people are looking for easy ways to make money quick. Instead of harder ways to make money sustainably. But even if you leave Tesco to start working as a real estate agent, thats progress and it can quickly escalate once you have the right attitudes and mindset. then it's about giving the struggling working class the support they need, not so they can have an easy life, but so their children can have better opportunities to break the cycle of poverty. Things like free school meals, better access to sports and social clubs, better access to public transport, better schools and after school study clubs, better access to safe spaces away from school where children from troubled homes can study, relax, and develop key skills to help their mental health and self belief. If we can get 1% of people to move one step up this ladder then we will have both the fastest growing and fastest equalizing economy in europe. If we can get 2% of people to move one rung up the ladder then the UK would be unrecognisable.
a great follow up to this would be to explain this disparity between the income and the wealth inequality seen in some countries, I think that'd be a great video
What they're not telling you about wealth inequality is that wealth data is notoriously inaccurate. Countries that appear to have the highest wealth inequality are generally the only ones with reasonably accurate wealth dara.
yep, similar story with sexual violence statistics, for example. Really highlights how data is a good tool, but useless and even dangerously misleading if not looked at critically.
High inequality countries tend to either be super underdeveloped i.e. most of Africa or over developed like Europe where a lot of money concentrated on a few wealthy families but still have generous public spending so that the average citizen is still well off. The UK took the worst of both worlds where it is a wealthy country with some of the poorest citizens.
If Nimbys didn't opposse new houses in underdeveloped parts of the country, if our trains didn't cost more than a commute by car and actually ran properly. If Londoners didn't buy second properties in seaside towns and leave them empty half the year then maybe we can start redistributing wealth.
if u get rid of illigal migrants and reduce the demand of housing u reduce the prices, if ur bureucracy would be less u could cut cost and taxes and if u would give more land to be build with less green restriction u would both increase income of people and reduce living costs further. and all of that would help immensely without redistributing wealth even more.... when wealth is more equal than income, u already do alot of redistribution.
@@Gardstyle35 Because that isn't the problem, the solution, or anything more than a Tory grift to ensure the country stays fucked forever. It's not exactly hard to realise that. But hey, continue forcing the blame on the innocent while the guilty laugh their way to the bank with the livlihood of our country stuffing their pockets.
Wealth often does not include pensions in the data. The Netherlands has giant pensions which compensate the differences between wealth and income in the sources cited here. This fact can be easily googled
I think the question is far more fundamental than that, yes the data may be skewed but is income equality actually a good thing? Would you want your income to be equalised with an unemployed person?
@@SaintGerbilUKthere is a graduation in which way income inequality is acceptable. A top manager responsible for a company or division and x number of employees should earn more than a person bringing the coffee. Sounds nasty to some, but itnis about responsibilities. What is making inequality unacceptable if if such a manager is earning 100 times more than the average person in the company. There needs to be a balance and a ceiling. No person is worth getting paid 3 million a year. An international company I once worked for had the rule that the ceo would have salary at maximum 7 times the average pay of the rest of the employees. You can debate the number 7, but at least there was a balance and a ceiling. When I read yesterday that ftse ceo's got pay rises of 500k, sorry, that is not OK.
I don't think income equality is going to include the unemployed for some reason: No one would survive on it, therefore, the economy would be dead.@@SaintGerbilUK
@@ab-ym3bf Sure, I'm sure the number could well be higher than 7x. Why is that not ok? If you are not happy with your wages renegotiate. If everyone did that then you would have a much closer salary to your manager or CEO. Or alternativly why not start your own company then you can be the CEO with a 7x salary, you can even be a "cool" boss and only earn 5x. The other side of this argument is how replaceable are you? If I can get someone else to do your job for the same money or less why would I not? We have flooded the job market with cheap labour, which have been dragging wages down for the past 25 years. If you want to be worth a good wage be irreplaceable. If you want to earn a shed load start a company, but there are risks.
@@SevenEllen Unemployed people still have an income in the form of welfare and JSA (for a while). But I agree, it absolutly would kill the economy, even if it was survivable, because there would be no incentive to not be unemployed.
Whether you are pro or anti-Brexit, the point about how much time and energy was wasted on dealing with it should really sink in. I really hope if my country's government ever goes in this direction, they will bear that experience in mind.
What is good about having everyone having the same income? People do different jobs at different levels and should be paid differently. If I was paid the same as an unemployed person do you think I'd go to work every day? Would anyone?
@@SaintGerbilUK You should be getting paid more than an unemployed person but the unemployed person should still be able to not starve or freeze to death. Why are you angry at the people with less than you and not the ones preventing you from having more?
I liked how you explained the GINI coefficient, I read about it a few times, but I think this one is going to sink in forever. Everything else about the UK situation was secondary to this video for me, all the things that I already knew :) (unfortunately)
Speaking as a citizen of UK Northeast: the fact were didn't even have a COVID Test or Vaccine Distribution Centre says it all (Vaccines were eventually done in numerous places after such as a Library were i got mine xD) Our NHS is always under stocked with resources and roughly 2 of 7 of people aged 30+ I know of still live with their parents if not in a committed relationship due of cost of living prices. Been the case for many years now
If you don't find a means of multiplying your money, you will wake up one day and realize that the money you thought you had, had been exhausted. Investment is a ladder to climb the financial wall.
When the Prime Minister is the wealthiest person in Parliament, has not revealed what and where his assets are and his father in law's Indian company gets big Government contracts, what can possibly go wrong?
There is no wonder why there is a growing northern independence movement, especially in Yorkshire there have been calls for devolution for years. Southern parties offer nothing to solve Northern problems. We are culturally, linguistically, historically, economically, and socially different from the South, it can hardly be considered the same country.
As a Northerner, we have no interest in independence, its laughable. We are more patriotic English than the South are.. And if you are a Northerner as well, then you know its fringe. What we want is some more devolved powers like our city mayors etc, not a parliament though. Although I would like England to have a parliament outside Westminster.
That's what we say in the South too😹The ruling Establishment is like a different people and a different culture, with different values and schools, and hospitals and justice and taxes. They rule the country in their own interests - at our expense. We want revolution. Would that work for the North?
Not at all, as a Northerner living in SE England (for the money ofc) it's still all the UK to me. I'd be firmly against devolution if it'll result in the farce that has been Scottish and Welsh devolution. More layers of politics just creates more problems, more corruption and more way to pick your pocket.
I had a British co-worker for many years and we talked about the British inequality one day. His explanation was that inequality has become part of British culture in the sense that most Brits accept it and some even prefer it that way over the alternative.
Levelling up was never intended to "level up" anything. It was a political soundbite meant to make it look like the government was doing something. And you shouldn't get bogged down in pointless discussions about how expensive levelling up is, that's antithetical to the point of the whole process.
I was always right-wing but must admit, we need to do something! Please correct me if I don’t understand economics but I would have thought surely the average wage should be enough to own a house and live a modest life. Nothing flashy but it seems you need two/three times this to achieve this. Surely that isn’t fair or right? What do all these people under £30K per year do?
buth UK and US (and, very unfortunately, my own country Turkey) followed Friedmanist recipes which invariably end in de-industrialization.. Friedman is a clown and his economic theories are very frequently very wrong (such as his replacement of "amount of all transactions" by GDP in MV=PY monetarist equation. Here M is amount of money, V is velocity, P is price level. Y, in its original fisher version, was the "amount of all transactions", but friedman replaced it by GDP, which is wrong even in an arithmetical sense. A high school student wouldnt make this error..)
The Northern areas of the UK has always been ignored by the south, of the UK, even though the south grew rich on the back of the 'industrial north'. The north should 'demand the money back', off the from London and the home counties...
It is pretty funny how London is presented as being a place where everyone is rich. I used to live there and whilst I knew some very rich people, most people I knew were poor and really struggled to survive. Think of all the people that work in tourism and hospitality. These are almost exclusively minimum wage jobs, yet the average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is £1,500 per month. London functions off of an endless supply of cheap desperate immigrants, which is why the politicians never do anything about immigration. The London elite need a steady supply of slaves to make their coffee, serve their meals and clean their streets. They have no interest in making a fair society, when it is they who benefit from the inequality.
1)Walt Disney is the father of Anime. 2)Hollywood is the father of Bollywood. 3)BSB is the father of BTS. 4)Hyperloop is the father of Shinkansen. 5)NASA is the father of ISRO. 6)America has most Olympic medals. 7)Silicon Valley is called technology capital in the world. 8)Dollar is the international currency. 9)American English is the international language. 10)New York has the longest metro in the world. **It shows that America is the superpower in every fields 🇺🇲
@@jeffbrunswick5511 I can feel you. I always talk to people outside of Kernow (Cornwall) and they almost always think its rich. When its one of the poorest regions in Europe. With Cornish and English people barely being able to afford living here. Cornish people being pushed out by second home owners and general anglicisation of areas. If you are thinking of moving down to Kernow. DONT! Trust me its not as nice living here as it is visiting here.
Two issues that weren't addressed: 1. Any heterogenous nation - especially one accepting large numbers of immigrants will have greater inequality due to different starting incomes or wealth. 2. Income inequality is less important if you ignore purchasing power. A person in London may make more than a person in Northern England, but they may also being paying twice as much. One difficulty with point #2 is that the devaluing of a currency will benefit those who have wealth and disadvantage those with lower incomes. A stable currency permits long term saving and growth on an individual level.
@TLDRnews you used the wrong wealth databook. Slightly confusingly the data for 2022 is in the 2023 wealth databook and its now from UBS as UBS owns CS. Uk median wealth is now $151k and gini coefficient now ever so slightly lower than France.
If the issue with the UK's inequality is income, how does that income scale with purchasing power parity? Ie if I earn 50% more in London but everything costs 50% more, does this mean I have more income?
but everything isnt 50% more. taxis are slightly more than me in Lincoln, same with booze. its only house prices you get screwed on. do amazon and ebay change you more than us? etc.
This is dependent on where you are in your career. If you are entry level, you are better off in the north. If you are top of your game, the pay increase is more than cost of living. What you see is people working entry level living in London hoping to make it to the top, but not all of them will.
You fail to explain what the difference between income and wealth, and so your analysis is less useful than it could be. Especially as the failure to understand the difference leads to confusion in the public as to why redistribution policies, such as tax reform, are needed to address wealth inequality, and who exactly does wealth need to be redistributed from and to whom. Without that fundamental knowledge, the public are liable to be misled when thinking about the issue. Why does it matter? Well, people still thing of wealth in terms of cash, but not in terms of assets that generate wealth. So, when you hear that "Rishi Sunak" is worth £800m, it's definitely not all cash in hand. He doesn't have hundreds of bank accounts with that money on deposit. it's mostly in the form of assets that generate cash regularly over time, and which if he needed, and other assets could be sold to generate even more. If he gets a 5% return from those assets annually, you are looking at a passive income of around £30m a year just be doing nothing. In contrast, the vast majority of people who rely on paid work in the past might have had a house, a car, a pension, and some savings, and few investments, which could never generate a passive income large enough to survive on. So, they would to work until retirement. Thus, we have 6-figure house prices, at the same time as as households upto their necks in consumer and mortgage debt debt, just keeping the show on the road, and with less savings over time. And they're the lucky ones... Anyone renting and relying on income from work, is facing lower living standards over time. And the low paid and the poor are even worse off. Campaigners like Gary Stevenson and Richard Murphy note the unfairness of the UK taxation in that it favours passive income over income from a job. That together with stagnant real wage growth in the UK over time, and significant relative low pay, is limiting the ability of the vast majority of wage earners to build wealth, but severely limiting their ability to have healthy and productive working lives. It's one of the growing causes of structural economic stagnation in the UK, resulting in accelerating wealth inequality, and increasing wealth transfers to the asset wealthy. This needs to be better understood by the public, and independent news outlets like yourself can help.
I've been to Mississippi and if the average Non-Londoner is poorer than that, you guys have to be very close to Mad Max Fury Road. I saw a no shit, unregulated, barbeque stand selling alligator meat guys, you CAN'T be poorer than that. I'm genuinely shook.
They are not poorer than that in living standards if you actually see them. Its just going off a random per capita stat for shock value. New Zealand and most of Canada would be on the same level, do you view them as poor as Mississippi as well? Of course not, its the same with majority of the UK. Outside London and in lower cost living areas, a couple on minimum wage (around $14 hr) can easily pay rent, go on holiday once a year and have money for luxuries and savings. No one is forcing them to stay in London or Bristol where rent and cost of living is high. Living standards on the HDI index, is higher than most US states and that is still on a lower per capita income. So like I said, its shock value to say UK is like Mississippi outside London. I've also never seen a tent city in the UK, and we only have a few thousand rough sleepers on the street out of a 70m pop. There is an obvious bias on TDLR, it portrays a lot of facts out of context.
They can't eat any alligators in the UK because of a royal decree from 1269 by king Edward I which declared all alligators to be personal property of the king. Only some guilds with a hereditary mandate may hunt a specific number of alligators each year. Also, while junkie alligator bbq is nowadays allowed, it used to be considered heretical until the late 1800s, and is still looked down upon. Cultural differences I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
A simple search shows the UKs homeless population is a lot higher, five figures for people sleeping rough and 6 figures for people with temporary accommodations. Again, a simple search online and you can see a lot of documented tent cities. Just because you don't see it or aren't looking for it doesn't mean that extreme poverty doesn't exist in the UK because it does and its more common then you are portraying.
@@SLDimarco I see you don't know the difference between rough sleepers (people actually on the street) and Homeless by UK definition. "There were 3,069 people estimated to be sleeping rough on a single night in autumn 2022 in England. This is an increase of 626 people or 26% from 2021 and an increase of 1,301 people or 74% since 2010 when the snapshot approach was first introduced, but was a decrease of 1,682 people or 35% since 2017". - UK Gov So as I say, a few thousand. Homeless in the UK = People in temporary accommodation, living accommodation but not registered there (such as living back at parents house), or staying at friends. Caravan. Staying at emergency accommodation like B&Bs or hotels. 99.9% of homeless people in the UK are not on the street or in a tent. And no, I don't class 25 people in a group living in a tent as a 'tent city'. US doesn't even class anything below 100 people a tent city. Thus no tent cities exist in the UK by this definition. US has around 600,000 rough sleepers or what they call 'unsheltered homeless'. So lets see some stats and sources you can use to counter me?
Tbf as explained in an earlier TLDR video it's a bit misleading as these are PPP-adjusted dollar figures, which skews things against the UK due to the strong dollar and the higher CoL in the UK. Makes for shock value in headlines though.
A fundamental mistake in this video, and in a lot of discussions of inequality, is to focus on wealth and income. If you instead take a look at expenditure, real resource consumption, and utility from consumption then you get a more useful and different view. Now, for example, you can see that being 'wealthy' in London can mean living in a small, noisy home while living in relatively less wealthy Scotland or Wales can mean living in a large, quieter home with the same monetary wealth.
The Gini coefficient measures socialism directly, if you are using it as a measure calling a low Gini coefficient good and high bad is a leftist point of view. I am not commenting on my opinion here but just stating that a politically centred channel taking this stance is not a politically centred view… I’m going to get hate for this but it’s painfully apparent
It’s been like that for decades it’s not suddenly “becoming” I live in a wealth part of Lancashire put you only have to travel 15 mins to Padiham/Nelson/Blackburn/Burnley etc to see the deprivation. The regional inequality in the U.K. has never been properly addressed and levelling up has been scrapped so we don’t have much hope
There are many other wealthy french cities apart from Paris, like Lyon, Montpellier, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Brest etc. Plus it's a much more equal society. Can't say the same about the UK
Clip at 0:27 is actually of an old project known the 'eco village' - the tents were some sort of demonstration thing. It's right by kew bridge in London, so a wee bit misleading (not some kind of slum)
Brexit was the nail in the coffin on this, but Leeds has been trying to get a tram (not even a metro) system for decades and the Government keep failing to deliver. They've also cancelled HS2 East and Northern Powerhouse Rail. Ultimately, no change will happen until the Government starts spending money.
This has literally been a problem since the creation of the UK. It has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Brexit was shit but blaming every single problem the UK faces on "brexit" is getting old
@@Me0wish because this really has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit, not even contributing. This would still 100% be a problem with or without the EU. The EU doesn’t just magic away wealth inequality like this
The problem with the UK, is that too much power is in Wessex while Mercia and especially Northumbria are left out to dry. The obvious solution is for Mercia (Midlands) and Northumbria (North) to become semi independent countries like Scotland and Wales, that are still part of the UK.
When the Tories talk about 'Leveling Up' it's just a distraction from inequality. It's a catchy 2 word slogan that is designed to imply : 'Hmm 🤔isn't it a big mystery why some people are poor? They need to somehow catch up - because we aren't going to redistribute any wealth to help them'. The tories have no intention of actually doing anything significant to address inequality, only to make a big show of doing practically nothing. It is just PR designed to reassure wealthy voters with a guilty conscience that they won't get taxed and to distract critics from the real causes of inequality. It's a bit like Cameron's 'Big Society' - that really meant 'Small Government' AKA public spending cuts = lower taxes for the already rich. The Tories don't communicate to impart information or convey meaning. They only 'message' the public to alter perception and divert attention away from their efforts to increase inequality.
You can thank Thatcher for the Uk's inequality. She deliberately caused this situation. Due to UK's electoral system, 'first past the post', she ensured the 'home counties' were kept well off and the rest didn't matter. The UK needs 'proportional representation' , this will ensure a better spread in parliament.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that we keep electing 10%ers as MPs and PMs. Even the next Labour leader is part of the 5% club. Who represents the majority of the people?
@@kanedNunable thats what he wants you to think. The guy is a mastermind of manipulation. He made Labour a right wing party but convinced most labour supporters that its still left wing. I can't wait to see parents being told they can't have more than 2 children, that parts of the NHS will be sold off, more tightening of any criticism of Israel's illegal occupation and even more strict immigration policies. Even Farage is a fan of Starmer! 😂
Why doesn’t parliament call in the French loans to pay for services and alleviate poverty? The French haven’t paid a penny on their trillion pound debt to Treasury since 1931 and have had a whoopy time thanks to British taxpayers.
Equality in wealth distribution is not a measure of how well a country is doing or even an indication of the standard of living of the poorest people within that country. This is because we can imagine a country with perfectly distributed wealth where everyone is poor and we can also imagine a country with a huge disparity in wealth distribution but where even the poorest people have a great standard of living.
@@mistermiles3271 Agreed, thanks. I removed that comment from my post. After a brief search, it seems as though there is little evidence for a meaningful relationship between economic inequality and growth, positive or negative. Cheers!
Wealth inequality in the UK is probably distorted by high housing prices, which make people appear wealthier than they actually are. Income inequality is a better indicator of consumer spending power and consequently, living standards.
Perhaps reducing the corporation tax rate for the rest of the UK to 15% whilst maintaining 25% in the south east would go some way to fixing this inequality over time.
From a Margaret Thatcher speech 30 years ago......Growth is greater where countries take a lower proportion of the nation's wealth leaving more available to industry and in the pockets of the people. The two most successful economies in the world are the US and Japan, both of whose governments take about 34 % of GDP. Low regulation and small bureaucracy, with flexible attitudes which are market driven. Contrast this with the European Union where regulations have reached unprecedented levels and are hampering the growth of industry and services. These regulations are created by a large non-elected bureaucracy while the powers of nationally elected parliaments and government are progressively diminished. There is the problem in a nutshell thats why there has been no growth in the UK or EU for over 25 years.
Am I the only one that had the opposite impression of the UK that they assumed everyone had? I associated it with poverty compared to the rest of Europe and was surprised that it's the sixth highest GDP in the world
@@oldskoolmusicnostalgia True, but I still think he's wrong that people have the impression that the UK is a rich country. I think the impression people have is that it was once rich but is now in decline both economically and socially.
@@firstsecond9569most people do have this perception. You think it’s poor because your a weirdo and one individual but the vast majority of people think it’s a super rich country and it is technically as it has one of the top GDPs and immagrints kill to come here
@@makeytgreatagain6256 It is 22nd for GDP per capita. Not exactly top in the world. But average gdp per capita doesn't tell the whole story. To visit, one encounters a lot of poor and rough people. While the old grand buildings show it was once wealthy, it feels like a country in decline.
@@firstsecond9569 it is in decline and what’s worse is most of europe is even in a worded state. Just hilarious to think most of europe is even worse, and tbf the working class in the uk have always lived in squalor even during the height of the nation it’s a truly capitalist classist nation for a reason
The thing is with the Gini co-efficient is that it is based upon statistical data but context is required to fully understand it. Here are two examples. In 1990 at her last House of Commons appearance as Prime Minister, Mrs Thatcher said that during her premiership, wealth across each quintile had increased in the UK. Her critics would point out that the top 20% had increased more than the bottom 20%. But the point is, if all of areas are increasing does it matter if one increases more than another? If the situation were reversed would it be better? If the top 20% decreased in wealth but the other 80% increased, is this an improvement? The other point is in an old Top Gear episode, they were performing various tests on 3 small cars, but later on realised that two of the tests were essentially the same but produced different outcomes, which Jeremy Clarkson summarised as "The fastest car is also the second slowest."
I was surprised to see the inequalities of Sweden in your charts, so I did a quick search to confirm. We don't actually talk about these things, we just pretend that we're too "egalitarian" to have economic clefts. Especially ones that seem to relate to discrimination of ethnicity. This does illuminate a bit on our own current financial woes. (The SEK is quite weak right now.) We also (according to my quick search) seem to have lowered our taxes on the high income earners, and with a currently rightwing government that isn't changing any time soon.
Poverty seems to be a key driver in Tory policy take tgf state pension lowest state pension in Europe the elder have been living in poverty for decades yet MPs have 82K plus a year and a huge expense account gas and electricity assistance and many other perks ,private education is given charity status and cost the UK Taxpayers over a billion pounds a year theses are just a few of the serious flaws in the UK inequality rife in the UK and is driven by Tory policy as culture of privelages is the way tgf system works division and inqualty are what drives the Tories on they have done very little else but waste tens of billions of taxpayers money over Brexit COVID pandemic and now we see tgf cost of living Scam with the energy sector and Ofgem a right stitch. up .
"Levelling up" was just a slogan,one of many uttered by the disgraced former P.M. Johnson, there was literally no intention to ever put the strategy in place, which of course is impossible anyway when there is no strategy.
I will give people reading this one good example how many northern towns like my own are disadvantaged. Let's take transport as our subject. The vast majority of jobs in the town are low paid, manual jobs working in the chicken factory, the bacon factory, the crisp factory etc. They're not jobs that can be done from home in the comfort of your living room on a laptop and phone. 90% of the townsfolk have to attend a place of work to carry out their manual jobs. Bearing this in mind we look at the local public transport which as follows. There are no trams or underground systems. There's only one train station in the town so that can't be used for commuting to work as it next stops 30 miles down the track in an entirely different town. The taxis are very expensive, one recent example I heard was £32 for a 12 mile round trip, then we finally come to buses. There's actually parts of the town not serviced at all by buses because the local private bus company won't run any routes they deem not profitable enough. I've personal experience of this when a few years ago my grandparents were left completely housebound when the local bus company axed their bus service from three buses per day, last one at 12 lunch, to zero buses because they said the route was no longer financially viable after government cut the subsidy they were giving the bus company to provide that service. So we've this combination of most people needing to travel if only for work combined with very poor to none existent public transport. This in turn means people like myself are heavily reliant upon our own cars to get to work at such as 5.30am on a cold, winter Sunday morning to start a 12 hour day shift when there's simply no public transport option to get the over 4 miles each way. This is why I say, I'm all for a cleaner environment but if the government persist with this policy of electric cars only from 2035 then it will kill northern towns like mine. People like me will be removed from the workforce and be on benefits. This is because of the combination of the heavy reliance of needing transport to get to a manual job, not having any public transport options then getting a low wage that means you can't afford to go out and buy an expensive electric car. Once again, for the poorer areas, any incentive or even ability to work is removed again. Fine if you want to go all electric but first you need to spend billions in investment money in northern towns like mine creating a good, reliable public transport system because the vast majority of locals will never be able to afford an electric car and this public transport improvement that's needed is exactly what the government is not doing. Even once they realise the situation which could take forever and finally give us the money needed then it's going to take years to build all the actual infrastructure that will be needed to support a public transport network in the town. Infrastructure that's simply never existed in the past. I think it puts it into perspective when people talk about heat pumps then there's people living in houses just outside my town who still to this day use heating oil because they've never had a main gas supply. The infrastructure, the pipes have never been laid. This is a world that people living in the likes of London have never seen with their own eyes so they think everywhere is exactly the same as where they live. They've no idea that things like this still exist today here in the UK because they've never experienced or witnessed it.
@@adineatha9766 My other half is from Sanderfjord, we have a long distance relationship. I absolutely love Norway…. It’s one of the most beautiful countries on the planet, but I don’t think moving to Norway is considered an option.
@@adineatha9766 The U.K. is not doing as bad as its being reported here all the time. People like to complain about a lot of things, Norway voted twice not to join the European Union, and the U.K. voted to leave. The difference between British residents and Norwegian residents is massive. Imagine if we in the U.K. had military conscription like in Norway… some people would have a fit
London may have a higher income but cost of living is also much higher, thus translated wealth may be lower. Just a theory in why income and wealth equality paints a different picture
@@iamagi after a recession and economic collapse. and that wealth started by selling everything off which we now pay much more for. boomers basically sold off their kids future for financial gain.
Because no money is diversified away from London. Office workers should be allowed to work fully remotely if they choose. That’d allow people to move out of London and spread spending around the country.
Great video and points. In fact, I live in London, one of the richest cities in the world and the largest urban economy in Europe. My point, you need to work for yourself in "gold collar" quaternary activity in order to realistically afford to live here! 😅 Just like the people who create TDLR(one such example I believe)!
London being so wealthy is a result of almost 1/3rd of the population living in London. Those areas with "lower incomes" are also less densely populated and way less expensive to live in. This is a superficial analysis at best.
Comparing German average wealth is a bit misleading given (i'm assuming) wealth is being calculated via property ownership and house prices and most Germans rent due to great socialist renter protections. Germans rent long term and some Germans are still renting in Berlin on rents fixed in the 1980s.
I’d say in the UK’s sense if you can afford inflation then your pretty much well off. But if you live in london the cost of living will leave you with no money at the end of the month.
The problem is the government sticking it’s nose in where it’s not needed. The government make it so difficult for honest businesses to work and turn a profit, so that all your left with is companies that bully. Take for example house builders, there’s only a handful of large companies because the industry buys all the land, even if it means waiting on it for years (because they can) and then slowly releasing the builds so that they can keep the prices artificially high. While smaller honest house builders are not able to buy and hold land.
The substantial increase of UK GINI coefficient in the last decade is due to the policies of Tory government favoring owner class at the expenses of working class.
To be fair, inequality wasn't particularly addressed by the Blair government in their 13 years in power, and the current Starmer administration looks like they're *at least* as corporatist as the Blair gov't, if not moreso. Sadly the UK's poor have no viable option right now.
You use the map showing London as wealthy and everywhere else not so. However your map of Scotland seems to generalise the wealth, for instance, Edinburgh and east Lothian is far more wealthy than Glasgow/Dundee, but you have just grouped that whole area into one zone, as if Glasgow/dufermline/stirling perth and dundee are all in the same wealth bracket. This is clearly not the case in Scotland. Propert in edinburgh and the surrounding areas is far greater in value than any of those other areas i mentioned.
Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription: ground.news/tldr
Could you make a video researching the contradiction between the UK's poverty and lower living-standards, while still being a prime destination for illegal migration? It seems weird to me that people would risk their life crossing the channel, only to end up in a worse economy than the countries they most likely had to cross to get there.
You seem to be being hammered by "investment" bots in the comments can you ban some of them?
Wealth inequality data is much less reliable than income inequality data because while an individual's income can be tracked by the government through tax payment, it is much harder to measure a person's wealth (it is not clear what counts and wealth and what doesn't) and some countries don't record the data on wealth.
Simply by changing poor tax choices, the UK can radically reduce income, wealth and regional inequalities and take a huge deadweight off our economy. Vested interests don;t want this discussed.
@@BenJamin-rt7ui can you expand on what specifically you mean?
It's funny that when he says "quite how poor the rest of the UK is" a clip from London is used. Even in London there's a huge divide in wealth and income
You can say that about any large town or city. Where do you draw the line. Chelsea is one of the most expensive areas of London but still has poor people.
Because London is England. Just London, that's it.
@@jamieakahenry i saiying economy does not matter. the economy made killed queen elizabeth and the uk collasped becasue of war in ukraine
MONEY DOES NOT DO FIX YOUR EVERYDAY JOB OR PAYING AT SCHOOL
@jamieakahenry in 2016, they got a massive shock. There's still life beyond London, 40 million people, whodathunk?
@@ganados0 and now those 40 million people are getting a massive shock as they realise that the people in London were right about how much of a cock up it was
It's amazing to see that since the 80s when everything was privatised and taken out of public hands that the wealth/income inequalities really started to show and when thatcher said the banks would keep the UK afloat with no need for industry
Shame you can't eat that observation
NHS is public, happy the way it’s working ?
@@SK-vg3mw Given the fact that it's had 13 years being absolutely destroyed by the Tories and sabotaged, I'd say they are still holding their own. Imagine it under a government that actually cared
@SK-vg3mw Perhaps you should try traveling to the US and see how much better the NHS is compared to a privatized system, they spend the most per capita in the world on healthcare and end up having tens of millions of people with no insurance and many more that are underinsured and would go bankrupt if they were to get sick or get into an accident.
@@SK-vg3mw in 2010 it was one of the best healthcare providers. Then someone took the power, destroyed the nhs, got Brexshit done, and destroyed the pound.
As an Irish Person, I saw the map of London being a wealthy island in the UK, and immediately could project that onto my own country
The British government just made Dublin the London of Ireland during British rule, because it worked so well in England 😂
London is propped up by Russian oligarchs and other forms of dirty money. It’s a cesspool of overpriced housing, corrupt politicians, and rampant crime.
Someone recently described the UK as Hungary with Singapore stuck on the bottom. We are almost definitely a poor eastern European country now
Hungary is a great country and Poland has a booming economy. Eastern European countries are well ahead in living standards than Uk.
@@marinamarley956Because of public ownership. That is the way forward.
Funnily enough I’ve just come back from the World Athletics in budapest this afternoon and no I can assure you they are still quite some way behind the UK. I talked to a lot of people there, especially taxi drivers and the average wage is about 1200- 1400 $ a month and inflations over 20%. Hungary is still well behind the UK economically.
@@liamb8644public ownership of what?
@@jackkruese4258 You jave to go out. Taxi drivers in Budapest are specific part of the population.
I would be really interested to see if the fact so much of the UK wealth is held abroad in shell company's makes the UKs wealth look more equal. Wealth is alot easier to hide than income after all.
If that were the case you'd see a far starker skew of mean wealth vs median wealth, which the video (4:21) shows to not be the case. In terms of median wealth the UK is doing far better than the US and Germany and not far off Switzerland, which was quite surprising to me.
Do u think closet Tories tldr are gonna spend significant time discussing that
If anything, that would make the figures less equal. It's not as if your average plumber has offshore assets.
Everybody worships Elvis Presley (Dollars). This tends to have an effect on patriotism (Pounds Sterling). Give it up for the man like Elvis!
In the case of foreigners it seems reasonable, they’re taxed on what they bring here. They don’t owe the Uk anything beyond that, why should they?
The economic models of the UK have exclusively relied upon low education and pay. Damaging the health service, underfunding schools and removing rights are all about keeping poor people working and not thinking.
Because of:-
1. The historic inequalities dating back to Feudal times that Attlee's reforms never dared address
2. The 'rent-based' economic model that Thatcher set up during the 1980's. Something which subsequent administrations have only sought to exacerbate.
What does rent based mean in this context?
@@tomlxyz It's an old term. At the crudest sense, 'The Drawing of Rent' is wealth that is extracted through non-productive means. Best to think of it through examples. Landlordism, privatised utilities (and essential services), excessive dividends, corrupt financial practises, corrupt state contracts. In all such cases, it is not only that wealth is extracted far in excess of the work that has been put in. But that it happens not as a one-off, but continually. Thus creating the 'trickle up' of wealth that is responsible for the inequality shown in the video.
The question then becomes, how is this possible?
'The historic inequalities dating back to Feudal times that Attlee's reforms never dared address' Would be interested to know more what you mean by this, I don't think I've ever heard someone mention this before. Inequalities from Feudal times makes sense to me, but how was Attlee involved specifically? Wouldn't that be a failure of multiple British leaders?
@@pm3302the working classes are not mostly immigrants. They make up 90%+ of the population. Only the top few % have enough wealth to have his model work for them.
@@marktaylor6491 i think that's called "economic rent" ("amount of money earned that exceeds that which is economically or socially necessary")
Either way, what are some concrete examples that were introduced during Thatcher's time in office?
I get TLDR is focused on short content but this seemed to just serve as a good introduction to the question of UK economic equality rather than actually explain it. I was hoping to see for example which professions/industries pay the most in the South East of the UK (e.g. Finance, Tech, Biotech etc.), concentration of foreign investment in certain industries and locations etc.
I agree, that would be very interesting. A more thorough look at the effect of government policies (and possible future policies) would interest me most.
I agree, this video was not about explaining UK economic inequality, just stating it and showing data that shows it
Exactly, the regional differences in the coast of living and other variables is not mentioned enough.
This is only TH-cam!
Some economists have projected that both the U.S. and parts of Europe could slip into a recession for a portion of 2023. A global recession, defined as a contraction in annual global per capita income, is more rare because China and emerging markets often grow faster than more developed economies. Essentially the world economy is considered to be in recession if economic growth falls behind population growth.
My main concern now is how can we generate more revenue during quantitative times? I can't afford to see my savings crumble to dust.
It's a delicate season now, so you can do little or nothing on your own. Hence I’ll suggest you get yourself a financial expert that can provide you with valuable financial information and assistance
Very true! I've been able to scale from $50K to $189k in this red season because my Financial Advisor figured out Defensive strategies which help portfolios be less vulnerable to market downturns
How can I reach this adviser of yours? because I'm seeking for a more effective investment approach on my savings?
My consultant is ‘’Catherine Morrison Evans’’ I found her on a CNBC interview where she was featured and reached out to her afterwards. She has since provide entry and exit points on the securities I focus on. You can look her up online if you care supervision. I basically follow her trade pattern and haven't regretted doing so.
We have to remember that the UK is such an equal society that 0.5% of the population controls 90% of the wealth and assets. As has been said the UK is a group of poor nations with a few exceedingly and obscenely rich people living in them. Poverty it should be explained is not about how much money you earn ; if you cannot afford or you are struggling from month to month to keep a roof over your head,pay for your energy needs or put food on the table you are in poverty and in the UK that is upwards of 30% of the population and is rising
That is a good point
Bollocks
You are making it up
So why is the state taxing the poor? Where are the trillions the workers have paid the socialist welfare state
@@Nickle314Disprove it then
@@pivomanslovensko the issue on wealth relates to government debt.
Let’s take one part socialist pensions. They have zero assets. Unfunded means no assets.
Working from the last two ONS estimates of the pension debts that is 600,000 per taxpayer. Negative wealth. The state pension puts you in poverty and causes the social care crisis
So what if mr average had retired last year but had invested his Ni free of taxes in a low cost FTSE tracker? He would have had a fund of 1.3 million. 40K a year in dividends.
So the state has destroyed the wealth of the masses.
650 people have done that
It's more about wanting to do anything than can. The Tories have treated the UK more like Feudalism than anything else, letting the peasants eat scraps and not caring if they die because of it, as they take everything for themselves.
And they are elected by the English working class so the idiots who vote for them deserve their poverty. It’s the rest of us that dont
The UK never got over feudalism. Why do you think they have a House of Lords? They’re not even trying.
The Tories treat the working poor like that because the working poor just let them do it!
The working poor just need to rise up against all this injustice once and for all.😑
@@AnthonyD-yy2inbut they won’t. And so they remain willing slaves as they should
@@makeytgreatagain6256tory detected, opinion rejected
Never forget that without London the UK is as rich as Mississippi
I think at this point it should be seen as a compliment that we are as rich as Mississippi because the Tories have tried to make it worse
Only if you look at per capita, if you look at living standards and HDI, it is way higher than Mississippi. Saying we are like Mississippi is done for shock value. New Zealand and most of Canada would be at the same level, and you don't think they are same living standard as Mississippi right? Exactly..
Yeah but this is probably measured in USD and you need to take into account things like purchasing power parity etc. It's hard to make exact comparisons.
Plus, while this is true on income inequality - does that take into account other benefits such as free healthcare?
The UK certainly has a lot of issues with regards to inequality, but I think ignoring other benefits is not helping the analysis. I work with Germans who say equivalent insurance costs for what they get with NHS access would cost thousands.
The SNP is desperate to cut Scotland off from the wealth and tax take of SE England - go figure.
I think you've misunderstood why they made a point about that, and it's not to compliment London.
Im 37 and worked my entire life, ive signed on for 2 weeks when i was about 22... ive worked for the government for over a decade and im pivitol to my team, they cant function without me as i do all of their work.
I can save maybe £20pm, i am constantly afraid and depressed because of how hard it is just to feed my children, as a single man i get no help.
This country is fucked, this government is fucked.
There are people like me who are well off, who are in the top 2% income bracket. You need to change job every few years and try to maximize your salary. That's how I got mine.
So basically your a slave 😂 why are you working hard for nothing I'm on mim wage and I save 70% of it a month
@@Alex-df4ltyep. What do you work as. I do tech myself and only make 24k but I am looking to upgrade myself soon
I have always tried to work and pay my way but I am one of them guys that is way smarter than I thought I was when I was 18 but at them ages had no encouragement so believed I was dumber after working in all these dead end jobs full of desperate liars and terrible inhumane managers I realised too late now I have no idea where to go I just want money because most jobs are pointless and fake with money I can do what I want I am far from materialistic but unfortunately money controls everything because of are believe in it so I rather have a million in bank than be working Job to pay for a place you didn't chose to live in just Purley the Economics of the country forse you to live there
"Levelling up" funds went nowhere near the poorest constituencies and went almost exclusively to Tory constituencies.
They just want to take care of their voters, they couldn't give a fuck about the rest of us. The conservatives aren't patriots, they are wankers.
Exactly what the English voted for
Levelling up the pockets of oxbridge mates. When will Britain get over the hype of Russell groups? We give power to poets not competent people who build things. Why not hire a software developer? Or someone in construction management. Nah we'll continue to awe at kids that read basic philosophy books with no life experience or outside perspective.
@@freeopinion2140i think you're describing more humanities v/s vocational/science than russell v/s non-russell
Agreed, but as someone in a Tory town, the levelling up funds are just a vehicle for giving money to Tory supporters, not to benefit the town. Our town is literally worse because of levelling up…
There’s always been a massive wealth divide. Socialist policies have been painted as communism and taxation on high levels of wealth or profit is frowned upon as ‘inappropriate’. Whilst the naming for this hasn’t always been the same, the ideology has been consistent for hundreds of years.
Wealth divide is fine, it's income divide that is bad for society.
These hundreds of years was also the the period when went from everyone except a few being poor to today's world few few people are poor.
@@iamagi That depends a lot on which country you happen to live in I think. It's also relative: a poor person in the US is sill be better off than a poor person in, say, Sudan. But that doesn't mean the gap between rich and poor in the US is much better. And there's still hundreds of millions who live in abject poverty: acording to the World Bank, about 9.2% of the world, or 719 million people, live on less than $2.15 a day. In the United States, the richest country in the world, 37.9 million people - lived in poverty as of 2021. 47% of the world lives on less than $6.85 per day and 84% live on less than $30 per day.
@@znail4675why though?
I'd expect two people doing different jobs to earn different amounts of money.
I wouldn't want my salary to be equal to someone who is unemployed for example. Otherwise why would I not just be unemployed?
@@SaintGerbilUK in the 1960s the average corporate executive was paid 20 times what the average worker in their corporation was paid. Now the average corporate executive is paid around 400 times what the average worker is paid. And yet the performance of those companies hasn't gotten any better. Of course different jobs pay different amounts, but when the people in charge of the payrolls mysteriously end up with multiple mansions and yachts and the people doing the work are told that theres just not enough money to pay them enough to pay rent and buy food at the same time theres something wrong with things
This is why I have always said that a nation that is large enough YET they push for a single nucleus of economic activity is doing things WRONG. All you create is rural exodus and extreme competition (which lowers wages) in the capital. London, Paris, Tokyo, ... all are guilty of the same sin.
Agreed, we have similar issue with government focusing on Dublin for decades, only recently did other cities get some focus but it’s still hugely tipped to a city that is over saturated and has diminishing returns on investment.
Ireland are content in keeping Ireland a stepping stone into The Kingdom of God (Great Britain).
@@Darren-fm3pe tbh that was true in a lot of ways before brexit, Irish government tended to copy bits from the UK on laws and processes, but it’s becoming less so since brexit as the government pivots more to Scandinavia and French government styles, it’s a bit messy as they haven’t decided exactly who they prefer and they haven’t stopped copying some UK moves but it shows how much soft power was lost by the Tory government in recent years.
London has low wages? You could buy a big house in a neighboring city and commute through Heathrow, earning a big profit.
@@theBear89451 oh what a brilliant idea I'm sure everyone would love an hours commute in and out of work everyday. Are you sure you aren't 30p Lee in disguise?
The government has really called things more difficult for its citizens, and we can't sit back and bear all the consequences of the bad governance. It's obvious we are headed for hyperinflation,it is always the poor who take the hit.
It's no longer a story that the world is experiencing a global economic downturn, I'm so happy that I've been receiving $64,000 from my $15,000 investment every 8 days
HOW !! I know it's possible I would appreciate if you show me how to go about it.
You actually need an expert trader assigned by a registered broker company to help you out. I currently trade expert Mrs Lori Jean. I thought I'm the only one trading with her .
Since I started my investment of $7,000 with Mrs Lori, I am now having $29,450 in my portfolio.
I have also been trading with her, The profits are secured and over a 100% return on investment directly sent to your wallet. I made up to $560,000 in months trading with her.
Because the Tories have been in power for 80 of the last 123 years.
And the aristocracy for the last 1000.
Maybe Labour should be less of a muppet then.
Selling off our gold reserves to pay for their failures.
The winter of discontent before.
The Tories may be shit, but they are slowly making everything shit, whereas Labour just want to accelerate the downfall.
Could you do an episode on what it would take to level up the UK and another one on the USA?
The English will never distribute enough well they are greedy and self serving by their very nature. They suck all the resources they can put of Scotland with companies listed in England to make it look like we are subsidised by the oppressors to the south.
Why put the thumbnail as “why the uk is unequal” then waste my time and not explain why at all
It’s because all the wealth is accumulated in london
Even within London the inequality in wealth is crazy. Whilst the average person might get a higher wage for a like for like job elsewhere e.g. retail etc. Its all swallowed up by the high cost of living there.
London is a tale of two cities.. where most are house sharing and barely get by
London has some of the worst income inequality in the Western World. So many millionaire investment bankers combined with so many bus drivers who barely scrape by paycheck to paycheck
You don't need "wealth" to live a decent life.
You need a steady normal income, a safety net guaranteed by the government, work-life balance, a culturally rich environment, free access to good education, a society without class structures... . Now compare that to the UK. Love from Germany :).
ohne die Freude der Köstlichkeiten wie 'Wigan Kebab' hat Deutschland ja nix für a decent life
@@ottohashmi Mein Gott, redest du einen Blödsinn, aber was will man von einem Briten erwarten, dessen Horizont nicht über seinen ekelhaften British Breakfast Tellerrand hinausgeht
That comment is so wrong. Because wealth is not just wealth, it opens up opportunities and networks, which in turn gives access to better job opportunities. When you rely on your employment income to get by, all it takes to fall into poverty is to lose your job. Wealth on the other hand is a buffer against such circumstances, and you can invest large chunks of it to generate more income.
@@ottohashmi Echt jetzt ??
@@oldskoolmusicnostalgia You sound like an American without the advantages one has living in Europe, lol.
Haven't watched it, but it's culture.
Starting from the top, the wealthy in the UK are generally less snobbish than wealthy Americans, but they are way more elitist. As someone who hasn't gone to uni, I've been dumped because "my mum doesn't want me dating someone without a degree". I have made friends who have broken through that ceiling, and spending any time among those people it's all about the school you went to, or your university (Oxbridge preferably, if not Durham and Warwick). They are nasty people per se, but there is a level of us and them about them.
Then you have the upper middle class, or as I call it the embarrassed middle class. Dad works an executive level job, mum stays at home, kids go to boarding school, grammar school or an outstanding state school in an exclusive area. Likely to vote Labour or Lib Dem, pro-EU, would love to help the poors and believe they understand what poor people need by reading the Guardian and a paper by an academic. Think the ULEZ is an awfully good idea while driving around in a brand new range rover that emits more emissions than a 2015 diesel but is still ULEZ compliant so Dad can park at the station in Esher.
One step down and you have the newly middle class. These people have money because they worked for it. Made money back in the 80s and 90s during the tech boom and the dotcom bubble. These are computer programmers, data scientists, IT specialists. They may or may not have degrees, but they know that free markets gave them the opportunity they needed to get on the property ladder and secure a good standard of living. Kids go to state schools, but they have 3 square meals a day and don't need to worry about rent.
Then you have the upper working class. These people have secure jobs as team leaders, receptionists, technicians, jobbies and labourers on contruction sites, admin roles in call centers and banks etc, basically anyone who works full time 40 hours a week earning between £12-15 an hour. They live paycheck to paycheck renting their home, can never save enough to buy a place but always has money for football, alcohol and a week in Tenerife. These people lack any ambition in life, getting a good job and moving up the corporate ladder is too much like hard work. So they will amble along in their dead end job, trying to make the most of their miserable existence, mostly with booze, drugs and holidays to Spain. I envy their ignorance.
Then you have the lower working class. These people lack education, they may have problems with addictions, they may have abusive relationships, they may be struggling with debt. They work part time gig work like deliveroo, Uber, zero hour contracts. They might work 10-20 hours a week, they constantly miss rent payments. They likely struggle to find employment due to lacking education, or their appearance puts off potential employers. These are the people who choose between heating and eating. Who need their children to have free scchool dinners. These are the people on benefits britain and other poor porn on channel 4. They have largely given up and who can blame them. Reliant on hand outs for everything, it's humiliating and a horrible existence.
At the very bottom you have the homeless and undocumented. These are either victims of slavery, trafficking etc. Turning up in the UK with no documents or right to be there, sleeping on the street because if they go to a shelter they willget sent to the police and deported. You have people with addictions who are so far gone that friends and family long since gave up on them. They survive by begging and charity.
So once we catagorise people, what next. How do we get a street beggar into Oxbridge. Well you don't, focusing all the money on the poorest in society is a great way to funnel money directly into criminal gangs who exploit those people in the first place. It's pointless targeting the poorest, nothing will come of it. Starting from the top, you break up the elitism. That doesn't mean nationalizing private schools, but it means forcing private schools to take in a certain % of students from state schools on full scholarships. If 10% of Etonians were scouted from state schools, then it wouldn't be a closed loop, and there would be more upwards mobility. Granted only from the middle classes up to the upper class, but social mobility nonetheless.
Next we get the upper middle class to check their privilege. That doesn't mean they can't talk on social issues. It means they see the opportunities they had as what they really are. The safe, secure learning environment. The additional paid tutoridge. The friend who has a house in london you can stay in for your work experience in PWC. The second home in France that allowed you to learn French as a native. The nutritional meals at regular set times to schedule your learning around. The access to sports and social clubs that kept you fit and socially active. These are the things poor people need. Not nationalised electricity, or ground source heat pumps. the upper middle represent the greatest amount of accessible wealth in this country. The upper have it locked away in overseas investments and what not. The upper middle are the ones spending in the economy and getting taxed on their income. We need to get them onboard with genuine progressive policies that actually solve problems, not just make them feel happy inside and like they're doing their bit.
Next we get the lower middle class. These people should be the inspiration for the working class. Forget footballers and Love Island contestants. It's the self employed electrician, the IT consultant, the civil service project manager, the accountant, the computer programmer. These people with their mortgage free houses, BMW cars, care free lifestyle. Thats what the aspiration should be for the working class. We need to get more working class people to believe that they can also achieve this easy living lifestyle if they actually put their mind to it and stuck with it. Went for that promotion at work with the extra responsibilities. Did that online course on cyber security. Didn't go out drinking because tonight I've got an online lecture on generative learning. That's what we need to be targeting.
So the working class, we need to get rid of the crab bucket mentality that is dragging the nation down. Fortunately with social media and the hustler mindset, the grind lifestyle, people are starting to realise that working hard is not just rewarding but can be fun as well. I worry that people are looking for easy ways to make money quick. Instead of harder ways to make money sustainably. But even if you leave Tesco to start working as a real estate agent, thats progress and it can quickly escalate once you have the right attitudes and mindset.
then it's about giving the struggling working class the support they need, not so they can have an easy life, but so their children can have better opportunities to break the cycle of poverty. Things like free school meals, better access to sports and social clubs, better access to public transport, better schools and after school study clubs, better access to safe spaces away from school where children from troubled homes can study, relax, and develop key skills to help their mental health and self belief.
If we can get 1% of people to move one step up this ladder then we will have both the fastest growing and fastest equalizing economy in europe. If we can get 2% of people to move one rung up the ladder then the UK would be unrecognisable.
Lawyer in London gets paid 160£k. Lawyer in Manchester gets paid 60£k.
a great follow up to this would be to explain this disparity between the income and the wealth inequality seen in some countries, I think that'd be a great video
The government wether you left or right it makes no difference they couldn't give a dam about us the people
What they're not telling you about wealth inequality is that wealth data is notoriously inaccurate. Countries that appear to have the highest wealth inequality are generally the only ones with reasonably accurate wealth dara.
yep, similar story with sexual violence statistics, for example. Really highlights how data is a good tool, but useless and even dangerously misleading if not looked at critically.
inequalty can also be quite obvious to the naked eyes
World Institute for Development Economics Research uses estimates to counter this bias. This is how they are able to rate African countries high.
High inequality countries tend to either be super underdeveloped i.e. most of Africa or over developed like Europe where a lot of money concentrated on a few wealthy families but still have generous public spending so that the average citizen is still well off. The UK took the worst of both worlds where it is a wealthy country with some of the poorest citizens.
@@xDemon1cxHow are women getting assaulted misleading?
If Nimbys didn't opposse new houses in underdeveloped parts of the country, if our trains didn't cost more than a commute by car and actually ran properly. If Londoners didn't buy second properties in seaside towns and leave them empty half the year then maybe we can start redistributing wealth.
if u get rid of illigal migrants and reduce the demand of housing u reduce the prices, if ur bureucracy would be less u could cut cost and taxes and if u would give more land to be build with less green restriction u would both increase income of people and reduce living costs further.
and all of that would help immensely without redistributing wealth even more.... when wealth is more equal than income, u already do alot of redistribution.
@@Gardstyle35 smh you’re fighting the Tory’s battle for them
@@lichaiepperson3009 its mine as well. tell me where i am wrong and why.
@@Gardstyle35 Because that isn't the problem, the solution, or anything more than a Tory grift to ensure the country stays fucked forever.
It's not exactly hard to realise that. But hey, continue forcing the blame on the innocent while the guilty laugh their way to the bank with the livlihood of our country stuffing their pockets.
GET RID OF YOUR ROYAL FAMILY. THEY COST THE TAX PAYER BILLIONS OF POUNDS TO DO NOTHING.
Wealth often does not include pensions in the data. The Netherlands has giant pensions which compensate the differences between wealth and income in the sources cited here. This fact can be easily googled
I think the question is far more fundamental than that, yes the data may be skewed but is income equality actually a good thing?
Would you want your income to be equalised with an unemployed person?
@@SaintGerbilUKthere is a graduation in which way income inequality is acceptable.
A top manager responsible for a company or division and x number of employees should earn more than a person bringing the coffee. Sounds nasty to some, but itnis about responsibilities.
What is making inequality unacceptable if if such a manager is earning 100 times more than the average person in the company. There needs to be a balance and a ceiling. No person is worth getting paid 3 million a year.
An international company I once worked for had the rule that the ceo would have salary at maximum 7 times the average pay of the rest of the employees.
You can debate the number 7, but at least there was a balance and a ceiling. When I read yesterday that ftse ceo's got pay rises of 500k, sorry, that is not OK.
I don't think income equality is going to include the unemployed for some reason: No one would survive on it, therefore, the economy would be dead.@@SaintGerbilUK
@@ab-ym3bf Sure, I'm sure the number could well be higher than 7x.
Why is that not ok?
If you are not happy with your wages renegotiate. If everyone did that then you would have a much closer salary to your manager or CEO.
Or alternativly why not start your own company then you can be the CEO with a 7x salary, you can even be a "cool" boss and only earn 5x.
The other side of this argument is how replaceable are you?
If I can get someone else to do your job for the same money or less why would I not?
We have flooded the job market with cheap labour, which have been dragging wages down for the past 25 years.
If you want to be worth a good wage be irreplaceable.
If you want to earn a shed load start a company, but there are risks.
@@SevenEllen Unemployed people still have an income in the form of welfare and JSA (for a while).
But I agree, it absolutly would kill the economy, even if it was survivable, because there would be no incentive to not be unemployed.
Why is britain so unequal?
Short answer: Tories
Long answer: Conservatives
Longer answer a two party con trick.
Wish it was just one party. Be easy to vote them out.
Labour are 100x better but still completely against the working and middle classes in favour of the rich and the foreigners. I won't vote for either
The question isn’t can the government do anything about it, rather is it in their interest to do so?
Whether you are pro or anti-Brexit, the point about how much time and energy was wasted on dealing with it should really sink in. I really hope if my country's government ever goes in this direction, they will bear that experience in mind.
I mean is anybody surprised that UK has one of the most income disparities after voting for conservative government consecutively for 13 years.
Try 40 of the last 53 years, 80 of the last 123 years. We are not here by accident.
@@Kage-jk4pj If only that applied to people like Nadine Dorris and Boris🤦♂
@@Kage-jk4pjSure. Punish the mentally disabled for being mentally disabled. That'll teach them.
Lazy is fixable. Low intelligence isn't.
What is good about having everyone having the same income?
People do different jobs at different levels and should be paid differently.
If I was paid the same as an unemployed person do you think I'd go to work every day?
Would anyone?
@@SaintGerbilUK You should be getting paid more than an unemployed person but the unemployed person should still be able to not starve or freeze to death. Why are you angry at the people with less than you and not the ones preventing you from having more?
I liked how you explained the GINI coefficient, I read about it a few times, but I think this one is going to sink in forever.
Everything else about the UK situation was secondary to this video for me, all the things that I already knew :) (unfortunately)
As long as the monarchy exists, that GINI coefficient will never get to a number that is adequate.
@@Peter-bk4pzAgreed
Income in London is immediately eradicated by the cost of everything... they should do assess what money is left after taking away basic costs
Speaking as a citizen of UK Northeast: the fact were didn't even have a COVID Test or Vaccine Distribution Centre says it all (Vaccines were eventually done in numerous places after such as a Library were i got mine xD)
Our NHS is always under stocked with resources and roughly 2 of 7 of people aged 30+ I know of still live with their parents if not in a committed relationship due of cost of living prices. Been the case for many years now
How do you know the NHS is ‘understocked’? The problem isn’t funding, its the middle managements who aren’t necessary AT ALL.
If you didn’t have covid centres then you should count yourselves lucky as you dodged a bullet.
Shut up bot nobody cares about COVID or getting a clot shot
I live in Norfolk and we got our vaccines inside a gym and a museum.
If you don't find a means of multiplying your money, you will wake up one day and realize that the money you thought you had, had been exhausted. Investment is a ladder to climb the financial wall.
Who is your financial coach, do you mind hooking me?
@kingbush9328Cryptocurrency investment, but you will need a professional guide on that.
Facebook 👇
Evelyn C. Sanders
Telgrm.....
When the Prime Minister is the wealthiest person in Parliament, has not revealed what and where his assets are and his father in law's Indian company gets big Government contracts, what can possibly go wrong?
There is no wonder why there is a growing northern independence movement, especially in Yorkshire there have been calls for devolution for years. Southern parties offer nothing to solve Northern problems. We are culturally, linguistically, historically, economically, and socially different from the South, it can hardly be considered the same country.
Devolution ≠ independence
As a Northerner, we have no interest in independence, its laughable. We are more patriotic English than the South are.. And if you are a Northerner as well, then you know its fringe. What we want is some more devolved powers like our city mayors etc, not a parliament though. Although I would like England to have a parliament outside Westminster.
That's what we say in the South too😹The ruling Establishment is like a different people and a different culture, with different values and schools, and hospitals and justice and taxes. They rule the country in their own interests - at our expense. We want revolution. Would that work for the North?
Not at all, as a Northerner living in SE England (for the money ofc) it's still all the UK to me. I'd be firmly against devolution if it'll result in the farce that has been Scottish and Welsh devolution. More layers of politics just creates more problems, more corruption and more way to pick your pocket.
@@ricequackers Exactly
All you have to do is compare Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland and it tells you everything you need to know
I had a British co-worker for many years and we talked about the British inequality one day. His explanation was that inequality has become part of British culture in the sense that most Brits accept it and some even prefer it that way over the alternative.
I mean, that's all there really is to Britain; that, bad food, colonisation and being tossed like a hot potato from the Romans to the Normans.
What is the alternative?
@@Beleth420 I presume the alternative the OP alludes to is a labour government and more EU friendly regime.
Levelling up was never intended to "level up" anything. It was a political soundbite meant to make it look like the government was doing something. And you shouldn't get bogged down in pointless discussions about how expensive levelling up is, that's antithetical to the point of the whole process.
You mentioned Johnson and Sunaks efforts to level-up. What about the role of Truss in levelling down?
He also failed to mention Sunak's contribution to "leveling up", which was to redirect funds from a poorer electorate to a richer (Tory) one.
@@raggedcriticalAny sources?
@@natenae8635 google "sunak redirected funding". No shortage of reporting - it was big news all the way back in 2022.
@@natenae8635Sunak was filmed in Tunbridge Wells (I think) saying that he was putting a stop to channelling money into poor urban areas.
@@clarecrawford9677 Has he done this and when did he say that? Was it before he was chancellor or during?
Genuine question
I was always right-wing but must admit, we need to do something! Please correct me if I don’t understand economics but I would have thought surely the average wage should be enough to own a house and live a modest life. Nothing flashy but it seems you need two/three times this to achieve this. Surely that isn’t fair or right? What do all these people under £30K per year do?
buth UK and US (and, very unfortunately, my own country Turkey) followed Friedmanist recipes which invariably end in de-industrialization.. Friedman is a clown and his economic theories are very frequently very wrong (such as his replacement of "amount of all transactions" by GDP in MV=PY monetarist equation. Here M is amount of money, V is velocity, P is price level. Y, in its original fisher version, was the "amount of all transactions", but friedman replaced it by GDP, which is wrong even in an arithmetical sense. A high school student wouldnt make this error..)
The Northern areas of the UK has always been ignored by the south, of the UK, even though the south grew rich on the back of the 'industrial north'. The north should 'demand the money back', off the from London and the home counties...
Bit of a shame that over 2 minutes of this video is ads
I'll explain it in one word GOVERNMENT !
Exactly! Time has shown that businesses only make this problem worse, the government needs to take them to task!
you explained the gini coefficient really well
It is pretty funny how London is presented as being a place where everyone is rich. I used to live there and whilst I knew some very rich people, most people I knew were poor and really struggled to survive. Think of all the people that work in tourism and hospitality. These are almost exclusively minimum wage jobs, yet the average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is £1,500 per month. London functions off of an endless supply of cheap desperate immigrants, which is why the politicians never do anything about immigration. The London elite need a steady supply of slaves to make their coffee, serve their meals and clean their streets. They have no interest in making a fair society, when it is they who benefit from the inequality.
1)Walt Disney is the father of Anime.
2)Hollywood is the father of Bollywood.
3)BSB is the father of BTS.
4)Hyperloop is the father of Shinkansen.
5)NASA is the father of ISRO.
6)America has most Olympic medals.
7)Silicon Valley is called technology capital in the world.
8)Dollar is the international currency.
9)American English is the international language.
10)New York has the longest metro in the world.
**It shows that America is the superpower in every fields 🇺🇲
@@K..781 You guys are obviously not a superpower in English grammar!
@@jeffbrunswick5511 I can feel you. I always talk to people outside of Kernow (Cornwall) and they almost always think its rich. When its one of the poorest regions in Europe. With Cornish and English people barely being able to afford living here. Cornish people being pushed out by second home owners and general anglicisation of areas. If you are thinking of moving down to Kernow. DONT! Trust me its not as nice living here as it is visiting here.
Tax the banks and corporations.
5:09: The poorest region of the Netherlands is richer than the poorest region of the US, so that comment is unnecessary.
Two issues that weren't addressed:
1. Any heterogenous nation - especially one accepting large numbers of immigrants will have greater inequality due to different starting incomes or wealth.
2. Income inequality is less important if you ignore purchasing power. A person in London may make more than a person in Northern England, but they may also being paying twice as much.
One difficulty with point #2 is that the devaluing of a currency will benefit those who have wealth and disadvantage those with lower incomes. A stable currency permits long term saving and growth on an individual level.
@TLDRnews you used the wrong wealth databook. Slightly confusingly the data for 2022 is in the 2023 wealth databook and its now from UBS as UBS owns CS. Uk median wealth is now $151k and gini coefficient now ever so slightly lower than France.
If the issue with the UK's inequality is income, how does that income scale with purchasing power parity? Ie if I earn 50% more in London but everything costs 50% more, does this mean I have more income?
but everything isnt 50% more. taxis are slightly more than me in Lincoln, same with booze. its only house prices you get screwed on. do amazon and ebay change you more than us? etc.
This is dependent on where you are in your career. If you are entry level, you are better off in the north. If you are top of your game, the pay increase is more than cost of living. What you see is people working entry level living in London hoping to make it to the top, but not all of them will.
Of course you do, because you have 50% more disposable income. Your disposable income grew as well.
You fail to explain what the difference between income and wealth, and so your analysis is less useful than it could be. Especially as the failure to understand the difference leads to confusion in the public as to why redistribution policies, such as tax reform, are needed to address wealth inequality, and who exactly does wealth need to be redistributed from and to whom. Without that fundamental knowledge, the public are liable to be misled when thinking about the issue. Why does it matter? Well, people still thing of wealth in terms of cash, but not in terms of assets that generate wealth. So, when you hear that "Rishi Sunak" is worth £800m, it's definitely not all cash in hand. He doesn't have hundreds of bank accounts with that money on deposit. it's mostly in the form of assets that generate cash regularly over time, and which if he needed, and other assets could be sold to generate even more. If he gets a 5% return from those assets annually, you are looking at a passive income of around £30m a year just be doing nothing. In contrast, the vast majority of people who rely on paid work in the past might have had a house, a car, a pension, and some savings, and few investments, which could never generate a passive income large enough to survive on. So, they would to work until retirement. Thus, we have 6-figure house prices, at the same time as as households upto their necks in consumer and mortgage debt debt, just keeping the show on the road, and with less savings over time. And they're the lucky ones... Anyone renting and relying on income from work, is facing lower living standards over time. And the low paid and the poor are even worse off.
Campaigners like Gary Stevenson and Richard Murphy note the unfairness of the UK taxation in that it favours passive income over income from a job. That together with stagnant real wage growth in the UK over time, and significant relative low pay, is limiting the ability of the vast majority of wage earners to build wealth, but severely limiting their ability to have healthy and productive working lives. It's one of the growing causes of structural economic stagnation in the UK, resulting in accelerating wealth inequality, and increasing wealth transfers to the asset wealthy. This needs to be better understood by the public, and independent news outlets like yourself can help.
I've been to Mississippi and if the average Non-Londoner is poorer than that, you guys have to be very close to Mad Max Fury Road. I saw a no shit, unregulated, barbeque stand selling alligator meat guys, you CAN'T be poorer than that. I'm genuinely shook.
They are not poorer than that in living standards if you actually see them. Its just going off a random per capita stat for shock value. New Zealand and most of Canada would be on the same level, do you view them as poor as Mississippi as well? Of course not, its the same with majority of the UK.
Outside London and in lower cost living areas, a couple on minimum wage (around $14 hr) can easily pay rent, go on holiday once a year and have money for luxuries and savings. No one is forcing them to stay in London or Bristol where rent and cost of living is high.
Living standards on the HDI index, is higher than most US states and that is still on a lower per capita income.
So like I said, its shock value to say UK is like Mississippi outside London.
I've also never seen a tent city in the UK, and we only have a few thousand rough sleepers on the street out of a 70m pop.
There is an obvious bias on TDLR, it portrays a lot of facts out of context.
They can't eat any alligators in the UK because of a royal decree from 1269 by king Edward I which declared all alligators to be personal property of the king. Only some guilds with a hereditary mandate may hunt a specific number of alligators each year. Also, while junkie alligator bbq is nowadays allowed, it used to be considered heretical until the late 1800s, and is still looked down upon.
Cultural differences I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
A simple search shows the UKs homeless population is a lot higher, five figures for people sleeping rough and 6 figures for people with temporary accommodations.
Again, a simple search online and you can see a lot of documented tent cities.
Just because you don't see it or aren't looking for it doesn't mean that extreme poverty doesn't exist in the UK because it does and its more common then you are portraying.
@@SLDimarco I see you don't know the difference between rough sleepers (people actually on the street) and Homeless by UK definition.
"There were 3,069 people estimated to be sleeping rough on a single night in autumn 2022 in England. This is an increase of 626 people or 26% from 2021 and an increase of 1,301 people or 74% since 2010 when the snapshot approach was first introduced, but was a decrease of 1,682 people or 35% since 2017". - UK Gov
So as I say, a few thousand.
Homeless in the UK =
People in temporary accommodation, living accommodation but not registered there (such as living back at parents house), or staying at friends. Caravan.
Staying at emergency accommodation like B&Bs or hotels.
99.9% of homeless people in the UK are not on the street or in a tent.
And no, I don't class 25 people in a group living in a tent as a 'tent city'. US doesn't even class anything below 100 people a tent city. Thus no tent cities exist in the UK by this definition.
US has around 600,000 rough sleepers or what they call 'unsheltered homeless'.
So lets see some stats and sources you can use to counter me?
Tbf as explained in an earlier TLDR video it's a bit misleading as these are PPP-adjusted dollar figures, which skews things against the UK due to the strong dollar and the higher CoL in the UK. Makes for shock value in headlines though.
A fundamental mistake in this video, and in a lot of discussions of inequality, is to focus on wealth and income. If you instead take a look at expenditure, real resource consumption, and utility from consumption then you get a more useful and different view. Now, for example, you can see that being 'wealthy' in London can mean living in a small, noisy home while living in relatively less wealthy Scotland or Wales can mean living in a large, quieter home with the same monetary wealth.
In Germany there’s better protection for renters and a lot of people rent rather than buy. Might explain the wealth disparity quite easily.
Same thought
UK is full of greedy landlords. Money grubbers with no social conscience whatever. Aided and Abetted by the stinking Tories.
The Gini coefficient measures socialism directly, if you are using it as a measure calling a low Gini coefficient good and high bad is a leftist point of view. I am not commenting on my opinion here but just stating that a politically centred channel taking this stance is not a politically centred view…
I’m going to get hate for this but it’s painfully apparent
You know the saying "Paris and the French Desert" is starting to apply to the UK as well.
The Paris imbalance has never been as bad as the London imbalance. At least from the Industrial era onwards
It’s been like that for decades it’s not suddenly “becoming” I live in a wealth part of Lancashire put you only have to travel 15 mins to Padiham/Nelson/Blackburn/Burnley etc to see the deprivation. The regional inequality in the U.K. has never been properly addressed and levelling up has been scrapped so we don’t have much hope
There are many other wealthy french cities apart from Paris, like Lyon, Montpellier, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Brest etc.
Plus it's a much more equal society. Can't say the same about the UK
Clip at 0:27 is actually of an old project known the 'eco village' - the tents were some sort of demonstration thing. It's right by kew bridge in London, so a wee bit misleading (not some kind of slum)
Brexit was the nail in the coffin on this, but Leeds has been trying to get a tram (not even a metro) system for decades and the Government keep failing to deliver. They've also cancelled HS2 East and Northern Powerhouse Rail. Ultimately, no change will happen until the Government starts spending money.
Brexit didnt change anything. The lockdowns however, did see a surge in wealth to the very rich as all smaller businesses were closed down.
Remoaners gonna moan.
This has literally been a problem since the creation of the UK. It has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Brexit was shit but blaming every single problem the UK faces on "brexit" is getting old
@@lenseclipse Why do you people after 3 years still not understand the phrase "contributing factor"?
@@Me0wish because this really has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit, not even contributing. This would still 100% be a problem with or without the EU. The EU doesn’t just magic away wealth inequality like this
The problem with the UK, is that too much power is in Wessex while Mercia and especially Northumbria are left out to dry. The obvious solution is for Mercia (Midlands) and Northumbria (North) to become semi independent countries like Scotland and Wales, that are still part of the UK.
When the Tories talk about 'Leveling Up' it's just a distraction from inequality. It's a catchy 2 word slogan that is designed to imply : 'Hmm 🤔isn't it a big mystery why some people are poor? They need to somehow catch up - because we aren't going to redistribute any wealth to help them'. The tories have no intention of actually doing anything significant to address inequality, only to make a big show of doing practically nothing. It is just PR designed to reassure wealthy voters with a guilty conscience that they won't get taxed and to distract critics from the real causes of inequality. It's a bit like Cameron's 'Big Society' - that really meant 'Small Government' AKA public spending cuts = lower taxes for the already rich. The Tories don't communicate to impart information or convey meaning. They only 'message' the public to alter perception and divert attention away from their efforts to increase inequality.
You didn’t explain it at all! You just said it was unequal…
Any UK problem: "Well, this has to do with London..."
Just burn the fucking city istg
You can thank Thatcher for the Uk's inequality. She deliberately caused this situation. Due to UK's electoral system, 'first past the post', she ensured the 'home counties' were kept well off and the rest didn't matter. The UK needs 'proportional representation' , this will ensure a better spread in parliament.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that we keep electing 10%ers as MPs and PMs. Even the next Labour leader is part of the 5% club. Who represents the majority of the people?
at least he is self made and not inherited.
@@kanedNunable thats what he wants you to think. The guy is a mastermind of manipulation. He made Labour a right wing party but convinced most labour supporters that its still left wing. I can't wait to see parents being told they can't have more than 2 children, that parts of the NHS will be sold off, more tightening of any criticism of Israel's illegal occupation and even more strict immigration policies. Even Farage is a fan of Starmer! 😂
Why doesn’t parliament call in the French loans to pay for services and alleviate poverty? The French haven’t paid a penny on their trillion pound debt to Treasury since 1931 and have had a whoopy time thanks to British taxpayers.
Equality in wealth distribution is not a measure of how well a country is doing or even an indication of the standard of living of the poorest people within that country. This is because we can imagine a country with perfectly distributed wealth where everyone is poor and we can also imagine a country with a huge disparity in wealth distribution but where even the poorest people have a great standard of living.
I will never understand the need of people to defend the capital class, you are absolutely brainwashed
I'm pretty sure they mentioned that inequality leads to less growth
@@mistermiles3271 Agreed, thanks. I removed that comment from my post. After a brief search, it seems as though there is little evidence for a meaningful relationship between economic inequality and growth, positive or negative. Cheers!
Wealth inequality in the UK is probably distorted by high housing prices, which make people appear wealthier than they actually are. Income inequality is a better indicator of consumer spending power and consequently, living standards.
Perhaps reducing the corporation tax rate for the rest of the UK to 15% whilst maintaining 25% in the south east would go some way to fixing this inequality over time.
2:59: The UK is slightly MORE unequal than France and Spain (please correct that)
Short answer. Tory's keep winning.
From a Margaret Thatcher speech 30 years ago......Growth is greater where countries take a lower proportion of the nation's wealth leaving more available to industry and in the pockets of the people. The two most successful economies in the world are the US and Japan, both of whose governments take about 34 % of GDP.
Low regulation and small bureaucracy, with flexible attitudes which are market driven. Contrast this with the European Union where regulations have reached unprecedented levels and are hampering the growth of industry and services.
These regulations are created by a large non-elected bureaucracy while the powers of nationally elected parliaments and government are progressively diminished. There is the problem in a nutshell thats why there has been no growth in the UK or EU for over 25 years.
Am I the only one that had the opposite impression of the UK that they assumed everyone had? I associated it with poverty compared to the rest of Europe and was surprised that it's the sixth highest GDP in the world
GDP and poverty levels are absolutely not correlated
@@oldskoolmusicnostalgia
True, but I still think he's wrong that people have the impression that the UK is a rich country. I think the impression people have is that it was once rich but is now in decline both economically and socially.
@@firstsecond9569most people do have this perception. You think it’s poor because your a weirdo and one individual but the vast majority of people think it’s a super rich country and it is technically as it has one of the top GDPs and immagrints kill to come here
@@makeytgreatagain6256 It is 22nd for GDP per capita. Not exactly top in the world. But average gdp per capita doesn't tell the whole story. To visit, one encounters a lot of poor and rough people. While the old grand buildings show it was once wealthy, it feels like a country in decline.
@@firstsecond9569 it is in decline and what’s worse is most of europe is even in a worded state. Just hilarious to think most of europe is even worse, and tbf the working class in the uk have always lived in squalor even during the height of the nation it’s a truly capitalist classist nation for a reason
The thing is with the Gini co-efficient is that it is based upon statistical data but context is required to fully understand it. Here are two examples.
In 1990 at her last House of Commons appearance as Prime Minister, Mrs Thatcher said that during her premiership, wealth across each quintile had increased in the UK. Her critics would point out that the top 20% had increased more than the bottom 20%. But the point is, if all of areas are increasing does it matter if one increases more than another? If the situation were reversed would it be better? If the top 20% decreased in wealth but the other 80% increased, is this an improvement?
The other point is in an old Top Gear episode, they were performing various tests on 3 small cars, but later on realised that two of the tests were essentially the same but produced different outcomes, which Jeremy Clarkson summarised as "The fastest car is also the second slowest."
I was surprised to see the inequalities of Sweden in your charts, so I did a quick search to confirm. We don't actually talk about these things, we just pretend that we're too "egalitarian" to have economic clefts. Especially ones that seem to relate to discrimination of ethnicity. This does illuminate a bit on our own current financial woes. (The SEK is quite weak right now.) We also (according to my quick search) seem to have lowered our taxes on the high income earners, and with a currently rightwing government that isn't changing any time soon.
Its not swedens fault for certain ethnicities being poorer and making less. They come to sweden uneducated and you think they will make the same? LOL
All caused by selfishgreedy bastards stealing all the profit and avoi
Poverty seems to be a key driver in Tory policy take tgf state pension lowest state pension in Europe the elder have been living in poverty for decades yet MPs have 82K plus a year and a huge expense account gas and electricity assistance and many other perks ,private education is given charity status and cost the UK Taxpayers over a billion pounds a year theses are just a few of the serious flaws in the UK inequality rife in the UK and is driven by Tory policy as culture of privelages is the way tgf system works division and inqualty are what drives the Tories on they have done very little else but waste tens of billions of taxpayers money over Brexit COVID pandemic and now we see tgf cost of living Scam with the energy sector and Ofgem a right stitch. up .
"Levelling up" was just a slogan,one of many uttered by the disgraced former P.M. Johnson, there was literally no intention to ever put the strategy in place, which of course is impossible anyway when there is no strategy.
And yet the English working class elected them. English serfs nothing more.
It's sooooo unequal because of 13 years of Tory Government. The gap always widens under them!
Got worse during the 80s you say? Wonder what caused that?
I think most of us already know
@@wind4758 It was the immigrants! no wait benefits scroungers! no wait single mothers! Disabled people?
Government debt.
I will give people reading this one good example how many northern towns like my own are disadvantaged. Let's take transport as our subject.
The vast majority of jobs in the town are low paid, manual jobs working in the chicken factory, the bacon factory, the crisp factory etc. They're not jobs that can be done from home in the comfort of your living room on a laptop and phone. 90% of the townsfolk have to attend a place of work to carry out their manual jobs.
Bearing this in mind we look at the local public transport which as follows. There are no trams or underground systems. There's only one train station in the town so that can't be used for commuting to work as it next stops 30 miles down the track in an entirely different town. The taxis are very expensive, one recent example I heard was £32 for a 12 mile round trip, then we finally come to buses.
There's actually parts of the town not serviced at all by buses because the local private bus company won't run any routes they deem not profitable enough. I've personal experience of this when a few years ago my grandparents were left completely housebound when the local bus company axed their bus service from three buses per day, last one at 12 lunch, to zero buses because they said the route was no longer financially viable after government cut the subsidy they were giving the bus company to provide that service.
So we've this combination of most people needing to travel if only for work combined with very poor to none existent public transport. This in turn means people like myself are heavily reliant upon our own cars to get to work at such as 5.30am on a cold, winter Sunday morning to start a 12 hour day shift when there's simply no public transport option to get the over 4 miles each way.
This is why I say, I'm all for a cleaner environment but if the government persist with this policy of electric cars only from 2035 then it will kill northern towns like mine. People like me will be removed from the workforce and be on benefits. This is because of the combination of the heavy reliance of needing transport to get to a manual job, not having any public transport options then getting a low wage that means you can't afford to go out and buy an expensive electric car.
Once again, for the poorer areas, any incentive or even ability to work is removed again.
Fine if you want to go all electric but first you need to spend billions in investment money in northern towns like mine creating a good, reliable public transport system because the vast majority of locals will never be able to afford an electric car and this public transport improvement that's needed is exactly what the government is not doing. Even once they realise the situation which could take forever and finally give us the money needed then it's going to take years to build all the actual infrastructure that will be needed to support a public transport network in the town. Infrastructure that's simply never existed in the past.
I think it puts it into perspective when people talk about heat pumps then there's people living in houses just outside my town who still to this day use heating oil because they've never had a main gas supply. The infrastructure, the pipes have never been laid. This is a world that people living in the likes of London have never seen with their own eyes so they think everywhere is exactly the same as where they live. They've no idea that things like this still exist today here in the UK because they've never experienced or witnessed it.
Anyone with the chance and means to leave the UK should do so right away. It ain’t gonna get better any time soon…
British people are welcome to Norway. We are in desperate need of people.
We only have a population of 5 million and 1 million of them are immigrants.
@@adineatha9766we can't afford to live in the UK let alone Norway :(
@@adineatha9766 I’m from East Anglia… our ancestors left Scandinavia a while back. Maybe it’s indeed a good time to return.
@@adineatha9766
My other half is from Sanderfjord, we have a long distance relationship. I absolutely love Norway…. It’s one of the most beautiful countries on the planet, but I don’t think moving to Norway is considered an option.
@@adineatha9766
The U.K. is not doing as bad as its being reported here all the time. People like to complain about a lot of things, Norway voted twice not to join the European Union, and the U.K. voted to leave. The difference between British residents and Norwegian residents is massive. Imagine if we in the U.K. had military conscription like in Norway… some people would have a fit
London may have a higher income but cost of living is also much higher, thus translated wealth may be lower. Just a theory in why income and wealth equality paints a different picture
Hmmm...wonder what was going on in the UK during the 80s....
A massive growth of wealth started in the mid 1980s
@@iamagi after a recession and economic collapse. and that wealth started by selling everything off which we now pay much more for. boomers basically sold off their kids future for financial gain.
Because no money is diversified away from London.
Office workers should be allowed to work fully remotely if they choose. That’d allow people to move out of London and spread spending around the country.
Great video and points. In fact, I live in London, one of the richest cities in the world and the largest urban economy in Europe. My point, you need to work for yourself in "gold collar" quaternary activity in order to realistically afford to live here! 😅 Just like the people who create TDLR(one such example I believe)!
Lay off that crack Jamie
London being so wealthy is a result of almost 1/3rd of the population living in London. Those areas with "lower incomes" are also less densely populated and way less expensive to live in. This is a superficial analysis at best.
Comparing German average wealth is a bit misleading given (i'm assuming) wealth is being calculated via property ownership and house prices and most Germans rent due to great socialist renter protections. Germans rent long term and some Germans are still renting in Berlin on rents fixed in the 1980s.
In Germany about 45 percent of households own their main residence. So yes, more people rent. But it's not a vast majority.
I’d say in the UK’s sense if you can afford inflation then your pretty much well off. But if you live in london the cost of living will leave you with no money at the end of the month.
The problem is the government sticking it’s nose in where it’s not needed. The government make it so difficult for honest businesses to work and turn a profit, so that all your left with is companies that bully. Take for example house builders, there’s only a handful of large companies because the industry buys all the land, even if it means waiting on it for years (because they can) and then slowly releasing the builds so that they can keep the prices artificially high. While smaller honest house builders are not able to buy and hold land.
😂 are you for real? Your country is filled with crooks.
Huge mistake was to close so many railways.such bad rail connections outside of London . Most of the uk has poor rail services
The substantial increase of UK GINI coefficient in the last decade is due to the policies of Tory government favoring owner class at the expenses of working class.
Yes they were elected by the English workingclass 🤣🤣 serfs the lot of them.
To be fair, inequality wasn't particularly addressed by the Blair government in their 13 years in power, and the current Starmer administration looks like they're *at least* as corporatist as the Blair gov't, if not moreso. Sadly the UK's poor have no viable option right now.
@@palindrome. the English elect the government and their serf nature means real change will never come.
You use the map showing London as wealthy and everywhere else not so. However your map of Scotland seems to generalise the wealth, for instance, Edinburgh and east Lothian is far more wealthy than Glasgow/Dundee, but you have just grouped that whole area into one zone, as if Glasgow/dufermline/stirling perth and dundee are all in the same wealth bracket. This is clearly not the case in Scotland. Propert in edinburgh and the surrounding areas is far greater in value than any of those other areas i mentioned.
UK has a huge number of NEETs. The benefits here are too good.
TDLR is completely missing the point here wealth is extremely unequal in the UK when you take offshore tax havens into account.
See the uk public are beinh fooled here ' ie' butterrd up ' there is no point listening to this noe ' as ususl to little to late '
its like closing the barn door after the horse has bolted this about sums up uk