"Britain among most unequal societies in the world"
"All the fault of the 1980's"
"terrible discrimination against anyone who vote Labour or may do"
(Ok, the last one maybe made up).
So I thought, let's see the form for this. Firstly it was commisioned by Harriet Harman - who could have written the conclusions without the report. You may as well ask me to write a report on benefits of capitalism.
Then I looked a the cronies she hired, a bunch of the usual academics with expertise in social work etc. So the report t is entirely self-serving, talks their own book and agenda. Why don't we ask bankers why they deserve their bonuss?
Then I looked at the summary. Apparently inequality has risen in the last 10 years? Why could this be, what huge changes have occured in the UK in the last 10 years - oh hang, on what about that record economic immigration and record numbers of asylum seekers accepted. Not mentioned, not even in passing.
No, it is al the fault of "class" and those evil parents who try and educate their children, bring them up properly, live in a nice house, try and get a good job and pass on these values to their kids. By doing this they destroy opportunity for everyone else, how else are the feckless to compete? Strangely the report does not mention the record emmigration of such people that the UK also has been experiencing.
Funnily enough though, off the top of my head I would have thought that is a chunk of the middlyingly wealthy leave and are replaced by very poor immigrants you would expect a rise in inequality for a couple of decades wouldn't you?
Of course the answer is more public spending and more intrusiveness to stop people bringing up their children nicely. No doubt somewhere today the call will go up to ban public schools, becuase of course, they are too good.
It is a total mixed up marxist horlix from start to finish, no wonder the BBC are going to run with it all day.
12 comments:
A listener pointed out the 'new wealthy' have a lot,lot more than the working class.
As the beeoid presenter was agreeing the text then went on to list the new wealthy -
Blair
Mandelson
Beckham
Bellamy
Prescott
"Not sure I agree with that" murmured Nicky Campbell
@Saturn, the listener should have said Ross, Norton for added wince!
I've now reached the point that whenever I hear any of these reports, I automatically start asking who's written it and what's their interest.
Yesterday was about children in extreme poverty, written by the NSPCC who receive vast amounts of taxpayers wonga to help children in poverty.
I really am fed up with these cretins insulting my intelligence.
And as for the televised end of the recession, didn't the ONS boys look unhappy. I smell a rat.
Well said that man. Well all of the above except the chinese thingy which is probably a link to a porn site.
I have a real problem with the NSPCC who in my experience seem to be nothing more than a political lobby group. So Brown saying that his actions have been endorsed by NuLabs pet political lobby group is a bit of a redundant protest.
Just turn over to Cheggers and car park catchphrase, can't be good for you reading this twaddle!
Hear hear,
But what're we going to do about it?
Well OK - a fun rant but actuality does seem to bear this out.
The downside of capitalism is that often wealth begets wealth more easily than productive work begets wealth. Living in East London - it is apparent to me that mobility between the classes has been closing down under New Labour.
I have long thought that a wealth tax - particularly on property - combined with a low flat income tax rate and a flat rate dole to every person resident for more than 15 years (counting residency from birth) would encourage entrepreneurship and productivity.
Semper, a wealth tax would drive people to emigrate the moment they had made their pile
our good friend Mark Wadsworth (see sidebar) can *ahem* enthrall you at length on property - well, Land Value - taxes, check his blog archive
Bring back Grammar Schools and discipline in schools.
Semper - cut taxes by reducing the size of the state, cut benefits to make work more attractive, re-introduce grammars and attack the marxist dogma that has destroyed our schools, limit immigration to stop the working class suffering the worst wage competition, tax breaks for starting your own small business.
In short get the working calss working, the opposite of what harriet and her minions are suggesting, which is throw more of other peoples money at the problem.
The problem is mainly cultural and incentives based, not a lack of subsidy which is what the marxists think.
Surely another reason for the growth in inequality was the recent boom in asset prices. If you had a home you got richer and if you didn't then you got relatively poorer.
Danny
Let's connect this inequality problem with David Hume's guillotine (is-ought problem). How do we get from: "One guy is rich, one guy is poor" to the "Rich guy must give the poor guy some money". It's pure nonsense.
Post a Comment