We’re just going to leave this here
The image below is a (slightly edited) graph (untouched original here) from The Poverty Site, an independent blog which monitors official UK government stats relating to poverty. It shows the gaps between the two richest and two poorest deciles of society, and covers almost the entire period of the last three Labour governments.
We haven’t amended the data in any way – all we’ve done to it is add a couple of shaded grey boxes to make it easier to judge the positions of the lines over time, and two thin vertical black lines immediately to the right of the vertical axis, again for ease of illustration. The line on the left shows the size of the gap when Labour came to power in 1997 (about 26%) and the one to its right shows the size of the gap in 2009, just before Labour lost the 2010 election (about 29.5%).
What that tells us is that under 13 years of UK Labour governments with thumping majorities, the size of the inequality gap between the richest and poorest grew by around 13% – or if you like, a steady 1% a year. (Luckily and famously, Labour were “intensely relaxed” about that.) So next time you’re thinking of voting Labour – or voting to remain in a Union where either they or the Tories will always form the government – because you want a more equal society, all we’re saying is, maybe bear it in mind.
Without a doubt, labour are just another brand of tory using values and beliefs in what labour used to be. This is why people still vote and believe in Labour because their actions never match their talk. Bad branding overall.
I see whatbthe gtraph says and think what it doesn't say as well.
Is it that the top 10% have grown their wealth faster than the other groups or that some groups have not grow,
It would be interesting to see not just relative comparisons but hard data corrected to some fixed point.
My gut feel is the following that;
the great trickle down myth underpins the concept of open borders free capitalism seems not to have happened ergo, the great cake has just benn reapportioned to suit the Billy Bunters.
Wingers – thought I'd alert you to another potential sighting of the Loch Ness Positve Case for the Union, about halfway down this page: link to telegraph.co.uk
I didn't quite see the case myself, but it may be in there somewhere.
The majority got steadily poorer and the elite at the top have got wealthier. This has happened under the watches of both Labour and Tory. Despite all their bluster they end up continuing the same processes. Over time even the facade is crumbling or being abandoned as now you can barely get a fag paper between the red Tories or the blue Tories.
The same con was pulled in America as their statistics are equally grim. They've been voting in what they thought was the "left" and "right" wings only to slowly find out after decades that the left wing and right wing are on the same bird. When you take true inflation, cost of living and spending power into account wages have been falling for the majority instead of rising. They have to work longer hours to get less, they are more indebted, less secure and it all relies on credit and cheap Chinese imports. Any bubble bursts and the most vulnerable will suffer badly. I know far too many that are in outrageously priced rents and mortgages and feel like they are on a knife edge, despite their best efforts.
A sorry mess watched over by and lead on by Tory and Labour leadership.