[petejh]

You misreading, am out so will reply later. I’m talking about full on evasion and fraud. Not divi’s. Yep

[kac]

I didn't say it was Pete. But the way the tax dodging of the wealthy is treated is very different to the tax dodging of the less wealthy. HMRC define wealthy as £2m plus in assets or £200k pa income. If you are wealthy you get a 'relationship manager' with HMRC. If wealthy you are also far more likely to be dodging stuff with the excuse that 'its what my tax advisor said I should do'. Which is the standard get out for saying you were acting carelessly rather than illegally. If you are a construction worker and you actually get caught you are far more likely to be done for tax evasion.

[ali k]

You misreading, am out so will reply later. I’m talking about full on evasion and fraud. Not divi’s. Yep

If you’re talking about full on tax evasion or hidden economy work (cash in hand) then I wouldn’t see that as less morally deficient or any ‘cuddlier’ than wealthy people dodging tax. Not sure who would, apart from people involved in doing the same? 

[Fultonius]

Actually quite surprising. For me, less the big black bogies and more the anaemic pinks. Coupled with a mild surprise at how the UK stacks up, um, so well(?)
Ireland too. I would have expected it to be better than the UK. Obviously my un examined impressions of Irish egalitarianism are skewed.

I guess the issue with *only* looking at wealth accumulation of the rich doesn't actually tell you about living standards of the poor.  While in principle I'm not too keen on the rich accumulating too much of the total pie, I care a LOT less if the same country treats it's working classes fairly with good services, education wages etc... 

Netherlands as a great example doesn't look too rosy in that plot, but the standard of living for most is better than here. The Gini Coefficient maybe shows this better, with NL being 29% and UK 34% (higher = worser). If I were poor I'd sooner live in Amsterdam than London, by a long, long way.

As always, the lens you look through skews the image.

[seankenny]

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1620949369561419777?t=l_1ofIvr2D5Y4tV8YS658g&s=19

An interesting look at inequality across Europe which isn't necessarily what you might expect.

This looks unlike what you’d expect as it’s basically a function of state pension provision. It’s a map of wealth inequality, not income, and lots of wealth is held in pensions. Generally in a state with good state pensions people at the lower ends of the income distribution accumulate far smaller pension pots, or none at all. Whereas high income people accumulate wealth in pensions as they do here, hence they have a bigger share of overall wealth. The flips side of this is obviously higher taxes required to pay for the good pensions.

Obviously Russia is the massive outlier as it’s a very different political economy.

What’s remarkable about the Netherlands is that (going from memory) they have avoided the uptick in income inequality that most western countries experienced in the 1980s/90s.

[Stu Littlefair]

w.r.t Fultonius' point about the living standards of the poor, look at this chart from the FT's Burns-Murdoch.

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1570832839318605824?lang=en



Looking at that data, the UK is not insanely unequal, but it is more unequal than the average developed country. That inequality is not really seen in the top few %, who haven't done that well in the last 20 years.

It's just that living standards are so poor for the bottom 50% of the income distribution, whilst the top 10% are doing OK

[TobyD]

What really surprised me about the graphic I posted was that France and Portugal are more unequal (using the particular metric on the graph, obviously) than the UK, and that Turkey is really bad. Erdogan is a pretty nasty piece of work though.

[seankenny]

Interesting substack post about a possible election outcome that is rather under-priced atm, or at least under-discussed: the Tories entering the next Parliament with under 100 MPs.

https://arieh.substack.com/p/what-if-the-tories-are-wiped-out

Whilst not unprecedented, it would certainly throw up all sorts of issues that the British political system would struggle to deal with.

My own gut feeling is that a Labour majority this big is very unlikely (I remember large polling leads between elections in the 1990s), but then again, it’s clear bad things are happening in the U.K. economy and at some point this will have political repercussions.

[seankenny]

What really surprised me about the graphic I posted was that France and Portugal are more unequal (using the particular metric on the graph, obviously) than the UK, and that Turkey is really bad. Erdogan is a pretty nasty piece of work though.

I’m not sure why you’d expect Portugal to be more equal than the U.K., it’s a poor (for Western Europe) country with a not particularly vibrant economy and high unemployment, hardly the environment in which lots of people are going to save considerable amounts of money (especially if extended family structures are still intact, takes the pressure of pension saving if granny lives with her kids).

If you wanted to devise a good set up for a small elite to hoard all the wealth gains in a society then a dictatorship or a military junta are ideal. Limited property rights, the very small ruling class get involved in all and any productive activities, huge opportunity for economic rent seeking. Portugal was a dictatorship until the early 70s and Turkey‘s democracy has been patchy.

[TobyD]

Interesting substack post about a possible election outcome that is rather under-priced atm, or at least under-discussed: the Tories entering the next Parliament with under 100 MPs.

https://arieh.substack.com/p/what-if-the-tories-are-wiped-out

Whilst not unprecedented, it would certainly throw up all sorts of issues that the British political system would struggle to deal with.

My own gut feeling is that a Labour majority this big is very unlikely (I remember large polling leads between elections in the 1990s), but then again, it’s clear bad things are happening in the U.K. economy and at some point this will have political repercussions.

Possible,  but I can't see Labour winning that big a majority,  there have also been a number of commentators suggesting that it might be a 1992 type scenario,  with the Conservative party struggling in government but scraping through an election with a small majority.  I doubt that too, personally. A number of things make Starmer's job harder than Blair's in 1997, such as the dominance of the SNP in Scotland,  constituency boundary changes,  Brexit etc; although the conservatives were economically strong in 1997 before losing anyway,  and that ain't going to happen by the next election. 

[TobyD]

What really surprised me about the graphic I posted was that France and Portugal are more unequal (using the particular metric on the graph, obviously) than the UK, and that Turkey is really bad. Erdogan is a pretty nasty piece of work though.

I’m not sure why you’d expect Portugal to be more equal than the U.K., it’s a poor (for Western Europe) country with a not particularly vibrant economy and high unemployment, hardly the environment in which lots of people are going to save considerable amounts of money (especially if extended family structures are still intact, takes the pressure of pension saving if granny lives with her kids).

If you wanted to devise a good set up for a small elite to hoard all the wealth gains in a society then a dictatorship or a military junta are ideal. Limited property rights, the very small ruling class get involved in all and any productive activities, huge opportunity for economic rent seeking. Portugal was a dictatorship until the early 70s and Turkey‘s democracy has been patchy.

I just said it surprised me,  that's all.  Turkey is a pretty repressive state in many ways,  they execute a shocking number of journalists for a start.  I know little about Portugal personally,  never having been there.

[Oldmanmatt]

What really surprised me about the graphic I posted was that France and Portugal are more unequal (using the particular metric on the graph, obviously) than the UK, and that Turkey is really bad. Erdogan is a pretty nasty piece of work though.

I’m not sure why you’d expect Portugal to be more equal than the U.K., it’s a poor (for Western Europe) country with a not particularly vibrant economy and high unemployment, hardly the environment in which lots of people are going to save considerable amounts of money (especially if extended family structures are still intact, takes the pressure of pension saving if granny lives with her kids).

If you wanted to devise a good set up for a small elite to hoard all the wealth gains in a society then a dictatorship or a military junta are ideal. Limited property rights, the very small ruling class get involved in all and any productive activities, huge opportunity for economic rent seeking. Portugal was a dictatorship until the early 70s and Turkey‘s democracy has been patchy.

I just said it surprised me,  that's all.  Turkey is a pretty repressive state in many ways,  they execute a shocking number of journalists for a start.  I know little about Portugal personally,  never having been there.

And yet, it has still “advanced” socially, by Western standards, hugely over the last century (largely as the legacy of an alcoholic, PTSD riddled, capricious, dictator; who despite some truly horrendous acts, seems to have averaged as benevolent and is still greatly revered).

[TobyD]

What really surprised me about the graphic I posted was that France and Portugal are more unequal (using the particular metric on the graph, obviously) than the UK, and that Turkey is really bad. Erdogan is a pretty nasty piece of work though.

I’m not sure why you’d expect Portugal to be more equal than the U.K., it’s a poor (for Western Europe) country with a not particularly vibrant economy and high unemployment, hardly the environment in which lots of people are going to save considerable amounts of money (especially if extended family structures are still intact, takes the pressure of pension saving if granny lives with her kids).

If you wanted to devise a good set up for a small elite to hoard all the wealth gains in a society then a dictatorship or a military junta are ideal. Limited property rights, the very small ruling class get involved in all and any productive activities, huge opportunity for economic rent seeking. Portugal was a dictatorship until the early 70s and Turkey‘s democracy has been patchy.

I just said it surprised me,  that's all.  Turkey is a pretty repressive state in many ways,  they execute a shocking number of journalists for a start.  I know little about Portugal personally,  never having been there.

And yet, it has still “advanced” socially, by Western standards, hugely over the last century (largely as the legacy of an alcoholic, PTSD riddled, capricious, dictator; who despite some truly horrendous acts, seems to have averaged as benevolent and is still greatly revered).

Hmm I'm not entirely sure about that; Erdogan certainly isn't revered by the Kurdish population for a start. He's also imprisoned people who have disagree with him. I believe he's a significant problem to NATO and the EU, but due to strategic importance and influence on migration, they need to keep him in the fold.

[mrjonathanr]

Is OMM talking about Atatürk?

[Nigel]

OMM will speak for himself but I expect so. Whatever your opinion of Erdogan he doesn't count as a dictator, otherwise he will find himself blindsided by the upcoming elections in May!

[Nigel]

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1620949369561419777?t=l_1ofIvr2D5Y4tV8YS658g&s=19

An interesting look at inequality across Europe which isn't necessarily what you might expect.

Rewinding to this graphic, the tweeter asks "hmmm wonder why one country stands out" (?). Honestly my first thought as the most obvious odd one out was the non-key coloured grey one with no percentage i.e. Belarus. I expect he meant to highlight Russia.

The other comment I would make is that to me the relative amounts are not the story. In absolute terms I guesstimate the average to be about mid 20s % of wealth held by 1% of the population. Throughout all of Europe. That seems too much to me but its just an opinion. If you go to the source page https://wid.world/world/#sptinc_p90p100_z/US;FR;DE;CN;ZA;GB;WO/last/eu/k/p/yearly/s/false/25.928500000000003/80/curve/false/country then you can find all sorts of equally eye opening stats on both wealth (e.g. 4% of UK wealth held by bottom 50%) and income. You can also zoom out to a global level and see that Russia is far from uniquely bad. You can also scroll back to see changes over time.

[TobyD]

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1620949369561419777?t=l_1ofIvr2D5Y4tV8YS658g&s=19

An interesting look at inequality across Europe which isn't necessarily what you might expect.

Rewinding to this graphic, the tweeter asks "hmmm wonder why one country stands out" (?). Honestly my first thought as the most obvious odd one out was the non-key coloured grey one with no percentage i.e. Belarus. I expect he meant to highlight Russia.

The other comment I would make is that to me the relative amounts are not the story. In absolute terms I guesstimate the average to be about mid 20s % of wealth held by 1% of the population. Throughout all of Europe. That seems too much to me but its just an opinion. If you go to the source page https://wid.world/world/#sptinc_p90p100_z/US;FR;DE;CN;ZA;GB;WO/last/eu/k/p/yearly/s/false/25.928500000000003/80/curve/false/country then you can find all sorts of equally eye opening stats on both wealth (e.g. 4% of UK wealth held by bottom 50%) and income. You can also zoom out to a global level and see that Russia is far from uniquely bad. You can also scroll back to see changes over time.

Yes I realised completely that the graphic represents a single and very narrow view of an extremely complicated issue. It may not really be a terribly good way of measuring inequality if you want to find out how most of the people in a given country feel about how well off they are.

[seankenny]

The other comment I would make is that to me the relative amounts are not the story. In absolute terms I guesstimate the average to be about mid 20s % of wealth held by 1% of the population. Throughout all of Europe. That seems too much to me but its just an opinion. If you go to the source page https://wid.world/world/#sptinc_p90p100_z/US;FR;DE;CN;ZA;GB;WO/last/eu/k/p/yearly/s/false/25.928500000000003/80/curve/false/country then you can find all sorts of equally eye opening stats on both wealth (e.g. 4% of UK wealth held by bottom 50%) and income. You can also zoom out to a global level and see that Russia is far from uniquely bad. You can also scroll back to see changes over time.

It’s worth pointing out that although wealth inequality was a bit less in the late 1970s, nevertheless where we are at today represents the result of 120 years of erosion of the amount of wealth held by the richest in society. That doesn’t show up on this graph as it shows income rather than wealth, and the two work rather differently, but the decline in the top 1% wealth share is absolutely massive. That took a total change in the nature of the British state to achieve, and the same elsewhere in Western Europe. Plus two world wars and the threat of communist revolution.

The slight increase in recent wealth inequality is also at least part a result of changes in the labour market since the 1970s which have affected nearly all developed countries and which it’s hard to counter with taxation. Well paid people can easily accumulate a lot of money and low paid people can’t and don’t.

[Oldmanmatt]

Is OMM talking about Atatürk?

Yes, sorry, should have mentioned. Erdogan would like to consider himself a modern, Islamic (Mustafa Kemal wasn’t, um, very observant, religion wise). The country is really very different from Western Europe. Essentially modern and quite liberal for an Islamic country, but only for a 50-100 km strip along the coastline. Travel inland and you quickly lose a century or two. The interior is probably more “traditional” now, than rural Romania was when I first visited it in ~2000. It’s also vast. Point being, it’s not really comparable to most of the of the EU. Greece, I guess, being the closest (in more ways than geographically)?
Anyway, a digression.

[TobyD]

In tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph,  Liz Truss claims,  in a 4000 word essay, that she was completely right,  and was brought down by the left wing establishment. 

hubris
[ hyoo-bris, hoo- ]
noun
excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance.

[edshakey]

I presume it's this:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/liz-truss-exclusive-i-assumed-upon-entering-downing-street-my-mandate-would-be-respected-how-wrong-i-was/ar-AA1778Eg

 What a load of

[Bradders]

To bring it back to that Times opinion Toby posted a while back...why can't people these days just fuck off?!

[lukeyboy]

It's hard to imagine how anyone could have any more compelling proof that they were wrong.

[andy popp]

I presume it's this:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/liz-truss-exclusive-i-assumed-upon-entering-downing-street-my-mandate-would-be-respected-how-wrong-i-was/ar-AA1778Eg

 What a load of

It's not my fault I didn't understand how the economy works:

"However, brewing in the background there was an issue relating to pension funds, which neither of us had been made aware of – a problem that would ultimately bring my premiership to an abrupt and premature end because of the panic it induced.

At no point during any of the preparations for the mini-Budget had any concerns about liability-driven investments (LDIs) and the risk they posed to bond markets been mentioned at all to me, the chancellor or any of our teams by officials at the Treasury."

[jwi]

In tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph,  Liz Truss claims,  in a 4000 word essay, that she was completely right,  and was brought down by the left wing establishment. 
...

Are global bond-markets a part of the left-wing establishment? That does not scan. ‘Left-wing establishment’ must be a shibboleth, the meaning of I am not aware.