You mean, the country that still has Lords, Ladies, Barons, Dukes, Dutchesses and a Royal Family are… financially classist ???
Yeah, zero surprises here.
I don’t think that that is related really. They are effectively just rich people who pass on generational wealth.
It’s probably more to do with more than a decade of conservative government.
I don’t think that anyone would argue that the US isn’t financially classist.
Lmfao, who do you think runs the government? (Hint: go read up on what some of those titles actually mean)
I’m not saying that they don’t have influence but the titles are pretty meaningless compared to the generational wealth.
Again, the US has the same situation and they don’t have titles.
Do you know how the UK government works?
I suppose next the UK is gonna axe the public healthcare system? Between inequality and the rising authoritarian laws showing up…yikes?
There is a few steps before then. We are currently at the stage of privatising previously state ran services within the NHS such as radiology and buying extra capacity from private business This is being done at a local level using existing budgets so it means money for actual services gets reduced or quality of service drops as no outsourcer works at a loss for very long.
Other step that happens is you can pay to jump the queue by paying the heavily subsidised private offerings in the UK. This is often the same person you would have seen via the NHS. There isnt this huge magical pool of extra doctors in the UK who only work private (outside cosmetic) so anybody you see privately will almost certainly have a NHS case load. More work private, less work NHS as there is only so many hours they can and will work.
Next stage is national privatisation of some of the bigger services, for example the recent agreement with Palantir that sells off our data for far less than its worth and without explicit patient permission.
I would imagine as that will increase costs it will then become optional to pay for the NHS and instead you can pay for private cover (rather than paying for both as we do currently if you want private cover). Once this happens its only a matter of time before the NHS becomes an empty shell as the middle earners who pay the most tax towards the NHS will simply stop paying. Then at that point does private start getting way more expensive and the exclusions start.
Usually some privatisation apologist will appear and say that we do not have to follow the American model, to which I always say what exactly about this government has ever given you the complete confidence that anything other than the shitest option will happen. Its nice to wish for unicorns but they are not going to happen here.
Welcome to America.
Rishi Sunak has been doing his bootlicking job quite well!
Sunak’s family is worth literal billions, he is the boot not the licker.
Yet when I have debates in work my colleagues are like but people now are richer than ever.
Look at how many cheap screens and toys the slaves have made for us, luxuries our forebears with nutritious food and community resources and homes could never imagine
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“Inequality has made the UK more unhealthy, unhappy and unsafe than our more equal peers,” said Priya Sahni-Nicholas, the co-executive director of the trust.
“It is also causing huge damage to our economy: we have shorter healthy working lives, poorer education systems, more crime and less happy societies.”
Sahni-Nicholas said: “There is a direct financial cost to inequality: the consequences of structuring society to allow for massive profiteering for the richest at the expense of the rest of us have been enormous.”
Stewart Lansley, the author of The Richer, the Poorer and The Cost of Inequality, said it was “an acute paradox of contemporary capitalism that as societies get more prosperous, rising numbers are unable to afford the most basic of material and social needs”.
Lansley blames the way the gains from growth have been increasingly colonised by a small group of financial and business magnates – a process he says is facilitated by state policy.
Too much of today’s economy involves unproductive activity geared to personal reward, a far cry from the culture of entrepreneurialism promised by Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair, Lansley adds.
The original article contains 606 words, the summary contains 185 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
The best thing is that ghis means Europe is just spending less, but it’s doing the same thing. Wtf EU
Capitalism, even though it was invented by the Dutch, I always associated with Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture.
You can see these same problems being repeated in other Anglo-Saxon countries like Canada, the U.S. and Australia, but less so in countries with other cultural influences.
Which countries are you talking about? China? Mongolia? South Africa? Emirates? Argentina? I would argue that the “Anglo-Saxon” countries probably have less capital inequality, but it’s definitely a global problem - people with money don’t need to adhere to borders.
Which countries are you talking about?
I literally wrote a list of countries in my comment…
The other ones you mentioned, with the exception of South Africa, are completely different. It’s like comparing apples to oranges. Some are rich, but the wealth is in the hands of one wealthy royal family and use actual slavery, others have a complex system of social classes meant to have a poor class for workers, based on family origin. Some are just poor countries. And one had an actual apartheid where a whole race of people were discriminated against.
I literally wrote a list of countries in my comment…
Let’s see…
…countries with other cultural influences.
No, no you didn’t.
You literally compared Anglo-Saxon countries to “countries with other cultural influences” and then say it’s complex… Pick a lane dude.
I misunderstood your reply, my dude.
You got to give it to the guardian for their headlines 😂
deleted by creator
