You mean, the country that still has Lords, Ladies, Barons, Dukes, Dutchesses and a Royal Family are… financially classist ???
Yet when I have debates in work my colleagues are like but people now are richer than ever.
The best thing is that ghis means Europe is just spending less, but it’s doing the same thing. Wtf EU
Generally companies get lower tax rate than physical persons with 10+ years experience in many european countries. And the rich have all assets in their companies. In my opinion it should be lowered to match the same as the companies. As for the lower class that can barely afford stuff with a basic salary in some EU countries, stay very low or just null.
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.
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!
You got to give it to the guardian for their headlines 😂
