Download DannyDorlingManchester_5_4_2011

Injustice, Inequality and the Cuts
Danny Dorling,
public meeting organized by Equality NW
5 April 2011, 6.30-9pm, Friends Meeting House, Manchester
5 graphs from the book and 5 new pieces of evidence
?
Elitism is believing that just a few children are sufficiently
able to be fully educated and only a few of those are then
able to govern; the rest must be led – unequal in ‘potential’.
The tenets of injustice:
1. Elitism is essential – for economic efficiency?
2. Exclusion necessary - the poor will always be with
us no matter how rich we are.
Because we cannot afford to alleviate poverty?
60
55
50
45
United Kingdom
40
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
60
55
United Kingdom
50
45
40
35
United States
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
60
United Kingdom
55
50
45
United States
40
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Greece
60
United Kingdom
55
50
United States
45
40
Greece
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Slovenia
60
United Kingdom
55
United States
50
45
Greece
40
Slovenia
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Germany
60
United Kingdom
55
United States
50
Greece
45
Slovenia
40
35
Germany
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
30
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
Spain
60
United Kingdom
55
United States
50
Greece
45
Slovenia
40
Germany
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
Spain
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Ireland
60
United Kingdom
United States
55
Greece
Slovenia
50
Germany
Spain
45
Ireland
40
Norway
Portugal
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
Italy
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
Netherlands
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Finland
60
United Kingdom
United States
55
Greece
Slovenia
50
Germany
Spain
Ireland
45
Norway
Portugal
40
Italy
35
Netherlands
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Finland
Austria
Sweden
60
United Kingdom
United States
Greece
55
Slovenia
Germany
50
Spain
Ireland
45
Norway
Portugal
40
Italy
Netherlands
35
Finland
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Austria
Sweden
France
Those of the world’s 25
richest large countries
which are in Europe + USA
60
United Kingdom
United States
Greece
55
Slovenia
Germany
50
Spain
Ireland
Norway
45
Portugal
Italy
Netherlands
40
Finland
Austria
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
Sweden
France
Denmark
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Belgium
Rich World Inequality League
Ratio of the income of the best-off tenth to worse of tenth of households
17.7 Singapore 15.9 US
15.0 Portugal
13.8 UK
13.4 Israel
10.3 Spain
12.5 New Zealand
9.4 Canada
11.6 Italy
9.4 Ireland
9.0 Switzerland
7.3 Slovenia
6.1 Norway
8.2 Belgium
6.9 Austria
5.6 Finland
12.5 Australia
10.2 Greece
9.2 Netherlands 9.1 France
8.1 Denmark 7.8 S. Korea
6.9 Germany 6.2 Sweden
4.5 Japan
The 24 richest countries in the world with a population of 1 million+
Source, UNDP world development report 2009, not updated since then.
60
Talk of cuts returning us to ‘2005’ are disingenuous
‘Still’ 3% higher than 2002 by 2015, but much higher unemployment,
lower wages so more in-work benefits needed, an aging population
so higher health costs, some 51% of women attending university so
why not 51% of men, higher school costs, and debt payments to
make, and – in 2002, no Iraq war to pay for (‘defence’ up 2% ’01-’05).
55
50
47
47
45
45
United Kingdom
44
43
43
40
39
40
41
41
42
41
40
38
35
Public Expenditure (%GDP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic
Outlook Databasefor October, Washington, DC, IMF, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
30
Thanks to Jon Swords for this and next three: http://www.envplan.com/graphics_a.html
Three terms: £10bn under, £31bn over (progress), £74bn over (bail-out)
£22bn more in 5 years
+£14bn ▼
+20bn
In short. The 1st Labour government saved money
The 2nd Labour government moved spending towards
the European Union norm – but still much lower.
The 3rd Labour government (2005-2010) reduced
spending as a % of GDP until the crisis of 2008.
Sources – Jon Swords (1997-2008), and IMF
47
47
45
4
43
39
40
41
41
40
012
011
010
009
008
007
006
005
004
003
002
38
Spot the difference….
2005 to 2010
Each parliamentary
constituency is
drawn with its area
roughly proportional
to its electorate.
2005 results have
been projected onto
2010 boundaries.
Are we becoming more segregated by
voting?
1918
1966
1945
1992
Voter segregation now risen for the seventh general
election in a row. Only 1918 more segregated than 2010.
2010
The tide changed 1968-1974
• The rise in electoral segregation has
coincided in Britain with the increased
acceptance of arguments that suggest
some people are worth much more than
others. Justifying injustice.
• In 2010 the Sunday Times Rich List 1000
were each ‘worth’ £335.5 million (+30%).
• In 2011 the UK billionaire count rose by
over 10% …. as did unemployment.
A small number believe prejudice is natural,
greed is good and despair is inevitable…
• They have come to believe that most
others are naturally, perhaps genetically,
inferior to them. And many of this small
group believe that their friends’ and their
own greed is helping the rest of humanity
as much as humanity can be helped; they
are convinced that to argue against such a
counsel of despair is foolhardy.
Income inequality has risen – before & after tax
lines below are share of the best-off 1% (‘Injustice’)
2011
2011
Inequalities in health (‘Injustice’). The two lines below are
how more often people in the poorest areas die aged under
age 65, and how less often those in the best-off areas
2010
2010
Rise in anxiety and depression amongst older adolescents
in the most unequal affluent countries (source – ‘Injustice’)
There was a
rapid rise in the
number of older
school children
reporting
concerns 20082009 before the
government
cancelled the
‘TellUs’ survey
in summer
2010. How
anxious would
you be now – if
you were age
15 today?
Politically it is very hard for the last government to
blame this one for rising inequalities. Health
Inequalities 1999-2008 (summary):
But health
inequalities
may have
finally fallen
slightly in
2009
between
areas.
Almost
everything
that could be
done to
increase
them is
occurring
now.
EspeciallyFigure
in 3. Inequalities in life expectancy between areas in Great Britain 1999–2008
housing....Source: Difference between the best and worst-off districts, 1999–2008 (ONS).
Conclusion: The near future really will be very different,
because, for at least the last six human generations, the
near future has changed radically with each single
generation. Don’t despair that there won’t be change.
Don’t assume it will be for the better, nor necessarily for
the worse. The very least we can do is describe clearly
the crux of our present predicament – that much that is
currently wrong is widely seen as either inevitable or
justifiable.
There are many alternatives, elsewhere in the world today,
in our past, and in our imaginations and aspirations.
Tax the wealthy (reparation), cut what is waste (war), don’t
saddle future generations with debt (fees), understand
that inequality causes poverty, concertina down incomes
in the public sector and for any subcontractor, introduce
a ‘right to sell’ to deter housing speculation, stop blaming
immigrants – so many alternatives – so where to start?