Friday, May 15, 2009


One of the illusions fostered by the Labour Party is that for all its shortcomings at least it is better than the Tories, but recent evidence seems to point out that even this modesty claim is erroneous.
"That relative poverty – the gap between rich and poor rather than the absolute availability of basic necessities – should be higher than it was when Harold Macmillan was prime minister is a galling discovery. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, a sort of non-partisan unofficial opposition party equipped with massive brainpower, tells us that the distance between our richest and our least fortunate citizens is as high as it has been since their data starts, in 1961. Which leaves open the possibility that Brown's Britain may be more unequal than we were before the creation of the NHS and the modern welfare state." (Independent, 8 May) RD


Highlander said...

No surprise there, just wish more people realised there were alternatives to Tory, Labour or LibDem...

Matthew Culbert said...

If those alternatives are promising to reform capitalism they are doomed to failure also.Here is what we said about some of them.