What do you mean by 'poor' and 'inequality'.

That could be said of those on the right quite easily. They ignore problems and blame others.

This quote is from a book published by the OECD in 2015:

"The gap between rich and poor keeps widening. Growth, if any, has disproportionally benefited higher income groups while lower income households have been left behind. This long-run increase in income inequality not only raises social and political concerns, but also economic ones. It tends to drag down GDP growth, due to the rising distance of the lower 40% from the rest of society. Lower income people have been prevented from realising their human capital potential, which is bad for the economy as a whole."

Rising inequality is a direct result of right wing neo-classical ideological policies. This isn't arrogance or high ground - it's harsh reality. It's an inconvenient truth as to fix it would mean redistribution of wealth from the rich and powerful to people who don't vote for right wing parties anyway.

There seems to be much debate about whether the widening gap between very rich and poor has a negative effect on relative wealth over all. I have seen the late Hans Rosling's positive findings on global prosperity and some less favorable findings.

Which is true? My observation is that in the last say 100 years, we are all far better off in this country at least.

Health spending by Government as % of GDP. Note difference between 1997-2010 and 2010-2015. One suggests increased funding to target problems of ageing population, easy to see which. I've highlighted Norway on there - outside the EU with ageing population. Germany which I haven't highlighted spends less as a % of GDP but they don't have peaks or troughs and their spending has been consistent with small increases from 6% in 1997 to 7.2% in 2015. The higher spending than us in the 90s and early 00s means that they didn't need large increases in spending to recover lost ground from underfunding pre 1997.

"There are basically three current definitions of poverty in common usage: absolute poverty, relative poverty and social exclusion.
Absolute poverty is defined as the lack of sufficient resources with which to keep body and soul together. Relative poverty defines income or resources in relation to the average. It is concerned with the absence of the material needs to participate fully in accepted daily life.
Social exclusion is a new term used by the Government. The Prime Minister described social exclusion as "a shorthand label for what can happen when individuals or areas suffer from a combination of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime environments, bad health and family breakdown"."

Income inequality is usually measured by the Gini coefficient which compares the incomes of deciles of the richest, median earners and the poorest. However I'm talking about not only income inequality but also inequality of opportunity and in how certain groups in society are treated. The lack of opportunity afforded to certain people is one of the biggest problems we have in addressing low levels of productivity and social cohesion. It also exacerbates the issue of income inequality.

Are you JamieMartin in disguise?

The 'cure' for all this 'poverty' and 'inequality' seems to be to take money and opportunities away from people who do not suffer from 'poverty' and 'inequality' and give it to the sufferers, or put the money in some state scheme that is supposed to address the problems. In reality it makes little difference, apart from damaging the economy and the lives of people from whom the money is extracted.