I’m not sure I get the outrage about this:
About 300,000 people in low-income areas don’t live within 1km of a free cashpoint. This has been highlighted as a scandal for the consumer banking industry that makes “Wonga look like Santa Claus”, according to Frank Field, Labour MP and government adviser on poverty.
Umm, aren’t we all fat lardy bastards who should be walking more these days? And what is 1 km anyway? 10 minutes walk? Yes, actually, it is about that. A brisk walk is 4 mph so yes, 1 km is about 10 minutes.
Looks so horrible, doesn’t it? People might have to walk more than 10 minutes to get to a cash machine?
But it should be noted that this is merely part of a pattern; it even has a name, The Poor Pay More, and has been an observable sociological pattern since 1967, when it was systematised by sociologist David Caplovitz. You can see it in the £2 courgettes from those same convenience stores,
Err, if you’re buying somewhere on the grounds of convenience rather than price then yes, you will get stung on the price. It’s rather there in the name of the shop really.
in the astonishing fact that the poorest decile pays the most tax (“you’re talking about marginal tax rates”, people always say soothingly, at this point; as though that would be ok, to have people who earn the least paying the greatest penalty for working. But anyway, that’s incorrect: the boost to VAT, coupled with the senseless reduction in council tax credit, has left the poorest spending an eye-popping 47% of their income back to the government, a proportion which is only echoed in the top decile who, of course, have a surfeit of options to get round it).
Err, no, it’s average tax rates you want there. And I’m afraid, Zoe, that you’ve made a big boo boo there. You’re including a tax credit: which means we are looking at both taxes and benefits. And the actual tax rat on the poor, including both of those, is negative. Because they get most of their income from benefits, you see?