Bye-bye Belgravia; sayonara South Kensington; ciao Chelsea; night-night Notting Hill. As the Government puts the finishing touches to its planned raid on non-doms and other financially fortunate individuals, the nation’s wealthy are preparing to flee.
According to new analysis by the Adam Smith Institute, the share of the population who are millionaires is expected to plunge by 20 per cent over the course of this Parliament. Where are they off to? Germany, France and Italy. In some cases, America.
I can’t say I blame them. Even before this hypocritical, class-obsessed government came to power, Britain has always had a peculiar attitude to people with money. Where most cultures see wealth and wealth creation as a good thing overall, in Britain we tend to look down our noses at it.
Culturally, we endlessly romanticise poverty on stage, screen and in print. We obsess about deprivation in a patronising and simplistic way, seemingly ignoring the fact that anyone who has known true hardship does their best to escape it.
Individuals such as Pimlico Plumbers’ Charlie Mullins, who do well financially through hard work, are reviled as traitors to their class
But even that is considered unacceptable: individuals who do well financially through hard work are reviled as traitors to their class (see Charlie Mullins, founder of Pimlico Plumbers, et al).
Meanwhile, politicians like Angela Rayner and Sir Keir Starmer – he of the ‘Toolmaker’ father – glorify their humble roots, every bit as arrogant and entitled as some toff who considers themselves superior by accident of birth.
No wonder those who are privileged feel duty-bound to play it down. Our schools and universities are full of middle-class kids from comfortable backgrounds desperately trying to pass themselves off as poor so they can be seen as ‘gangsta’. What they don’t realise is that growing up on some godforsaken estate where the only employment options are binman or drug dealer is far from cool. It’s miserable. That’s why this whole government’s attitude to aspiration (VAT on private schools, property tax, capital gains, inheritance tax) is so damn depressing. Labour don’t want to level up; they want to level down.
My father once summed it up perfectly. Years ago, I asked him why he and my mother had emigrated to Italy in the 1970s.
‘Simple,’ he explained. ‘Here, if your neighbour sees that you’ve bought a new car he’ll come round for a drink, congratulate you on your good fortune, and ask if he can have a ride. In Britain, he’ll key it.’
In other words, it’s the politics of envy. Barely months into this administration, and Labour are already proving that they would sooner destroy the economy than allow people to prosper (unless, that is, they happen to be part of their cosy little club). Which is exactly what they’re in the process of doing. And driving out the rich is part of it.
The rich, of course, are going because they can. There are plenty of ordinary people who would go too, if only they could afford to.
But sadly ordinary people can’t just up sticks: they are too tied down. They can’t afford to take the hit on their mortgage or have the luxury of six months without a salary. And so they are trapped, hemmed in by commitments, easy pickings for a Chancellor who seems determined to squeeze every last drop of joy out of life.
But the rich are different. Their money buys them freedom, and so they are going with their bounty. And what Labour in their class-warrior fervour forget is that a country’s economy is an ecosystem and, as with all ecosystems, diversity is the key to survival; if you drive out one group you risk upsetting the whole delicate balance.
Without the rich to spend their money on fancy restaurants and designer clothes, without the rich to take cabs and rent hotel rooms, without the rich to employ cleaners, gardeners, builders, chauffeurs, architects, interior designers, personal trainers, nannies, tutors, personal chefs, accountants and goodness knows what else, who will support that economy? How will all these people make a living?
The rich banker’s wife in her silly Range Rover with her perfect blonde highlights and precision Botox may seem like a ludicrous figure, but actually she represents lunch for a lot of people. Force her to take her custom elsewhere, and it’s not she who loses out but us.
You only have to look around at the remnants of once-thriving market towns to see what happens once wealth dries up. Businesses can’t survive, there’s no creativity or energy, the only jobs people can find are soul-destroying and badly paid.
Communities turn inward, alcohol and drug abuse take hold. Pretty soon it’s all boarded- up shop fronts and charity shops, with only discount supermarkets remaining.
London has so far escaped that fate because, however bad the traffic or the weather, it’s always been a welcoming place for wealthy individuals who enjoy a taste of top-class culture. But without that vital supply of disposable income, all the glamour will soon dry up.
The Michelin-starred restaurants, the iconic hotels and theatres, the private members’ clubs: they have no purpose without patrons. They will simply disappear – or follow the money elsewhere. And all of us will be worse off as a result.
Disney and a little White lie
Rachel Zegler, star of the new version of Snow White, has come up with a novel back story for her character’s name
Rachel Zegler, star of Disney’s remake of Snow White, has given an interview in which she claims her role ‘fell back to another version of Snow White that was told in history, where she survived a snowstorm that occurred when she was a baby.
And so, the king and queen decided to name her Snow White to remind her of her resilience.’
What tosh. Everyone knows she was called Snow White because she had ‘skin as white as snow’. These endless attempts to re-cast tales with modern, woke sensibilities are so tiresome. History, warts and all, is what it is. You can like or dislike it, but only a fool would try to re-write it.
———————————————————————————————————
- Heinz is in trouble for an advert depicting a mixed-race couple on their wedding day in an advert for pasta sauce.
The bride, a woman of colour, is pictured scoffing a big plate of spaghetti while seated next to her groom, who is white. An older man and woman are on her right, while an older black woman, who appears to be her mother, is on her left.
The problem? The apparent absence of the bride’s father has led to accusations of ‘deliberately erasing black fathers’ and pandering to stereotypes.
I looked long and hard at the image, and while the groom and one of the women are pale as ghosts, I would say the older gentleman could be of mixed race.
Also, etiquette at weddings dictates that the groom’s mother sits next to the bride’s father – in which case the father who’s missing is the new (white) husband’s.
Controversy averted.
————————————————————————————————————–
On scrapheap at 57
Dame Judi Dench would be considered too old for a job according to HR departments
Well, it’s finally happened. At 57 I’m on the scrapheap. According to a new study, that is the age at which HR departments judge applicants too decrepit to be considered for a job. On that basis there would be no Sir David Attenborough, Dame Judi Dench, Dame Joanna Lumley, Sir Trevor McDonald . . . the list is endless. It is also worth pointing out that, in a world where half of 16-24 year olds say they would quit if they were forced into the office more than three days a week, my age group can still be relied on to actually show up.
—————————————————-
Asked about the renovations of No 10 Downing Street when he was PM, Boris Johnson told LBC: ‘The whole thing looked like a bit of a crack den to be totally honest with you and it needed to be refurbished.’ The previous incumbent was, of course, Theresa May, she of the strangely shaped nostrils (also according to Johnson). Surely not?
———————————————————————————————————————
Another day, another Labour nepo-baby. Hamish Falconer (son of Lord Falconer, Tony Blair’s former flatmate) pops up on the anniversary of the October 7 massacre in his role as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Middle East. An alumnus of fee-paying Westminster School (no hypocrisy there), he was only elected as an MP in July. What could possibly have propelled him to a coveted junior ministerial role?
———————————————————————————————————————
Rachel Reeves’ novel ways to deal with the crisis in social care
As if scrapping the winter fuel allowance for millions of pensioners wasn’t enough, Rachel Reeves is now being urged to ditch free prescriptions for the over-60s in a move that could raise more than £6 billion for the Treasury. Now if those pesky oldies don’t freeze to death, they’ll croak because they can’t afford their medication. I suppose it’s one way of dealing with the crisis in social care…
***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk