IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/sticar/casereport127.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Living on Different Incomes in London: Can public consensus identify a 'riches line'?

Author

Listed:
  • Tania Burchardt
  • Abigail Davis
  • Ian Gough
  • Katharina Hecht
  • Donald Hirsch
  • Karen Rowlingson
  • Kate Summers

Abstract

London is home to vast and visible economic inequality, where the richest 10 per cent own 61 per cent of overall wealth, while at the same time four in ten Londoners do not earn enough for what is considered by the public to be a decent standard of living. This study sought to explore opinions about what constituted a standard of living that could be considered 'fully flourishing', and, by extension, if there was a point beyond that at which individual or household resources could be identified as being excessive. The findings provide thought-provoking insights into how people think about the protection wealth and higher incomes offer, and the judgements they make about the 'deservingness' of different sources of wealth and the uses to which it is put.

Suggested Citation

  • Tania Burchardt & Abigail Davis & Ian Gough & Katharina Hecht & Donald Hirsch & Karen Rowlingson & Kate Summers, 2020. "Living on Different Incomes in London: Can public consensus identify a 'riches line'?," CASE Reports casereport127, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:cep:sticar:casereport127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cr/casereport127.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mcknight, Abigail, 2019. "Understanding the relationship between poverty, inequality and growth: a review of existing evidence," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103458, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Marcelo Medeiros, 2006. "The Rich and the Poor: The Construction of an Affluence Line from the Poverty Line," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 78(1), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Ingrid Robeyns, 2019. "What, if Anything, is Wrong with Extreme Wealth?," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 251-266, July.
    4. Atkinson, Anthony B., 2015. "Inequality: what can be done?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 101810, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Hills, John & Mcknight, Abigail & Bucelli, Irene & Karagiannaki, Eleni & Vizard, Polly & Yang, Lin & Duque, Magali & Rucci, Mark, 2019. "Understanding the relationship between poverty and inequality: overview report," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100396, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Abigail McKnight, 2019. "Understanding the relationship between poverty, inequality and growth: a review of existing evidence," CASE Papers /216, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karen Rowlingson & Amrita Sood & Trinh Tu, 2021. "Public attitudes to a wealth tax: the importance of ‘capacity to pay’," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(3-4), pages 431-455, September.
    2. Andy Summers, 2021. "Ways of taxing wealth: alternatives and interactions," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(3-4), pages 485-507, September.
    3. Gough, Ian, 2021. "Two scenarios for sustainable welfare: new ideas for an eco-social contract," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112594, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Summers, Kate & Accominotti, Fabien & Burchardt, Tania & Hecht, Katharina & Mann, Elizabeth & Mijs, Jonathan J.B, 2022. "Deliberating inequality: a blueprint for studying the social formation of beliefs about economic inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114591, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Ellie Benton & Anne Power, 2021. "CASE Annual Report 2020," CASE Reports casereport136, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    6. Ingrid Robeyns & Vincent Buskens & Arnout Rijt & Nina Vergeldt & Tanja Lippe, 2021. "How Rich is Too Rich? Measuring the Riches Line," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 115-143, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Davis, Abigail & Hecht, Katharina Maria & Burchardt, Tania & Gough, Ian Roger & Hirsch, Donald & Rowlingson, Karen & Summers, Katherine Elizabeth, 2020. "Living on different incomes in London: can public consensus identify a 'riches line'?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121513, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Shah Imtiyaz Ahmad & Haq Imtiyaz ul, 2022. "The Impact of Tourism Development and Economic Growth on Poverty Reduction in Kazakhstan," Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 10(1), pages 77-90, September.
    3. Duque, Magali & Mcknight, Abigail, 2019. "Understanding the relationship between inequalities and poverty: a review of dynamic mechanisms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103457, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Magali Duque & Abigail McKnight, 2019. "Understanding the relationship between inequalities and poverty: a review of dynamic mechanisms," CASE Papers /217, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    5. Jan Vandemoortele, 2021. "The open‐and‐shut case against inequality," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 39(1), pages 135-151, January.
    6. Nuno Crespo & Sandrina B. Moreira & Nadia Simoes, 2015. "An Integrated Approach for the Measurement of Inequality, Poverty, and Richness," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 62(5), pages 531-555, December.
    7. Mcknight, Abigail, 2019. "Understanding the relationship between poverty, inequality and growth: a review of existing evidence," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103458, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Ingrid Robeyns & Vincent Buskens & Arnout Rijt & Nina Vergeldt & Tanja Lippe, 2021. "How Rich is Too Rich? Measuring the Riches Line," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 115-143, February.
    9. François, Martin & Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille & Maréchal, Kevin, 2023. "Unlocking the potential of income and wealth caps in post-growth transformation: A framework for improving policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    10. Peppel-Srebrny, Jemima, 2021. "Not all government budget deficits are created equal: Evidence from advanced economies' sovereign bond markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    11. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    12. Franzini, Maurizio & Raitano, Michele, 2019. "Earnings inequality and workers’ skills in Italy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 215-224.
    13. Timm Bönke & Markus M. Grabka & Carsten Schröder & Edward N. Wolff & Lennard Zyska, 2019. "The Joint Distribution of Net Worth and Pension Wealth in Germany," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(4), pages 834-871, December.
    14. Guido Alfani, 2017. "The rich in historical perspective: evidence for preindustrial Europe (ca. 1300–1800)," Cliometrica, Springer;Cliometric Society (Association Francaise de Cliométrie), vol. 11(3), pages 321-348, September.
    15. Islam, Nizamul & Colombino, Ugo, 2018. "The case for NIT+FT in Europe. An empirical optimal taxation exercise," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 38-69.
    16. Valeria Bonis & Luca Spataro, 2018. "Optimal income taxation and migration," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(4), pages 867-882, August.
    17. Nora Lustig, 2017. "Fiscal Policy, Income Redistribution and Poverty Reduction in Low and Middle Income Countries," Commitment to Equity (CEQ) Working Paper Series 54, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    18. Schmid, Günther, 2020. "Beyond European unemployment insurance. Less moral hazard, more moral assurance?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 465-480.
    19. Thomas Straubhaar, 2018. "Universal Basic Income – New Answer to New Questions for the German Welfare State in the 21st Century," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 19(03), pages 03-09, October.
    20. Venkatasubramanian, Venkat & Luo, Yu & Sethuraman, Jay, 2015. "How much inequality in income is fair? A microeconomic game theoretic perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 435(C), pages 120-138.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    income; wealth; rich; inequality; poverty;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cep:sticar:casereport127. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/case/_new/publications/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.