Rettelse

 En flink person som vil rette min opgave?

Skriv gerne årsager til fejlene (kasus, kongruns, stavefejl sov)

På forhånd tusind tak!

If I had a little money…

Summary of the article:

I have chosen to separate the article into sections. It makes good sense to me because of the different attitudes and subjects in each section.

Section 1 (p. 85 – p. 86 l. 5

This section tells about how the super-rich live in London and comes with a lot of examples about their VIP-clubs. It’s all very objective, but still somehow sceptical of the rich because it only tells about the good things of being a super rich businessman or sports star. That they drink 35.000 £ cocktails, drive Bentleys and so on. Nothing about how much they work and have worked to get that rich.

Section 2 (p. 86 l. 5 – p. 86 l. 22)

The second section discusses the extremely high salaries in the Square Mile (financial district). The mayor meant that they were all totally fair, but hundreds of banking grandees turned up and voted against the motion.
The most common political response to the high salaries was essentially a shrug. The government (Labour) believed that politicians should not get in the way of people in the top, but help people at the bottom, which means that the politicians did not tackle the raising inequality between the middle- and upper class.
Less than a decade later London has turned into a “bolthole” for the business elite, and the upper class has left everyone else far behind.

Section 3 (l. 22 p. 86 <)

In the third section there are a lot of examples and different politicians opinions about the increasing gap between the classes.

Solutions:
More tax

Cons:
No hope to make the position in the upper class.
Many of the rich don’t pay English tax.
Trying to keep up with the rich.
Worried about competition from China and India.
Increasing house prices, which is bad because many people can’t afford to live close to their work.
Expensive education, because parents want their children to go to a school in a good (rich) area.
According to Ian Martin (p. 88 l. 15-20) many of the rich people only actually live in London for a few months a year, and therefore fill up with empty housings.

As you see, the article is overall very sceptical about the rich people.
I think the quote in the end of the text “people used to believe that if you were on a good income you probably deserved it. But super-rich money is often seen as ill-gotten, unearned. When you see a Russian oligarch in a posh jeweller’s like Asprey, you certainly don’t think ‘he must be better than me’,” refers the section quite good. It tells with quotes, opinions and consequences that it’s bad that some people are super rich and they haven’t deserved being it. They more likely deserve to be punished with higher tax.

My opinion:
I think that the gap between the super-rich and anyone else is a bad (because of unequal education for the children etc.), but necessary thing. It’s necessary for a society that some people are richer and have more power than other.
The article is definitely not written by a liberal person, more likely a socialist who believes that everyone should be as equal as possible.