Health & wellbeing
Why coronavirus might just create a more equal society in Britain | Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett
Since the 1980s, inequality has risen. But the pandemic has forced the government to put wellbeing before growth
For those who are cooped up in a flat at the moment with a baby and no garden, worrying about getting the government’s 80% income replacement after losing your job, the lockdown must be almost intolerable. Then there is the rise in people needing food banks and in cases of domestic violence – both predictable results of lockdown. For those working at home with a secure income and a garden, it is much easier.
Governments, careless of the contrasts between rich and poor, always want us to believe “we are all in this together”. In the wake of the 2007-8 financial crisis we didn’t buy it: we remained strongly aware of divided interests and circumstances. However, this time, despite the stark differences in people’s experience, there is a strong feeling that we really are in it together. As with other great challenges, most notably the second world war, the present crisis has given rise to more neighbourliness, sociability and a desire to take care of each other.
Inequality breeds stress and anxiety. No wonder so many Britons are suffering | Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett
In equal societies, citizens trust each other and contribute to their community. This goes into reverse in countries like ours
The gap between image and reality yawns ever wider. Our rich society is full of people presenting happy smiling faces both in person and online, but when the Mental Health Foundation commissioned a large survey last year, it found that 74% of adults were so stressed they felt overwhelmed or unable to cope. Almost a third had had suicidal thoughts and 16% had self-harmed at some time in their lives. The figures were higher for women than men, and substantially higher for young adults than for older age groups. And rather than getting better, the long-term trends in anxiety and mental illness are upwards.
For a society that believes happiness is a product of high incomes and consumption, these figures are baffling. However, studies of people who are most into our consumerist culture have found that they are the least happy, the most insecure and often suffer poor mental health.
Prepare for the worst: this inequality rift will tear our society apart | Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett
The biggest rise in inequality since Thatcher is on its way, bringing economic instability, poverty, poor health, increased violence and fear among neighbours
Homelessness and child poverty have risen, the NHS is in dire financial straits, understaffed prisons have record suicide rates, the elderly lack social care – yet the rich continue to get richer, and continue to avoid taxes. This is an expression of abject moral bankruptcy.
But, if the Resolution Foundation’s forecast is right, this is just a prelude to the biggest rise in inequality since that seen under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. And with more inequality there will be a growing need for services of every kind – including more prisons and police. An increasing body of scientific evidence has shown that almost all of the problems related to lower social status get worse when inequality escalates. That goes for poor health and child wellbeing, for violence, school bullying and lower maths and literacy scores.
Say goodbye to capitalism: welcome to the Republic of Wellbeing
If governments and companies are serious about meeting the Sustainable Development Goals then they’ll need to ditch their bad habits
Imagine a country genuinely committed to pursuing the sustainable development goals (SDGs), set to be agreed on by the international community later this month. It would place emphasis on human and ecosystem wellbeing as the ultimate objective of progress. This country – let’s call it the Republic of Wellbeing – and its business sector would need to embark on a profound transformation to achieve durable, long-term change.
Around the world today, companies and governments do precisely the opposite: they put more emphasis on short-term economic dynamics, or what Hillary Clinton criticised as “quarterly capitalism”. If we are serious about meeting the SDGs then this cannot continue.
Can we take happy Britons at face value? | Richard Wilkinson
The 1930s brought poverty but also better health – partly because inequality declined. Today's situation is rather different
Although we know a little about influences on the happiness of individuals within a population, we know next to nothing about what determines national average levels of happiness. What does it mean that as a nation we score 7 out of 10 for happiness? If you're asked "How satisfied are you with your life nowadays?" or "How happy did you feel yesterday?" – what would you answer? "Mustn't complain … not so bad … could be worse," perhaps?
But if we don't know how to make everyone happier, it's no better guide to policy than asking people how much sunshine they've had recently. The release of official figures on happiness makes it sound as if the government is concerned with our wellbeing, and that it recognises that our wellbeing might not be synonymous with that of the economy. The ONS data shows that on average people currently rate their "life satisfaction" at 7.4 out of 10, despite the fact that the economy probably isn't doing more than about 3 out of 10.