Callista Gingrich – Credit at Tiffany’s

Callista Gingrich it has recently been revealed had a credit line with Tiffany & Co of nearly half-a-million dollars. The extent of the line does not surprise me but that it was interest free made my eyebrows raise!

It is more significant as she is the wife of Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich and that in these times of austerity such politicians will make great play of a ‘shared sacrifice’.

This week it was also revealed that UK Prime Minister David Cameron has spent up to £700000 of its tax-payers money renovating 10 Downing Street within his first year of office.

He and his party also when announcing cuts – or in the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Orwellian speak, savings, will state that we are all in this together.

Both these actions reveal that we are most definitely not.

Any reductions in public spending is going to be felt most by those most reliant on those services – our rich politicians are not likely to feel any pain at all from such cuts.

Interior Redecoration Courtesy of UK Taxpayers

Any rise in our income tax is not likely to be borne equally either – we know that the very rich can use tax-evasion, or with more Orwellian speak, tax-avoidance measures, as the actions of UK Uncut most explicitly demonstrate.

And any rise in our direct tax, such as VAT, again is going to impact those on lowest incomes most with but the faintest of ripples upon those of six and seven figure annual incomes and beyond (that is our politicians and their wealthy friends and patrons) being as it is a regressive taxation measure.

This is the Downton Abbey economy – where servants and masters all occupy the same house – all occupants in it together!

When watching shows like Made in Chelsea we are no longer watching the spectacle of how the other half live but how the other ten tending toward one percent live. And our politicians are of and beholden to that ever shrinking percentage of super-wealth.

If only we had politicians and political parties whose primary agenda was to address income inequality and social mobility rather than appease wealthy special interests and entrench social immobility. If only.