Always. If inflation runs away, the poor suffer. If we get stuck in a deflationary cycle the poor suffer. Apparently it is impossible to construct an equitable system that works without gross inequality (spoiler: it isn’t but some people love inequality and will do anything to prevent things being distributed more equally.)

It provides a reason for them not to just “take their ball and go home” once they have a pile of money.

If that’s the reason for it it’s not doing its job. Investments are much like savings to high net worth individuals and their investments are managed by someone else and they simply lay in the cut and collect dividends. Yes there is a risk to investments but if you’re in a good wealth fund then over time you’re almost guaranteed to win even if you have disastrous months here and there.

Yes, this is true but you also have to factor in the marginal propensity to consume, or in plain English, the poorer you are the more of your income you have to spend on necessities like rent or groceries.

There are always high interest investments available to people with a large amounts of spare cash floating about even when inflation is low.

If your rent + utilities + food = your income then you ain’t hoarding money even in a deflationary spiral.

This is because inflation isn’t a bug it’s a feature.

Anything that transfers wealth up the chain, from working class to middle class and from middle class to upper class, is a feature of the western economic system.

For example, in England and Wales the Bank of England is charged with keeping inflation at a target of around two per cent. This means that the pound in a workers pocket is supposed to devalue. The advantage is that the government borrows money in its own currency so inflation means that its debt goes down (in real terms) when inflation goes up.

Yes, I agree. I just wanted to point out that Brexit wouldn’t have happened without some fairly serious money being put behind it (UKIP’s funding had to come from somewhere and there were not one but two pro-Brexit campaigns Vote Leave and LeaveEU) and that money had to spent with a purpose.

This is a great post but I would say that there were some people who were absolutely dedicated to achieving Brexit and in large part their participation can be explained by the proposed financial transaction tax.

The idea that a supra-national entity might be able to impose a tax that could be difficult to mitigate was absolutely intolerable to various millionaires and billionaires e.g. The Telegraph owning Barclay Brothers. Any downsides from the resulting chaos, which in any case would only affect the working and lower middle classes, would be more than offset by the ability to bank offshore and retain their profits untaxed.