Clare Francis
The man, the films, those blondes. Free DVD collection starting this Sunday
British society is becoming increasingly divided. The gap between rich and poor is at its widest for 40 years, research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has revealed.
The wealthy have become disproportionately more well-off while an increasing number of families find themselves below the bread line. The disparity is leading to a schism as rich, poor and average households are now less likely to live next door to one another than they were in the 1970s.
The wealthy have moved to the suburbs while poorer households remain in the inner cities. The wealthiest families are concentrated in the south east. This is likely to be a result of local economies with many of the highest paid working in the capital. Rising house prices are also a contributing factor.
The average house price in London is £292,409, compared with £134,523 according to Nationwide’s latest figures. Not only does the house price divide have an impact on where people can afford to live, but it has also meant that the richest people have benefited most, and had their wealth boosted, by the property boom.
Danny Dorling at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation said: “Over time it has become clear that there is less and less room in the south for those who are neither rich nor poor; they have either moved elsewhere or become poor.”
However, the Joseph Rowntree report also found that the number of very poor is declining, because of initiatives such as tax credits. The less well-off are more likely to use loans and credit cards to smooth out the effects of fluctuations in their incomes. The level of debt relative to income for the poor tends to be 20 per cent to 25 per cent higher than for the population as a whole.
Those caught in the debt trap are also more likely to struggle with rising interest rates. The Bank of England has hiked rates five times since last August, and while figures out today reveal that inflation slipped back slightly to 2.4 per cent last month, most economists doubt this will be enough to stave off another rate increase. The situation for those already facing financial difficulties therefore looks set to get worse rather than better in the near term.
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers

Our Credit Clinic has free help and advice
2007
£47,700
2007
£41,899
2008
£41,445
Great car insurance deals online
£25,510 – 32,000
Transport for London
London
£50k
NHS
Nationwide
£
£90,000 + PRP
Essex County Council
Essex
100K
Confidential
London
5% below developer pre-launch price!
Luxury Appts, beautiful gardens w/ Thames views
Great Investment, River Views
By Funway – Thailand
from £589pp
Christmas Cruises
From only £995pp
APTs East Coast now from only
£2425pp.
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - find property for sale and rent in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
You don't say, but I suspect that the mesure of "poor" being used here is that of "relative poverty" - which measures the extent to which a household's financial resources falls below an average income threshold for the economy - it is the most common measure used in this country.
The problems with it is that it is (a) a politically inspired measure, because it says that someone who is earning £1m per annum is poor if everybody else is earning £40m. This is a measure of difference in income, not necessarily of poverty. Dressing it up as poverty advances a certain political agenda. (b) it provides no information, as it gives us no sense of the extent to which the poor are deprived.
As a result, it shows up as cynical and dishonest, and will not create solidarity nor commitment to action.
DavidlntheUK, London, UK
Feather-bedding has been ended, and scored by economists as efficiency gains. In fact it was a diguised form of welfare.The people who were working inefficiently in secure jobs that paid for a family now work, producing about the same amount, in casualised jobs that need to be topped up with social security payments.
Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK
Of course, with their income they will look after thier own. The better off. To them, working classes are low class trash.
Alan Emsley, Widnes, England
House prices are out of control. The young trying to start out have'nt got a chance. Bring on tighter lending criteria and higher interest rates............... then house prices will decrease.
The high life is over for many, change is on the way.
A Foster, UK,
At last, we're back to living in the good old days!
C, Egham, Surrey
This is unsurprisingly typical of the Blair/Brown economical policy, since THEIR numerous high pay rises which bring THEM nearer/into the Tory income section of society. So now THEY are looking after their own interests and are out of touch with their so-called political roots. Thus are known as more Tory than the Tories. Can you imagine their conversations? Wouln't be seen with the common middle class and especially the working classes,ugh. They wouldn't consider any raise in tax on the better off etc because it means THEY would have to pay a bit more. Remember, they will not even sign the EU charter on employment rights to protect British workers against unscrupulous firms. ie. those who shut-up shop creating mass 'cheap' redundancies in favour of other countries including those in the EU. To give one example only; If General Motors want to close Vauxhall's the workers would get an avarage of £4.000. To do the same in Germany, Belgium etc. They will get aprox' £100.000 +more.
Alan Emsley, Widnes, England
Of couse the gap has widened, it always does under Labour Governments.
The amazing thing is, or perhaps it isn't, the British electorate never learn.
Adrian Clegg, Bournemouth, UK