At the heart of this work are questions about our nature as social beings, what exactly it is that we want government to do, and the way that individuals, society and the environment are affected by the balance between state and market.

We cannot elevate concerns about individuals losing future profits over the general public interest. That would be an affront to democracy.

I welcome any contribution to the debate on inequality. But this one is selective in its evidence, and mistaken in some of its key conclusions.

The government’s drive to get people off benefits is a failure, and forgets the interests of those it purports to help.

We should be concerned about the obvious lack of resources for a crucially important public office.

Our inequality may not be as bad as America’s, but we can’t ignore the cumulative impact of large income and wealth imbalances.

Farage himself didn’t play much part in the cricket match, but he did turn up wearing, all of things, a pith helmet.

This Budget may address some of the consequences of social problems, but it does little to tackle their causes.

However, that share is still very large, indicating significant income imbalances.

Last year’s Budget may have taken a huge amount of heat out of inequality as a political issue, but it may not have changed the long-term pressure.