The ‘new’ parties on the political block have identified different enemies to blame for Britain’s economic woes:  Reform blame immigrants (illegal ones when they need to caveat it); the Greens, billionaires.  Both populist narratives appeal to their bases - neither stands up to scrutiny.  

Purely economically, immigration has always been and is an essential component of growth: for centuries migrants have brought the skills, innovation and entrepreneurial drive that has turbo-charged British economic growth.  The unspoken truth is that our businesses, public services and universities suffer every time we seek to exclude and discourage migrants.  

The Greens’ analysis is marginally more nuanced but remains deeply flawed.  We need wealth to pay for the things we want as a nation and that isn’t coming from ever more heavily taxing a few billionaires, however rich.  The individuals who create wealth are part of any success story and we need more, not fewer of them.  

While it is tempting to try to cap individual earnings on the basis of equality, it is only when the ultra-rich use their wealth to avoid taxes, monopolise the market and prevent others from also becoming wealthy that their wealth becomes the problem.  In other words, the problem is not too much wealth but too much associated political power in the hands of too few individuals.  

There are tools that could be used to prevent the ultra-rich from accumulating and abusing political power - political donation caps, House of Lords reform, effective regulators, a free state funded media to name just a few – and all these measures are important.  Top of the list, however - far from limiting opportunities for wealth creators - should be to extend the opportunities for wealth creation ever more widely.

For years, centrists have talked about breaking down monopolies and empowering SMEs, but the policies to deliver such interventions have frankly been unimpressive.  They are all rather ‘micro’ when it comes to promoting a true democratisation of wealth creation.  So, here’s an agenda to really empower wealth creation.

First, let’s take advantage of the massive expansion of the digital economy to offer more and more people the opportunity to build wealth - regardless of background, geography, or starting capital. 

Historically, wealth creation has been concentrated in the hands of those with existing capital, connections, or access to exclusive financial systems. Traditional investment opportunities—such as private equity, venture capital, or large-scale real estate—have been out of reach for ordinary individuals.  Even financial advice is increasing only for the wealthy.  This concentration has reinforced cycles of inequality, where wealth generates more wealth, and those without it are permanently locked out.  

Technological and financial innovations offer the opportunity to break this cycle. The rise of digital platforms, low-cost investing apps, decentralised financial systems and (whisper it quietly) cryptocurrencies has significantly lowered barriers to entry. Today, individuals can start businesses online, invest in stocks, or participate in global markets with minimal capital. 

This shift could represent a fundamental rebalancing of economic power, enabling more people to take control of their financial futures, but then we hit a behavioural and psychological barrier: 21st century Britain is deeply culturally ambivalent about wealth creation.  

Insofar as business is taught in schools it is not presented as something that ‘ordinary people actually do’.  Young people are told to ‘go out and find a job’ rather than ‘create their own’ or ‘set up a business’.  In popular culture, such as The Apprentice, wealth makers are subject to ridicule.  Older people are told to ‘save for a rainy day’ rather than look for opportunities.  And our pensions funds do the equivalent by focusing on reducing risk rather than generating returns for savers.  As a consequence, the UK has £6 trillion locked up in gilts and bonds and invested overseas rather than invested in UK businesses and improving business infrastructure.

Yet this was not always the British way:  in our time of great economic success – the Victorian era – extraordinary progress was made in a very short period by releasing Britain’s entrepreneurial spirit.  For those tempted by Reform UK’s nostalgia, a government that wants to create a truly entrepreneurial society could have real appeal.  What might it look like?

First, we can start to learn from some of the most successful projects in the developing world by using microfinance initiatives to get capital to individual entrepreneurs.  And we can make use of digital platforms to match savings with investment opportunities.   Of course, the Government can provide publicly backed start-up loans, but it may not even need the public sector at all if we can change the cultural approach to risk. 

Second, Government can massively expand and simplify tax incentives for small investors and early-stage entrepreneurs, reducing capital gains tax on long-term investments, offering tax relief on start-up investments, or credits for reinvesting profits into business growth. Simplifying tax systems for small businesses can also reduce administrative burdens and make entrepreneurship more attractive.

Third, we need to look at regulation, both to do more to ensure competition and break up monopolies but more generally to simplify business registration processes, reduce fees, and provide clear, accessible guidance to make it significantly easier for people to turn ideas into enterprises.

Fourth, Government has a key catalytic role to play by investing in infrastructure—both physical and digital. Reliable broadband access and modern transport systems enable entrepreneurs to operate and scale businesses more effectively, particularly in underserved or rural areas.

Underpinning all of this is a cultural change that can only be wrought through education. Embedding financial literacy and entrepreneurial skills into the national curriculum to ensure that individuals are equipped from an early age to understand risk, investment and opportunity; lifelong learning in business and finance; a massively expanded and properly run apprenticeship system paid for with funds redirected from higher education courses that fail to offer students value for money.

Finally, we need to get over the idea that wealth creation is bad for someone else.  We should consider targeting support and education at groups that, in particular currently, feel excluded: women, ethnic minorities, and individuals from lower-income backgrounds. After all, most micro-loans in the developing world go to female-led enterprises with enormous success.   This might also include dedicated funding programmes, procurement policies that prioritise small businesses, and partnerships with not-for-profit community organisations.

The political appeal of identifying someone else to blame is understandable, but it bakes in inertia.  It’s all the billionaires or the immigrants fault (sic) is simply to excuse ourselves from taking responsibility for wealth creation. The Internet has given more and more people access to wealth-building opportunities, with the potential for our economy to become more dynamic and resilient, but we are not harnessing it. 

Ultimately, the democratisation of wealth creation is about fairness and inclusion. It recognises that talent and ambition are widely distributed, even if opportunity is not. By pairing technological innovation with thoughtful public policy, we can unlock vast untapped potential.

Who’s really to blame for our current economic straits?  We all are, by refusing to recognise the opportunities that are around us.  Only a new, Victorian-style entrepreneurial revolution can save us now.

Rate this post

Leave a comment

Please login or register to leave a comment on this post.