I was just pointing out that it's not necessarily correct to assume self-interest is what drives people's voting decision.
No need to get defensive. I don't really mind how people vote, as long as they have good reasons for doing so.
I think you make a good point.
When I choose who to vote for, I don't just look at my own circumstances and what would benefit me. I genuinely think about which party would be best for the country as a whole. That's why I couldn't bring myself to vote Tory - they just don't care about the poor and the vulnerable - and over half of them voted to try to stop gay people from marrying.
Britain always feels most divided under the Tories. I don't like it.
If you're looking for policies that throw money at you then no the conservatives won't give you that. I've had to work for every penny i have since leaving university too.
However conservative ideology is to support people who want to try such as in starting their own business:
-Lowering NI contributions and removing them completely for the first £2000.
-Reducing cooperation tax to one of the lowest levels in the developed world.
-The government money made available to banks for small to medium business loans.
One of the biggest ever tory ideas was the right to buy your own council house. This gave people the opportunities which still resonates around the country now.
These are the type of policies i support, giving people the opportunities to make their lot better with hard work.
The weird thing is i have never been on the receiving end of these policies yet i support them.
We have the bigger picture too, of the economy. The tories are trying to sort out 13 years of waste and overspend with countless millions of pointless jobs created from public money.
You may see it all as pain and horribleness right now, but in ten years time you may realise that this dose of bad medicine stopped the country from hitting the bottom of the barrel.
You can't borrow your way out of debt, you just have to cut your cloth to fit.
And yet the Tories promised to match Labour's spending plans in 2007 - and even increase it by 2% pa!
I haven't voted Labour since 1997, but I'm getting quite fed up of the Tories taking the moral high ground on this.
Also, it's all very well reducing corporation tax to one of the lowest levels in the developed world, but when it comes to finding ways for corporations and high net worth individuals to avoid paying tax, the UK is also up there with the very best (Osborne and his family being amongst the tax avoiders according to a Dispatches programme in 2010). We're far too tolerant of tax-dodging and I don't trust the Tories to tackle it.
In know its basically down to supply and demand market forces but I think this should be addressed by more tax cuts for people doing low paid (but essential) jobs and more tax increases for those lucky enough to be in highly paid jobs.
The Tories policies seemed designed to keep the rich rich and the poor poor which is the reason I'd never vote for them.
There would seem to be a contradiction here - the increase of the lower rate is bringing even more of the poorest out of taxation altogether - so increasing their income.
The measure was targeted at the poorest by reducing the upper rate tax - thereby ensuring that upper rate taxpayers did not benefit.
IIRC Brown never did this except when he brought in the 10% rate and then abolished it - forcing people to go on Tax Credits to get the money back.
Their policies don't seem to make sense. They just seem to get us in a shit heap of ruination.
I presume conservative supporters are of the upper class?
Just thought I would add balance to a Gordon Clown thread;):D[/QUOTE
It would not be unreasonable to suggest that you were just a twinkle in your fathers eye when Mrs T fist came into power, otherwise you would not be such a juvenile and un-informed individual
The Tories policies seemed designed to keep the rich rich and the poor poor which is the reason I'd never vote for them.
This sort of tired old cliche really is nonsense. Other posters have already pointed out the tax changes that come into effect this month; back in the 70s & 80s and in the Major govt the whole point of wealth creation was to create wealth that ultimately benefits the whole of society. Rich people spend money and employ other people - that's how it works.
Rehashing tired old Socialist Worker slogans is a bit tiresome and dull. It's amazing that people still believe that Tories really do base their policy objectives on #1 - How Do We Keep Poor People Poor? Nonsense, on stilts.
Their policies don't seem to make sense. They just seem to get us in a shit heap of ruination.
I presume conservative supporters are of the upper class?
Just thought I would add balance to a Gordon Clown thread;):D[/QUOTE
It would not be unreasonable to suggest that you were just a twinkle in your fathers eye when Mrs T fist came into power, otherwise you would not be such a juvenile and un-informed individual
It is not often you are right but this time you are wrong:p:p
In know its basically down to supply and demand market forces but I think this should be addressed by more tax cuts for people doing low paid (but essential) jobs and more tax increases for those lucky enough to be in highly paid jobs.
That's what socialists fail to understand, it's not luck, you are in a highly paid job because you have a skill to merit it (and yes you probably all know a senior manager who is useless but gets paid a lot, but as a general rule, it is true). So why should you be penalised for that.
I believe in a flat rate of tax which is the same for everyone. The more your income the more you pay anyway so why should this amount suddenly shoot up to nearly half your salary (40%) at some arbitary income level.
And the recent increases in personal allowances will mean those paid the least do pay less tax, it's just a more efficient way of administering it than having yet another tax band.
This sort of tired old cliche really is nonsense. Other posters have already pointed out the tax changes that come into effect this month; back in the 70s & 80s and in the Major govt the whole point of wealth creation was to create wealth that ultimately benefits the whole of society. Rich people spend money and employ other people - that's how it works.
Rehashing tired old Socialist Worker slogans is a bit tiresome and dull. It's amazing that people still believe that Tories really do base their policy objectives on #1 - How Do We Keep Poor People Poor? Nonsense, on stilts.
Where exactly do you think the name "Conservative" comes from in the first place?.
My understanding was it was derived from the principle of CONSERVING the social and economic status quo. Which traditionally in this country has been based on a small, rich, powerful elite lording it over a large poor lower class bunch of labourers.
That's what socialists fail to understand, it's not luck, you are in a highly paid job because you have a skill to merit it
It also helps if you've been Eton, Oxford or Cambridge, have immensely wealthy parents, are an heir to a baronetcy or marry into the aristocracy. Our current government is like something out of the 18th century with the lords of the land telling the little people how to live.
I haven't voted Labour since 1997, but I'm getting quite fed up of the Tories taking the moral high ground on this.
Also, it's all very well reducing corporation tax to one of the lowest levels in the developed world, but when it comes to finding ways for corporations and high net worth individuals to avoid paying tax, the UK is also up there with the very best (Osborne and his family being amongst the tax avoiders according to a Dispatches programme in 2010). We're far too tolerant of tax-dodging and I don't trust the Tories to tackle it.
Of course they would match it. You think the public who have had 10 years of comfort and good times will be happy that the jobs that was made purely to keep people in employ is suddenly removed?
They would probably match things in the first year to keep people happy then slowly implement the changes over their term in government. Unfortunately the situation is that bubble burst and someone has to mop up the mess. So you're going to be hated anyway so they might as well make their changes as fast as possible.
If the banks are not willing to lend money to new businesses (and lets face it they will not lend to anyone now) how can you set one up?
The best thing any party could do was force the banks into lending.
Those gits have had the country to ransome for years.
Whoever is in power needs to grow some balls, stop buggaring about with benefits and charging for spare rooms and start with the root of the problem, the banks yielding too much power.
All imho of course.
The problem also is that there will always be poor people.... we need poor people for society to operate.
We need bin men and care assistants and people who mop up mess in hospitals. Everyone benefits form these low paid jobs. It seems Tory ideology is all about business and wealth generating but without the poor people doing the menial jobs, we would be in a bit of a mess.
Unfortunatly yes the banks are out of control with their greed. But the government can't just tell them what to do. Its a free market and we have to keep some semblance of that whilst the changes are made. Plus there are international laws about getting too involved in the running of banks, hence why we have to sell our RBS shares back before (i think) 2015.
The ideology of some of the wealthy and the bankers aren't any governments fault though and there is only so much that can be done to change that without doing damage to our biggest money making organisations.
That's what socialists fail to understand, it's not luck, you are in a highly paid job because you have a skill to merit it (and yes you probably all know a senior manager who is useless but gets paid a lot, but as a general rule, it is true).
Of course its luck! How do you think people acquire the skill needed to do a highly paid job?
They are either lucky enough to be born with the genetic intelligence or talent to allow them to succeed (e.g. Wayne Rooney) or they are lucky enough to be born into an environment which allows them opportunities and connections to do well (e.g. someone of average intellect who is educated at Eton and ends up the CEO of some large company).
I'll be honest. In my case it's probably got a lot to do with when I first became politically aware in the late 1970s. It seemed to me then that industrial action had reached epidemic proportions and trade union leaders - some of whom were authentic Marxists - had more power than politicians with far greater legitimacy. In my mind I linked that dangerous state of affairs with socialism and the Labour party.
Rightly or wrongly that shaped my youthful view of party politics and it's stayed with me. Despite the world being a different place now and my great reservations with many aspects of Conservatism, the blues are for me the lesser of two 'evils'.
I should just add that I haven't voted for over 20 years but I would very likely vote Conservative if voting was compulsory.
Of course its luck! How do you think people acquire the skill needed to do a highly paid job?
They are either lucky enough to be born with the genetic intelligence or talent to allow them to succeed (e.g. Wayne Rooney) or they are lucky enough to be born into an environment which allows them opportunities and connections to do well (e.g. someone of average intellect who is educated at Eton and ends up the CEO of some large company).
It all comes down to luck though at some level.
I'm not smart, i come from west yorkshire and had a very crap education, scraping enough GCSEs, scraping through my A levels to get to liverpool university (nothing amazing).
However, through sheer hard work i got a first and now am doing a PhD at Cambridge. Its painfully obvious when around my peers that i am not that smart, but i work at least twice as hard as those people to make up the difference.
Luck does give advantages but it doesn't stop anyone from achieving whatever they want.
On the side of the average intelligence people with lots of money, it doesn't matter how much money you have, you do not get the grades from Eton or get into Oxbridge and work your way into such important positions purely on money. You need to be intelligent too.
I'll be honest. In my case it's probably got a lot to do with when I first became politically aware in the late 1970s. It seemed to me then that industrial action had reached epidemic proportions and trade union leaders - some of whom were authentic Marxists - had more power than politicians with far greater legitimacy. In my mind I linked that dangerous state of affairs with socialism and the Labour party.
Rightly or wrongly that shaped my youthful view of party politics and it's stayed with me. Despite the world being a different place now and my great reservations with many aspects of Conservatism, the blues are for me the lesser of two 'evils'.
I should just add I haven't voted for over 20 years but I would very likely vote Conservative if voting was compulsory.
That's a an interesting point. Most of the people I know at work aged in their 50's (from the South) tend to be Conservatives. If you ask them why they'll tell you about how bad the 70's were under Labour with the unions and 3 day week etc.
People I know of of my generation (aged 30's and 40's) tend to be more Labour or Liberal. We became politically aware during the 80's under Thatcher. Most of the people I admired as a teenager in the 80's like musicians, bands, alternative comedians etc tended to be left wing and very anti-Thatcher and it probably did have a large influence as well as my own ideas obviously.
We do indeed need people to do menial jobs. I don't see why these people should be necessarily poor though. I've always found it fundamentally unfair that people prepared to do unpleasant menial jobs are so poorly rewarded.
In know its basically down to supply and demand market forces but I think this should be addressed by more tax cuts for people doing low paid (but essential) jobs and more tax increases for those lucky enough to be in highly paid jobs.
The Tories policies seemed designed to keep the rich rich and the poor poor which is the reason I'd never vote for them.
Yay, more tax increases for me. I listened at school instead of bunking off, and knuckled down to tertiary technical education and training when I left when all my mates were off pissing their low wages up the wall, years of "yes sir, no sir" as I worked day and night to gain the experience I needed whilst juggling it with a degree. Yeah, how lucky I am to benefit from finally getting that salary that affords me a more than comfortable life, so lucky that I should pay more tax so that Dean the Roadsweep can have a tax break. I should have just joined him.
Their policies don't seem to make sense. They just seem to get us in a shit heap of ruination.
I presume conservative supporters are of the upper class?
Just thought I would add balance to a Gordon Clown thread;):D[/QUOTE
It would not be unreasonable to suggest that you were just a twinkle in your fathers eye when Mrs T fist came into power, otherwise you would not be such a juvenile and un-informed individual
I think the OP is refering to the thread started by another poster.
Yay, more tax increases for me. I listened at school instead of bunking off, and knuckled down to tertiary technical education and training when I left when all my mates were off pissing their low wages up the wall, years of "yes sir, no sir" as I worked day and night to gain the experience I needed whilst juggling it with a degree. Yeah, how lucky I am to benefit from finally getting that salary that affords me a more than comfortable life, so lucky that I should pay more tax so that Dean the Roadsweep can have a tax break. I should have just joined him.
Are you saying if the pay was only slighly different you would rather be a road sweeper than whatever you do now?
Because I wouldn't. I'd still rather be sat in my nice warm office doing something a bit more mentally stimulating.
But roads still need to be swept. So I don't understand why people who are prepared to do it should be paid so little in comparison with those with more educated jobs?
Yay, more tax increases for me. I listened at school instead of bunking off, and knuckled down to tertiary technical education and training when I left when all my mates were off pissing their low wages up the wall, years of "yes sir, no sir" as I worked day and night to gain the experience I needed whilst juggling it with a degree. Yeah, how lucky I am to benefit from finally getting that salary that affords me a more than comfortable life, so lucky that I should pay more tax so that Dean the Roadsweep can have a tax break. I should have just joined him.
That's exactly how I feel, and my husband for that matter.
Its pointless trying to explain though as the bitterness and envy is too strong in many people. Its a sad state of affairs.
Yay, more tax increases for me. I listened at school instead of bunking off, and knuckled down to tertiary technical education and training when I left when all my mates were off pissing their low wages up the wall, years of "yes sir, no sir" as I worked day and night to gain the experience I needed whilst juggling it with a degree. Yeah, how lucky I am to benefit from finally getting that salary that affords me a more than comfortable life, so lucky that I should pay more tax so that Dean the Roadsweep can have a tax break. I should have just joined him.
What if there were no road sweepers though and no one to wipe your ass shold you ever need it doing?
Hows about paying these people, that do these vital services a decent living wage, so they do not need tax breaks of any kind.
There are many people in low paid jobs who are trying to better themselves (I am working full time day and night on a low wage, whilst doing a degree).. a lot of these people do not want extra help and feel ashamed to take it.
We need these people doing these jobs though, just as much as we need our Alan Sugars and Maggie Thatchers.
When you become old and double incontinent money does not stop you needing someone to wipe your backside. A lot of people would do well to remember that when sneering at people in such jobs (not suggesting you do but I know an awful lot that do)
A young lad I used to work with was a Tory supporter. Lived in a Council house on a rough estate and was employed on 6 month temp contracts.
Nice enough lad......just a bit oddly misguided.
Why misguided - I have known several Tory voters who had similar personal experiences to him (i.e. working class, menial job/contract jobs, council house etc).
Does being working class or living in a council house mean you automatically have to vote left of centre?
But roads still need to be swept. So I don't understand why people who are prepared to do it should be paid so little in comparison with those with more educated jobs?
Supply and demand largely dictates wages and a job will always find its level.
There must be enough people willing to do that job for the pay the job is offering.
The only way to circumvent the supply/demand effect on wages is to dictate what those wages should be (e.g. NMW).
So I don't understand why people who are prepared to do it should be paid so little in comparison with those with more educated jobs?
It's just been explained to you. Anybody can clean a toilet or sweep a pavement, so unfortunately the remuneration reflects that. Those jobs require little in the way of training, aptitude, education, expertise etc. I don't earn as much as a top barrister, because I wouldn't have the intelligence or aptitude to study law or devote the time needed to join the bar.
Comments
I think you make a good point.
When I choose who to vote for, I don't just look at my own circumstances and what would benefit me. I genuinely think about which party would be best for the country as a whole. That's why I couldn't bring myself to vote Tory - they just don't care about the poor and the vulnerable - and over half of them voted to try to stop gay people from marrying.
Britain always feels most divided under the Tories. I don't like it.
And yet the Tories promised to match Labour's spending plans in 2007 - and even increase it by 2% pa!
The video's right here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR_hfQU-4r0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Or you can read about it here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1562023/Tories-vow-to-match-Labour-spending.html
I haven't voted Labour since 1997, but I'm getting quite fed up of the Tories taking the moral high ground on this.
Also, it's all very well reducing corporation tax to one of the lowest levels in the developed world, but when it comes to finding ways for corporations and high net worth individuals to avoid paying tax, the UK is also up there with the very best (Osborne and his family being amongst the tax avoiders according to a Dispatches programme in 2010). We're far too tolerant of tax-dodging and I don't trust the Tories to tackle it.
Not that I would ever vote Conservative, anyway.
There would seem to be a contradiction here - the increase of the lower rate is bringing even more of the poorest out of taxation altogether - so increasing their income.
The measure was targeted at the poorest by reducing the upper rate tax - thereby ensuring that upper rate taxpayers did not benefit.
IIRC Brown never did this except when he brought in the 10% rate and then abolished it - forcing people to go on Tax Credits to get the money back.
Rehashing tired old Socialist Worker slogans is a bit tiresome and dull. It's amazing that people still believe that Tories really do base their policy objectives on #1 - How Do We Keep Poor People Poor? Nonsense, on stilts.
So if the rich are getting richer (and the figures show the divide is getting greater) why aren't there thousands of jobs available for people?
Why are these rich people not spending money and employing people?
That's what socialists fail to understand, it's not luck, you are in a highly paid job because you have a skill to merit it (and yes you probably all know a senior manager who is useless but gets paid a lot, but as a general rule, it is true). So why should you be penalised for that.
I believe in a flat rate of tax which is the same for everyone. The more your income the more you pay anyway so why should this amount suddenly shoot up to nearly half your salary (40%) at some arbitary income level.
And the recent increases in personal allowances will mean those paid the least do pay less tax, it's just a more efficient way of administering it than having yet another tax band.
They dont make sense to you perhaps.
They make perfect sense to me
Where exactly do you think the name "Conservative" comes from in the first place?.
My understanding was it was derived from the principle of CONSERVING the social and economic status quo. Which traditionally in this country has been based on a small, rich, powerful elite lording it over a large poor lower class bunch of labourers.
It also helps if you've been Eton, Oxford or Cambridge, have immensely wealthy parents, are an heir to a baronetcy or marry into the aristocracy. Our current government is like something out of the 18th century with the lords of the land telling the little people how to live.
Of course they would match it. You think the public who have had 10 years of comfort and good times will be happy that the jobs that was made purely to keep people in employ is suddenly removed?
They would probably match things in the first year to keep people happy then slowly implement the changes over their term in government. Unfortunately the situation is that bubble burst and someone has to mop up the mess. So you're going to be hated anyway so they might as well make their changes as fast as possible.
Unfortunatly yes the banks are out of control with their greed. But the government can't just tell them what to do. Its a free market and we have to keep some semblance of that whilst the changes are made. Plus there are international laws about getting too involved in the running of banks, hence why we have to sell our RBS shares back before (i think) 2015.
The ideology of some of the wealthy and the bankers aren't any governments fault though and there is only so much that can be done to change that without doing damage to our biggest money making organisations.
Of course its luck! How do you think people acquire the skill needed to do a highly paid job?
They are either lucky enough to be born with the genetic intelligence or talent to allow them to succeed (e.g. Wayne Rooney) or they are lucky enough to be born into an environment which allows them opportunities and connections to do well (e.g. someone of average intellect who is educated at Eton and ends up the CEO of some large company).
It all comes down to luck though at some level.
Rightly or wrongly that shaped my youthful view of party politics and it's stayed with me. Despite the world being a different place now and my great reservations with many aspects of Conservatism, the blues are for me the lesser of two 'evils'.
I should just add that I haven't voted for over 20 years but I would very likely vote Conservative if voting was compulsory.
I'm not smart, i come from west yorkshire and had a very crap education, scraping enough GCSEs, scraping through my A levels to get to liverpool university (nothing amazing).
However, through sheer hard work i got a first and now am doing a PhD at Cambridge. Its painfully obvious when around my peers that i am not that smart, but i work at least twice as hard as those people to make up the difference.
Luck does give advantages but it doesn't stop anyone from achieving whatever they want.
On the side of the average intelligence people with lots of money, it doesn't matter how much money you have, you do not get the grades from Eton or get into Oxbridge and work your way into such important positions purely on money. You need to be intelligent too.
Some of us have lived through more than one conservative government and seen the mess they make of things.
That's a an interesting point. Most of the people I know at work aged in their 50's (from the South) tend to be Conservatives. If you ask them why they'll tell you about how bad the 70's were under Labour with the unions and 3 day week etc.
People I know of of my generation (aged 30's and 40's) tend to be more Labour or Liberal. We became politically aware during the 80's under Thatcher. Most of the people I admired as a teenager in the 80's like musicians, bands, alternative comedians etc tended to be left wing and very anti-Thatcher and it probably did have a large influence as well as my own ideas obviously.
Yay, more tax increases for me. I listened at school instead of bunking off, and knuckled down to tertiary technical education and training when I left when all my mates were off pissing their low wages up the wall, years of "yes sir, no sir" as I worked day and night to gain the experience I needed whilst juggling it with a degree. Yeah, how lucky I am to benefit from finally getting that salary that affords me a more than comfortable life, so lucky that I should pay more tax so that Dean the Roadsweep can have a tax break. I should have just joined him.
Are you saying if the pay was only slighly different you would rather be a road sweeper than whatever you do now?
Because I wouldn't. I'd still rather be sat in my nice warm office doing something a bit more mentally stimulating.
But roads still need to be swept. So I don't understand why people who are prepared to do it should be paid so little in comparison with those with more educated jobs?
That's exactly how I feel, and my husband for that matter.
Its pointless trying to explain though as the bitterness and envy is too strong in many people. Its a sad state of affairs.
What if there were no road sweepers though and no one to wipe your ass shold you ever need it doing?
Hows about paying these people, that do these vital services a decent living wage, so they do not need tax breaks of any kind.
There are many people in low paid jobs who are trying to better themselves (I am working full time day and night on a low wage, whilst doing a degree).. a lot of these people do not want extra help and feel ashamed to take it.
We need these people doing these jobs though, just as much as we need our Alan Sugars and Maggie Thatchers.
When you become old and double incontinent money does not stop you needing someone to wipe your backside. A lot of people would do well to remember that when sneering at people in such jobs (not suggesting you do but I know an awful lot that do)
Why misguided - I have known several Tory voters who had similar personal experiences to him (i.e. working class, menial job/contract jobs, council house etc).
Does being working class or living in a council house mean you automatically have to vote left of centre?
Supply and demand largely dictates wages and a job will always find its level.
There must be enough people willing to do that job for the pay the job is offering.
The only way to circumvent the supply/demand effect on wages is to dictate what those wages should be (e.g. NMW).
It's just been explained to you. Anybody can clean a toilet or sweep a pavement, so unfortunately the remuneration reflects that. Those jobs require little in the way of training, aptitude, education, expertise etc. I don't earn as much as a top barrister, because I wouldn't have the intelligence or aptitude to study law or devote the time needed to join the bar.