Is England shifting ever leftward?
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
One of my sons-in-law is a carer working for a local authority. Despite his high quality degree, he receives low wages for the work he does, caring for those unable to take care of themselves unaided. These include Down's syndrome, ESN, those with brain damage and other situations that render them as in need of help.
The present government has, by way of policy, forced most councils into privatising such arrangements, something that the council in question has fought against but has, recently, conceded defeat on, at least to an extent.
For minor savings these unfortunates will be largely abandoned apart from the occasional visit, timed to the minute, of barely trained privatised staff. Each will be given, perhaps, 10 minutes a visit, to include any holdups in traffic, the time it takes them to get to the door, etc. Or, to put it another way, just a visit to see whether they are alive or not. Their quality of life will not so much suffer as become non-existent.
The current government knows this but doesn't care it would appear.
The council has come up with plans to take the worst cases on as they feel these will be the worst affected by the changes.
My son-in-law is devastated. All he can do is use social media, and his father-in-law, to publicise what is happening in the hope that the bottom of the pile, those whom we are told are better off under the tories, will not be sacrificed.
I voted tory for the last two elections but not this time. However, I live in a safe tory seat, with an oaf who doesn't do anything for the local area that I can see, but there are enough idiots who vote without discretion to ensure he'll get back in. I'd vote for any party or person to get him out but an 8,000 majority is too much.
If shifting leftward is abandoning those who are unable to look after themselves, or protect their interests, then this country has lurched to the left. Somehow, though, I don't think so.
This is not so much the nasty party as the nasty man.
Christ that's grim.The present government has, by way of policy, forced most councils into privatising such arrangements, something that the council in question has fought against but has, recently, conceded defeat on, at least to an extent.
For minor savings these unfortunates will be largely abandoned apart from the occasional visit, timed to the minute, of barely trained privatised staff. Each will be given, perhaps, 10 minutes a visit, to include any holdups in traffic, the time it takes them to get to the door, etc. Or, to put it another way, just a visit to see whether they are alive or not. Their quality of life will not so much suffer as become non-existent.
The current government knows this but doesn't care it would appear.
The council has come up with plans to take the worst cases on as they feel these will be the worst affected by the changes.
My son-in-law is devastated. All he can do is use social media, and his father-in-law, to publicise what is happening in the hope that the bottom of the pile, those whom we are told are better off under the tories, will not be sacrificed.
I voted tory for the last two elections but not this time. However, I live in a safe tory seat, with an oaf who doesn't do anything for the local area that I can see, but there are enough idiots who vote without discretion to ensure he'll get back in. I'd vote for any party or person to get him out but an 8,000 majority is too much.
If shifting leftward is abandoning those who are unable to look after themselves, or protect their interests, then this country has lurched to the left. Somehow, though, I don't think so.
This is not so much the nasty party as the nasty man.
Modern caring Britain.
McWigglebum4th said:
Don't forget fairness
I love fairness
No idea what fairness is
Never met anyone who can tell me what fairness is
What's a working family? Is that one where you send the children up chimneys and down t'mill to clean fluff out of unguarded rotating and reciprocating machinery?I love fairness
No idea what fairness is
Never met anyone who can tell me what fairness is
Fat Fairy said:
Maybe it is because the 'left' are rather over represented. Almost all of the small constituencies (in terms of population) are Labour strongholds (there are some in the 40000 pop, for instance in Wales). Almost all the largest constituencies are Conservative (ie the Isle of Wight, pop 111,000). Boundary changes have helped over the last few years, but The Lib Dems hissy fit ruined the last lot, and Labour will always squeal 'Gerrymandering'.
FF
They benefit from passive gerrymandering, how are they going to squeal it meaningfully?FF
Edited by hidetheelephants on Tuesday 21st April 18:18
The Conservatives and Lib Dems have managed the economy pretty well. It really is backed up by the figures when compared to other developed economies. Why are they not making bigger electoral gains? Because of the lack of the "feel good factor". I reckon a large part of that is due to the mountain of personal debt that a huge number of people are sitting on. They are going to feel financially insecure for a long time yet regardless of them beginning to see modest pay rises and increased job security. Is it any wonder that people feeling risk averse might be attracted to a party that claims it'll put a safety net under their financial arse? The net is an illusion and we need to have a bit more moral courage and take responsibility for ourselves for the greater good, in my ever humble opinion.
nadger said:
Personally I would argue that the nation is moving to the right, as evidenced by the rise of UKIP.
It's odd. You'd expect a right leaning party like UKIP to be picking up the more extreme Tory voters, yet the majority of the people I have seen vocalise support for UKIP and state their voting intentions as such are former Labour voters.
McWigglebum4th said:
Don't forget fairness
I love fairness
No idea what fairness is
Never met anyone who can tell me what fairness is
But i suspect
Fairness is me getting up at 06:00 getting to work at 07:00 working my ass off getting home at 18:00 and then giving most of half of my wages to the state so others can watch daytime telly
Natalie Benett has just emailed to say she hates your sort. She wants to squeeze any remaining pips you might have retained! I love fairness
No idea what fairness is
Never met anyone who can tell me what fairness is
But i suspect
Fairness is me getting up at 06:00 getting to work at 07:00 working my ass off getting home at 18:00 and then giving most of half of my wages to the state so others can watch daytime telly
"Vote Green, get screwed..."
ClaphamGT3 said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Don't forget fairness
I love fairness
No idea what fairness is
Never met anyone who can tell me what fairness is
But i suspect
Fairness is me getting up at 06:00 getting to work at 07:00 working my ass off getting home at 18:00 and then giving most of half of my wages to the state so others can watch daytime telly
But, according to that punchable, cretinous, droning weasel Milliband this morning, your shoulders are broadest so it is 'fair' that you should bear more of the burdenI love fairness
No idea what fairness is
Never met anyone who can tell me what fairness is
But i suspect
Fairness is me getting up at 06:00 getting to work at 07:00 working my ass off getting home at 18:00 and then giving most of half of my wages to the state so others can watch daytime telly
sidicks said:
Derek Smith said:
One of my sons-in-law is a carer working for a local authority. Despite his high quality degree, he receives low wages for the work he does, caring for those unable to take care of themselves unaided.
Is his degree (or any degree) relevant to his ability to do the job?He worked for the LA whilst he was at university. The requirement of the post is 24 hours of instant response. Some of the people panic and slow response could cause problems, which, no doubt, will be demonstrated when their care is privateised. He worked at night and then became convinced that he could make a difference, so took up the role.
But the pay is low. However, the pay of those who will take over his role will be poorer still, probably all but minimum wage. Turnover will be high, security will be low.
Moonhawk said:
It's odd.
You'd expect a right leaning party like UKIP to be picking up the more extreme Tory voters, yet the majority of the people I have seen vocalise support for UKIP and state their voting intentions as such are former Labour voters.
It's not odd. Ukip have realised that there's more mileage in ploughing the 'immigrants are the source of all evil' furrow than there is in complex issues surrounding European trade blocks.You'd expect a right leaning party like UKIP to be picking up the more extreme Tory voters, yet the majority of the people I have seen vocalise support for UKIP and state their voting intentions as such are former Labour voters.
As a result they've picked up some of the economically left-wing but socially right-wing ex-Labour supporters.
TTwiggy said:
NicD said:
Complete b
ks.
Not worth more response than that.
Does an alarm go off somewhere in your house any time anyone mentions Ukip on here? You're nothing if not sadly predictable.ks.Not worth more response than that.
As a non-UKIP voter it was indeed complete b
ks and at the very least NicD addressed the post not the poster.UKIP are doing well not because of smearability with same-old tosh but because the two main Parties are letting their voters down in different ways and UKIP offer a credible alternative, well about twice as credible as the LibDems.
With the Tories it's because CMD is a green tie PR fluffer not a Conservative, and with Labour it's because they don't have the competence to help the people they claim to champion.
Unfortunately for everyone else the average Labour voter isn't able to work that out, and believes their mix of hype and spin. Apparently, Wallace couldn't answer Andrew Neil's questions on the Mansion Tax mechanism but was confident it would raise a certain amount of cash and save the NHS. That's a joke yet it won't have registered with the average Labour voter who will have swallowed it wholesale. We know as much from the fact that Labour aren't at the same level as the Greens in polls, which is their rightful place after what they did to the country in making a bad situation *not wholly their fault* far worse than it needed to be - entirely their fault.
Buying off the public sector is hardly ethical, if Labour used their own money that would be a different matter but they're as bust as the country's economy that they wrecked.
turbobloke said:
A purely personal angle response, not predictable at all.
As a non-UKIP voter it was indeed complete bks and at the very least NicD addressed the post not the poster.
UKIP are doing well not because of smearability with same-old tosh but because the two main Parties are letting their voters down in different ways and UKIP offer a credible alternative, well about twice as credible as the LibDems.
With the Tories it's because CMD is a green tie PR fluffer not a Conservative, and with Labour it's because they don't have the competence to help the people they claim to champion.
Unfortunately for everyone else the average Labour voter isn't able to work that out, and believes their mix of hype and spin. Apparently, Wallace couldn't answer Andrew Neil's questions on the Mansion Tax mechamism but was confident it would raise a certain amount of cash and save the NHS. That'sa joke yet it won't have registered with the average Labour voter who will have swallowed it wholesale. We know as much from the fact that Labour aren't at the same level as the Greens in polls, which is their rightful place after what they did to the country.
Buying off the public sector is hardly ethical, if Labour used their own money that would be a differnt matter but they're as bust as the country's economy that they wrecked.
Oh look, you're here - in your capacity as a vocal non-Ukip voter - to defend your mate. How cute. And yes, that's a personal angle. What are you going to do about it? Bore me to death with verbosity?As a non-UKIP voter it was indeed complete b
ks and at the very least NicD addressed the post not the poster.UKIP are doing well not because of smearability with same-old tosh but because the two main Parties are letting their voters down in different ways and UKIP offer a credible alternative, well about twice as credible as the LibDems.
With the Tories it's because CMD is a green tie PR fluffer not a Conservative, and with Labour it's because they don't have the competence to help the people they claim to champion.
Unfortunately for everyone else the average Labour voter isn't able to work that out, and believes their mix of hype and spin. Apparently, Wallace couldn't answer Andrew Neil's questions on the Mansion Tax mechamism but was confident it would raise a certain amount of cash and save the NHS. That'sa joke yet it won't have registered with the average Labour voter who will have swallowed it wholesale. We know as much from the fact that Labour aren't at the same level as the Greens in polls, which is their rightful place after what they did to the country.
Buying off the public sector is hardly ethical, if Labour used their own money that would be a differnt matter but they're as bust as the country's economy that they wrecked.
The reason for traditional Labour voters defecting to Ukip is the same as it was in the days when some of them defected to the BNP et al. The belief that foreigners are taking their jobs away (plus some good old fashioned hatred of brown people).
TTwiggy said:
turbobloke said:
A purely personal angle response, not predictable at all.
As a non-UKIP voter it was indeed complete bks and at the very least NicD addressed the post not the poster.
UKIP are doing well not because of smearability with same-old tosh but because the two main Parties are letting their voters down in different ways and UKIP offer a credible alternative, well about twice as credible as the LibDems.
With the Tories it's because CMD is a green tie PR fluffer not a Conservative, and with Labour it's because they don't have the competence to help the people they claim to champion.
Unfortunately for everyone else the average Labour voter isn't able to work that out, and believes their mix of hype and spin. Apparently, Wallace couldn't answer Andrew Neil's questions on the Mansion Tax mechamism but was confident it would raise a certain amount of cash and save the NHS. That'sa joke yet it won't have registered with the average Labour voter who will have swallowed it wholesale. We know as much from the fact that Labour aren't at the same level as the Greens in polls, which is their rightful place after what they did to the country.
Buying off the public sector is hardly ethical, if Labour used their own money that would be a differnt matter but they're as bust as the country's economy that they wrecked.
Oh look, you're here - in your capacity as a vocal non-Ukip voter - to defend your mate. How cute. And yes, that's a personal angle. What are you going to do about it? Bore me to death with verbosity?As a non-UKIP voter it was indeed complete b
ks and at the very least NicD addressed the post not the poster.UKIP are doing well not because of smearability with same-old tosh but because the two main Parties are letting their voters down in different ways and UKIP offer a credible alternative, well about twice as credible as the LibDems.
With the Tories it's because CMD is a green tie PR fluffer not a Conservative, and with Labour it's because they don't have the competence to help the people they claim to champion.
Unfortunately for everyone else the average Labour voter isn't able to work that out, and believes their mix of hype and spin. Apparently, Wallace couldn't answer Andrew Neil's questions on the Mansion Tax mechamism but was confident it would raise a certain amount of cash and save the NHS. That'sa joke yet it won't have registered with the average Labour voter who will have swallowed it wholesale. We know as much from the fact that Labour aren't at the same level as the Greens in polls, which is their rightful place after what they did to the country.
Buying off the public sector is hardly ethical, if Labour used their own money that would be a differnt matter but they're as bust as the country's economy that they wrecked.
Verbosity
vocal non-Ukip voter TTwiggy said:
The reason for traditional Labour voters defecting to Ukip is the same as it was in the days when some of them defected to the BNP et al. The belief that foreigners are taking their jobs away (plus some good old fashioned hatred of brown people).
The BNP vote is far too small to explain UKIP's popularity.Have another go. You might like to use some actual evidence. Here's some, easy enough to find with more besides.
"The proportion of UKIP voters coming from the Labour party has trebled from 7% to 23%. Politically, “recent” Ukip converts look much more like the electorate as a whole than “early” converts."
"Anti-EU Labour voters who switch to Ukip..."
YouGov: "Many Labour and Tory voters agree UKIP 'gets people like me'"
AnotherClarkey said:
Ovaltine said:
Utterly bewilders me too... getting to the point where country I grew up up in no longer exists, I want to live and die somewhere else.... 
That's simple then, just become an immigrant somewhere else. This country is turning into a s
t hole going down the U bend faster than a greased turd... I'm very sad to say.I'll come back to visit the nice bits for holidays....
wiki said:
In 1971 the top rate of income tax on earned income was cut to 75%. A surcharge of 15% kept the top rate on investment income at 90%
so in answer to the OPNo
One can argue about left vs right, but marginal taxation levels at the top are as clear a quantative indication as any
Derek Smith said:
sidicks said:
Derek Smith said:
One of my sons-in-law is a carer working for a local authority. Despite his high quality degree, he receives low wages for the work he does, caring for those unable to take care of themselves unaided.
Is his degree (or any degree) relevant to his ability to do the job?He worked for the LA whilst he was at university. The requirement of the post is 24 hours of instant response. Some of the people panic and slow response could cause problems, which, no doubt, will be demonstrated when their care is privateised. He worked at night and then became convinced that he could make a difference, so took up the role.
But the pay is low. However, the pay of those who will take over his role will be poorer still, probably all but minimum wage. Turnover will be high, security will be low.
So given that you were so keen to mention it, I assumed it might have been relevant to the point you were trying to make.
Clearly it wasn't.
FredClogs said:
...we've all been sucked into the game of pretending our day to day bank balance and the things we own represent the value we give to the economy and our stake in it, they don't of course, someones value in the economy is not what they take out but what they put in..
How do you reconcile that with your deliberate avoidance of NI (so the rest of us have to pay it for you) and subsequently your avoidance of other PAYE income taxes?FredClogs on another thread said:
I've been paying myself at the personal allowance for 10 years as advised by my chartered accountant, by not coming into NI contributions you get a NIL stamp on your record and don't need to worry about all the various ins and outs of different types of NI contributions, that's my excuse anyway, it's not taking the piss its just making an over complicated system simpler.
trashbat said:
Mark Benson said:
If the turnout in this election is significantly higher than previously, your comments may have merit.
But election after election the turnout has fallen, suggesting that far from anyone 'energising' new voters, more and more are feeling disenfranchised.
Also, if the Greens are not attracting anyone they wouldn't previously, why are the polling at 8% or so when in the past they would have been way below that?
All that's happening is that the pool of voters is shrinking while the distribution remains around 50:50 with Cons/UKIP at 34+14=48% while Lab/Grn/Lib at 34+8+5=47% - much the same as at the last election. So where's the shift?
The turnout doesn't matter here - although obviously it matters more broadly - because as a disenfranchised non-voter, you're still going to get the representation that those who do turn out choose for you, regardless of popular mandate.But election after election the turnout has fallen, suggesting that far from anyone 'energising' new voters, more and more are feeling disenfranchised.
Also, if the Greens are not attracting anyone they wouldn't previously, why are the polling at 8% or so when in the past they would have been way below that?
All that's happening is that the pool of voters is shrinking while the distribution remains around 50:50 with Cons/UKIP at 34+14=48% while Lab/Grn/Lib at 34+8+5=47% - much the same as at the last election. So where's the shift?
Imagine this. I grow up in the 90s and I have a keen interest in politics, developing my own ideas. I'm looking for a progressive party that offers what the SNP now call 'social justice'. In the 90s and 2000s, I vote Labour, if at all. In 2010, I vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems. In 2015, I vote Green, a close match between staying at home or spoil my vote. My ideas and philosophy haven't changed, just the party I pick to represent me. So if enough people are like me, the Greens get 8% but it's not really won from anywhere different. Tactical voting obviously does factor in here.
Then imagine I grow up in the 90s in the North and I don't really have an interest but if I vote, I vote Labour anyway because that's what my old man said we've always done. Then I start hearing all the time about how the lack of jobs is because of the EU & the immigrants, and how the gays are making it rain (and it does rain a lot, although I don't know which way the Pennines swing), so this year I vote UKIP as it sounds like what's right based on what everyone else is saying. My ideas have changed and if enough people are like me, there will be a big political ripple from it.
You can look for a mirror opposite of this whereby the progressive left win people over, but I think you'll struggle to find one outside Scotland.
That's what I mean by conformation bias. You're making up a scenario to suit what you think is happening.
I'd suggest that as your political character matures, you're moving leftward, ergo you see more people to your right and therefore your perception is that the country is moving to the right.
The OP has gone the opposite way and as he's moved to the right over time (often happens when people get older and have more of a stake in society to lose) then he sees more people to the left and forms to opposite opinion.
In reality, the country remains about where it was, hovering around the centre.
Edited by Mark Benson on Wednesday 22 April 09:41
Mark Benson said:
Your first scenario has happened I assume(to you), your second is in your imagining.
That's what I mean by conformation bias. You're making up a scenario to suit what you think is happening.
And you one in which it's not.That's what I mean by conformation bias. You're making up a scenario to suit what you think is happening.
You claim that voter distribution is static. Let's see.
2010 - BBC results
CON: 36.1%
LAB: 29.0%
LD: 23%
UKIP: 3.1%
BNP: 1.9%
then DUP, SNP, SF, PC, SDLP adding up to 3.9%
then Green 1%
2015 prediction - Apr 20 Graun/ICM poll
CON: 34% (-2pp)
LAB: 32% (+3pp)
LD: 10% (-13pp)
UKIP: 11% (+8pp)
GREEN: 5% (+4pp)
so unless you're going to claim that most 2010 Lib Dem voters were always latent UKIP voters who have naturally ended up there, there is a shift happening. How surprising.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff