Is England shifting ever leftward?

Is England shifting ever leftward?

Author
Discussion

wc98

10,334 posts

139 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
nadger said:
Personally I would argue that the nation is moving to the right, as evidenced by the rise of UKIP.
Absolutely.
could you point me to all the parts of the ukip manifesto you would deem right wing ?

turbobloke

103,737 posts

259 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
Bradgate said:
When you have a Tory Prime Minister introducing legislation to allow gay & lesbian people to get legally married, against the wishes of what Theresa May called 'the nasty party', then there is no doubt that in terms of social policy England is 'drifting ever leftward'.

And that is a very good thing. Gay marriage makes me proud to be British. I have some news for all you right wingers :

The left has won the social argument. Deal with it.
Gay marriage and similar issues don't define left or right, but if they did, then I'm glad that the left has 'won' on such matters, relating to tolerance and liberty.

However, the left has lost the economic argument. The left was stuck on the grid with a stalled thought process and never really entered the fray.

Deal with that, also. A well-managed strong economy generates more tax-take, including via use of lower rates, to help those who need help. This is more important than preventing the rich from becoming richer.

Which Labour actually achieve in any case as per 1997-2010.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
trashbat said:
I also didn't make any such claim. Note the 'if'.
While your statement did indeed start with 'if', to me it was posed as a rhetorical question and appeared very obvious that you were claiming it to be a 'fact'.

I apologise if this wasn't actually the case?
beer

trashbat said:
No, I didn't miss it. The article demonstrates that it's a complex issue which could be looked at using a variety of measures. Just like how politics is complicated, eh?
Which was exactly my point!,

Halb

53,012 posts

182 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
I thought the country was moving right in it's economics (since Blair too over the Labour) and left in it's social concerns.

IainT said:
But UKIP a party with wholly right or left policies. Their policies in some areas are very right-wing, in others very left-wing and centrist in others. The cynic will say they pander to easy vote winning policies rather than coherence, their supporters would argue that they're not bound by conventional demarcation and form a coherent strategy around what's correct for each situation.

I find some UKIP policy agreeable and some disagreeable and taken as a whole they're not the party for me. I agree more with Labour social policy but favour Conservative economic policy. Understanding that we can't afford the Labour social policies without the Conservative economic policies will see me voting Tory in May as my constituency is a seat up for grabs by either side. UKIP, even if they massively outperform expectations, will only ever be 3rd here even if I could vote for them.
Pandering...or considering? It's a pragmatic approach in my opinion as opposed to a dogmatic view that is espoused by other parties, but that just makes things difficult for people like myself who consider issues individually. I enjoy taking the 'whom should I vote for' test, last time I was highest with UKiPs and the GReens. biggrin
It's a pickle and no mistake.

trashbat

6,005 posts

152 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Also there has to be a suspicion that comments around the poor (variably defined) relate to their lot not improving as fast as others, rather than deteriorating in absolute term. Not getting better off quicker does not qualify as 'becoming poorer'.
For most, wealth is a moving target - not just in the most obvious terms of inflation, but in terms of the rest of the world and contemporary standards. That's the magic of the growth-based economy, after all - so for some definition of 'you', if you stay still, you get left behind.

turbobloke said:
Gaps matter to politicians who want to exploit the poor, even if they're getting better off, for their own personal and political ends.
Or you know, when people get sufficiently tired of the disparity, and revolt.

The gap, or what I'm really talking about which is the movement of the gap, is linked to a great many things, whether you like it or not. I think we can probably agree that there are big socio-economic differences between say, the US, the UK and Sweden, in which the typical middle classes are all roughly similar, led by the respective national approaches to wealth distribution. We will probably disagree about whether those effects are positive or not.

turbobloke said:
As to crime and inequality, correlation isn't causation. It's down to personal decisions and whether an individual makes a good decision or a bad one. People can do that in any circumstances and I suspect some who would consider themsevles poor would object to any slur suggesting they are more likely to be criminals purely because of some particular level of poverty.

Rich people shoplift, embezzle, try insider dealing etc as bad decisions are available to all.
Yes, of course. Except we're talking trends where your individuals are likely to become outliers in fairly short order. It's not rocket science to suggest that if you don't want to be carjacked or mugged at gunpoint every few months, it's probably in your interest - if not personally - to make sure your countrymen have decent education and opportunities, for instance. Can you have that and an enormous rich/poor gap? Mmmm, maybe, but it starts to look less likely.

FredClogs

14,041 posts

160 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
However, the left has lost the economic argument.
How do you come to this conclusion? Perhaps you could outline for the class what you think the "lefts" economic argument is/was and when it was proved to have been nullified.

Last time I checked we lived in a democracy, arguments are lost and won at the poles.


turbobloke said:
A well-managed strong economy generates more tax-take, including via use of lower rates, to help those who need help. This is more important that preventing the rich from becoming richer.
The rising tide floats all ships argument... Hmmm, I think that argument was lost wasn't it? Given Thatcher's record on the "economy" - making rich people richer is a sure fire way to retain power in the short term but it doesn't do much for the long term viability of political ideals in a democracy.

And beside wealth is an entirely subjective and relative idea, you naturally get poorer when the rich get richer - that's the way things work I'm afraid, see the London housing market for example.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
FredClogs said:
turbobloke said:
However, the left has lost the economic argument.
How do you come to this conclusion? Perhaps you could outline for the class what you think the "lefts" economic argument is/was and when it was proved to have been nullified.

Last time I checked we lived in a democracy, arguments are lost and won at the poles.
It certainly appears that your ideas are very 'cold'...


turbobloke said:
A well-managed strong economy generates more tax-take, including via use of lower rates, to help those who need help. This is more important that preventing the rich from becoming richer.
The rising tide floats all ships argument... Hmmm, I think that argument was lost wasn't it? Given Thatcher's record on the "economy" - making rich people richer is a sure fire way to retain power in the short term but it doesn't do much for the long term viability of political ideals in a democracy.

And beside wealth is an entirely subjective and relative idea, you naturally get poorer when the rich get richer - that's the way things work I'm afraid, see the London housing market for example.
You appear not to understand the difference between absolute poverty and relative poverty.


Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 21st April 13:00

turbobloke

103,737 posts

259 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
trashbat said:
It's not rocket science to suggest that if you don't want to be carjacked or mugged at gunpoint every few months, it's probably in your interest - if not personally - to make sure your countrymen have decent education and opportunities, for instance. Can you have that and an enormous rich/poor gap? Mmmm, maybe, but it starts to look less likely.
As mentioned earlier, it's complicated, but yes it's possible. As to what 'enormous' means, I'm not sure but suspect we have that already in that there are multi-billionaires and people living on the street with their worldly goods in a placcy bag or two.

At the risk of going slightly off-topic, the point about violent crime also reflects lenient sentencing and an almost infinitely credulous and repetitive approach to such crime and (non-)rehabilitation.

If people make seriously bad decisions, or serially bad decisions (both unlawful in other words) and voluntarily pass the prison entry test in those ways, they should be removed from generally law-abiding sons and daughters of gentlefolk in wider society for very long periods of time. And yes I'd pay more tax for more prison places. At which point, holding people to ransom using thuggery wold not only be unacceptable but largely pointless and inapplicable. It won't be a panacea, just much better, and if we already have more people locked up than other countries that's no reason not to do it.

IainT

10,040 posts

237 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
Halb said:
I enjoy taking the 'whom should I vote for' test, last time I was highest with UKiPs and the GReens. biggrin
It's a pickle and no mistake.
That is truly messed-up!

I usually come out UKIP with Tory in close 2nd BUT I'm largely in favour of the EU and our current level of involvement or thereabouts. Leaving the EU would, in my opinion, be a retrograde step.

Elroy Blue

8,686 posts

191 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
Is it shifting to the left, or is it just keen to be rid of a Government that takes spin to a new level and lies through it's teeth about its 'achievements'. It's not a Conservative Government, it's a club and if you're not in it, you can just f@ck off.

I'll post this, which is part of a post I did on another thread.


Elroy Blue said:
Cameron and May have made one significant achievement though. We recently had a straw poll at work about voting. Every single person (bar one Lib Dem) put their hand up when asked if they voted Tory at the last election. For 2015 it's zero. And as long as the current 'team' are anywhere near the cabinet, that is unlikely to change.

The really sad fact is that a lot of us were long term Tory voters. We are now in a position where the only way to get rid of a Government that has totally abdicated it's responsibility for state functions (Police, Ambulance, Fire, Coastguard, border controls), the only viable option is a Labour party likely supported by the left wing Nationalists. Has Politics really sunk that low?
I can't wait to see the back of the utterly despicable Cameron, May and Osbourne (along with the man with many names, Grant Shapps). Hopefully, we will then see a return to a Cabinet that actually demonstrates some values. I don't expect utopia (they're Politicians after all), but some people who have had their foot in the real world would persuade me to return to voting Tory.

4v6

1,098 posts

125 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
Bradgate said:
The left has won the social argument. Deal with it.
Im sure youre sitting there with a big sloppy smile on your silly face when you trot out such pap and holding hands singing the red flag.... rolleyes

As if the left are the only lot who are in any way "social". Duh!


turbobloke

103,737 posts

259 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
FredClogs said:
turbobloke said:
However, the left has lost the economic argument.
How do you come to this conclusion? Perhaps you could outline for the class what you think the "lefts" economic argument is/was and when it was proved to have been nullified.

Last time I checked we lived in a democracy, arguments are lost and won at the poles.
N or S, all the same to me.

As to the basis for my comment, see under Denis Healey, also under Gordon Brown and Liam Byrne.

Their disastrous track record speaks volumes, but the left has yet to cope with the pricing/calculation problem, also the lack of understanding over who pays the country's bills (and how to help them pay even more without complaining) is lost on politicians on the UK left.

My point isn't a rising tide and ships thing, as though the result is some sort of accident, it's a basic economic management thing. A government will get more tax-take, to help those who need help, by encouraging enterprise and high earners to be more enterprising and earn more, not by disincentivising them through vilification and punishing them via tax rates. The left just doesn't get it; the same goes for lawful tax avoidance, though their hypocrisy is legendary on that matter.

Halb

53,012 posts

182 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
IainT said:
That is truly messed-up!
I usually come out UKIP with Tory in close 2nd BUT I'm largely in favour of the EU and our current level of involvement or thereabouts. Leaving the EU would, in my opinion, be a retrograde step.
hehe I know. Last time I voted for an OAP war veteran, a real independent. He was nice and practical.
If there is no decent independent this time, I'll have to look at which party I despise the least.....or I may do a 'none of the above' message and 'spoil' my vote.

trashbat

6,005 posts

152 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
As mentioned earlier, it's complicated, but yes it's possible. As to what 'enormous' means, I'm not sure but suspect we have that already in that there are multi-billionaires and people living on the street with their worldly goods in a placcy bag or two.
Again whilst the outliers at each end might be emotionally significant, it matters more about whether it's replicated en-masse. If significant numbers of Hardworking People™ are losing their homes whilst significant numbers of others make increasingly silly amounts out of no real physical, intellectual or other effort, then an alarm bell ought to be ringing at least for anyone that cares about social direction and believes in any kind of intervention whatsoever.

I suspect we have both clearly present, but to a limited extent in comparative global terms, and also that it won't pass many people's threshold for interest.

turbobloke said:
If people make seriously bad decisions, or serially bad decisions (both unlawful in other words) and voluntarily pass the prison entry test in those ways, they should be removed from generally law-abiding sons and daughters of gentlefolk in wider society for very long periods of time. And yes I'd pay more tax for more prison places. At which point, holding people to ransom using thuggery wold not only be unacceptable but largely pointless and inapplicable. It won't be a panacea, just much better.
So you channel your wealth into the greater collective, in this case for prisons and a police force and whatever else, possibly even some carrots somewhere to go with all the nightsticks.

But be careful - go on redistributing your wealth like that and you might accidentally reduce the gap. The prison element probably keeps it in check though.

boyse7en

6,671 posts

164 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
McWigglebum4th said:
Don't forget fairness


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
Fairness is me getting up at 07:00 getting to work at 08:30 working my ass off getting home at 20:00 so the company directors can afford holidays in the Caribbean and a nice Range Rover for the missus

turbobloke

103,737 posts

259 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
trashbat said:
But be careful - go on redistributing your wealth like that and you might accidentally reduce the gap.
That wouldn't be the point - and as it happens such a result would be fine by me, but neither sought nor unwanted.

supersingle

3,205 posts

218 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
Bradgate said:
When you have a Tory Prime Minister introducing legislation to allow gay & lesbian people to get legally married, against the wishes of what Theresa May called 'the nasty party', then there is no doubt that in terms of social policy England is 'drifting ever leftward'.

And that is a very good thing. Gay marriage makes me proud to be British. I have some news for all you right wingers :

The left has won the social argument. Deal with it.
Well done the left, you made marriage a 'gay' thing. hehe

Today, the left dominate the social realm. With the demographic changes that are occurring, things will be very different in 50 years.

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

122 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
We'll soon find out. The current government have been reasonably responsible when it's come to borrowing and spending and are fighting this election on that issue. If it's not enough to return them to power then perhaps fiscal conservatism is dead in Britain. Too many people want a free lunch and don't really care who pays for it.

JagLover

42,262 posts

234 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
It depends how you define "left" and "right"

In terms of social policy England is indeed becoming more "left wing" as people become more tolerant of non-traditional lifestyles whether that be same sex partnerships or single parenthood. But the more libertarian right wingers wouldn't be having an issue with this.

In terms of crime and immigration values have not shifted all that much in decades. English voters have usually favoured tight controls over immigration and being "tough" on criminals it is politicians who usually fail to deliver.

In economic terms we had a big shift to the right with the Thatcher revolution (following a massive post war shift to the left), that was partially rowed back in the labour years.

What we have seen is a new establishment forming that dominates the media, judiciary etc, that holds values fairly alien to the ordinary working man and has a fairly narrow range of "permitted" views and is dominated by "right on" thinking. This can make England appear to be becoming more left wing when the likely combined vote of the Tories and UKIP would suggest that at least half sit on a range from Centre to right.


Edited by JagLover on Tuesday 21st April 13:30

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Tuesday 21st April 2015
quotequote all
BlackLabel said:
We'll soon find out. The current government have been reasonably responsible when it's come to borrowing and spending and are fighting this election on that issue. If it's not enough to return them to power then perhaps fiscal conservatism is dead in Britain. Too many people want a free lunch and don't really care who pays for it.
"Someone else..."