Is England shifting ever leftward?
Discussion
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.
That seems likely. Even when it's their children who will be paying, though them too if it goes titsup quicker than expected.sidicks said:
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..."
That's the default left field position. Spend using other people's money, waste a lot of it, then when there's none left, borrow like there's no tomorrow, add demands for freeloading, kick the can down the road for as long as possible, but go back to using other people's money to pay off something if absolutely necessary, and if it hits the fan blame somebody else with scapegoating and vilification to go. EU and Labour to a tee. Not fit for purpose.
sidicks said:
trashbat said:
lazy post. Compared to what? Not the rich, so what? Inflation?
You made the claim!
trashbat said:
Edit: I'll do the legwork for you - http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check/...
Maybe you missed this bit:Robert Joyce, a senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, says the claim that the bottom fifth of UK households saw a rise in their disposable income between 2008 and 2012 is upheld by data from the Office for National Statistics.
"But almost all the gain can be attributed to the Labour government's boost to child tax credits and other benefits before the coalition arrived in May 2010."
and
"Yet forecasts from the Office for Budget responsibility concerning the impact of tax and benefit changes shows that in the period 2007/8 and 2015/16 the bottom 10% will be 3.4% worse off."
turbobloke said:
That's the default left field position. Spend using other people's money, waste a lot of it, then when there's none left, borrow like there's no tomorrow, add demands for freeloading, kick the can down the road for as long as possible, but go back to using other people's money to pay off something if absolutely necessary, and if it hits the fan blame somebody else with scapegoating and vilification to go. EU and Labour to a tee. Not fit for purpose.
I suspect the correlation would be strong.
JagLover said:
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.
Indeed you would be correct I think about libertarian right-wingers, except for scenarios where one persons freedom trumps another's, such as the 'gay cake' thing a while ago.iphonedyou said:
I would love to see an in-depth analysis of the correlation, if any, between the degree to which one considers oneself left-wing, and the propriety with which one manages their personal and business finances.
I suspect the correlation would be strong.
I run a successful business and have solid personal finances with little debt. Debt is car which is leased through business. Can afford to buy it outright but works better for me and the business this way.I suspect the correlation would be strong.
House is in the process of being bought with mortgage less than 60% of value. Also have an interest in a Greenfield development site.
I consider myself left wing.
HTH.
Colonial said:
I run a successful business and have solid personal finances with little debt. Debt is car which is leased through business. Can afford to buy it outright but works better for me and the business this way.
House is in the process of being bought with mortgage less than 60% of value. Also have an interest in a Greenfield development site.
I consider myself left wing.
HTH.
When your sample population have an interest in 'News, Politics & Economics' that's to be expected no?House is in the process of being bought with mortgage less than 60% of value. Also have an interest in a Greenfield development site.
I consider myself left wing.
HTH.
Derek Smith said:
The rise of the UKIP would suggest that the country has moved to the right.
What about the rise of the Greens, the SNP etc. The collective support in recent polling for those and other parties identifying themselves as 'progressive' certainly equals that of UKIP. Socially we're more liberal, economically we're more (small 'c') conservative and politically we're more authoritarian than any time since the war. It's becoming clear that this isn't a product of ideas from the 'left' or 'right' holding sway, but simply that people and governments move toward and away from ideas over time.
The main parties have moved so far to the centre, thanks in part to the use of focus groups and polling in the pursuit of the 'floating voter' that they've made room either side for those outliers who feel that their wishes are no longer represented. These are the new 'floating voter', looking for what they feel the party of their old allegiance has lost.
The problem for Labour and the Tories is that they now have semi-credible parties only too happy to hoover up their lost vote, but that in itself is not an indication of the country moving one way or another.
Mark Benson said:
Derek Smith said:
The rise of the UKIP would suggest that the country has moved to the right.
What about the rise of the Greens, the SNP etc. The collective support in recent polling for those and other parties identifying themselves as 'progressive' certainly equals that of UKIP.UKIP, albeit to a largely unproven extent, have done this too of course, but also actually won many people over. This doesn't mean that they are (or aren't) successful; after all, the BNP was doing this for a very long time, ultimately achieving almost nothing. Nonetheless that potentially is a meaningful shift to the right.
The SNP is its own kettle of fish and probably isn't a very good bellwether for left/right.
trashbat said:
Mark Benson said:
Derek Smith said:
The rise of the UKIP would suggest that the country has moved to the right.
What about the rise of the Greens, the SNP etc. The collective support in recent polling for those and other parties identifying themselves as 'progressive' certainly equals that of UKIP.UKIP, albeit to a largely unproven extent, have done this too of course, but also actually won many people over. This doesn't mean that they are (or aren't) successful; after all, the BNP was doing this for a very long time, ultimately achieving almost nothing. Nonetheless that potentially is a meaningful shift to the right.
The SNP is its own kettle of fish and probably isn't a very good bellwether for left/right.
The 'progressive' non-Labour vote is just the disgruntled Labourites, apart from those few who aren't while the UKIP vote is some people who wouldn't have voted Conservative in the past, apart from those who would? Really?
Both main parties have lost votes to the respective fringes, the rise of UKIP signifies no more or less than the rise of the Greens et al.
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.
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.
Mark Benson said:
You seem to be contradicting yourself in the pursuit of confirming your own bias, it seems to me.
The 'progressive' non-Labour vote is just the disgruntled Labourites, apart from those few who aren't while the UKIP vote is some people who wouldn't have voted Conservative in the past, apart from those who would? Really?
That's a very strange interpretation of what I wrote.The 'progressive' non-Labour vote is just the disgruntled Labourites, apart from those few who aren't while the UKIP vote is some people who wouldn't have voted Conservative in the past, apart from those who would? Really?
Right-leaning parties in the UK have, since the 90s and no doubt much longer before, been quite good at energising people who may have no historical party allegiance, no interest in politics per se, and often who wouldn't vote at all. When the BNP were at their most recent peak popularity, in the North of England for example, where did their vote come from? From historical Labour voters mostly, but also the Conservatives and a bunch of new voters. This is a meaningful political shift because ideas have actually been either developed from nothing or changed, rather than just being switched from party to party.
I'm not suggesting UKIP are a close parallel to the BNP, but they are apparently achieving something similar - as well as reorganising the party vote, e.g. socially-right Tories defecting to them after growing tired with their old party.
I don't see any parallel of that on the left. The Greens aren't attracting anyone that they previously wouldn't. The left in general is not winning anyone new over.
trashbat said:
Mark Benson said:
You seem to be contradicting yourself in the pursuit of confirming your own bias, it seems to me.
The 'progressive' non-Labour vote is just the disgruntled Labourites, apart from those few who aren't while the UKIP vote is some people who wouldn't have voted Conservative in the past, apart from those who would? Really?
That's a very strange interpretation of what I wrote.The 'progressive' non-Labour vote is just the disgruntled Labourites, apart from those few who aren't while the UKIP vote is some people who wouldn't have voted Conservative in the past, apart from those who would? Really?
Right-leaning parties in the UK have, since the 90s and no doubt much longer before, been quite good at energising people who may have no historical party allegiance, no interest in politics per se, and often who wouldn't vote at all. When the BNP were at their most recent peak popularity, in the North of England for example, where did their vote come from? From historical Labour voters mostly, but also the Conservatives and a bunch of new voters. This is a meaningful political shift because ideas have actually been either developed from nothing or changed, rather than just being switched from party to party.
I'm not suggesting UKIP are a close parallel to the BNP, but they are apparently achieving something similar - as well as reorganising the party vote, e.g. socially-right Tories defecting to them after growing tired with their old party.
I don't see any parallel of that on the left. The Greens aren't attracting anyone that they previously wouldn't. The left in general is not winning anyone new over.
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?
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.
My opinion is that the true nature of socialism is the belief that the means of production is the labour force and the labour force should own a stake in the value of that production, this can be done through the labour movement (unions), through a democratic state ownership of the apparatus of the state or through any other means of shared ownership schemes.
Is this an increasingly popular point of view? I doubt many people really think about it, 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.
There is some truth that in the austere times we live in and with a widening wealth gap people feel aggrieved and will tend to lean toward voting for ideals which promise a leveling of wealth - this is not necessarilly socialism or leftist thinking - it's pandering for votes.
BUT people please see the link and understand the data - the countries in the world which you would consider to be "sociallist" run the smallest deficits or have surplus, by some margin compared to what you might consider the "right" think marketeering of the US and UK - we're talking China, Russia, Scandinavia, Germany, France.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_bu...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_sta...
It's just not true to say that socialism and leftist thinking are failed ideologies, yes it's not Marxism but where countries concentrate effort of the value of the means of production and not the value of consumption they tend towards stability and surplus.
Is this an increasingly popular point of view? I doubt many people really think about it, 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.
There is some truth that in the austere times we live in and with a widening wealth gap people feel aggrieved and will tend to lean toward voting for ideals which promise a leveling of wealth - this is not necessarilly socialism or leftist thinking - it's pandering for votes.
BUT people please see the link and understand the data - the countries in the world which you would consider to be "sociallist" run the smallest deficits or have surplus, by some margin compared to what you might consider the "right" think marketeering of the US and UK - we're talking China, Russia, Scandinavia, Germany, France.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_bu...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_sta...
It's just not true to say that socialism and leftist thinking are failed ideologies, yes it's not Marxism but where countries concentrate effort of the value of the means of production and not the value of consumption they tend towards stability and surplus.
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?Bit baffled by this topic.
The general balance of opinion in this country sits in the middle, same as it has for yonks. Leaving aside the labels, many in the Tory Party could quite comfortably work with many in the Labour party if they had to, and there is not much ideologically to separate a Tristram Hunt from a David Cameron; at least, nothing that translates much into policy.
We have just had a right/centre coalition in govt for 5 years, and the bulk of the vote is split evenly between Tory and Labour (there is 1 seat difference between them on current projections) with the Lib Dems as the next biggest national party and assorted fringe national parties on (projected) 5 seats or fewer.
The difference is the rise of the SNP, who are a Labour-style party but, nationalist agenda aside, they are no more "left-wing" than Labour candidates in the same constituencies.
The country is certainly becoming more liberal (small "l") re gay marriage, minority rights etc., but that is not a "left-wing" agenda, it's just a product of children of the more liberal 60s - 80s now being the majority.
So, if you think that the country is becoming more left-wing, chances are that it's just you becoming more right-wing. It's a male menopause thing - normal cure is a sports car
The general balance of opinion in this country sits in the middle, same as it has for yonks. Leaving aside the labels, many in the Tory Party could quite comfortably work with many in the Labour party if they had to, and there is not much ideologically to separate a Tristram Hunt from a David Cameron; at least, nothing that translates much into policy.
We have just had a right/centre coalition in govt for 5 years, and the bulk of the vote is split evenly between Tory and Labour (there is 1 seat difference between them on current projections) with the Lib Dems as the next biggest national party and assorted fringe national parties on (projected) 5 seats or fewer.
The difference is the rise of the SNP, who are a Labour-style party but, nationalist agenda aside, they are no more "left-wing" than Labour candidates in the same constituencies.
The country is certainly becoming more liberal (small "l") re gay marriage, minority rights etc., but that is not a "left-wing" agenda, it's just a product of children of the more liberal 60s - 80s now being the majority.
So, if you think that the country is becoming more left-wing, chances are that it's just you becoming more right-wing. It's a male menopause thing - normal cure is a sports car
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff