Tories lost the 2019 election among working age adults

Greebo said:
Thing is the older vote only used to 17%. Go back to the 50s and it was only 10% of the voters. By 2050 it will be 38%. Makes a distract difference. Yes it would help if the young got involved and voted. If they turned out to vote at 85% like the elderly then they could make changes even now. As time goes by that will become less acheivable.

Only 24% of old people vote Labour vs 63% Tory. Plus the issue isnt so much whether its Labour or Tory, its all going to be concentrated on which party offers whatever older people want. Clearly all the under 65 will never vote all for the other party, whoever that may be.

When you see the figures that

65% of Department for Work and Pensions benefit expenditure goes to those over working age, equivalent to £100 billion in 2010/11 or one seventh of public expenditure. Continuing to provide state benefits and pensions at today’s average would mean additional spending of £10 billion a year for every additional one million people over working age. There will be 9m more retired by 2050 so an extra £90 billion per year needed and will become almost one third of public expenditure. To put this in perspective its almost spending the same as HS2 extra every year

1 in 6 of all people(including kids) are currently over 65, by 2050 it will be 1 in 4

The average NHS cost of a retired household is double what the under 65 household costs so as the population moves towards more people being older, the extra annual NHS spend will be 13% more than it is now just to account for the elderly.

The Department of Health estimates that the average cost of providing hospital and community health services for a person aged 85 years or more is around three times greater than for a person aged 65 to 74 years. As more and more people move into this age bracket, the total cost will continue to rise.

Centenarians will be the fastest growing age group for the next 40 years.
Click to expand...
Yea, I get that, people seem to keep wanting to throw stats but how you gonna fix it, or even begin to? Again the reality is people will be minded that "they will fix it though, they always fix it".You can worry or you can protect your self interests. See, like old people do....or when the young get older and see that's the only way.

This is why I keep saying to young people, wait to you get older....it is generational. You have all the answers as a young person, all the ideas, all the creative minds....you get older and the ears get deafer and with that you become more militant. It has happened generation after generation but the young STILL believe they won't be like that. But most will, they always are.
 
Housey said:
Most people prefer the status quo as well. Being vocal means little sadly....and to some extent thankfully too if you read social media.
Click to expand...
Social media is just a cesspit and has given people this weird idea of an online protest, if you want something to change you have to go out and change it nothing is going to be radically altered without making a scene!
 
a1ex2001 said:
Social media is just a cesspit and has given people this weird idea of an online protest, if you want something to change you have to go out and change it nothing is going to be radically altered without making a scene!
Click to expand...
It is a microcosm of our nation given a voice by wider media. When we have national news reporting on what people on Twitter think we are lost. The need to be instant/first out there with stories is the ruination of reporting, the monetisation of it the final nail.
 
Owen Jones (spit) was writing about this in the Guardian today. His conclusion was that Labour should emulate a Clement Atlee with a huge National Care Service and enhanced pension to attract the pensioners to the Labour frame of mind.
I'm not sure how that would work out. He still seemed to be in favour of the pension triple lock as well, a concept dipping in the ratings.
 
Housey said:
It is a microcosm of our nation given a voice by wider media. When we have national news reporting on what people on Twitter think we are lost. The need to be instant/first out there with stories is the ruination of reporting, the monetisation of it the final nail.
Click to expand...
Agreed. There's become this weird notion which people seem to have which is that their opinion, simply because they have one on [insert topic], means something, anything. It rarely does. When media then use these opinions to fill pages, or more likely to bolster the view their editor has (the Daily Mail is a shocker for this), then it's just like the Scaramanga hideout scene on Ko Khao Phing Kan but with less 007 and more crap.
 
chroniclard said:
Overall it's estimated a big benefit to the Tories.
Click to expand...

10 seats I've read, which would help them with a coalition or to cling on with a majority.

However, I am not convinced it is as big for the Tories as Labour getting the young voting age population out to vote. This is also why photo ID has become somewhat more a contentious issue for Labour - because younger voters will feel deterred and won't bother to vote if they do not have some form of ID, which in my opinion is more impactful than boundary changes.
 
Secret_Window said:
10 seats I've read, which would help them with a coalition or to cling on with a majority.

However, I am not convinced it is as big for the Tories as Labour getting the young voting age population out to vote. This is also why photo ID has become somewhat more a contentious issue for Labour - because younger voters will feel deterred and won't bother to vote if they do not have some form of ID, which in my opinion is more impactful than boundary changes.
Click to expand...

Both are just sly corruption. Neither are necessary.
 
cheesyboy said:
Interesting stat that's been knocking around for the last day or two. It feels to compliment, and perhaps provide context to, the "highest ever working household poverty" thread

It seems that the will of the old and economically inactive is what really matters in UK politics now.


And drilling down, again excluding retirees, the Tories only won with working age people earning £100k+


I suppose the question is: is it potentially problematic to have a government who are only favoured by groups whose interests are so different to the majority of working people?
Click to expand...

I find it disturbing the way the thread suggests that maybe old people don't count!

The government does and should represent all of the people, not just part of them.
 
I agree ^^^. You'd struggle to find a party or MP that doesn't believe in a single vote for every adult of voting age.

Edit: except possibly Tories on jailed criminals. Should have thought more before I posted. Please accept my profound apologies.
 
Housey said:
Yea, I get that, people seem to keep wanting to throw stats but how you gonna fix it, or even begin to? Again the reality is people will be minded that "they will fix it though, they always fix it".You can worry or you can protect your self interests. See, like old people do....or when the young get older and see that's the only way.

This is why I keep saying to young people, wait to you get older....it is generational. You have all the answers as a young person, all the ideas, all the creative minds....you get older and the ears get deafer and with that you become more militant. It has happened generation after generation but the young STILL believe they won't be like that. But most will, they always are.
Click to expand...

You could fix it by getting rid of FPTP. But neither of the two main parties want that as it would be the end of them winning big majorities.

I am not even sure it can be fixed. Its a matter of just reality and the change in how selecting a Govt is going to work in this country. It used to elected by up to 90% of working people and is going to be selected by the over 65s going forward, certainly the over 55s.

More worryingly is they are going to have to select Governments who will have to decide how to deal with the massive cost burden of the very large over 65 population and the chances of them voting in anybody who is going to cut pensions or NHS benefits is slim. When you are looking at the entire cost of HS2 every year as an increase to the budget you are going to have slash everything for anybody under 65 or massively increase taxes for those still working.
 
pp111 said:
I find it disturbing the way the thread suggests that maybe old people don't count!

The government does and should represent all of the people, not just part of them.
Click to expand...

Sadly the trend nowadays is they dont. They represent those who voted for them. Politics has moved to Party first, country second and constituents last.

Looks at the recent town grant giveaways. The three towns that got the money where I live are all recent Tory wins. One town has already had millions spent on improving it in recent years but gets another 20m whereas other Labour towns nearby who have had no money, still get no money. The message is clear. If you vote for us in the next GE, your town could too get millions of pounds spent on it. If you don't then you will get nothing.

And looking on local social media pages, lots of people are actually behind this and dont see it as anything wrong. Lots of people posting saying to the people in other towns that its their fault for voting Labour.
 
Last edited:
Greebo said:
Sadly the trend nowadays is they dont. They represent those who voted for them. Politics has moved to Party first, country second and constituents last.

Looks at the recent town grant giveaways. The three towns that got the money where I live are all recent Tory wins. One town has already had millions spent on improving it in recent years but gets another 20m whereas other Labour towns nearby who have had no money, still get no money. The message is clear. If you vote for us in the next GE, your town could too get millions of pounds spent on it.
Click to expand...

Well that's true.
 
Secret_Window said:
However, I am not convinced it is as big for the Tories as Labour getting the young voting age population out to vote. This is also why photo ID has become somewhat more a contentious issue for Labour - because younger voters will feel deterred and won't bother to vote if they do not have some form of ID, which in my opinion is more impactful than boundary changes.
Click to expand...

I think a shake-up of postal votes is far more urgently needed rather than photo ID's. Have it go back to its original purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom