Tories lost the 2019 election among working age adults

Soldato
Joined
16 Aug 2009
Posts
6,478
The question is how long can this go on before things basically fall apart. The situation for the young is getting worse all the time. Private rental is increasing; home ownership is decreasing; the cost to the taxpayer of subsidising rents paid to private landlords is increasing. The young are thoroughly disillusioned and many do not want to be part of this crooked system, which exists solely to benefit the wealthy.

Many look at today's society and think, "There's no future for me here. I don't want to live all my life a slave in a job I hate and then die, because I won't even be able to retire the way things are going."

Our FPTP system ensures perpetual Tory rule, and we all know what their priorities are. Not those of the common man, that's for sure.

The whole game is rigged, and this country seemingly is yearning for a return to the Victorian era. All the while, economists warning of the perils of a growing wealth divide, and just about everyone talking about how unsustainable our current trajectory really is.

Going to be fun watching the whole thing unravel.

Alright lets turn this around why don't you think Labour have no policies about this? BTL tenants are more likely to be underprivileged and hence more likely to be labour voters, they aren't going to do anything about this system because it benefits them too. As soon as people become homeowners they automatically become Tory voters because you've removed dependency culture and introduced aspiration. It isn't going anywhere because it suits both sides too well.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Dec 2012
Posts
16,100
Location
Gloucestershire
Alright lets turn this around why don't you think Labour have no policies about this? BTL tenants are more likely to be underprivileged and hence more likely to be labour voters, they aren't going to do anything about this system because it benefits them too. As soon as people become homeowners they automatically become Tory voters because you've removed dependency culture and introduced aspiration. It isn't going anywhere because it suits both sides too well.
Labour did have a policy around housing for the last election (see here: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...cQFnoECAQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0cy7rKD_6ai0BVdFIXyn28 ) But, as per thread, the olds voted for the other party.

Current Labour is trying to appeal to the olds by being more Tory, so no progressive housing policies have emerged. So old people voting so heavily Tory has not only prevented a government which would help young people, it's also killed the option for young people of voting for a party which will help young people.
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Feb 2018
Posts
7,821
As soon as people become homeowners they automatically become Tory voters because you've removed dependency culture and introduced aspiration. It isn't going anywhere because it suits both sides too well.
lol what a silly statement. Ive been a home owner for over 30 years. Do you honestly think that people that own their own homes dont vote Labour? Seriously?

Labour isnt all about dependency culture. What an crazy statement.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2009
Posts
9,906
Alright lets turn this around why don't you think Labour have no policies about this? BTL tenants are more likely to be underprivileged and hence more likely to be labour voters, they aren't going to do anything about this system because it benefits them too. As soon as people become homeowners they automatically become Tory voters because you've removed dependency culture and introduced aspiration. It isn't going anywhere because it suits both sides too well.

There are many forms of aspiration, being a home owner is one of them. I’m a home owner in the most expensive post code in a major city.

Aspiration doesn’t extend solely to wanting to be a landlord and ruin the housing market, and lock in an entire generation of people who have no chance of building capital to buy their own home because they are paying to rent from someone who owns multiple homes.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Posts
9,377
Interesting that social supporting mechanisms are now been called dependency culture, how detached can people get? Its the kind of phrase expected from someone who has never had to deal with proper problems. Pray you dont get a heart attack or you dont have children and cant afford them to go to private school as other wise you are part of that "dependency culture".

Something of interest happened today, the reason I am back in this thread, got a letter from the council asking me to take part in a consultation about the standards of private letting, apparently the problem has got so bad in the city with excessive enforcement orders and the like they are considering introducing what they call "discretionary private rental licensing schemes".
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Nov 2003
Posts
7,061
Location
Shropshire
Interesting that social supporting mechanisms are now been called dependency culture, how detached can people get? Its the kind of phrase expected from someone who has never had to deal with proper problems. Pray you dont get a heart attack or you dont have children and cant afford them to go to private school as other wise you are part of that "dependency culture".

Something of interest happened today, the reason I am back in this thread, got a letter from the council asking me to take part in a consultation about the standards of private letting, apparently the problem has got so bad in the city with excessive enforcement orders and the like they are considering introducing what they call "discretionary private rental licensing schemes".


Ah, so the council are after another cut of the profits are they... ;)
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,970
Labour did have a policy around housing for the last election (see here: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...cQFnoECAQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0cy7rKD_6ai0BVdFIXyn28 ) But, as per thread, the olds voted for the other party.

Current Labour is trying to appeal to the olds by being more Tory, so no progressive housing policies have emerged. So old people voting so heavily Tory has not only prevented a government which would help young people, it's also killed the option for young people of voting for a party which will help young people.

This really is a problem. Due to FPTP and the fact that younger people are concentrated in larger cities, there is no incentive for any major party to appeal to younger voters. As such, young people don't have any parties that consistently represent their interests, so they are less likely to vote. And the circle continues. And due to the ageing population, we'll have fewer and fewer young citizens of voting age anyway so this problem will only get worse.

We need to break up our party system and move to proportional representation. That's the only way young people will ever get any representation in this country.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Mar 2014
Posts
2,281
This really is a problem. Due to FPTP and the fact that younger people are concentrated in larger cities, there is no incentive for any major party to appeal to younger voters. As such, young people don't have any parties that consistently represent their interests, so they are less likely to vote. And the circle continues. And due to the ageing population, we'll have fewer and fewer young citizens of voting age anyway so this problem will only get worse.

We need to break up our party system and move to proportional representation. That's the only way young people will ever get any representation in this country.

What if the boundaries were changed?
 

dod

dod

Soldato
Joined
31 Oct 2002
Posts
3,966
Location
Inverness
We need to break up our party system and move to proportional representation. That's the only way young people will ever get any representation in this country.
PR fair enough. How would you break up the existing party structure? What would you replace it with?
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,970
PR fair enough. How would you break up the existing party structure? What would you replace it with?

We need smaller parties with clear vision and priorities, which are more uniform without the infighting that we often see in big parties. It should happen as a byproduct of PR. There really is little incentive to form huge parties in a PR system so naturally we should encourage breakup of big parties into several smaller ones.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Posts
9,377
In effect a new PR referendum could be forced at GE time.

Setup a party with the sole intention of bringing in PR if it wins power, it would then immediately set a new GE to rerun with PR. With that promise in theory you would get united voters from all sides of the political spectrum together who support PR.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Dec 2012
Posts
16,100
Location
Gloucestershire
Alongside the upcoming NI rise, which will lose the average earner £23 per month from their net pay and is a tax only payable by working age people (OAPs don't pay NI), the government has added to the burden of young people by freezing the Student Loan repayments threshold.


Yet another example of the young being hammered in ways the old never were.

We're just loading up the burden of younger people in the face of the country's birth rate falling off a cliff, as young people simply can't afford to set themselves up for family life.
 
Associate
Joined
1 Jul 2008
Posts
2,149
Location
Birmingham
Alongside the upcoming NI rise, which will lose the average earner £23 per month from their net pay and is a tax only payable by working age people (OAPs don't pay NI), the government has added to the burden of young people by freezing the Student Loan repayments threshold.

Yet another example of the young being hammered in ways the old never were.

We're just loading up the burden of younger people in the face of the country's birth rate falling off a cliff, as young people simply can't afford to set themselves up for family life.

£23 a month - is that all?

As a former student loan payer (forgotten when I paid it off), I can tell you now it won't make a difference as you never saw the money in the first place.

PS. Why is this thread not in Speakers corner?
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Dec 2011
Posts
5,611
Location
City of London
Alongside the upcoming NI rise, which will lose the average earner £23 per month from their net pay and is a tax only payable by working age people (OAPs don't pay NI), the government has added to the burden of young people by freezing the Student Loan repayments threshold.


Yet another example of the young being hammered in ways the old never were.
Most of 'the old' didn't get a chance to go to university at all, now over half of people do. Would you prefer it were like it was for 'the old' and it was just the privileged few that were attending?
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Dec 2012
Posts
16,100
Location
Gloucestershire
Most of 'the old' didn't get a chance to go to university at all, now over half of people do. Would you prefer it were like it was for 'the old' and it was just the privileged few that were attending?
Job spec creep, with more and more careers requiring a degree, was not something younger people instigated: it was foisted upon them.

And then they get taxed and criticised for it.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Jan 2010
Posts
24,903
Location
Llaneirwg
Alongside the upcoming NI rise, which will lose the average earner £23 per month from their net pay and is a tax only payable by working age people (OAPs don't pay NI), the government has added to the burden of young people by freezing the Student Loan repayments threshold.


Yet another example of the young being hammered in ways the old never were.

We're just loading up the burden of younger people in the face of the country's birth rate falling off a cliff, as young people simply can't afford to set themselves up for family life.

No its pretty clear we are on the decline as a society. World competition for resources is growing so we are competing with that.

Main issue is cost of putting a roof over your head is skyrocketing along with taxes and basically every other cost.

It's what world. Needs really. A decline in population. And part of me does think this is just the inevitable decline that all populations in nature eventually through.

It sucks for us as individuals. So so many factors to not have kids now. It's an unstoppable trend. I'm guessing in UK immigration can pick up the slack. But it's irreversible.

I'm certainly glad to be in the beginning of the decline and not the middle of it.


I don't think a party change however can correct this. Its a direct consequence of capitalism and a free market on property.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Dec 2012
Posts
16,100
Location
Gloucestershire
I don't think a party change however can correct this. Its a direct consequence of capitalism and a free market on property.
Party changes have had a huge effect in the past 40 years in the UK.

Fertility rate declines under Tory government, and rises under Labour

JM9ebNp.png
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Jan 2010
Posts
24,903
Location
Llaneirwg
Party changes have had a huge effect in the past 40 years in the UK.

Fertility rate declines under Tory government, and rises under Labour

JM9ebNp.png

It's probably a consequence of cost of living/culture movements.

Child free is a really growing thing people now identify with. Coupled to the cost of living jump in the last few years its a recipe for tanking rates.

Not sure Labour could make much of a dent in it. I know the current idea from them is to tax oil corps to pay for the cost of living. And that the tories have chosen NI as a 'fair' tax. Even though it hits middle earners most. Probably the most likely group to put off kids.

My sister for example. She wants kids but can't get onto the housing ladder.

You maybe right though. How much of this recent house price boom was caused by the completely unnecessary stamp duty break?
Tories also chose to put this on NI. And not things like capital gains etc.

I wish we could get the tories out.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2009
Posts
2,970
I don't think a party change however can correct this. Its a direct consequence of capitalism and a free market on property.

The property market is the opposite of a free market. Every time there is any downwards pressure, the government does something to alleviate that. Whether schemes to inflate prices (help to buy, shared ownership, relaxing borrowing regulations, encouraging foreign ownership, reducing taxes, encouraging buy to let, etc). If it was a truly free market it would have been allowed to go down as well as up. But it goes only one way, by design. This is not how a fre market should operate.

I always say, if housing is treated as an investment (i.e. people can profit from it) then people shouldn't be protected from losses either. And if people need to be protected from losses, then nobody should be allowed to profit from it. We can't privatise the gains and socialise the losses. That's not capitalism.

My sister for example. She wants kids but can't get onto the housing ladder.

You maybe right though. How much of this recent house price boom was caused by the completely unnecessary stamp duty break?
Tories also chose to put this on NI. And not things like capital gains etc.

I wish we could get the tories out.

Stamp duty break definitely played a role in inflating prices, but it's the last in a long list of policies that come every time there's even a small sign of stagnation, let alone a correction. This is just a giveaway to older generation to buy votes by increasing their paper wealth which they love more than anything else.

Labour would be no different. They will also want to buy the votes from the same people.

The only way this would change is when the "have nots" become a stronger voting block than the "haves", e.g. workers and renters become more politically powerful than homeowner/landlord class. Another way is general strikes, if the working people stop working and start civil disobedience en masse, then we'll get some concessions. As long as we're all fighting between ourselves over culture war stuff, we can't ever unite to fight the actual class war, despite how hostile this country has been to children and young adults in recent years.
 
Top