Labour and the Triple Lock

The ‘Red Wall’ may now be leaning Labour, but whether or not Starmer’s party do indeed recapture these old heartlands has different immediate consequences in terms of electoral fortunes for the two parties vying to lead the next government.

For Labour, failing to win back the constituencies across the North and Midlands which fell to Johnson’s Conservatives – and indeed to May in 2017 – would spell defeat. Without splashing red paint back across the ‘Red Wall’, there is no feasible path to a parliamentary majority for Labour. There are not enough winnable constituencies in Scotland, Wales, and the South of England to get Starmer into Number 10.

The Conservatives know that while the ‘Red Wall’ is crucial for Labour’s chances of governing, the same is not true for them.

Indeed, Labour need to push beyond the ‘Red Wall’ to win the election, charting a course of wins which extends south and into those former bellwethers and traditional battlegrounds of British politics. Labour need to win over ‘Stevenage Woman’.

U.K. in a changing Europe.

Mamardoit

They can promise what they like. The country has an aging population and a low birth rate. Ultimately we can't afford to keep paying a state pension for everyone.

I'm not sure how the Australian pension system works but I'm sure well off retired people don't get anything from the state.

My children range from early 40s to late 20s they expect to work until they drop.

The State Pension is means tested in Australia.
If it is awarded, it is more generous than our old State Pension but I'm not sure how it compares with the new UK State Pension but it is still higher, I think.

It depends how you define 'well-off'. I believe your assets are taken into account.

Paying into a pension scheme is compulsory and employers have to contribute a considerable sum too. The minimum wage is now over $23.00 per hour, so I was told, exclusive of Superannuation, holiday and sick pay contributions which are on top.

maddyone

So given that it is true that Muslims vote Labour, the question is why?

Muslims living in western nations generally vote for progressive (or left-leaning) parties. Why is complex, but broadly the right is seen as being less in line with Islam’s emphasis on social justice; as having economic priorities which don’t align with that; as being more Zionist (which is now why Labour are losing Muslim support; as being somewhere on a scale of ‘Christianity is better’ (necessary to appeal to their core vote) to outright Islamophobic (see Boris Johnson, whose blatant Islamophobia drove even more Muslims to vote for progressive parties). Second and subsequent generation Muslims may well be more socially liberal, as well. And, of course, all WWM’s data applies to Muslims too.

These are broad sweeping generalisations, and there is significant diversity in how different Muslim communities vote and how much impact that has; Indian-heritage Muslims in the UK, for example, tend a little more to vote Conservative, and as they are the biggest single bloc, their votes may be disproportionately impactful.

There are other reasons, and other exceptions, but it’d need a book and I’m not the right person to write it!

Germanshepherdsmum

Students might support Labour but many change their views once they get into the real world of work.

my adult children haven't.

There are many people where I live who cling to their student left-wing politics; they vote tactically Lib-Dem to keep Conservatives out, but consider themselves staunch Labour apart from living or working in a Labour constituency or admitting publicly where their allegiance lies.

eazybee

There are many people where I live who cling to their student left-wing politics; they vote tactically Lib-Dem to keep Conservatives out, but consider themselves staunch Labour apart from living or working in a Labour constituency or admitting publicly where their allegiance lies.

And your point is?

HousePlantQueen

Germanshepherdsmum

Students might support Labour but many change their views once they get into the real world of work.

my adult children haven't.

Mine did - along with three brothers all involved in heavy industrial employment. Common sense kicks in along the way.

I think the pension should be tied to the rise in household income and nothing else.

I do not think that we should be getting higher proportionate rises in pension than our children and other people who still work get in wages..

What kicks in with age is an increasing desire to protect your assets and a consequent reduction in altruistic motivation. That’s why over 65s are the biggest Tory voting group by some distance.

I think older people might protect their assets for two reasons: one is in case they might need to go into a care or nursing home (currently about £72,000 per annum) and secondly to try to leave something to help their children who might be struggling with high mortgages.

Otherwise, I believe many older people are altruistic - without them the voluntary sector and many charities would just fold.

Casdon yes, and it’s why the ageing=moving towards the Tories link is now broken.

I don’t understand your point, Siope. I believe my assets would be better protected by the Conservatives than Labour.

Norway, which is often held up as an example of how we should run our country, has a slightly higher rate of income tax but no inheritance tax.
Finland too, but the inheritance tax rate is just 19%.

Spinnaker

HousePlantQueen

Germanshepherdsmum

Students might support Labour but many change their views once they get into the real world of work.

my adult children haven't.

Mine did - along with three brothers all involved in heavy industrial employment. Common sense kicks in along the way.

So, by this you mean that my adult children are lacking in common sense do you?

My idealistic opinions when young soon changed when I started earning money and saw the deductions.

My point, GSM is that many young people don’t have assets to protect.

Young in this context including, increasingly, middle-aged folk, as per WWM’s figures in a previous post.

I don't think I have ever been idealistic, in fact I was a bit of a Tory when I was younger, and have gone against the usual trend and have become more left wing as I have got older, and wiser. I grew up watching the excesses of union power in the 1960s and 70s, so don't have rosy tinted glasses about socialism. I can understand old style Conservatives, decent people like my late parents voting as they did, and there are quite a few ( mainly kicked out by Johnson) Conservative MPs who I consider principled, moral people with the right ethics and approach. But, from Cameron onwards, I have been aware of the race to the bottom, of the courting of the basest of instincts, of 'othering' of people, of sneering disregard for anyone in need of state help, and of massive dismantling of those things which keep society a fair and equitable place. I understand how many people are unable to vote Labour after a lifetime of voting Tory, but I am mystified as to how anyone can think that this bunch of incompetents and liars are their choice for the next government.

Callistemon21

Norway, which is often held up as an example of how we should run our country, has a slightly higher rate of income tax but no inheritance tax.
Finland too, but the inheritance tax rate is just 19%.

Norway also has wealth tax, so rather than paying the tax after they've died, Norwegians pay tax on their wealth while they're still alive.

HousePlantQueen

Spinnaker

HousePlantQueen

Germanshepherdsmum

Students might support Labour but many change their views once they get into the real world of work.

my adult children haven't.

Mine did - along with three brothers all involved in heavy industrial employment. Common sense kicks in along the way.

So, by this you mean that my adult children are lacking in common sense do you?

Presumably my children lack common sense too, which is strange because in her very early 30s my daughter is already paying 40% tax on some of her income.

So we are equating common sense with voting Tory now are we?😄😄

Germanshepherdsmum

I expect most people paying tax at 20% would rather have 80% of the increase in their pension than no increase at all. With inflation falling as it has, the triple lock will be far less expensive to maintain than has been the case of late.

There will be quite a few like my mother, who can't get her head around it.
Last year, she had to pay tax for the first time since retiring over twenty years ago.
The tax is taken from her small private pension. Try as I might, I can't get her to see /accept her that the increase in her state pension is far greater than the increased amount of tax taken from that private pension. She seems convinced that she is getting less now overall, even though that isn't the case.

Correction - she started paying tax for the first time in thirty years, not twenty - not that it makes any difference, apart from meaning she is older now.

Germanshepherdsmum

I expect most people paying tax at 20% would rather have 80% of the increase in their pension than no increase at all. With inflation falling as it has, the triple lock will be far less expensive to maintain than has been the case of late.

Just a little deviation from the topic, but it does occur to me that we could apply exactly the same reasoning to inheritance tax, which, IIRC, you, and others who wish to 'protect their assets' don't agree with..

Whitewavemark2

So we are equating common sense with voting Tory now are we?😄😄

I don't dare post what I equate with tory voting, it would be taken down in double quick time 😆