Keir Starmer's definition of working class

Pippa000

Kier Starmers father owned the tool making factory.

He rented a workshop on an industrial estate and was a self-employed tradesman.

Not quite the same as owning a factory.

I can remember when it was recommended that one had an amount in savings - just in case. I forget the amount - whether it was a month's salary in hand, or 6 months.

I managed to pay the necessary bills on time but never had any surplus money for that rainy day. This was back in the 60s early 70s. Once we bought our house, late 70's, all our money went on paying the mortgage and renovation costs - so again no surplus.

It was only once we "retired" to France (and I continued to work) with no mortgage that I started to save, and still do, for that "rainy day" which will probably be when I finally stop work.

Allsorts

What’s the matter with working class?. Isn’t it those that keep this country and economy going. The shop workers, the bus drivers, the van drivers who delivered shopping all through Covid when teachers wouldn't work, the doctors surgeries were closed. Are working class to menial to bother about?

Apologies if I'm diverting the thread but I cannot let 'when teachers wouldn't work' pass uncorrected.

Teachers were given notice on the Friday that they would be working through Zoom on the Monday. They not only had to modify resources and teaching styles accordingly, but had to plan extra lessons for when they were teaching pupils in their classroom, sons & daughters of key workers, and planning lessons for those pupils who were unable to access lessons through Zoom. My final point is that many were teaching/supervising key workers' children through the 3 holidays until schools were open to all again.

That doesn't sound like 'wouldn't work' to me. I was retired by then, so I have no personal axe to grind, but sometimes I find that when it comes to school, some on social media (and I don't just mean here) and in the media, haven't got a clue about teaching.

Well said Chardy.

Dinahmo

I can remember when it was recommended that one had an amount in savings - just in case. I forget the amount - whether it was a month's salary in hand, or 6 months.

I managed to pay the necessary bills on time but never had any surplus money for that rainy day. This was back in the 60s early 70s. Once we bought our house, late 70's, all our money went on paying the mortgage and renovation costs - so again no surplus.

It was only once we "retired" to France (and I continued to work) with no mortgage that I started to save, and still do, for that "rainy day" which will probably be when I finally stop work.

I can remember feeling down the side of the sofa hoping to find some money that had got lost there. My husband was a graduate engineer but we still struggled financially when the children were born ( this was on top of never knowing each month if he would be out of work; this was during the Tebbit on your bike period…)

I can remember feeling down the side of the sofa hoping to find some money that had got lost there.

I once went upstairs to borrow some money from my son's piggy bank to pay the milkman, who was at the door.
All I found was the IOU I'd put in there the previous week! 😕

V3ra

^I can remember feeling down the side of the sofa hoping to find some money that had got lost there.^

I once went upstairs to borrow some money from my son's piggy bank to pay the milkman, who was at the door.
All I found was the IOU I'd put in there the previous week! 😕

Crikey, yes, me too! I’d forgotten that. Except it was my son that found it, not me!

In Starmer's view, working class people don't wear ties, have their sleeves rolled up, and drink tea out of big white mugs! Haven't you noticed that this is how he behaves when he brings himself down to their level?

I did read the thread GSM but I think getting hung up on definitions - working class or working people - is a real diversion from the failings of the Tory government.

Curtaintwitcher

In Starmer's view, working class people don't wear ties, have their sleeves rolled up, and drink tea out of big white mugs! Haven't you noticed that this is how he behaves when he brings himself down to their level?

That hadn’t struck me, but you’re right!

Curtaintwitcher

In Starmer's view, working class people don't wear ties, have their sleeves rolled up, and drink tea out of big white mugs! Haven't you noticed that this is how he behaves when he brings himself down to their level?

What 'level' would that be, Curtaintwitcher?.

(Evidently one you view with disdain, of course...)

Starmer did not speak of working class people, O/P was confused perhaps

M0nica

Maybee70 quite frankly I do not want any of them - except possibly Binman, but I am in the wrong constituency. The depth of my cynical disgust for all of our current generation of politicians of all parties is bottomless.

Working class, working people, in the context in which it was used they were more or less synonyms.

To misquote is to mislead. Changing words to suit ones own agenda is deceitful.

ldFrill Thu 20-Jun-24 09:27:57
M0nica
Maybee70 quite frankly I do not want any of them - except possibly Binman, but I am in the wrong constituency. The depth of my cynical disgust for all of our current generation of politicians of all parties is bottomless.

Working class, working people, in the context in which it was used they were more or less synonyms.
To misquote is to mislead. Changing words to suit ones own agenda is deceitful.

Agree , having disgust for should not be an excuse for an untruth

Grantanow

I did read the thread GSM but I think getting hung up on definitions - working class or working people - is a real diversion from the failings of the Tory government.

It’s no diversion. It’s a discussion about why what Starmer’s definition of working people is not the definition the man in the street would use, and not even Reeves uses.

M0nica

If ever I needed proof that class definitions are nonsense and all that matters is how much money you earn/have saved, then Keir Starmer's latest pronouncement on what is working class is the absolute proof.

According to the Times this morning he defined working class as those who cannot afford to write a cheque when they get into trouble

This definition will exclude almost all those traditionally considered 'working class', builders, tradesmen, many factory and assembly line workers, railway men. It will include many of those past retirement age, including many women, probably mostly over 80, who may never have worked since they married.

It will include all the financially inept, but not include many on small salaries who manage a small income with the skill of the Governor of the Bank of England.

It was a really strange thing for him to say wasn’t it? Is he becoming a victim of election burn out?😁

Starmer did not give a definition of working class

M0nica

If ever I needed proof that class definitions are nonsense and all that matters is how much money you earn/have saved, then Keir Starmer's latest pronouncement on what is working class is the absolute proof.

According to the Times this morning he defined working class as those who cannot afford to write a cheque when they get into trouble

This definition will exclude almost all those traditionally considered 'working class', builders, tradesmen, many factory and assembly line workers, railway men. It will include many of those past retirement age, including many women, probably mostly over 80, who may never have worked since they married.

It will include all the financially inept, but not include many on small salaries who manage a small income with the skill of the Governor of the Bank of England.

I've read and re-read this post, and am no wiser as to what its point might be.

Is it that the OP thinks that KS struggles to identify the working class (even though he referred to 'working people')? He's not alone there - since traditional industry was destroyed by Thatcher it is difficult to define. The old definitions don't apply, unless we go back to Marx's 'non-owners of the means of production who sell their labour', and that definitely includes 'professionals' and office workers, alongside those who work in factories, distribution centres and call centres.

Is the OP genuinely making a point that class definitions are nonsense? In that case what has KS to do with anything? If the definition makes no sense, then how can he be expected to define it?

Is the point that 'background' is less important than 'how much money you earn/have saved'? Again, nothing to do with taxation or KS, surely?

Is the point of the OP that there is something strange about the term 'working people' not including workers who have saved a few quid? One of the defining characteristics of the old 'respectable working class' was that they were careful to save, whether in the form of weekly payments to insurance policies, via a building society book or credit unions. Also, these days 'tradesmen' (rightly) earn good money. Why is it odd that they should be excluded from a definition that includes those who can't afford to 'get out of trouble' when the rainy day strikes?

Or is it just having a go at the Labour Party? If so, this is why KS et al are so very careful not to say anything that can be twisted like this. Whatever they say is pounced on and used against them (ineptly or otherwise), and if they stay bland they are criticised for that, too. I've stayed away from threads like this as they are mud-slinging rather than debate, but this one is baffling. I'll be delighted when this is all over in a few weeks and we have a new government who can just get on with equalising society.

Wha is the term "used in the street", then?

I think it was a strange thing to say Doodledog and am a Labour voter.I think it may have just been tiredness on KS part as he’s usually careful with what he says, cautious even.

Good post Doodledog. Page after page just designed to have a go.

No presentation of what conservative policies are on issues that we discuss.

Its the politics of despair - no point in this, no point in that, but no statements of what Sunak can offer or how he's going to cut 17 million.

Mollygo

^ This for example should have been phrased as "the working poor" those who have nothing left for emergencies who struggle to make their money last to the end of the month.^
A much better description than working people. It would imply a better understanding of how some working people live.

That’s it.

doodledog

👍👍👍

How is anyone supposed to know how people manage their money when setting tax levels? If 'the working poor' are those with nothing left at the end of the month, it is impossible to say that they won't be hit with tax rises (on top of the numerous ones everyone's had over the past 15 years) if other 'working people' will be taxed. All that can be done is to set levels based on income, as outgoings cannot (and should not) be taken into account. I think what KS was saying is that there will be tax rises for the wealthy, but most of us needn't worry as he's not planning to make life worse for the majority.

Terms like 'working class' are problematic for all sorts of reasons, so I understand why he might have avoided using it. Tories tend to use 'hard-working families' which is equally meaningless. We all know that it means the 'squeezed middle', but it implies that those with less money don't work hard, which is patently untrue. The implicit judgement pleases their supporters and antagonises those who want equality.

It must be a real pain in the proverbial (for politicians on all sides) to have to weigh every word whilst trying to sound natural, knowing that interviewers are doing their best to catch you out, and that if they don't there will be people on social media nit-picking over everything and looking for a detrimental way to take it.

Curtaintwitcher

In Starmer's view, working class people don't wear ties, have their sleeves rolled up, and drink tea out of big white mugs! Haven't you noticed that this is how he behaves when he brings himself down to their level?

Which is no different to Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, or Rishi Sunak donning aprons , hard-hats or high-viz jackets, when they visit various companies and organisations to mingle with the workers.

And all three have done that.

This is just getting so tiresome. Bashing for the sake of it. Let's debate their past record, their promises, their policies, because ultimately this is what will matter to 99% of the electorate - not Johnson / Truss / Sunak sporting a hard-hat or Starmer rolling up his sleeves. It's what they do - all of them, they've always done it whichever party they represent. It's playground-level stuff to make an issue of it.