Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New YouGov polling finds that ex-Londoners are more likely to

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited May 9 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New YouGov polling finds that ex-Londoners are more likely to vote LAB even after they’ve left

NEW POLL – Been working with @election_data looking at how ex-Londoners (those that moved out of London in past 5 years ) voted in the last couple of elections. TLDR – They swung towards Labour https://t.co/aL2xQh8hLU pic.twitter.com/ru4hw0cvAS

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,779
    edited May 9
    First?

    Wow just out of court after a very hot and sweaty day and I get a first. Things are looking up.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,905
    Second?

    Like Corbynistas.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,938
    POEWAS. Time to drag old an oldie but a goodie.

    Victory for Fleet Street and the hacks!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383
    edited May 9
    The Tory margin may narrow slightly in the South East through recent ex Londoners but it is still comfortably the most Tory voting region in the country.

    It should also be noted that the Tories have been making inroads into the Brexit voting Midlands, including winning seats like Mansfield and Nuneaton that even Kinnock won
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,762

    POEWAS. Time to drag old an oldie but a goodie.

    Victory for Fleet Street and the hacks!

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,343
    edited May 9
    "Wow just out of court after a very hot and sweaty day and I get a first."

    Cool and raining here in the NW. Proper weather.

    PS Hope you escaped with a light sentence. Mr L.

  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 202
    edited May 9
    I wonder if any serious statistician has analysed voting patterns for age, educational achievement, employment, income, ethnicity and other factors to quantify the "London" effect? Does it actually exist or does the profile of the London population entirely explain voting patterns?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,407
    edited May 9
    FPT

    How Brexit is damaging the economy.
    By, a Brexiter.

    https://capx.co/it-is-official-brexit-squabbling-is-damaging-the-economy/

    A Brexiteer who doesn't "care or understand" how to implement it. These people ought to be ashamed.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,762

    A Brexiteer who doesn't "care or understand" how to implement it.

    That's all of them...
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,480
    The political north-south divide is going into reverse for the first time in decades. This really ought to be commented upon much more than it has been.

    Labour is not suddenly going to start sweeping the south east and East Anglia. However, there are a clutch of seats that look newly vulnerable to them. Labour don't need to take 60 seats in the south east and East Anglia: 15 would do them very nicely.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,103
    There are probably two trends at work, which may cancel each other out.

    1. Londoners move into surrounding constituencies, boosting the potential Labour vote.

    2. The longer Londoners live in those constituencies, the more they adopt the voting habits of the locals, boosting the potential Conservative vote.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    I am now one of the 'moved away', and I don't expect my voting intention will change. Although the country does feel different when viewed from a perspective away from the capital.

    What would be interesting is whether or not (and I suspect not) those moving away have different average voting preferences to those remaining.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,779
    CD13 said:

    "Wow just out of court after a very hot and sweaty day and I get a first."

    Cool and raining here in the NW. Proper weather.

    PS Hope you escaped with a light sentence. Mr L.

    Not really I am condemned to come back tomorrow and Friday. :-)
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,480
    Sean_F said:

    There are probably two trends at work, which may cancel each other out.

    1. Londoners move into surrounding constituencies, boosting the potential Labour vote.

    2. The longer Londoners live in those constituencies, the more they adopt the voting habits of the locals, boosting the potential Conservative vote.

    There's a bit more than that happening here:

    "We surveyed more than 25,000 voters last weekend – after the local elections – to identify a sample of respondents who have left London in recent years, to find out which parties they supported in the 2015 and 2017 general elections, as well as the 2016 EU referendum. The results are striking. On attitudes to Europe, those who have migrated out of London in the past five years were more likely to have voted remain than those they were leaving behind, breaking 66% remain to 34% leave.

    At the 2017 general election, Labour experienced similar swings among these ex-Londoners as it did among those who remained in London, increasing itsvote share by 11% on the previous election among ex-Londoners while the Conservatives’ vote share fell by 3% (a seven-point swing to Labour).

    The net result means that Labour held a 12-point lead over the Conservatives among these ex-Londoners in the 2017 general election, with the parties on 47% and 35% retrospectively.

    Historically speaking, you might have expected these voters to be much more Conservative. Many can be described as affluent young families with suburban mindsets. Seven in 10 are ABC1 social grade. However, over the last two years they have moved from supporting the Conservatives, then the remain side in the European referendum, and now Labour."

    It's hard to avoid the B word when looking for an explanation of this type of movement.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,103
    IanB2 said:

    I am now one of the 'moved away', and I don't expect my voting intention will change. Although the country does feel different when viewed from a perspective away from the capital.

    What would be interesting is whether or not (and I suspect not) those moving away have different average voting preferences to those remaining.

    London voted 45/34 Lab/Con in 2015, and 55/33 Lab in 2017, so the answer to your question is that they do.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,839
    edited May 9
    FPT:

    AndyJS said:

    2006 local elections: Lewisham East, using highest vote method.

    LD 6,432 (29.5%)
    Lab 6,357 (29.2%)
    Con 5,072 (23.3%)
    Greens 2,637 (12.1%)
    Ind 1,020 (4.7%)
    UKIP 281 (1.3%)

    The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.
    I don't entirely agree, I think the figures show there is some potential for the LDs in this constituency. Even in Lewisham the majority of current voters must have been living there in 2006.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,103

    Sean_F said:

    There are probably two trends at work, which may cancel each other out.

    1. Londoners move into surrounding constituencies, boosting the potential Labour vote.

    2. The longer Londoners live in those constituencies, the more they adopt the voting habits of the locals, boosting the potential Conservative vote.

    There's a bit more than that happening here:

    "We surveyed more than 25,000 voters last weekend – after the local elections – to identify a sample of respondents who have left London in recent years, to find out which parties they supported in the 2015 and 2017 general elections, as well as the 2016 EU referendum. The results are striking. On attitudes to Europe, those who have migrated out of London in the past five years were more likely to have voted remain than those they were leaving behind, breaking 66% remain to 34% leave.

    At the 2017 general election, Labour experienced similar swings among these ex-Londoners as it did among those who remained in London, increasing itsvote share by 11% on the previous election among ex-Londoners while the Conservatives’ vote share fell by 3% (a seven-point swing to Labour).

    The net result means that Labour held a 12-point lead over the Conservatives among these ex-Londoners in the 2017 general election, with the parties on 47% and 35% retrospectively.

    Historically speaking, you might have expected these voters to be much more Conservative. Many can be described as affluent young families with suburban mindsets. Seven in 10 are ABC1 social grade. However, over the last two years they have moved from supporting the Conservatives, then the remain side in the European referendum, and now Labour."

    It's hard to avoid the B word when looking for an explanation of this type of movement.
    That's interesting. Given a 2/1 lead for Remain among such voters, the Conservatives were perhaps fortunate to hold the Labour lead to 12%.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,416

    Sean_F said:

    There are probably two trends at work, which may cancel each other out.

    1. Londoners move into surrounding constituencies, boosting the potential Labour vote.

    2. The longer Londoners live in those constituencies, the more they adopt the voting habits of the locals, boosting the potential Conservative vote.

    There's a bit more than that happening here:

    "We surveyed more than 25,000 voters last weekend – after the local elections – to identify a sample of respondents who have left London in recent years, to find out which parties they supported in the 2015 and 2017 general elections, as well as the 2016 EU referendum. The results are striking. On attitudes to Europe, those who have migrated out of London in the past five years were more likely to have voted remain than those they were leaving behind, breaking 66% remain to 34% leave.

    At the 2017 general election, Labour experienced similar swings among these ex-Londoners as it did among those who remained in London, increasing itsvote share by 11% on the previous election among ex-Londoners while the Conservatives’ vote share fell by 3% (a seven-point swing to Labour).

    The net result means that Labour held a 12-point lead over the Conservatives among these ex-Londoners in the 2017 general election, with the parties on 47% and 35% retrospectively.

    Historically speaking, you might have expected these voters to be much more Conservative. Many can be described as affluent young families with suburban mindsets. Seven in 10 are ABC1 social grade. However, over the last two years they have moved from supporting the Conservatives, then the remain side in the European referendum, and now Labour."

    It's hard to avoid the B word when looking for an explanation of this type of movement.
    I would be suspicious of 2 data points on top of each other. You need a 10 year view to draw conclusions.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817

    I wonder if any serious statistician has analysed voting patterns for age, educational achievement, employment, income, ethnicity and other factors to quantify the "London" effect? Does it actually exist or does the profile of the London population entirely explain voting patterns?

    Detailed analysis was done on the 16 ref vote, concluding that there was no "London effect" on leave/remain once age and education had been allowed for. London just has a younger more educated, and therefore more remain, voting population.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,416
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    There are probably two trends at work, which may cancel each other out.

    1. Londoners move into surrounding constituencies, boosting the potential Labour vote.

    2. The longer Londoners live in those constituencies, the more they adopt the voting habits of the locals, boosting the potential Conservative vote.

    There's a bit more than that happening here:

    "We surveyed more than 25,000 voters last weekend – after the local elections – to identify a sample of respondents who have left London in recent years, to find out which parties they supported in the 2015 and 2017 general elections, as well as the 2016 EU referendum. The results are striking. On attitudes to Europe, those who have migrated out of London in the past five years were more likely to have voted remain than those they were leaving behind, breaking 66% remain to 34% leave.

    At the 2017 general election, Labour experienced similar swings among these ex-Londoners as it did among those who remained in London, increasing itsvote share by 11% on the previous election among ex-Londoners while the Conservatives’ vote share fell by 3% (a seven-point swing to Labour).

    The net result means that Labour held a 12-point lead over the Conservatives among these ex-Londoners in the 2017 general election, with the parties on 47% and 35% retrospectively.

    Historically speaking, you might have expected these voters to be much more Conservative. Many can be described as affluent young families with suburban mindsets. Seven in 10 are ABC1 social grade. However, over the last two years they have moved from supporting the Conservatives, then the remain side in the European referendum, and now Labour."

    It's hard to avoid the B word when looking for an explanation of this type of movement.
    That's interesting. Given a 2/1 lead for Remain among such voters, the Conservatives were perhaps fortunate to hold the Labour lead to 12%.
    maybe all the remainers have left and London is being taken over by Leavers :-)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,625
    AndyJS said:

    FPT:

    AndyJS said:

    2006 local elections: Lewisham East, using highest vote method.

    LD 6,432 (29.5%)
    Lab 6,357 (29.2%)
    Con 5,072 (23.3%)
    Greens 2,637 (12.1%)
    Ind 1,020 (4.7%)
    UKIP 281 (1.3%)

    The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.
    I don't entirely agree, I think the figures show there is some potential for the LDs in this constituency. Even in Lewisham the majority of current voters must have been living there in 2006.
    I think there is potential for the Lib Dems to improve long term in Lewisham BUT that will have to wait for a Labour Gov't. In by-elections people generally give a kicking to the Gov't, not the opposition.
    I've laid the Lib Dems on Betfair, the Greens should have a serious tilt at coming 2nd in the forthcoming BE I think.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    Sean_F said:

    IanB2 said:

    I am now one of the 'moved away', and I don't expect my voting intention will change. Although the country does feel different when viewed from a perspective away from the capital.

    What would be interesting is whether or not (and I suspect not) those moving away have different average voting preferences to those remaining.

    London voted 45/34 Lab/Con in 2015, and 55/33 Lab in 2017, so the answer to your question is that they do.
    I don't know why I said 'not', a brain typo. I expect that they do, too.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383

    The political north-south divide is going into reverse for the first time in decades. This really ought to be commented upon much more than it has been.

    Labour is not suddenly going to start sweeping the south east and East Anglia. However, there are a clutch of seats that look newly vulnerable to them. Labour don't need to take 60 seats in the south east and East Anglia: 15 would do them very nicely.

    15 would still be far short of those needed for a majority.

    Plus the Tories could pick up more seats in the Midlands and parts of the North

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,322
    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,494
    AndyJS said:

    FPT:

    AndyJS said:

    2006 local elections: Lewisham East, using highest vote method.

    LD 6,432 (29.5%)
    Lab 6,357 (29.2%)
    Con 5,072 (23.3%)
    Greens 2,637 (12.1%)
    Ind 1,020 (4.7%)
    UKIP 281 (1.3%)

    The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.
    I don't entirely agree, I think the figures show there is some potential for the LDs in this constituency. Even in Lewisham the majority of current voters must have been living there in 2006.
    Not sure about that, it feels like it must be close on a 12-year basis.

    There is definitely potential for a Brexit vote for the Lib Dems, especially if Corbyn whips against the Lords amendments, but the 2006 result must have been to do with Blair-weariness, Iraq etc. which simply doesn't apply to Corbyn; he's what some of those LD's wanted all along.
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 232
    Why exactly do ex-Londoners want to vote Labour, when that party's policies have lead to most of the factors that induced them to leave London in the first place? Are they thick?

    Disclosure: ex-Londoner, Tory then, Tory now.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    blueblue said:

    Why exactly do ex-Londoners want to vote Labour, when that party's policies have lead to most of the factors that induced them to leave London in the first place? Are they thick?

    Disclosure: ex-Londoner, Tory then, Tory now.

    I expect there is a right-ward bias, due to age and means (and perhaps ethnicity) if nothing else, in the politics of those leaving London. Nevertheless exposure to living in a youthful, vibrant multi-cultural city is likely to have left many with more liberal views on social issues than the average person who has spent their life in the rural provinces.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,329
    blueblue said:

    Why exactly do ex-Londoners want to vote Labour, when that party's policies have lead to most of the factors that induced them to leave London in the first place? Are they thick?

    Disclosure: ex-Londoner, Tory then, Tory now.

    Being in London exposes people to multilcultural values where it's thought deeply uncool to have prejudices about races and nationalities, feel suspicious of gays, averse to change, etc. People generally don't like to feel they've become stuffier and more prejudiced, so they tend to take the values with them. Often they left London not because they hated it but because they couldn't afford to live there with a growing family.

    But as they get older, they get more of a stake in things as they are and less eager to embrace any change that comes along, so older people do tend to be more Conservative, especially for some reason after they stop working - Labour usually has a majority of people of working age, but is miles behind after 65.

    Whether all these dynamics will remain true is an interesting question!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    The big political question right now is whether the Tories' putting politics before the economy will have lasting, or just short-term, transformational impact on British politics.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840

    I wonder if any serious statistician has analysed voting patterns for age, educational achievement, employment, income, ethnicity and other factors to quantify the "London" effect? Does it actually exist or does the profile of the London population entirely explain voting patterns?

    I'd like to know the answer to that one. It is quite an interesting question. If there is a London effect, what is the cause of it?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,480
    With a bit of luck, my other half and I should be two men experiments in this dynamic in the next month or so.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,416
    IanB2 said:

    blueblue said:

    Why exactly do ex-Londoners want to vote Labour, when that party's policies have lead to most of the factors that induced them to leave London in the first place? Are they thick?

    Disclosure: ex-Londoner, Tory then, Tory now.

    I expect there is a right-ward bias, due to age and means (and perhaps ethnicity) if nothing else, in the politics of those leaving London. Nevertheless exposure to living in a youthful, vibrant multi-cultural city is likely to have left many with more liberal views on social issues than the average person who has spent their life in the rural provinces.
    guff

    what is it about Londoners that they cant conceive that anywhere else has as many views as they do.

    Are you all forced fed Cold Comfort Farm or something ?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,322
    Breaking: looks like Mahathir Mohamad has won the Malaysian election - totally against the odds, and despite serious gerrymandering by the government.

    Bizarrely, 92-yr-old Mahathir has pledged to put Anwar Ibrahim into power - the protege turned rival Mahathir jailed for “sodomy” in 1998.

    There’s still hope for Ken Clarke. Or even Lord Heseltine!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817

    blueblue said:

    Why exactly do ex-Londoners want to vote Labour, when that party's policies have lead to most of the factors that induced them to leave London in the first place? Are they thick?

    Disclosure: ex-Londoner, Tory then, Tory now.

    Being in London exposes people to multilcultural values where it's thought deeply uncool to have prejudices about races and nationalities, feel suspicious of gays, averse to change, etc. People generally don't like to feel they've become stuffier and more prejudiced, so they tend to take the values with them. Often they left London not because they hated it but because they couldn't afford to live there with a growing family.

    But as they get older, they get more of a stake in things as they are and less eager to embrace any change that comes along, so older people do tend to be more Conservative, especially for some reason after they stop working - Labour usually has a majority of people of working age, but is miles behind after 65.

    Whether all these dynamics will remain true is an interesting question!
    The biggest problem the Tories have, in the south at least, is that the housing crisis is preventing a rising cohort currently in their 30's of acquiring such responsibilities, as did their predecessors in my generation.

    Living in London makes no sense nowadays unless you are tied to the capital through work. My saving in housing costs will pay for enough visits to London each year, staying in a central London hotel, to enjoy its cultural offering at the same rate as I have previously by travelling in by tube from the suburbs, through to an age when I expect to either be in some care home or telling for the LibDems at the pearly gates.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    Scott_P said:

    POEWAS. Time to drag old an oldie but a goodie.

    Victory for Fleet Street and the hacks!

    Good! Faith in Parliament to do the right thing slowly returning...
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,322
    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,182

    With a bit of luck, my other half and I should be two men experiments in this dynamic in the next month or so.

    There's a chance you might become a PB Tory. Is that worth the risk? :o
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,103
    IanB2 said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    The big political question right now is whether the Tories' putting politics before the economy will have lasting, or just short-term, transformational impact on British politics.
    I think that Brexit has accelerated trends that have been in place for 50 years, Labour gradually extending their support among middle class voters, and in large cities, the Conservatives gradually extending their support among working class voters, in new towns, and ex-coal mining areas.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,480
    RobD said:

    With a bit of luck, my other half and I should be two men experiments in this dynamic in the next month or so.

    There's a chance you might become a PB Tory. Is that worth the risk? :o
    Given the MP representing my potential new home, that is particularly unlikely.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 1,478
    On attitudes to Europe, those who have migrated out of London in the past five years were more likely to have voted remain than those they were leaving behind, breaking 66% remain to 34% leave.

    Affluent Anywheres and impoverished Somewheres. Perhaps.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,421

    With a bit of luck, my other half and I should be two men experiments in this dynamic in the next month or so.

    I assume you will become a true leaver immediately
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,407

    RobD said:

    With a bit of luck, my other half and I should be two men experiments in this dynamic in the next month or so.

    There's a chance you might become a PB Tory. Is that worth the risk? :o
    Given the MP representing my potential new home, that is particularly unlikely.
    That doesn't narrow it down much.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817

    IanB2 said:

    blueblue said:

    Why exactly do ex-Londoners want to vote Labour, when that party's policies have lead to most of the factors that induced them to leave London in the first place? Are they thick?

    Disclosure: ex-Londoner, Tory then, Tory now.

    I expect there is a right-ward bias, due to age and means (and perhaps ethnicity) if nothing else, in the politics of those leaving London. Nevertheless exposure to living in a youthful, vibrant multi-cultural city is likely to have left many with more liberal views on social issues than the average person who has spent their life in the rural provinces.
    guff

    what is it about Londoners that they cant conceive that anywhere else has as many views as they do.

    Are you all forced fed Cold Comfort Farm or something ?
    I refer you to the comments of fellow PB'ers.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,322
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
    Thanks. Like I said, non-productive are trending Tory. The productive to Labour.
    Luckily for the Tories, though sadly for the country, there are more idlers than workers, and the trend is likely to continue.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,322

    RobD said:

    With a bit of luck, my other half and I should be two men experiments in this dynamic in the next month or so.

    There's a chance you might become a PB Tory. Is that worth the risk? :o
    Given the MP representing my potential new home, that is particularly unlikely.
    Surely not Nadine Dorries?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817

    Sean_F said:

    There are probably two trends at work, which may cancel each other out.

    1. Londoners move into surrounding constituencies, boosting the potential Labour vote.

    2. The longer Londoners live in those constituencies, the more they adopt the voting habits of the locals, boosting the potential Conservative vote.

    There's a bit more than that happening here:

    "We surveyed more than 25,000 voters last weekend – after the local elections – to identify a sample of respondents who have left London in recent years, to find out which parties they supported in the 2015 and 2017 general elections, as well as the 2016 EU referendum. The results are striking. On attitudes to Europe, those who have migrated out of London in the past five years were more likely to have voted remain than those they were leaving behind, breaking 66% remain to 34% leave.

    At the 2017 general election, Labour experienced similar swings among these ex-Londoners as it did among those who remained in London, increasing itsvote share by 11% on the previous election among ex-Londoners while the Conservatives’ vote share fell by 3% (a seven-point swing to Labour).

    The net result means that Labour held a 12-point lead over the Conservatives among these ex-Londoners in the 2017 general election, with the parties on 47% and 35% retrospectively.

    Historically speaking, you might have expected these voters to be much more Conservative. Many can be described as affluent young families with suburban mindsets. Seven in 10 are ABC1 social grade. However, over the last two years they have moved from supporting the Conservatives, then the remain side in the European referendum, and now Labour."

    It's hard to avoid the B word when looking for an explanation of this type of movement.
    Surely this is simply that the educated and equity-rich Londoners, mostly remainers, have more opportinity to move away than those in London's social housing, mostly leavers?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,373
    edited May 9
    Mr. Meeks, to which part of the country will you be moving?

    Edited extra bit: and huzzah for the defeat of the censorious Witchsmeller Pursuivant!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,416

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
    Thanks. Like I said, non-productive are trending Tory. The productive to Labour.
    Luckily for the Tories, though sadly for the country, there are more idlers than workers, and the trend is likely to continue.
    so we have the highest working population EVER yet there are more idlers than workers ?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No qualifications and skills needed for the job too.

    At the last general election the Tories won ABs and C2s, Labour won DEs and the two tied C1s.

    Though it is also true to say the LDs get the highest percentage of their support from ABs and UKIP the highest percentage from C2s and DEs
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,811
    There was in the 1970s a case of a Swedish bookseller who was heavily fined under advertising laws because books he had advertised as erotic were insufficiently pornographic.

    One customer said had he wanted to see potted plants and curtains he would have bought a furnishings catalogue.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,322

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
    Thanks. Like I said, non-productive are trending Tory. The productive to Labour.
    Luckily for the Tories, though sadly for the country, there are more idlers than workers, and the trend is likely to continue.
    so we have the highest working population EVER yet there are more idlers than workers ?
    Ageing population.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,480

    Mr. Meeks, to which part of the country will you be moving?

    Edited extra bit: and huzzah for the defeat of the censorious Witchsmeller Pursuivant!

    I'm hoping to be becoming a (north) Essex boy. But we haven't exchanged yet, so I'm not counting my chickens just yet.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,416

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
    Thanks. Like I said, non-productive are trending Tory. The productive to Labour.
    Luckily for the Tories, though sadly for the country, there are more idlers than workers, and the trend is likely to continue.
    so we have the highest working population EVER yet there are more idlers than workers ?
    Ageing population.
    there are about 32million economically active people in the country and 10 million pensioners
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Mr. Meeks, to which part of the country will you be moving?

    Edited extra bit: and huzzah for the defeat of the censorious Witchsmeller Pursuivant!

    I'm hoping to be becoming a (north) Essex boy. But we haven't exchanged yet, so I'm not counting my chickens just yet.
    Good luck!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,322

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
    Thanks. Like I said, non-productive are trending Tory. The productive to Labour.
    Luckily for the Tories, though sadly for the country, there are more idlers than workers, and the trend is likely to continue.
    so we have the highest working population EVER yet there are more idlers than workers ?
    Ageing population.
    there are about 32million economically active people in the country and 10 million pensioners
    I was being half facetious.

    But the serious point remains: the income earners are trending Labour, those on benefits and pensions toward Tory.

    Thus, given the UK’s economic geography, the South is trending Labour, the North Tory.

    Not wholesale of course, but enough to make a difference.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,414
    DavidL said:

    First?

    Wow just out of court after a very hot and sweaty day and I get a first. Things are looking up.

    Playing squash when you should be working?

    Tsk tsk
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,161

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
    Thanks. Like I said, non-productive are trending Tory. The productive to Labour.
    Luckily for the Tories, though sadly for the country, there are more idlers than workers, and the trend is likely to continue.
    so we have the highest working population EVER yet there are more idlers than workers ?
    Ageing population.
    there are about 32million economically active people in the country and 10 million pensioners
    I was being half facetious.

    But the serious point remains: the income earners are trending Labour, those on benefits and pensions toward Tory.

    Thus, given the UK’s economic geography, the South is trending Labour, the North Tory.

    Not wholesale of course, but enough to make a difference.
    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The macro trend is that the Conservatives have positioned themselves as the party against openness and prosperity. They have other priorities.

    In despair, the wealth-earners are voting Labour. While the wealth-takers are quite happy to close down others’ opportunities as they will still get their pension, benefit etc.

    Not true nationally, the Tories won ABs and Labour won DEs at the last general election.

    Although it is true that Remainers did best with ABs and Leavers with C2s and DEs
    Maybe.

    Is the ABC system purely based on income?
    No, occupation

    The class divide in politics, at least amongst the working population, has now all but disappeared. The idle rich still lean toward the Tories, and the idle poor toward Labour, but for everyone else, class/occupation is no longer any indication of voting behaviour.
    Thanks. Like I said, non-productive are trending Tory. The productive to Labour.
    Luckily for the Tories, though sadly for the country, there are more idlers than workers, and the trend is likely to continue.
    so we have the highest working population EVER yet there are more idlers than workers ?
    Ageing population.
    there are about 32million economically active people in the country and 10 million pensioners
    I was being half facetious.

    But the serious point remains: the income earners are trending Labour, those on benefits and pensions toward Tory.

    Thus, given the UK’s economic geography, the South is trending Labour, the North Tory.

    Not wholesale of course, but enough to make a difference.
    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.
    So you join Mrs M in having a clear idea as to the problem whilst lacking the imagination, abiition and political capital to offer anything by way of solution?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,373
    Mr. Meeks, best of luck.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 1,991
    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,182
    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,161
    edited May 9
    @IanB2 Not at all, I outlined in the previous thread that we should introduce a new value tax on second property of 3% per year (and make the landlords pay for the valuations!) to force them to sell up. I'd have an exemption for build to let and allowances for a change in ownership of previously empty or derelict property. I'd also introduce a 25% annual tax on ownership of property by people not registered for tax in the UK and an even more punitive tax on opaque ownership structures.

    All of those measures would take the heat out of the housing market.

    I see the problems, I propose solutions!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,373
    Mr. S, given how turbulent politics has been recently, I think making forecasts about voting patterns decades into the future might be unwise.

    Anyway, I must be off. For those into The One Hundred*, it resumes tonight, 9pm, E4. What mischief will our improbably attractive nuclear holocaust survivors get up to now?

    *I know, it's meant to be The Hundred (The 100). But The One Hundred reminds me of Xenophon's Anabasis. It also resumes for those not into the series.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 1,991
    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,812
    edited May 9
    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 60%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,161

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 40%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    Germany has a vast professional rental sector with large companies renting hundreds of flats. We have a very amateurish marketplace ruled by the whims of how much money unscrupulous landlords think they can extract from their tenants.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,625

    Mr. Meeks, to which part of the country will you be moving?

    Edited extra bit: and huzzah for the defeat of the censorious Witchsmeller Pursuivant!

    I'm hoping to be becoming a (north) Essex boy. But we haven't exchanged yet, so I'm not counting my chickens just yet.
    Can Bernard count on your vote :innocent face: :o ?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,184

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 40%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    The problem is that in Britain housing is an investment as well as a residence. People want to buy houses because they expect to make money on them. Rent is seen as money lost while an interest only mortgage is an investment expected to pay dividends.

    Lowering house prices may well be popular with aspiring home owners, but deeply unpopular with existing ones.

    On the Continent, often other dynamics apply.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 60%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    Spain and France though now have more home owners than the UK
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 752

    Mr. Meeks, best of luck.

    North Essex is a beautiful part of the country - particularly Saffron Walden. So I am sure he will do just fine.

    A hotbed of pro Brexit Tory MPs as well - Bernard Jenkin, James Cleverly, John Whittingdale, Kemi Badenoch, Will Quince and last but not least Priti Patel! How could you go wrong which ever area you move to.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,812
    edited May 9
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 60%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    Germany has a vast professional rental sector with large companies renting hundreds of flats. We have a very amateurish marketplace ruled by the whims of how much money unscrupulous landlords think they can extract from their tenants.
    So regulate better. But don't try to reduce the amount of renting by making it uneconomic. All that does is add to the housing crisis.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383
    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    The Tories have not won under 30s since 1987 and Labour have not won pensioners since 1997.

    Short of a landslide the young always vote Labour and the old always vote Tory as ever it is the middle aged who decide elections
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,812
    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 60%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    The problem is that in Britain housing is an investment as well as a residence. People want to buy houses because they expect to make money on them. Rent is seen as money lost while an interest only mortgage is an investment expected to pay dividends.

    Lowering house prices may well be popular with aspiring home owners, but deeply unpopular with existing ones.

    On the Continent, often other dynamics apply.
    And that is where we go wrong. We cannot afford to be seeing houses as an investment rather than a home when so many people don't have a place to live.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    The Tories have not won under 30s since 1987 and Labour have not won pensioners since 1997.

    Short of a landslide the young always vote Labour and the old always vote Tory as ever it is the middle aged who decide elections
    Doesn't sound like great news for the Tories, then?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    The Tories have not won under 30s since 1987 and Labour have not won pensioners since 1997.

    Short of a landslide the young always vote Labour and the old always vote Tory as ever it is the middle aged who decide elections
    Doesn't sound like great news for the Tories, then?
    Given rising life expectancy you could argue the reverse
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 677
    Does anyone know how I can get a private prescription in the UK from a doctor, for something that is not currently part of the NICE guidelines?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,182
    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    LOL. Longer life expectancy? This meme has been around for ages.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 60%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    The problem is that in Britain housing is an investment as well as a residence. People want to buy houses because they expect to make money on them. Rent is seen as money lost while an interest only mortgage is an investment expected to pay dividends.

    Lowering house prices may well be popular with aspiring home owners, but deeply unpopular with existing ones.

    On the Continent, often other dynamics apply.
    And that is where we go wrong. We cannot afford to be seeing houses as an investment rather than a home when so many people don't have a place to live.
    Exactly. Politicians spout so much guff about supply and demand, when the origins of our housing crisis are largely financial. Low interest rates. QE. Openness to foreign capital. Negligible taxation for property ownership. A tax system that subsidies landlords. Meagre rights for tenants. Etc. Etc.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,625
    edited May 9
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 40%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    Germany has a vast professional rental sector with large companies renting hundreds of flats. We have a very amateurish marketplace ruled by the whims of how much money unscrupulous landlords think they can extract from their tenants.
    The prices are alot lower too, http://www.rightmove.co.uk/overseas-property/property-38254845.html?currencyCode=GBP 1600 m^2 plot + 5000 m^2 of grazing land for 261k, this would cost more ANYWHERE in England (Including Stoke)
    Same deal with Berlin or Frankfurt property compared to London.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    The Tories have not won under 30s since 1987 and Labour have not won pensioners since 1997.

    Short of a landslide the young always vote Labour and the old always vote Tory as ever it is the middle aged who decide elections
    Doesn't sound like great news for the Tories, then?
    Given rising life expectancy you could argue the reverse
    Rising life expectancy keeps existing old people around for longer. But doesn't generate extra Tory votes, whilst the ageing middle aged are shut out of the housing market and hence passing up the opportunity to become more right wing because they can't get their own home.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,812
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:



    Tbh, I don't think that is something that will hold over time. At the moment the reason income earners are trending towards Labour is because of anger over housing (something we discussed on the previous thread). Home ownership among 25-40 year olds in the south is at a post-Thatcher low, until that changes the Tories will be out of favour with working age people.

    As I said on the last thread it is imperative that we increase home ownership and reduce private renting, not only is it bad for us as a party, it is economically questionable as it concentrates wealth among fewer people and reduces the spending power of working age people.

    Some of the most successful countries in Europe seem to disagree with you. In Germany renting accounts for just about 50% of homes. In Switzerland it is nearer 60%. Denmark and Austria also both have higher percentages renting than the UK.

    Spain and France though now have more home owners than the UK
    They do but that is no support for Max's claim that home ownership is better for the economy than a large rental sector. Indeed it is property booms like those in Spain and Ireland which cause significant damage to the economy.

    Personally I am unsure which is the better balance but the idea that large scale home ownership is necessarily automatically better for the country seems a case unproven. And certainly at the moment the widely held belief that homes should be an investment rather than just somewhere to live - with the associated need for ever increasing house prices - is seriously damaging our economy and our social wellbeing.

    What we need in this country is a serious rebalance of house prices - deflation of probably at least 30%. But no Government will countenance that because of the damage it would do to so many people who see their house as their pension.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 1,968
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    The Tories have not won under 30s since 1987 and Labour have not won pensioners since 1997.

    Short of a landslide the young always vote Labour and the old always vote Tory as ever it is the middle aged who decide elections
    Doesn't sound like great news for the Tories, then?
    Given rising life expectancy you could argue the reverse
    due to Tory/LibDem austerity,life expectancy is not rising any more,largely dependant upon social class so more poor people are dying for sure but the Tory party could still collapse given a flu epidemic.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    brendan16 said:

    Mr. Meeks, best of luck.

    North Essex is a beautiful part of the country - particularly Saffron Walden. So I am sure he will do just fine.

    A hotbed of pro Brexit Tory MPs as well - Bernard Jenkin, James Cleverly, John Whittingdale, Kemi Badenoch, Will Quince and last but not least Priti Patel! How could you go wrong which ever area you move to.
    So long as he doesn't expect his vote to count for anything.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,652

    Mr. Meeks, to which part of the country will you be moving?

    Edited extra bit: and huzzah for the defeat of the censorious Witchsmeller Pursuivant!

    I'm hoping to be becoming a (north) Essex boy. But we haven't exchanged yet, so I'm not counting my chickens just yet.
    Best of luck. I'm probably making the reverse move soon.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,905
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    The Tories have not won under 30s since 1987 and Labour have not won pensioners since 1997.

    Short of a landslide the young always vote Labour and the old always vote Tory as ever it is the middle aged who decide elections
    Doesn't sound like great news for the Tories, then?
    Given rising life expectancy you could argue the reverse
    Rising life expectancy keeps existing old people around for longer. But doesn't generate extra Tory votes, whilst the ageing middle aged are shut out of the housing market and hence passing up the opportunity to become more right wing because they can't get their own home.
    Yes it does as today's middle aged will become tomorrow's old people for longer. There is nothing unique about today's old people that makes them Tory, it is age that does it.

    Today's old people were once young and do you think they were Tories when they were young? Were they born Tory?
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,652
    brendan16 said:

    Mr. Meeks, best of luck.

    North Essex is a beautiful part of the country - particularly Saffron Walden. So I am sure he will do just fine.

    A hotbed of pro Brexit Tory MPs as well - Bernard Jenkin, James Cleverly, John Whittingdale, Kemi Badenoch, Will Quince and last but not least Priti Patel! How could you go wrong which ever area you move to.
    I'd add Giles Watling but I really can't see Alastair moving to Clacton.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,817
    MaxPB said:

    @IanB2 Not at all, I outlined in the previous thread that we should introduce a new value tax on second property of 3% per year (and make the landlords pay for the valuations!) to force them to sell up. I'd have an exemption for build to let and allowances for a change in ownership of previously empty or derelict property. I'd also introduce a 25% annual tax on ownership of property by people not registered for tax in the UK and an even more punitive tax on opaque ownership structures.

    All of those measures would take the heat out of the housing market.

    I see the problems, I propose solutions!

    Great. You lead, but will the Tories follow? Oh dear.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,480
    IanB2 said:

    brendan16 said:

    Mr. Meeks, best of luck.

    North Essex is a beautiful part of the country - particularly Saffron Walden. So I am sure he will do just fine.

    A hotbed of pro Brexit Tory MPs as well - Bernard Jenkin, James Cleverly, John Whittingdale, Kemi Badenoch, Will Quince and last but not least Priti Patel! How could you go wrong which ever area you move to.
    So long as he doesn't expect his vote to count for anything.
    I live in Islington South & Finsbury. I'm used to my vote not counting for anything.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,414
    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    Walpole tried it first
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,519
    Labour outperformed in Hertfordshire last June. Broxbourne albeit with a 15k majority not as safe as it used to be relatively speaking compared to 15 yeasts ago.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,625
    edited May 9



    What we need in this country is a serious rebalance of house prices - deflation of probably at least 30%. But no Government will countenance that because of the damage it would do to so many people who see their house as their pension.

    House prices holding a nominal flat value for the next 10 years (If we assume 2-3% inflation) would do the trick, avoiding the negative equity trap for new owners but also returning affordability to those who wish to buy, or move to a more expensive property.
    It would also hold nominal rents steady all else being equal making that aspect superior.

    Of course if you're trying to move house some rental sector is needed else your chain will have a much greater probability of failure.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,526
    edited May 9
    Not sure if been discussed but reports suggesting Con is going to let the Lab backbench boundary review bill go through as part of deal that Lab won't push votes at 16.

    The Bill will scrap current boundary review and replace it with new one with:

    - 650 seats (not 600)
    - Tolerance 92.5 to 107.5 (not 95 to 105)
    - NI fixed at 18 seats irrespective of population changes
    - Reviews every 10 years (not 5) after first review - see below

    All other rules as per current review.

    First review - Boundary Reports to be issued before 1 October 2020 so would still mean new boundaries on above basis before next GE as long as Govt survives post October 2020.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,470

    Does anyone know how I can get a private prescription in the UK from a doctor, for something that is not currently part of the NICE guidelines?

    Talk to your NHS GP. I had exactly the same issue some years ago and he was ready to do it on a private basis. As it turned out what I wanted soon became possible on the NHS and didn't have to do it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,182
    MikeL said:

    Not sure if been discussed but reports suggesting Con is going to let the Lab backbench boundary review bill go through as part of deal that Lab won't push votes at 16.

    The Bill will scrap current boundary review and replace it with new one with:

    - 650 seats (not 600)
    - tolerance 92.5 to 107.5 (not 95 to 105)

    Boundary Reports to be issued before 1 October 2020 so would still mean new boundaries on above basis before next GE as long as Govt survives post October 2020.

    Keeping the seats at 650 sounds sensible. And having a slightly larger variation is probably a price worth paying to ensure they aren't 15 years out of date....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,383

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    On topic - This is very ominous for the Tories. Young, educated, sophisticated and liberal voters who have nothing in common with an old and staid Tory party.

    The writing is on the wall folks!

    How often are we going to hear the Tories are dying out meme?
    I guess longer life expectancy is helping the Tories in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether this cohort of voters stay Labour as they get older. If it does, this demographic bow-wave will finish the Tories.
    The Tories have not won under 30s since 1987 and Labour have not won pensioners since 1997.

    Short of a landslide the young always vote Labour and the old always vote Tory as ever it is the middle aged who decide elections
    Doesn't sound like great news for the Tories, then?
    Given rising life expectancy you could argue the reverse
    due to Tory/LibDem austerity,life expectancy is not rising any more,largely dependant upon social class so more poor people are dying for sure but the Tory party could still collapse given a flu epidemic.
    Given the Coalition halved unemployment from where Labpur left it you can't really blame the Tories for slashing life expectancy
This discussion has been closed.