2024 Election thread
Comments
-
Yeah, I posted just afterwards with some.
0 -
Of course he has, he's gone on about it and infinitum, there are Tory safe seats that have voted them in for donkeys years, but Rick doesn't have a chip on his shoulder about regions so he doesn't bang on about it.
1 -
-
It was quite a bit more even in 1992.
But I think the key thing is that the support has absolutely crashed among the population with the exception of pensioners.
I think that, as ever with broad demographic analysis, Rick ends up missing nuance, and because it's the length of a forum post (albeit a long forum post) there's no mention of Brexit or culture wars. It's also quite a South East centric view (and I'd argue the SE focus of this country is basically as big an issue as the Tories focus on OAPs)
I also think Rick will probably look quite mild compared to Gen Z, who will have a harder time than millennials.
1 -
- Tories favouring those who vote for them can hardly be surprising. Maybe if enough under 50s voted as per intentions then what the tories think wouldn't matter.
- No shit Sherlock. Everything looks different to different people at different stages of their lives. Your own opinions may well change.
- Obviously, but when those working outnumber the retired why do the retired have so much say?
- A drop in house prices affect all house owners, not just the old. In fact they probably don't care about the value, they just like their house.
- Nonsense. The average retirement income is £361/week. Average salary is £617/week.
- Not being directly affected ≠ not being concerned.
- That's your opinion. Other opinions are available.
- It can be both ageist and reality.
- It's a decision that you've made. Some have decided to vote communist. Democracy is the best way of resolving things that we have. Maybe if more people bothered to vote.
- Balance depends on the viewer's optics.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
If you are comparing all retiree income with only the income of those in work you’re not comparing apples with apples.
Pensioners now have more disposable income than working families, analysis has revealed.
The average disposable income for pensioner couples, after housing costs, rose by close to two thirds between 1999 and the end of 2022, from £16,588 to £27,144.
During the same period, disposable income for couples with children only rose 41pc, from £17,524 to £24,752, analysis of official data by brokers Interactive Investor found.
Following a 10pc increase in the state pension last year, pensioners had around £3,924 more disposable income per year than the average family with children by the end of 2022 – a difference of 23pc
0 -
I’d argue Brexit and culture wars divides on the same lines.
the Brexit referendum of 2016, 73 percent of people aged between 18 and 24 voted to Remain in the European Union, compared with just 40 percent of people aged over 65. In fact, the propensity to have voted Leave increases with age, with the three oldest age groups here voting leave and the three youngest voting to Remain. Overall, 17.4 million people voted to Leave the European Union in 2016, compared with 16.1 million who voted Remain, or 51.9 percent of the vote to 48.1 percent.
And here: Combining age and gender of respondents shows it is men aged 60 and above (31%) who are most likely to identify as anti-woke, while younger women aged 18 to 29 are least likely to (3%)
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/public-increasingly-see-politicians-as-stoking-culture-wars-study-finds
0 -
If voting intention for women was the same as for over 60s would you have felt justified ranting about how we should bring in policies that adversely impact on women to redress the balance on the basis of your mother-in-law’s politics / view of life and her being female? If you did do you think accusations of sexism would be justified.
0 -
If I felt that the balance was tipped too far their way then why not?
If working age families were all living it up with generous state hand outs when the elderly were being screwed over I’d have a different view, but they’re not so I don’t.
0 -
Yes you found a swing from 40% to 57% and quickly changed tack 😂 yes yes the ages are slightly different
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Of course most retirees have more disposable income, they don't have mortgages, or dependent children.
(And your original point specifically mentioned income, not disposable income. Different things.)
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.1 -
Why is that of course? It’s literally the first time in history that has happened?!
Retirees are not working, why should they have more disposable income?!
0 -
People getting final salary pensions was a short window. That's why it never happened previously. Then those who had final salary pension option removed started saving for retirement.
Are you suggesting that those saving/investing instead of spending should have that taken from them?
I'd suggest that Logan's Run is your ideal scenario but then you'd not be here.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I think it is incredibly skewed to protect state pensions from austerity which is handed out to literally everyone over a certain age for a cohort who literally had more money to hand day-to-day than any other cohort, as per above, and absolutely cripple all other state support, most of which, health excluded, is means tested!
That one generation literally takes £250k more per lifetime from the state than they pay in lifetime tax is a ridiculous position to be in.
Who is paying for that?
0 -
I didn’t change tack. My point was, and remains, that blaming an entire generation because an element of their cohorts vote a particular way is unreasonable. That applies whether it is 40% or 57%. Lumping everyone in based purely on a single common factor is lunacy.
1 -
-
FPTP politics is all about generalising.
That’s how political and voting analysis works. There are millions of voters.
0 -
What do you think the voting split would be in your industry sector? My suspicion is that it would be highly skewed to the Tories. If that was the case would it be reasonable for the industry including you to be “punished”?
0 -
From what I know in the office it’s just an age thing with a couple of exceptions for two boarding school types but the rest is pretty much in line with the polls. We talk politics quite a lot and the idea of any of the juniors voting Tory is genuinely laughable and the opposite for senior management.
That’s what I mean, it’s not a socioeconomic thing primarily anymore. You’d think they’d all be Tories but they really aren’t.
0 -
But as long as I remember young people have been much more left-leaning, even if some of us didn't foresee what was to become of the Tory Party in in the 21st century. At the time, the like of Scargill and the power of the unions was enough to scare a lot of people off, the same way the likes of the Braverman have done for the Right.
But what I am witnessing is a lot of people of my age and older getting really pissed off with the Tories and vowing never to vote for them again, whilst virtually the entire younger generation have been utterly turned off by the rapid drift right of the Tories.
I'm not sure that socio-economic groupings have played such a major part in that: is it possible that in your line of work the older ones are not typical older people generally?
0 -
All the research and analysis suggests that it was socioeconomic first, education second, age third in importance for voting demographics and that switched in 2016 to age, education, socioeconomic.
Take a look at voting by age over the various GEs - it’s nowhere near as linear as it now is.
Regardless, the reality of the political problems are defined by age - that’s why the vote splits so cleanly by age.
People infamously do not mix in different circles when it come to politics - that’s why looking at the polling and demographic stats is much much more reliable then your own experience.
0 -
What's the detail behind this headline?
Disposable income is qualified by "couples with children" suggesting it is carving out childcare costs and possible loss of employment hours due to having children. Is also "after housing costs".
I sense an analysis that goes not far beyond "things cost money".
1 -
TBH have a Google and there’s tonnes of articles on the subject, not all from the same research.
FT reported the switch to retirees with more disposable income around 2017 - noting that the increase was driven largely by more well endowed private pension pots coming online, which was also driving bigger inequality in that cohort.
I know the forum loves going down a rabbit hole of detail because a statistic was used but the point remains.
Pension spending dominates welfare spending in the UK - 42%!! It’s almost the same size as the NHS! Enormous spend. Vast.
0 -
Sorry but you are conflating different things here - private and state pensions. It is all a bit ranty.
What's your point, that the state pension is unaffordable? Should be means tested?
1 -
I’m not conflating. They are two points. Hence the paragraph separating them.
If you have a massive private pension why are you still receiving a state pension? For what reason?
0 -
Okay, and so your solution is to charge for GP visits?
0 -
-
Because you might have paid in to the state scheme for 40 plus years.
1 -
So this is the issue. If you might not get it, paying for it becomes unfair, because it's not a trivial amount. In turn. If you give people the option, people will be unduly optimistic and decide not to pay in. This will result in a generation of people with no pension.
There are other levers to pull. Qualifying age, obvs., which given that life expectancy has gone up 7 years since 1990 isn't unreasonable.
NHS is unsustainable. Good luck getting elected or reelected if you undertake to do much more than pour money in, though.
0 -
I recall that when the state pension was first introduced, the average life expectancy meant that on average people were drawing the state pension for something like 3 years before they croaked.
A big driver of the overall cost of pensions is that people are living longer, hence the total amount of pension payments is increasing (despite the state pension age being moved progressively higher in recent years). A lot of that trust be down to advances in medical science etc, but it's hard to say it's the fault of nasty Boomers.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1
