Who should I vote for? My views seem to be all over the place.

[tobybox]

None of the parties seem to represent anything near where my political views lie.

Could someone who is more clued up than me help me out?

My main views are:

• NMW should rise dramatically, to a 'living wage', and the low threshold for tax should rise too. Tax hike for higher incomes and a slight raise for middle incomes (that would be me!) but with full tax visibility (so we can see where our taxes are being paid).
  

• A much stricter cap on university places, but with the funding money saved on university expenditure, transfer this to apprenticeship/technical training schemes instead.
  

• I am against free schools. I think they cause divisions within local communities in terms of religion/ethnicity discrimination etc. I am however in favour of academically selective grammar schools and independent schools. I would like to see the return of the Assisted Places Scheme.
  

• I am in favour of HS2 and generally in favour of increased infrastructure & transport links, and wind power. I support First Buy schemes etc. but (and I don't know much about this) would support schemes to limit people buying up properties and then not living in them, to sell them at a profit later.

[claig]

'In fact, everything Tristram Hunt says seems to make a lot more sense!'

Listen to him again when you have sobered up and see if that is still the case!

[claig]

It sounds like you are cloiser to Labour than Conservative.

[mrsnec]

I remember before the last election I found a website where you had to answer questions based on Your opinions of all the major parties manifestos and it didn't reveal which was which and then at the end it showed you which party your opinions fit with the most. Mine came out about 50 percent tory, 30 lib dem 15 green and 15 bnp! ( I wasn't shocked at the tory figure but I was about the others)It was a very interesting experiment but I can't remember the website. Perhaps someone else knows about it? I'd be interested in trying it again.The point is I believe that a lot of people vote for who they think they should vote for without understanding the policies and what they mean to you as an individual. Many of my staunch socialist friends lead very capitalist lifestyles for example.

[NeoFaust]

www.politicalcompass.org/

Awesome website. The main quiz is cool but they've also got last elections UK parties as a separate one. Fun and thought provoking.

In our office we've found that, politically, we're diametrically opposed in ideology to all the main parties. Frustrating, but interesting.

[claig]

'NMW should rise dramatically, to a 'living wage', and the low threshold for tax should rise too'

Labour say that they are in favour of a "living wage" but what they say and do is often different. Meanwhile, Osborne increased the minimum wage by about 10% I think. Also under Osborne and the LibDems, the tax threshold has risen substantially and is likely to be increased even more. I doubt Labour would do the same, because their focus is more on benefit increases rather than those in low-paid employment. Isitmebut will have all of the figures to explain it better.

'I am against free schools. I think they cause divisions within local communities in terms of religion/ethnicity discrimination etc. I am however in favour of academically selective grammar schools and independent schools. I would like to see the return of the Assisted Places Scheme.'

If you are against free schools, then in theory you would be better off under labour as they say they are against opening new ones, but they won't close the ones that are already open. Again what they say and what they do are often different as we will find out if we have the misfortune to elect them again. The Tories are in favour of independent schools, but not academic selection or grammar schools. If you want that then UKIP is your bet.

I am in favour of HS2 and generally in favour of increased infrastructure & transport links, and wind power.

They are all in favour of those apart from UKIP which I think has no reversed its polcy on HS2 an is against it and which is against wind power. Some Tory rebels are against wind power, and Cameron was allegedly supposed to have said let's cut the "green crap", but as ever what they say and what they do are often different, and most people believe Cameron is green through and through - he even has a wind turbine on his roof!

"I support First Buy schemes etc. but (and I don't know much about this) would support schemes to limit people buying up properties and then not living in them"

The Tories support First Buy schemes and Labour probably would do too. Limits to people buying property and not living in them is the sort of thing that Labour generally likes unless it applies to their own homes and the homes of their ex-leaders, bigwigs and nose in the trough luvvies. Conservatives generally believe in freedom, so would generally be against restrictions on this type of thing.

'I am in favour of no cap on immigration providing they have a job in the UK before emigrating'

That is more like a UKIP policy. The other parties cannot place a cap on EU immigration at all. As Farage says, in theory 485 million people have the right to move here if they want to.


So, on the whole, you are a bit of everything. You need to decide which of the issues are the most important for you. Weight them and then decide which party best meets your needs and best matches your views on your core issues and principles.

[Impatientismymiddlename]

Like most people you seem to like different issues represented by different parties. All you can do is read the manifestos carefully prior to voting and decide which party has the most policies that you agree with on the issues that you feel most strongly about.
I don't think you will find any of the parties fits all of your ideals exactly and you have to bear in mind that promises are not always delivered regardless of which party gains control.

[Impatientismymiddlename]

Labour say that they are in favour of a "living wage" but what they say and do is often different. Meanwhile, Osborne increased the minimum wage by about 10% I think.

NMW has not kept up with inflation, particularly under the current govt. 10% over 4 years has not been sufficient. Other essential workers have had their pay frozen and are effectively worse off than they were 4 years ago.

[claig]

Oh, UKIP also want to increase the tax threshold even further.

[Isitmebut]

Tobybox…whether you are looking across ALL the issues, or a few specifically, peel away ‘the class war’ rollocks, there is now plenty off historical data to help you decide.

On taxation, in 1979 Labour passed over income tax rates around 32p as the lower rates, 65p and higher for the upper rate, around 96p for unearned income and Corporate Tax 50% - and slowly, when they could, the Conservative reduced to cost of the State, improved business conditions and lowered taxes SUBSTANTIALLY until they were far lower in 1997.

Labour in 2010 said they would continue to spend on the big fat state and raise taxes, but were never politically brave enough whilst in government to give any detail to the electorate. FYI in 1997, their first year in power, they brought in various ideological taxes that were not needed, and never mentioned within their 1997 manifesto. As we will have £1.5 tril of national debt in 2015, the only way to reduce it is by Private sector led growth and/or extra taxes, and as we are currently paying £32 billion a year interest on our debt, it has to be reduced asap – we need as vibrant a Private Sector as we can encourage.

As for education, Free Schools are controversial, not least because there isn’t a long enough academic record, but what was clear, was that went before wasn’t working for our children. If you haven’t read it yet, may I suggest the following post, as throughout the thread all sides give good input.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/politics/1990838-UK-education-what-is-the-REAL-problem

[Impatientismymiddlename]

www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/oct/01/uk-minimum-wage-history-in-numbers

A history of national minimum wage can be found on that link, clearly showing that it has risen much more slowly (percentage wise) under the current govt.

[mrsnec]

Very interesting that put me between Gandhi and Farancois Hollande!

[claig]

Impatientismymiddlename, Osborne probably has increased the minimum wage by less, but he has substantially increased the tax threshold too, so there is some swings and roundabouts too.

He has not had an easy time of it because he is dealing with the worst recession since the 1930s after the dire state of our finances left to him by Gordon Drown, the luvvies and the amateurs in charge of financial mismanagement under New Labour.

[Impatientismymiddlename]

Impatientismymiddlename, Osborne probably has increased the minimum wage by less, but he has substantially increased the tax threshold too, so there is some swings and roundabouts too.

Not if you work part time and earn below the threshold (in which case you would have also been battered by changes to supplementary benefits and VAT rising to 20%). Swings and roundabouts as long as you at not on the lowest wages or on low wages and working part time.

[claig]

Yes, I think you are right about part time work, I don't know the details there.

I think Vat would probably be the same under both parties. I think Ed Brawls raised it to 20% and now he says he would lower it, but one wonders if what he says and what he does will be different.

[Isitmebut]

A ‘living wage’ is desirable by all, but apart from a lean government/low tax environment e.g. the £10,500 start rate of taxation budgeted for next year, I’m not sure how it can be guaranteed, especially in periods of slump/recessions.

The term ‘full employment’ does not usually mean everyone is employed, it means we are as close as we are going to get.

FYI the stronger the economy, the tighter the jobs market gets, and private sector pay rates rise, but clearly not for all – but then INFLATION tends to rise, interest rates follow, so it’s a constant moving target.

And clearly during the last boom, not everyone can share the proceeds of growth, even if keep raising welfare/benefits, as then taxes have to rise to fund that. A tough balance.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245080/Embarrassment-Brown-major-report-reveals-inequality-increased-Labour.html

[sittingatmydeskagain]

Interesting compass website. Apparently, I'm roughly with Ghandi too.

[Impatientismymiddlename]

VAT was reduced to 15% under labour, it was increased back to 17.5% by the coalition in 2010 and then in reads to 20% (I think in 2011).
VAT is a tax which impacts on the poor more significantly than it does on this with higher incomes (even though wealthier people buy more vatable goods). VAT is a regressive tax.

[Impatientismymiddlename]

I haven't decided who I am voting for yet as I have similar dilemmas to the OP, but I have decided that there are certain parties who will not be getting my vote.

[Isitmebut]

Claig...Labour lowered VAT a few % in fairness, with I believe a 2-year time horizon, plus a £2k 'cash for clunkers' new (foreign?) car policy - which was their master plan for 'growf' - but would shop keepers have passed all the VAT cut on.

Osbourne raised it, seeing it as a tax on consumption, and the more richer you are and consume, the more you pay - Labour should have loved that. lol

[claig]

Impatientismymiddlename, you're right. I remembered it wrong.

[claig]

You have to incentivise people and promote enterprise. You have to let people keep more of what they earn and you have to take the low-paid out of taxation. You have to make work pay and increase the tax threshold. It is no use paying a higher living wage and then clawing it back in tax.

Small and medium businesses need to be promoted and their rents, rates and taxes need to be decreased in order to kickstart employment and create wealth that can then be shared around.

Who is best at all that? UKIP and the Tories, not New Labour.

[RiaOverTheRainbow]

I recommend vote for policies - it lets you compare party manifestos by subject without knowing who's who.

[mrsnec]

That's the one I used before Ria. Thanks!

[NeoFaust]

My mother, who works at a large well known charity, took the political compass test and now takes great joy in admitting that she is 'further left than Ghandi'.

But while I think the compass is pretty good as a guide (and fun), it ain't perfect. I'm a psychotic totalitarian militarist (who the hell do I vote for? I don't believe in democracy at all!) but I still end up in the socially liberal, planned economy quarter.

[Impatientismymiddlename]

Who is best at all that? UKIP and the Tories, not New Labour.

But are they though?
The low paid with children are not better off und the coalition because they used to get up to 80% of their childcare costs paid and now the maximum they can get is 70%.

The middle and higher income earners with children have lost their child benefit so those just under the current child benefit threshold have no incentive to earn more.

Inflation has been running quite high over the last few years, so higher wages are being swallowed up by the higher cost of living.

The help to buy scheme is pushing prices up very quickly so we have returned to the situation we had a decade ago where house prices are outstripping salaries and even people on middle incomes are struggling to buy a home even if they are paying less income tax.

There have been lots of policies under both the previous govt and the current govt which have made lower and even middle income families worse off, particularly those with children.
I don't buy the idea that Tory and lib dems have a magic solution which makes them better to manage the country's finances than new labour. I don't necessarily believe that new labour are best placed to help ordinary families either. Hence why I am currently undecided. However, the coalition mocking Eds plans to freeze fuel prices and then taking on the idea several months later (as a good idea) makes me question their ability to help ordinary families using their own initiative and planning skills.