Talk

Advanced search

AIBU to be fed up with all the champagne socialists?

(462 Posts)
winniemum Fri 05-May-17 16:01:31

Just come back from school pick up and the conversation turned to politics for obvious reasons!
My DC is in year 6 and going to high school next year. Many of his friends are going to the local grammar school. Fine, no problem with that we didn't put him in for the GS exams.
However so many of the mums were upset that Lib Dem/ Labour had done badly in the local elections, whilst driving to school in their 4 by 4's, having driven from their £750K + houses.
It's just the contradiction, they are not prepared to spread their wealth or support the Tory policy of Grammar schools and harp on about how they all voted Lib/labour.
When I asked one mum why she was sending her DC to Grammar school if she didn't agree with anything the Tory's stood for, I got, 'Oh that was one of our most difficult decisions, we thought very long and hard about that one, but you know....' No I still don't know as she couldn't explain why that was OK.

AmyGDalae Fri 05-May-17 16:09:12

Surely that does not make them hypocritical? There is no one candidate/party that agrees with my own views 100%. Also what makes you say they are not prepared to spread their wealth boting labour? Surely that is exactly the opposite of the truth given their tax contributions would increase under labour. Presumably they are not selfish enough to vote purely on their own financial best interests, i.e. Tory as they don't wish to live in that sort of society.

APlaceOnTheCouch Fri 05-May-17 16:11:39

Personally I think we need all the socialists we can get. Champagne, gin, tee-total ...

LittleNellsDog Fri 05-May-17 16:14:22

Agree APlaceOnTheCouch

Pinkheart5917 Fri 05-May-17 16:15:30

Why can't you vote labour or lib dem if you have a 4x4 or a £750k house?

Why can't you send your dc to grammar school if you don't support Tory?

I'm genuinely not seeing a problem here tbh.

Kokusai Fri 05-May-17 16:16:22

You can want and work towards better society, whilst making the best of the current one we have.

floatingfrog Fri 05-May-17 16:17:02

Do you share your wealth? I'm not sure what house you live in or what car you drive stops you from being being a Liberal - just look at the Guardian reading lefties of Disdbury, Manchester.

OlennasWimple Fri 05-May-17 16:18:27

Buying high cost items like an expensive car or house contributes ££££s to the economy in taxes (along with keeping the thirsty car in fuel)

If they are high earners, they also contribute ££££s in tax and NI every month.

Why do you say that they do not help re-distribute wealth OP?

TempsPerdu Fri 05-May-17 16:21:03

So anyone earning over a certain amount has to vote Tory by default?

I think sometimes those on the Left can't win - if you're poor and angry about inequality it's dismissed as the politics of envy; if you're better off and concerned about others then you're a champagne socialist.

If the other mums would be worse off under a Labour government, surely they are voting to spread their wealth?

intheknickersoftime Fri 05-May-17 16:21:24

I don't get your beef with the mum who sent her kid to grammar school amd how she votes. It's a grammar school not Eton or Harrow.

Mothervulva Fri 05-May-17 16:21:33

If they're voting labour and Libs surely that's proof they don't support the Tory style? My DH and I do better under the Tories than other parties but I wouldn't vote for them.

LoudBatPerson Fri 05-May-17 16:21:37

Being a socialist (champagne or otherwise) doesn't tend to equal being unwilling to share money around, I am not sure where you are getting this idea. Just because they are more affluent than the majority of the country doesn't mean they cannot have socialist views and vote for centre-left/left wing parties.

I am genuinely confused what exactly you are complaining about.

Do you think all people who are better off than the average have to automatically vote Conservative?

Ketzele Fri 05-May-17 16:22:00

I'm not aware that there's an entry requirement to liberal/left politics where you have to agree to no personal wealth.

Personally, I oppose grammar schools because they increase social inequality, not decrease it - so I don't see how opposing that policy is hypocritical for a socialist.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut Fri 05-May-17 16:22:23

The simple reason is that you can't change the system from outside the system. If they gave up their expensive houses and cars tomorrow and gave all the money to the State it would change nothing. By voting for a party that says "we should pay for our public services and try to share our wealth more equally" they will change something.

You don't have to be living in poverty to understand that living in poverty is a bad thing. You can have an expensive house and recognise there is a housing crisis. Hell you can have a buy-to-let and agree the tax incentives need to be reformed to take away the unfair advantage.

Governments effect change. People elect governments. Principles inform how people vote.

Having money doesn't stop you thinking.

user1471453601 Fri 05-May-17 16:22:26

Look, I'm a socialist, voted labour all my voting life, I'm a card carrying member. Mother was a Labour councillor for years. However, this year o will b

Ketzele Fri 05-May-17 16:24:23

And I support higher taxation for higher earners, support charities, and send my kids to community schools. I don't have a 4x4, though (or indeed, any car) so maybe I'm not who you're talking about...

TheBlushBaby Fri 05-May-17 16:24:39

My partner has paid about £2m in taxes to this country. His vote is his vote. Doesn't matter about his background or his current living standards, it's about how he fits into this country and how he believes it should be run. How his tax money is spent in the country will influence his vote. Simple.

user1471453601 Fri 05-May-17 16:28:56

Sorry, pressed send before I finished. Was going on to say that latter this year I will be going private to have my cataract removed. I don't like private medicine, the NHS is one of the greatest gifts the socialists of the 40s/50s left us. Like your friends who have sent their children to grammar school, I cannot suffer because this benighted government continues to destroy the countries NHS and education.

Just because I feel backed into a corner 're my opinion, it does not make me a "bad" socialist

Ratonastick Fri 05-May-17 16:30:21

This is bullshit, sorry but it really is lazy thinking. I have a very nice house in a very blue area, I drive a sports car and work in central London for a substantial salary (which I am very happy to pay my tax and NI). I have voted labour my whole life. Why? Because (like the rest of my family) i grew up in a rough place, went through state comprehensive schooling and ended up with a superb education that gave me entry to a professional career. I do not see any reason why, having made it this far, I should vote to pull the ladder up behind me. The highest standards of education for all will bring positive economic benefits into the long term. It is the foundation of a modern, knowledge based economy.

Oh and the NHS has saved my life twice and my DSs once. I think it is one of the greatest glories of this country. And I have lived in the US and have a very clear view of what the alternative looks like.

So please don't be so judgemental about other people's decisions.

Ketzele Fri 05-May-17 16:31:55

And there's another reason why I hate this line of argument: it's because it makes people defensive and closes down effective debate about how we all make accommodations with the system we live within. Take private schools: I'm opposed to them. I'm sad at how many parents assume they must be better, just because they're private. I'm even more sad at how, once they've done this, they completely close down critical thinking about the role of private education works in perpetuating social inequality.

I have a number of wealthy friends - intelligent people - who have just done this. You see it on every MN thread about independent schools. Look, I completely get that people may be in a situation where the local private school is a brilliant match for their child, or the local state school is horrendous. I'm not going to give them grief about that. But in return, I'd like them to think about how we can all work together to create better education for ALL children. And if we start guilt-tripping each other, that doesn't happen.

haveacupoftea Fri 05-May-17 16:32:19

How exactly are they not willing to share their wealth if they're voting for socialist parties? That literally makes no sense.

SeriousSocks Fri 05-May-17 16:34:16

Rat

I'm totally with you. 100%

acquiescence Fri 05-May-17 16:34:54

Liberal does not mean communist. Should they all move into a 2 bed flat and donate their cash to the government?

By voting for politicians who are in favour of higher rates of taxation on higher earners then they are showing that they are prepared to share their wealth as they are prepared to pay higher taxes which are then redistributed. YABU.

ImperialBlether Fri 05-May-17 16:35:51

You show a shocking ignorance, OP.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut Fri 05-May-17 16:39:53

Let's take just one example of why a wealthy person might be a socialist. Let's say, for arguments sake, this person holds a fundamental belief that the wealthy should pay more tax than the poor and we should all pay enough tax to support a welfare state.

Do you achieve this by...

a) voting for a political party who have the same fundamental belief and who have stated they will try to achieve this in their manifesto

b) Selling your house and car, giving up your job, donating all your money to the State and moving into a slum rental then doing a)

c) keeping your house, car and job and voting for the political party who state the exact opposite of that fundamental belief in their manifesto?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now