We don't want the government to lurch to the left

Like all these things, most of us know the extra funding will never reach the point of need (the kids in this case).

The PS VAT raid and promised 6,500 new state school teacher is another example.

It’s all bullshit.

This in spades. The SNP has ‘lifted x number of kids out of poverty’ apparently, when all they’ve done is bung their parents lots and lots of money. The educational attainment gap is still widening though. They could have worked to improve kids lives but that’s far too much like hard work. Giving away money is much easier, makes us look like nice guys. Let’s just turn a blind eye as to whether it helps anyone.

I posted above the membership for Reform and Labour. Labour members earn significantly more but have not become members of the Conservative Party or Reform. Conversely, Reform membership is over 40% working class, with high representation in manual industries.

I don't have children. So why am I paying for nursery care and schools?
Should I pay tax to help someone live in a council home? Not everyone can be a CEO of a company on a handsome wage - we need people to do the lesser paid jobs too, just as important but not valued money wise. What about some poor soul who became ill or was born poorly? What about benefit of a mum or dad who's relationship broke down or partner died and they're suddenly unable to work, keep a roof over their heads because they've 3 children under 10? A woman fleeing in the night to get away from her abusive husband before he kills her. Should any of my tax go into potholes, if I don't drive? Street lighting if I don't go out at night?

Can you see where I am going with this yet? You don't get to chose which taxes you pay or what it's spent on.

Yeah, those bitching about benefits etc are just selfish. I've never claimed a penny in benefits, live in a home that is owned, am more left leaning so that kinda screws up your argument.

I just want to add that contrary to many people's opinions on this thread, I am not against removing inequality and improving prospects for those that are struggling.

I simply don't think lurching the left will achieve this. It's like when people talk about the two child cap and inequality. We know that there is an apparent link between deprivation and poor educational outcomes, we would therefore expect educational outcomes to drop for impacted families when the cap was introduced. Except it didn't. It stayed broadly the same. Why was this? Because there is far more at play than just money. Removing the cap won't improve educational outcomes either. You need to look at other factors before simply throwing money at the problem. The left is obsessed with lifting people out of financial poverty but they don't understand that real poverty extends far beyond the financial, especially for children. The easiest thing to do is pretend this isn't the case and just give families more money so you can game the metric rather than tackle what's really going on. I say this as someone from a deprived area who grew up around these families during the New Labour era. There was a chronic lack of ambition, poor attitude to education and intergenerational cycles of benefits dependency and at times criminal activity. Most of my peers didn't break the cycle despite funding being thrown at them from all angles.

The wording of this topic is almost too idiotic to make it worthy of a response. What ‘promise’ are you referring to? Labour’s manifesto pledges? (Newsflash, manifesto pledges have been broken by every government in living memory). Or are you just against paying taxes at all? In which case I’m sure you won’t be using any public roads, calling the police next time you need help, using NHS healthcare, or depending on your household waste being collected anytime soon?

Can you share the data? Its just that I actually conducted political research in a Kentish community and found the complete opposite of what you are saying. Of course, there could be regional differences, but that would still run contrary to your statement that this is globally recognised behaviour.

What info do you have to support your statement here

ie That most left wingers will stay left wing irrespective of a change in circumstances
and
That right wingers only ever vote for themselves rather than actually supporting industry, farming and growth etc.

I’ve already posted that studies and polls show a change to net provider status does in fact result in the majority switching to a more Conservative Government
What intel do you have that contradicts this for the majority

The electorate we are a few years away from a general election

Governments do not need to be dictated by market predictions

See upthread the impact of immigration on voting patterns.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society/trackers/the-most-important-issues-facing-the-country

Who do you think has ranked immigration as their biggest issue? Reform voters. They aren't voting for them due to their economic policy.

Actually no, and it really shows how you think that you said this. Many left wingers think 'If im doing badly, I'll vote to help myself. If im doing ok, I'll vote to help others'. In the last election I voted for the party that I thought would help others the most because I'm doing ok. Its the compete opposite of the right wing 'im alright Jack' attitude.

Conversely, so many poorly off right wingers who rely on welfare, social housing and the NHS are voting for parties like Reform who would scrap it all! Edit to add: the mentality seems to be, I'll give up all this as long as it stops immigrants getting it too!

Well they can convince each other they need to take big risks and do it without mandate but the electorate and the markets might show what they think of that.

Are left wingers not selfish if they vote to spend other people's money on services and things that will directly benefit them? Ultimately they are voting to enrich themselves in the way that right wingers might vote to pay less tax so that they can keep more of their own money. It's just two sides of the same coin.

Turkeys generally don't vote for Christmas.

They don't have the political mandate to take big risks. Nobody votes for these big risks. If they've known since 2008 another way was needed then why not campaign on this basis? Why couldn't they make the argument and convince people? We are meant to live in a democracy where the majority rules. Not where you lie to get into power and then completely change your agenda once you're in so that you can make radical changes nobody actually voted for. I am flabbergasted you think this is ok!

It doesn't just show that. It shows the economic elasticity of voters. Why would a left wing voter suddenly vote right wing after winning the lottery if their overall goal was the greater good? Why would anyone turn more right wing when they become wealthy? Surely they would be glad to contribute more to a cause they so strongly believe in and help people poorer than themselves ...

https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/money-makes-people-right-wing-and-inegalitarian#:~:text=Rich%20people%20typically%20lean%20right,allegiance%20from%20left%20to%20right.