To vote against my own interests?

[Babycham1979]

There's a thread on here about the very naive women on Question Time who voted Tory and was surprised to find that some of the £12bn promised cuts to welfare came from her benefits. It seems 99% of responses refer specifically to whether she should have foreseen this and subsequently not voted Tory.

It made me think. I'm a higher-rate tax payer, home-owner etc etc and I've only ever voted for left-wing parties (Green, Labour, socialist); all of whom would implement policies that don't directly benefit me, and would probably have a detrimental effect at least on my pocket. I do this with my eyes open and fully aware of the consequences, should they win.

Am I naive? Am I the unusual one? Whatever happened to principle and conviction over and above self-interest?

I'm the same OP, this thread is heartening!

YANBU at all.

The only way that we can earn high incomes in order to pay high taxes is because we live in a country that offers
Universal healthcare
Universal education
Safe incorrupt policing, law system, courts
Clean water
Public transport
Safe regulated food
Welfare safety net
universal pension (which takes up the largest proportion of the welfare budget)
Safe regulated roads
Health and safety regs at work
Maternity leave
Sick leave
Holiday leave

And so on. The safe stable society in which we all live and contribute to is what enables us to make high incomes.

So you're actually very reasonable

fastdaytears we would be better off if I wasn't working, what I earn gets swallowed up in rent, council tax, utilities etc, I worked it out and if I wasn't working we would have more left over at the end of the month. But maybe I am not claiming something I should be.. I haven't really thought about that tbh. Yes you are right, wrong thread for me, I just get all caught up in the conversations, find it all interesting.
I actually feel like I am writing rubbish reading this back lol it is either bed time or gin time..

Basically the Citizens income idea does away with a load of red tape, applications forms and sanctions etc and says everyone will get a basic (low) income regardless. It's low enough to be unattractive for the long term, but a universal benefit so no-one has to worry about sanctions, forms and all sorts of other crap and can concentrate on getting a job, getting well, or doing something useful instead. New Scientist reports studies in India, Canada and (from memory) Denmark, produced positive results, and didn't immediately lead to everyone lounging around watching telly all day.

BTW - to follow on from the OP, there's an oft-parroted "pub/Daily Mail Logic" that says benefit recipients always vote Labour. In fact, studies show that the very poorest are least likely to vote at all (presumably because they have survival as a higher priority).