To ask about the fundamental Tory belief?

[Beadyohfeedme]

So I've argued with quite a few people today about this issue, not on MN but in RL and on other forums. Most tories I know seem to share this belief that we are all responsible for our own fortune, or lack of it.
So that's the underlying reason that they are against higher taxes ('I've worked hard so why should I pay for those who haven't.')

So how does one do this? Are you honestly saying that everyone can become successful?

I’m not against higher tax, but when the upper tax rate in this country is already over 50% by the time you’ve factored in NI etc plus you factor in VAT, road tax, fuel tax etc on top I don’t think it is unreasonable to want and expect the government, whatever the colour, to do much much better with peoples hard earned money. There is so much waste and inefficiency that can be tackled first.

There is a persistent myth that the private sector is more efficient and therefore it should be the sector to deliver things. This is demonstrably false for anyone who has ever worked on a large scale complex project in the private sector. Budget and timescale overruns are just as bad. The reality is that it would be the same project managers private or public and it is the complexity of these projects that causes issues because decision makers are utterly crap at dealing with complexity and nuance.

To quote an earlier post

*Pretty much all the Conservative voters l know, and they come from all walks of life, feel that to the best of one's ability, people should take responsibility for their actions and choices first and foremost.

But equally believe that there will always be those who don't have that ability, ie disabled/unwell/mentally unwell/ carers, those who have fallen on hard times, and that an, economically strong economy is best able to support those people*

What I don’t understand from this is how, without some kind of state interference, does that support reach those people?

The most wasteful things I have seen in the public sector are large framework contracts given to the private sector for delivery. They require additional layers of management, are usually poorly delivered (because quality is squeezed to maintain profit margins) and often have hugely punitive fees for deviations from initial scopes.

Tories believe in law and order - building more jails, longer prison sentences. All good stuff that appeals to people and makes good headlines.

It's not good headlines to discuss the causes that lead people to crime in the first place, the social issues, the justice system, alternatives to prison, rehabilitiation, prisoner education etc. And investing money in that. Doesn't make good headlines. It's not an easy soundbite. Much easier to say we'll invest in prisons, build more places, have more police and longer sentences.

Most voters and politicians believe in improving people’s lives. What they disagree on is how to do it.

Fiscally the right believe that capitalism is the route to improving the standard of living. The left believe it is socialism. Both systems operated during the C20. Capitalism provided bigger and quicker improvements in the standard of living. Socialism improved the standard of living but not as much and slowly. Even the left don’t disagree with that outcome, just that socialism was never allowed to work.

But the issue with capitalism is that it leads to inequality. Socialism removes inequality amongst the masses (but not the elite). Inequality is a determinate of health and wellbeing. On this score socialism was the winner.

Most European countries try and some succeed in combining both systems to reap the benefits. They have systems of managed capitalism and welfare states. Britain has never really been able to achieve this. Primarily because of the strength of its capital markets and their influence on the economy. But also because the electorate don’t really like paying taxes or big government. The accepted big government in the war and that pathed the way for the welfare state. Something we all revere but don’t want to pay for.

Btw, socialism or communism isn’t about people all earning the same as one pp stated. People don’t all earn the same and they pay taxes. Socialism is about the means of production being in hands of the people.

Churchandstate Because you sign up to the Army on the understanding that you will live like that

The Army might, but there are other types of military besides the Army..you might even have heard of the Royal Navy and the RAF. Why assume military = Army?

The rest of the public servants in the UK have to provide receipts, choose the cheapest options for accommodation and travel. Many in the military are very qualified for what they do, and provide value for money (unlike MPs). I don't see leave being cancelled for MPs because someone has ballsed up the security for the Olympics; or the MPs being called out when the emergency services are on strike; or the MPs being used to dispose of the carcasses in 2001 during the foot and mouth outbreak.

MPs push the envelope again and again with their expenses, which we all pay for. The easiest way to do that is to treat them as we do military officers, and house them in accommodation, where they have a good sized bed sitting room with room enough for a sofa and desk, and a wet room. Laundry facilities on tap, a gym, and two meals a day served.

If it's good enough for Mr Princess Anne at Shrivenham, then it should be good enough for the MPs.

yes, many Tories aer hard-working business owners (or professionals) but there are very hard-working 'working-class' people who couldn't have private education/ have no cushion of inheritance/ connections to further careers, and however hard they work they won't haev anywhere near comparable standard of living. Yes they earned less, you can argue, as their talents mighht be more modest, but the Left argues that proportionately the outcome (llife style) is not fair to the degree of abilities, i.e. way too big a difference.

Also being hard-working applies a LOT more to working class women or those on modest saaries with same class husbands) than many Tory wives who don't work. Yes mostly they aer SAHP but haev a lot more in te way of child care support than a working woman with kids.
So not, not all Tories are hard-working.

I've been a LibDem voter recently, as although I recognise the business less economy, I agree that the inequality is vast so I don't feel I can happily support either Lab or Cons.

*business-based (last paragraph)

I have a disability, its genetic and I'm unable to work because of it, due to the bedroom tax and being eventually moved over onto UC I'll be £120 a month worse off, please Tory voters is that my fault because I'm disabled? Why should I lose money because I'm disabled it wont get any better by removing my financial support will it? Please square this circle for me, or I'm sure it will be the usual radio silence because you honestly dont have a fucking clue do you?

JustAnotherPoster00 the problem is that people just didnt believe labour would fix this.

JC in an interview admitted he couldnt do it all, at least in the foreseeable future. People just didnt believe he would make it easier for you but probably make it worse for the country as a whole.

Also, so many people (apparently) voted tactically. It didnt work. Do you feel that these people are in part to blame for the Tories getting in? Their tactics, as predicted, did work and contributed to the result. And what about the people who didnt vote?

Its shit. I became a single parent under the Tories and got fuck all help. I agree that its shit. But I don't agree that it must follow that all Tory voters dont care.

There is a difference between the core tory belief and why people voted for them. They don’t have to be the same. In this election they won votes from their core and from labours core.

The Tories are a party that strives to govern above all else. They will dump leaders and ideology to govern. They dumped Thatcher, their remainers and they dumped austerity as their mantra. You can argue it’s all on the surface. But that’s what they did. All to secure votes and to offer people what they wanted.

This time they offered to get Brexit done. People wanted this resolved, not more debate and elections.

They also identified a long standing contradiction at the heart of our voting. Britain wants American taxes and North European public services. So they said they would spend more but not increase taxes.

People also believe that austerity in 2010 was caused by high public spending. In that instance they were largely wrong. But it was case in the 1970s. I stopped voting Labour in 2017 because of this. I think they would have bankrupted the country and led us into a new period of austerity.

In 2017, I believed the Labour Party was fiscally irresponsible, anti Semitic and that Corbyn was in part responsible for Brexit.

In 2019, I believed the Labour Party was even more anti Semitic and far more fiscally irresponsible than in 2017. Also that due to bad leadership they stopped a soft Brexit under May and pathed the way for Boris Johnson.

I don’t like that anyone and everyone lost out financially as a result of the financial crisis. I don’t think it was caused by New Labour. But I do believe that Corbyns policies would have led to an even worse financial crisis and even more catastrophic austerity.

The Tory party stopped a softer (it still wasn’t that soft) brexit- ERG members wouldn’t vote for it. What we’ll get now is their wish- a hard brexit and the economic hardship that will bring with it. Hope the torys have a gargantuan money tree hidden away to pay for everything they’ve promised AND the economic costs of brexit.
But they don’t so my prediction is that in 5 years time we’ll all be poorer with less access to public services 🤷‍♀️

The Tory party stopped a softer (it still wasn’t that soft) brexit- ERG members wouldn’t vote for it. What we’ll get now is their wish- a hard brexit and the economic hardship that will bring with it.

Why does it follow that we’ll get a hard Brexit? That’s not what Johnson has indicated that he wants, and with a large majority the ERG has lost its power. A smaller majority would have made a hard Brexit much more likely!

Because Bojo has surrounded himself with hard brexiters. We’ll see how the cabinet looks next week but if, as I suspect, it’s stays stuffed full of hard brexit supporters then that’s what we’ll get. And there will be nothing we can do about it.

Do you think Dominic Cummings wants a nice, soft brexit?

Plus, the moderate torys have all been booted out. Who’s there to push for a soft brexit anymore?

Could you ignore a child in poverty because of the actions of their parents?
As with the nuclear weapons - do not underestimate the deterrent value.
I am from a country where children can be taken into care if they are living in extreme poverty, as it is considered neglect. While I don't fully agree with it and it is obviously a radical solution, it does place the responsibility on the shoulders of the parents, and I must say that such cases are almost unheard of.

The Labour Party could have supported Mays deal and got it passed. Brexit would have been done in the eyes of their core vote who wanted it. The Tories would have split and an election called before they had time to select a new leader. A half decent Labour Party could have won that election.

It was what northern labour MPs were telling them.

The point is that the conservatives shouldn’t have needed labour to get brexit through- that’s why they bought off the DUP. Brexit has always been a conservative project yet it’s their own MPs that blocked it.
It’s immaterial anyway because it worked- the ERG now reign. And we have voted for their version of brexit. My main fear is that they are not a very bright bunch of MPs and we have handed over our biggest economic project of the last 50 years over to them. I don’t expect it to go well and think we will all suffer for their ambitions.

I would be the most relieved person in the world if Boris brings in a vaguely sensible, balanced cabinet. He won’t though.

It is very hard to generalise about every Tory and every Labour voter. I voted Conservative and my reasons will be differnt from others. Labour simply did not have enough people with confidence it was best for the country. Unless it moves more to the centre ground it is not likely to win in 5 years' time either (which is fine by me).

i don't however agree that thsi Tory party is for lower tax. The current upper rate is 45% income tax and 2% nationa. insurance (plus 9% graduate tax for those with new student loans). I think taking about half in direct tax of most of higher earners' money is offensively high. there is no small state, low tax, low spend party currently. The Tories got in as they are relatively high spent, high tax, big state sadly. So yes for me they are better than Labour but nothing like the low tax party I would prefer. In a sense that is why they were elected as whoever is middle ground in the Uk wins. We had an extremist far left Labour party so they lost. When Blair moved Labour more to the centre it won. Luckily Corbyn and Co didn't do that so we Tories won. I always said Corbyn was a very useful asset for the Conservatives.

bestiswest good point,
that is where l feel the Conservatives fail, they do not spend nearly as wisely as the electorate would like them to...
So why vote for them over Labour? well the distribution of wealth can be improved, pressure applied and public demonstrations held to force change...
but only if there is money to spend long term, and Labour's policies would not generate wealth.They would spend, spend, giving a short term illusion of better services, but only by borrowing huge amounts, and that will soon catch up with the next generation, if not ours.
the country will be in far worse debt and paying far more interest, and services would HAVE to be cut.

I personally would like to see a seperate pathway of help for those who are disabled/chronically ill/ caring for a disabled or seriously ill child. ie those who quite clearly are unable to ever work.
People could be immediately identified and financial help should be immediate, and set at a comfortable standard of living, not a scraping by level) with appropriate PERMANENT housing, and support services.

There are so many ways of improving the current system to weed out the huge wastage and cheats, and ensure those in most need are properly supported not just scraping by. If only the Conservatives could sort this out people would feel better about taxation.

I feel similarly about the NHS, it needs less levels of expensive management and more nurses, midwives and Doctors. It should be free to train as a nurse, Doctor and midwife as long as at least 5 years working in the NHS on graduating.
We should be creating far more University places, it is ludicrous that it is immensely difficult to get a place to study medicine yet we are massively short of Doctors. The Government should fund these places.
It requires long term thinking and collaboration rather than infighting and division which is how it has been for far too long.

I completely agree re Medicine. Why do we train so few?

Pigeon I saw on twitter someone hinting (as if they were in the know) that Boris will go fo hard brexit because his rich sponsors have it as a condition. Otherwise they'll eak the dirt on him as to the dubious financial sources supprting the Tories.

Might be a conspiracy theory but what if it's true? He was onbs never a hard brexiteer himself before he got interested (and advised) in becoming PM, so I thought there was hope for a soft brexit but now I'm worried.

*leak the dirt

I don’t think Boris really has any opinions of his own. He’s a journalist at heart and says whatever appeals to his readers/backers/voters.