Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Tories lose over 1000 seats in local elections

427 replies

noblegiraffe · 05/05/2023 19:24

Which was their damage limitation number so when they lost 800 they could say 'we've not done as badly as we feared'.

AIBU to be cracking open the champagne while they try to figure out how the hell they can put a positive spin on this?

OP posts:
jgw1 · 08/05/2023 18:21

Paul2023 · 08/05/2023 18:16

It isn’t my personal grudge. Many people from the Armed force’s community don’t forgive Labour for how they were treat.

Many, I dare say would not want to vote them back in.

People still hold a grudge about Margaret Thatcher , she hasn’t been in office for 32 years.

So , I’ll vote for who I like when the time comes , thank you.

Show quote history

Those who I know in the armed forces are far more concerned about the current underfunding, than something that happened 20 years ago.

TheHateIsNotGood · 08/05/2023 18:24

Time for a change isn't it? No political party stays in power forever in the UK, that's coz it's a democracy no matter how anyone tries to colour it otherwise.

The local election results were great - a real shift in how powers are allocated; towards NOC, Green and the Lib Dems did very well - eg: Horsham DC, previously a Tory bastion.

Maybe after the next GE the note left on the Chancellor's desk will read:

"There is no money left - we've taken it all and fucked off to the Virgin Islands"

jgw1 · 08/05/2023 18:43

Paul2023 · 08/05/2023 18:16

It isn’t my personal grudge. Many people from the Armed force’s community don’t forgive Labour for how they were treat.

Many, I dare say would not want to vote them back in.

People still hold a grudge about Margaret Thatcher , she hasn’t been in office for 32 years.

So , I’ll vote for who I like when the time comes , thank you.

Show quote history

Those who I know in the armed forces are far more concerned about the current underfunding, than something that happened 20 years ago.

xcvbn · 09/05/2023 08:12

Florenz · 08/05/2023 17:24

I don't believe in taking wealth from people who have worked for it and giving it to people who haven't. Opportunity should be evened out as much as possible. But people have to want to take those opportunities and work hard to achieve their full potential in life. People should not expect the state (ie, other people) to provide for them all their life, no matter how irresponsible/lazy/criminal they are.

What if they're not lazy but working for minimum wage very hard and managing childcare and a household and still struggling?

BitOutOfPractice · 09/05/2023 09:02

If only there was a direct correlation between hard work and wealth @Florenz if there were we’d have a glut of nurses, care workers and bin men and the City would be empty, with pleas on the tv for people to consider stock broking as a career.

Florenz · 09/05/2023 09:47

You don't think stock brokers work hard? It's one of the most competitive industries out there. It's far harder to become a stockbroker than it is to become a nurse, care worker or bin man, and far harder to stay a stock broker as well. You have to deliver results or you're out.

jgw1 · 09/05/2023 10:47

xcvbn · 09/05/2023 08:12

What if they're not lazy but working for minimum wage very hard and managing childcare and a household and still struggling?

Show quote history

Quite clearly they are not working hard and not nearly as clever as me, because if they were they would be able to join me at the golf club two afternoons a week.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 09/05/2023 10:57

You don't think stock brokers work hard?

You don't think nurses work hard?

OP posts:
jgw1 · 09/05/2023 11:45

noblegiraffe · 09/05/2023 10:57

You don't think stock brokers work hard?

You don't think nurses work hard?

If nurses worked hard like stockbrokers then they would be rich and wouldn't need to use a foodbank.

#torylogic

L1ttledrummergirl · 09/05/2023 12:31

So we need more stockbrokers and fewer nurses. Gotcha.

BitOutOfPractice · 09/05/2023 12:57

I didn’t say stockbrokers don’t work hard (though if you think they work harder than nurses you’re deluded).

But the point I was making clearly sailed straight over your head. Working hard is not enough to make you rich. It’s not even the biggest indicator of financial success. If it was the King would be claiming universal credit and care workers would be millionaires. Surely you don’t think everyone struggling financially is simply lazy and if they worked harder they’d be rich? Surely you’re not that blinkered?

Florenz · 09/05/2023 13:03

If you work hard AND take advantage of opportunities available to you, you'll be richer than someone who started off in the same position as you that didn't work hard and didn't take advantage of opportunities available to you.

You don't get many stockbrokers playing golf at two in the afternoon. Doctors, maybe.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 09/05/2023 13:09

If you work hard AND take advantage of opportunities available to you, you'll be richer than someone who started off in the same position as you that didn't work hard and didn't take advantage of opportunities available to you.

But you'll still be way behind the kid whose parents are rich and could afford to buy them all sorts of extra opportunities, give them a deposit to get them on the property ladder etc etc.

OP posts:
jgw1 · 09/05/2023 13:11

noblegiraffe · 09/05/2023 13:09

If you work hard AND take advantage of opportunities available to you, you'll be richer than someone who started off in the same position as you that didn't work hard and didn't take advantage of opportunities available to you.

But you'll still be way behind the kid whose parents are rich and could afford to buy them all sorts of extra opportunities, give them a deposit to get them on the property ladder etc etc.

And also don't pay the same rate as tax as you, dont forget that.

I dont understand why an argument that hard work should be rewarded does not extend to a tax on wealth instead of income.

How can it be sensible that a multi millionaire pays a lower rate of tax on their unearned income than a nurse does as a result of their hard work?

Florenz · 09/05/2023 13:12

noblegiraffe · 09/05/2023 13:09

If you work hard AND take advantage of opportunities available to you, you'll be richer than someone who started off in the same position as you that didn't work hard and didn't take advantage of opportunities available to you.

But you'll still be way behind the kid whose parents are rich and could afford to buy them all sorts of extra opportunities, give them a deposit to get them on the property ladder etc etc.

Yes but they've benefitted from having several generations in a row doing the right thing. If they spurn the opportunities available to them, their kids won't be as fortunate. There is nothing wrong with parents working hard to make sure their kids have a good future. That is what all parents should do.

Bimbom · 09/05/2023 13:16

Florenz · 09/05/2023 13:12

Yes but they've benefitted from having several generations in a row doing the right thing. If they spurn the opportunities available to them, their kids won't be as fortunate. There is nothing wrong with parents working hard to make sure their kids have a good future. That is what all parents should do.

Show quote history

It's easy to do the "right thing" when you've been born into a more privileged background.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 09/05/2023 13:19

Yes but they've benefitted from having several generations in a row doing the right thing.

Building personal wealth and keeping hold of it is better than e.g. philanthropy?

OP posts:
Notonthestairs · 09/05/2023 13:41

Intrigued by the idea that everyone in the UK are offered the same opportunities. If that were the case then we would have greater social mobility. Instead we have low social mobility in comparison with our EU counterparts. Although I think Switzerland and the US score even lower.
You can pretend this is all down to feckless parents but Deloittes and Goldman Sachs would disagree.

"In the UK today, the data tells us a that your social background still impacts your opportunities in life:
By the age of three, poorer children are estimated to be, on average, nine months behind children from more wealthy backgrounds.
By 16, children receiving free school meals achieve 1.7 grades lower at GCSE.
Just 7% of children in the UK attend independent schools, but 30 per cent of all A* grades at A level are achieved by these children.
32% of MPs, 51% of top medics, 54% of FTSE-100 chief execs, 54% of top journalists and 70% of High Court judges went to an independent school, compared to 7% of the population.
The UK has one of the poorest rates of social mobility in the developed world. This means that people born into low-income families, regardless of their talent, or their hard work, do not have the same access to opportunities as those born into more privileged circumstances."

www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/about-deloitte-uk/articles/social-mobility.html

•	Four in five adults (79%) now believe there is a large gap between different social classes.
•	Three-quarters (74%) of people think there are large differences in opportunities across Britain.
•	Only 31% of people in the north-east believe opportunities to progress in their area are ‘good’, compared to 74% in London.
•	A third (35%) of adults across the UK believe everyone has a fair chance to go as far as their hard work will take them. Only one in four (25%) people from black and ethnic minority groups believe we live in a fair society.
•	On average 39% of the public think it is getting harder for people from less advantaged families to move up in British society. 42% of those aged 25 to 49 think it is getting harder.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-mobility-barometer-2021

The UK performs poorly on international comparisons for both social mobility and inequality. The poorest and the richest are the most socially immobile. This exacerbates inequality as disadvantaged individuals are less likely to climb the income ladder, and the economically advantaged tend to stay at the top.

www.gspublishing.com/content/research/en/reports/2022/02/24/c9116edf-3ff1-4ec3-a459-bf9889763b0b.html

Abhannmor · 09/05/2023 14:01

Florenz · 09/05/2023 09:47

You don't think stock brokers work hard? It's one of the most competitive industries out there. It's far harder to become a stockbroker than it is to become a nurse, care worker or bin man, and far harder to stay a stock broker as well. You have to deliver results or you're out.

Yeah we've seen the results. Repeatedly. Boom .Crash. Pump and Dump. Beg tax payer for bailout. Rinse the mugs and repeat.

A lifetime ago I worked for a stockbrokers , Phillips and Drew. I was a humble courier but one Christmas I got talking to a director. Two things he said stayed with me.

  1. ' The economy is always better under Labour' 2 ' It's bollocks that you can't spend your way out of a recession - Roosevelt did it years ago '
Case of ' in vino veritas'. But still....
Xenia · 09/05/2023 14:13

Certainly it is vital for any Tories on here not to change parties. Don't let us split the Tory vote in any ay shape or form. Obviously given the swing of the pendulum an fact Labour last won in 2005 it is likely Labour might well win (which will mean massive extra taxes for many of us which we cannot afford given we have the highest tax burden for 70 years do to this very socialist high spending Tory party in charge) but splitting the Tory vote in any way will make it even more of a chance Labour obtain an element of power . Hopefuly Labour will not win a majority nor even enough to be in a coalition but every Tory vote counts. So do start now checking if you have voter ID, ensuring Tory teenage children register etc etc.

Garethkeenansstapler · 09/05/2023 14:15

@Xenia ive seen a lot of your posts on here and respect your position. But can I ask, do you want the tories in, or just to keep Labour out? And why?

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 09/05/2023 14:21

Did you vote for Liz Truss, Xenia?

OP posts:
jgw1 · 09/05/2023 14:23

Xenia · 09/05/2023 14:13

Certainly it is vital for any Tories on here not to change parties. Don't let us split the Tory vote in any ay shape or form. Obviously given the swing of the pendulum an fact Labour last won in 2005 it is likely Labour might well win (which will mean massive extra taxes for many of us which we cannot afford given we have the highest tax burden for 70 years do to this very socialist high spending Tory party in charge) but splitting the Tory vote in any way will make it even more of a chance Labour obtain an element of power . Hopefuly Labour will not win a majority nor even enough to be in a coalition but every Tory vote counts. So do start now checking if you have voter ID, ensuring Tory teenage children register etc etc.

@Xenia have I understood you correctly that we should vote Tory because they are the party of high taxes and low economic growth?

Neededanewuserhandle · 09/05/2023 14:36

MotherofPearl · 06/05/2023 18:56

The current Tories make me pine for the Milk Snatcher.

I agree. I may not have agreed with her policies, but at least she had principles and ideals, and believed that what she was doing was in the best interests of the country. The current lot are only in it for self-interest and have no principles whatsoever.

Why do people keep peddling this crap. She was a brilliant politician, that's all. Whatever "principles" she had were sacrificed the moment she spotted any advantage for M Thatcher. She was such a defender of freedom and democracy that she wined and dined a war criminal dictator at our expense. She claimed not to talk to terrorists whilst secretly negotiating with the IRA. She was an anti-smoking campaigner who ended up on the payroll of a tobacco company.

Neededanewuserhandle · 09/05/2023 14:41

Florenz · 09/05/2023 09:47

You don't think stock brokers work hard? It's one of the most competitive industries out there. It's far harder to become a stockbroker than it is to become a nurse, care worker or bin man, and far harder to stay a stock broker as well. You have to deliver results or you're out.

If stockbrokers were bin men they'd empty all the rubbish into one person's garden, claim it was a brilliant new investment and get paid a fee for making the council clean it all up. It's not some form of magical alchemy, it's legalised con tricks and gambling.