AIBU To think that Labour is more against aspirations than the Conservatives?

[DistinguishedSocialCommenator]

Both of the above are ready to shaft the hard-working people who have not just worked hard, but spent/invested wisely rather than throw it way on lifestyles.

IMO, Labour is seriously anti those with some investments, EG, BTL, and people who own another property. People who have savings etc as these people decided not to blow away their money but be wise with it

Both, Labour and Tories don't give a flying F about those that own even a single property when it comes to care home charges. The new alliance is a con. So, if you don't own you home as about 45% of England does not, you are unlikely to be shafted unless you have large amount of savings for your rainy day/retirement etc

The extra tax on cars , ir road tax pay extra in their hundreds/thousands on cars costing more than 40k new RRP was set several years ago and not been adjusted for inflation - thanks to Tories

LL's getting hammered by new rules always favouring the T's - There are many good LL's as well as T's, so why penalise asperations?

We boguth a couple of properties to fund our retirement, erly retirement and went without hols/etc for many years and at times both of us worked 50 hours a week, 6/7 days a week. We also did not want to live of the state and pass money etc to our children/grandchildren to help them to a less stressful start thn us.

Though both Lab/Con are as bad as the other, if you've saved a few qquid, earn a decent amount of money and have more than one property, AIBU to think the Labour lot will shat us hard, seriously hard and waste money on foolish projects in order to secure votes for the next election if they win this election?

Much as I dislike the Tories, I'm not sure we can completely blame them for the state of the economy as Covid was a huge factor (even though they perhaps didn't manage it the best).

I'm not sure about Labour themselves, but I feel a lot of more left leaning people have a more socialist outlook and I'm not sure how I feel about this, despite not being a Tory supporter either.

I've no issue with the disabled etc and genuinely needy being helped but I do also believe that in most cases you reap what you sow and that it you don't want to work hard or choose a lucrative career you should perhaps just live with the fact you won't have the lifestyle of somebody who took the risks of starting their own business or spent the years learning a profession.

They're trying to appeal to older socially conservative voters, in addition to their base.

We know a vast amount about voter habits already, it isn't going to change much in the next year barring a shock event.

There are very few socialists, social democrats are a completely different thing.

Labour is a centre-left party.

People really don't reap what they sow in Britain. Social mobility is low - if you're born rich you stay rich.

I've no issue with the disabled etc and genuinely needy being helped but I do also believe that in most cases you reap what you sow and that it you don't want to work hard or choose a lucrative career you should perhaps just live with the fact you won't have the lifestyle of somebody who took the risks of starting their own business or spent the years learning a profession.

What about the lifestyle of people born into generations of wealth and privilege? What risks did they take? What years did they spend learning a profession?

Bottom line for me is that everyone should have a dry, safe roof over their head, enough food to eat, enough money to provide heat and light and some things that are purely there to bring pleasure. Ideally they should work to earn those things, but they should be paid enough to have them. If they cannot work, they should have those things nevertheless. Nobody should live in poverty in a country like the UK.

Apparently the conversion which used to happen to the 40 something voter from Labour to Conservatives no longer holds (presumably because they haven't got the assets, houses etc which tends to mean a more conservative vote) Apparently across all age groups the Labour vote is growing. Even pensioners.

And that anything you buy that costs more than £500 is a luxury that should be subject to 30% vat 🙄

I often think of this. Have done for a while ...

I've no issue with the disabled etc and genuinely needy being helped but I do also believe that in most cases you reap what you sow and that it you don't want to work hard or choose a lucrative career you should perhaps just live with the fact you won't have the lifestyle of somebody who took the risks of starting their own business or spent the years learning a profession.

I think that really denies just how hard it is to establish a career or know how to start your own business if you don’t have anyone in your circle modelling that.

Some professions don’t pay enough because they’re sited in the public sector and unless you achieve a level of seniority you’re not going to be paid beyond £40k. Besides we need people in essential services, which tend to not pay well. Hard work will only get you so far - luck and privilege play their part and that’s where the gap has widened hugely.

I have always thought it's lazy thinking to somehow believe that only one thing changes over time and everything else somehow - magically - stays the same. It's why those ideas we had in the sixties of hover cars and silver suits never really came to pass.

By the same token imagining a 40 year old in 2024 as being the same as a 40 year old in 1994 isn't really going to fly.

The Tories problem is so many people have grown up under them. Same as in 1997 when people who had been just born when the Tories first took power in 1979 finally got to vote.

Voter base is a factor, Labour in Wales is a good example of how you get a demographic swing big enough to stay in. Funds need to come from somewhere though and obviously we don’t have a comparable outside Wales version to rely on.

People seem excited about Labour and looking at posts on here and generally, have high expectations on what they’ll get or will improve

Whatever happens I’ve sorted things for different outcomes, will wait and see

Bottom line for me is that everyone should have a dry, safe roof over their head, enough food to eat, enough money to provide heat and light and some things that are purely there to bring pleasure. Ideally they should work to earn those things, but they should be paid enough to have them. If they cannot work, they should have those things nevertheless. Nobody should live in poverty in a country like the UK.

Unless they’re disabled, they should absolutely be working for these things.

@ElevenSeven agreed, but they have to be able to earn enough after taxes to have those basics. And that means we need to do something about the cost of housing, the cost of childcare, the cost of utilities, the cost of food, the cost of transport. Until work really pays, nothing will change. And you don't resolve that by taking away money from those at the bottom. Why is it that the very wealthy always need to be given more money as an incentive, while those who are not wealthy need to have money taken away from them by way of incentive?

Nobody should live in poverty in a country like the UK.

But therein is the problem, the British exceptionalism of ‘we are inherently and immutably a wealthy country; and therefore we don’t need to earn money, make cutbacks, or have any personal responsibility’.

I feel like Jon Snow at the Battle for the Wall, trying to lay out hard facts for people burying their heads in the sand and clinging on to the past. Colonialism is no more, industry is no more, our high quality immigration from the EU has all but departed, we have left the EU, we have sky high covid debts… it’s scary. We need to find a niche and we need every person capable of work - even if it’s difficult - to be working.

Poland’s economic growth will overtake ours by 2030(ish). And possibly Romania/Hungary by 2040.

Wow, really? I missed that one.

Although I am laughing at Sunak’s response to the by election kicking, deluded much

@Naptrappedmummy (love your username, I was one of those!) I agree with you. My DS has a host of chronic conditions which mean he uses a wheelchair and is in pain 24/7. He gets higher rate PIP for everything. And he works.

However, he can physically and mentally only work part time. He's found a job that's 22.5 hours a week. He's really good at it and loves it, it boosts his confidence, it gives him transferable skills for after he completes his final year at university. The reason it's all so great is that he has a really excellent employer who pays full rate NMW to all their staff regardless of their age, who genuinely provide reasonable adaptations for his disabilities and those of others, who really upskill and train their staff. My DS' job is a jobshare too. Jobs like his are like hens' teeth and that is the problem - people need to work for a living, but employers also need incentives to employ people who have disabilities or chronic illnesses, people who need adaptations and flexibility. Everybody benefits from implementing that, but it isn't happening because it's all about profits before people.

Until the mindset changes, we won't ever see an improvement to the horrific inequality that thrives in the UK. I don't mind people getting rich, I really don't, but I do object to accepting an ever growing cohort of people who aren't even able to scrape by. And the culture in the UK is to blame them for being in that position rather than looking at the underlying system that perpetuates the situation.

You seem to know a lot of unpleasant people.

@Eleganz

Then there is even more competition for the good comp/grammar schools possibly and the ex private school parents could pay for tutoring or a house in the catchment so I don't think it will help

My dc didn't go to private school btw

Societies that spend their time, policies and resources on the old are foolish

Nice. 🙄

It's true though. Investing in youth is how you grow and sustain an economy.

How about we invest in both? FFS the ageism on this site is appalling.

How do you invest in the elderly? Provide what's necessary, yes. Invest, not really possibly. Current "investing" in the elderly is largely propping up inequality, being ploughed into inheritances and driving up house prices.

Thank you @Butterdishy. It depresses me that often the actual care and vulnerability of children in the UK comes a distant second to older people. In terms of government spending it's true. The UK is going nowhere unless we invest in our young and our business.

IMO the problem is the government and media using the words spending and investing interchangeably.

Why shouldn't you pay to live in a care home?