To think the main Mumsnet demographic are out of touch politically

[Veiledveritas]

Reform.are smashing the polls yet any Reform voter is despised and ridiculed on here.

😂Self important to have an opinion? I have heard it all now..

I don't think anyone asked for your manifesto and the only purpose it served was to show that we can at least be grateful for small mercies. So thank you for that.

“However a government taxation scheme that prioritises women staying at home and having babies isn’t a choice, and I can’t understand why any woman would encourage that.”

@Allisnotlost1 - of course it is a choice. If women can deduct taxes for the amount of children they have, it will benefit successful higher earners. There are plenty of educated women who may have a 3rd child if they got free childcare too and could deduct eg 20k per child from their taxes instead of having to shove it into a pension/reduce their hours to fall under the threshold. Lots of successful educated women fall into this bracket. We all work for a very long time now, if the system helps women who are educated to have a first child by 30 and then be able to deduct taxes that will help, not the opposite. If you had become a corporate lawyer and were paying 60% plus tax like myself and having to put 4DC through uni you would agree with me completely.
There are a ton of highly educated and competent women around who with help from the system can be a lot more productive and have more babies (should they choose to). At the moment, all the educated professionals are literally being punished by Labour (private school VAT which for many was simple childcare, no free hours for under 3, no tax deductions, punitive tax rates).

Truly frightening. What you suggest borders on eugenics. I visited a museum in Berlin where I saw some propaganda from the 1930s rewarding the right kind of women for having babies. I think there was a gold medal involved once a certain number was reached.

Ha ha - I must say I do love that you refer to it as my manifesto, it was a facetious description ('manifesto', as meaningless as Labours').

To add, leveling the field is not punishment for the privileged. They may see it like that because they enjoy and want to keep their advantage but that's immaterial.

You called it your manifesto, did you forget?

As I said I was not being serious with the title. You however, used in a serious context. So thank you for that, cute.

I guess your "humour" doesn't come across that well in writing. But well done! You made a funny joke! Very good.

@ForWittyTealOP - Godwin’s law is a cheap shot - always! Did nobody teach you that at school?

You cannot deny Reform won a lot of seats, and it is time to listen and learn. That is what I am trying to do. My values are Lib Dem all the way anyway. You may have misunderstood…

I didn't say funny. I said facetious.

Firstly I don't think you understand Godwin's law. Secondly, there is nothing to suggest that people, writing in support of a far right party can't be reminded that other far right parties of the past espoused similar values to those which you are advocating. So think carefully before you write such ignorant things in future because you are making yourself ridiculous.

Then unfortunately you don't understand the meaning of the word facetious.

No more from you, thank you. We've heard enough.

Not at all, but ‘this is my manifesto’ is a bit more than an opinion isn’t it.

Have you seen the crap reform voters go on about? Don’t even mention their pathetic worship of Trumps mate Farage. The green voters are a nicer bunch.

I think we all know who is making themselves ridiculous now @ForWittyTealOP The whole premise of the thread was to not refer to the Nazis and it appears the message has still not reached the cheap seats.

Maybe the most denominator is not that mm posters are “out of touch” but that they are not swayed by people who are winning seats by exploiting harmful divisive, ideology as long overdue, rather than call it what it is.

So you think Godwin's Law is about it being forbidden to make any comparison with the fascism of the 1930s and the quasi fascism of Mr Farage's party? Uh huh.

Care to point to where it says that the "premise of the thread was to not refer to the Nazis (sic)"? I'll wait.

@ForWittyTealOP - well you did not come up with any solution to deal with the ageing demographic, shrinking pool of healthy workers, reduction in birth rate, immigrants being scapegoated. Whereas at least I tried.

Let me spell it out. To be economically productive and even survive as a democracy and a country, we need either immigrants of a certain kind (who contribute economically and are not a drain on the country’s finances) or we need more babies being born that grow into productive humans.

Personally do not really care how we achieve it. But digging one’s head in the sand is not going to work. And referring to Nazis is irrelevant.

Not sure why you've picked me out to harangue. Nobody asked me to come up with a solution. I'm intelligent enough to at least recognise that "solutions" are not so easy to arrive at in complex societies and not so arrogant as to feel I could achieve that.

Two bottles of wine and half a bottle of vodka a day destroy livers regardless of cost and the diet of the drinker. The only exercise most alcoholics get is the walk to buy more booze.

So what you’re advocating is a system that allows women who already use the loopholes to pay less tax, to pay less tax by having another baby? And you’re assuming that no educated women earn less, and don’t care about them having children. So what we end up with, in your fantasy system, is the well off women benefiting, maybe having more kids (which to be honest they could afford anyway), while less wealthy women dictated women are still priced out. Possibly even more so, depending on how the scheme was built. So we can have loads of kids born to (to use your example) corporate lawyers, but not to scientists, nurses, teachers, social workers, academics. And less educated people (or truthfully less well off people) are even less able to have kids, or more kids, despite the essential roles they also fulfil in our society, so we’ll still have to import people to work in the care sector, for example.

How is any of that an overall good?

ETA There’s absolutely no world at all in which I’d agree with you, I am well paid in a different sector and have a second income, so this isn’t some envy of the rich. I base my views on the evidence, not half arsed thoughts about what would be best for me and my own family.

😀On the contrary - but you clearly don't understand. Fret not.

I've been through this with not wittyteal

People seem to be taking your off the cuff comment rather seriously.