Voting if you’re classed as high earning

[time2changeCharlieBrown]

just wondering if you earn high or wealthy who will you vote for?
I’m not wealthy but we both do have a higher than average income, however 7 dependents and a large mortgage takes everything!! So on paper we may look it
but realistically we budget for everything

anyway we live in a wealthy area with a lot of rich people (a lot lot better off than us, as far as I can tell anyway )
and they all said not voting labour as would be bad for them and all now detest the tories so all going Lib Dem or reform they keep asking me but I said I don’t know and I still don’t

got to say I’m not as clued up on politics as them and I struggle with understanding it all and what to believe
(maybe none) any one help me get a better understanding, everything I read I find overwhelming

High earners, high assets, traditionally Tory voter but didn't vote Tory last time and won't this time,

Won't vote Labour (don't believe in big state) or any of the others mainly due to their disrespect of women. Not sure what I'll do, possibly spoil ballot.

I normally vote for what is best for me and my family. Labour is definitely not best for my family.

These threads are fascinating. I cannot get my head around the posters, and there are quite a few, who say that they can't decide between Reform and the Lib Dem's. Surely they are poles apart and even if you vote tactically they are too ideologically different to ever be in the same voter's brain?

We’re in the higher tax bracket- both voting Green.

High earners here, even though it doesn’t feel like it anymore. Voting Reform and hoping they at least get to be the opposition - numerous reasons including a desire to move away from two main political parties and bring in proportional representation. Can’t bring myself to vote Labour again.

I think i might choose Lib deb. No way in hell i choose tory after their support to genocide in palestine. Also for labour keir stammer its the same. Its like tory in a sheep skin.

Rachel Reeves left the Bank of England in December 2006, aged 27 - Mark Carney didn't join the Bank of England until 2013.

Her next job didn't go well according to this timeline (she joined HBOS as an economist on the retail mortgages team);

Ms Reeves, an economist, worked on the retail mortgages team of HBOS between 2006 and 2009.

HBOS timeline: the countdown to collapse

June 2007 HBOS’s share of new mortgage lending halves to 8%, its lowest level for seven years. Pricing errors are blamed.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/nov/19/hbos-timeline-countdown-collapse-lloyds-takeover

Top 0.5% of earners (just had a Google to find that out). Proudly and loudly voting labour.

Ok Proud and loud as is the socially accepted party 😂

I'm sure she speaks very highly of you @Clavinova

You mean you think she solely responsible for the HBOS’s downturn 😂😂😂😂

Wow some fascinating and valid points on here lots to stew over and consider
thanks for taking the time to post /share thoughts

This.

A frightening number of people on here are saying they are going to vote Reform

An equally frightening number are saying they're going to vote for the party which will do the most financially for them/their families rather than for society in general.

This country is really screwed if those people prevail at the polling booth on 4th July

How would voting Reform be a tactical vote?

Sure, you're right, bring back Kwasi Kwarteng, all is forgiven 🤨

An even more frightening number of people who are going to vote for a party who thinks a woman can have a penis and plan to allow children to be transgender.

Labour. But I don’t feel much better after 14 years of Conservative in terms of being a “higher earner”. Paying more tax than I ever did before!

I don’t think it matters if you are a high earner or not when deciding who to vote for. Labour have said they won’t raise taxes that affect the working person. However I was slightly alarmed that Keir Starmer defined a working person as:-

”People who earn their living, rely on our [public] services and don't really have the ability to write a cheque when they get into trouble."

So in other words, anyone who is able to work, provide for themselves, not rely on the state and has some savings put by (either for emergencies/house deposit/retirement planning etc) isn’t a “working person”.

I have to say his definition is odd. Who writes a cheque? But it’s clear, not much priority for those with other assets that provide income.

I'm voting tactically for the candidate in my constituency who can win who isn't a Tory.

www.getvoting.org/

Conservative. I have always voted labour but I won’t vote for a party who are going to cost us potentially thousands extra in school fees. And I don’t trust Starmer at all on protecting women’s spaces.

It's hardly a glowing addition to her CV. Rachel Reeves joined HBOS's retail mortgage team as an economist in 2006 - the following year their share of new mortgage lending halved to its lowest level for seven years. That was her department - not a plan for growth was it. Shortly after working for HBOS, Rachel Reeves was elected as an MP (at the age of 31) - Mark Carney's endorsement is built on sand.

Are you suggesting that we should vote Labour because Rachel Reeves is not Kwasi Kwarteng?

I think I'll stick with Jeremy Hunt.

Well no one else is in sufficient numbers so Reeves it will be. At least we’ve tested the Conservatives on their economic competence to decide

A frightening number? At the time of your post a quick count was 15 pps only. Just 15. So not much more than 10% and therefore just a bit lower than the current polling might indicate.

The reality of the thread is that sanity is far more likely to prevail.