Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Now the economy has bounced back to pre recession levels, the Tories have won! Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Face it, Tories fixed it while Labour are still spewing **** out of their mouths.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Whilst I am a Tory supporter, I can see the other side of the argument. Labour have been saying and will continue to say:

    1. The recovery is too slow, it would have been quicker with Labour, (I doubt it)

    2. It's only for the rich, "crisis of living" etc.

    3. Public services have been destroyed

    4. Unemployment stats manipulated, food banks etc.

    It's an argument that resonates with some, and that combined with Labour's promise to give freebies and tax the rich more means they will get many votes. Labour still have a very big chance of winning the election, it's always easier when you're in opposition.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    GDP per capita hasn't returned to normal though so this essentially means nothing.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Private home ownership as a percentage of population is plummeting.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    When quality of life has lowered and cost of living has risen (for those less well off), the state of the economy is irrelevant.

    What is the economy? Basically it's something to support the people. People should be put before the economy, and if they aren't, something which is basically theoretical is being given more priority than those its meant to support.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The average quality of life has not returned to pre-recession levels so no

    Also, this is not to say that Labour would not have done equally well
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    While I believe Labour will fail in their mantra of the squeezed middle (there's a difference between not being able to spend on your credit card and needing a food bank) thus meaning that Cameron will retain a plurality of B and C1 voters, I think the incompetence surrounding some of the welfare cuts though in addition to the cost of living message will generate quite a large C2 swing to Labour (Cameron got 39% in 2010). This makes a majority exceptionally unlikely.

    While I don't think Labour in government would gave done much better I do believe that the coalition made some notable mistakes like halving capital spending so I give their economic performance only a B-.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    While I believe Labour will fail in their mantra of the squeezed middle (there's a difference between not being able to spend on your credit card and needing a food bank) thus meaning that Cameron will retain a plurality of B and C1 voters, I think the incompetence surrounding some of the welfare cuts though in addition to the cost of living message will generate quite a large C2 swing to Labour (Cameron got 39% in 2010). This makes a majority exceptionally unlikely.

    While I don't think Labour in government would gave done much better I do believe that the coalition made some notable mistakes like halving capital spending so I give their economic performance only a B-.
    If anyone from the Plain English Campaign saw this, I think they might actually explode.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    In for facts.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The next general election is in 2015. Over 5 years since 2010 (7 years since the financial crash), it was always more than likely that the economy would have recovered back to pre-recession levels regardless of what the government did, certainly under labour, the same would've happened, considering how there was so little difference between both of their plans.

    I think we're now seeing the REAL reason why one of the first things this coalition government did when they came to power, was to create fixed 5 year parliament terms. They wanted to give themselves to maximum amount of time for the economy to recover, they knew the economy probably wouldn't have recovered until about now or later. If they didn't have these 5 year fixed term, they would've had have a general election a few months ago. Of course, they could've done what gordon brown and john major did, by clinging onto power into the 5th year of parliament, but that would've been seen as desperate and negative. Now, david cameron could go into the general election next year 'just as planned', claiming to have fully repaired the economy within his 5 year term.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Old_Simon)
    Private home ownership as a percentage of population is plummeting.
    Given that new builds still have not matched the 300,000 we need a year that's not surprising. We need more houses built.

    With that being said, I support less mortgage lending as banks actually learnt their lesson afterward and restricted lending. Unfortunately the political class stuck their oar in.

    (Original post by InnerTemple)
    If anyone from the Plain English Campaign saw this, I think they might actually explode.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ha, I'll try explain more simply.

    Voters are split into 6 categories (a, b, c1, c2, d, e)..

    A - Upper class
    B - Middle class
    C1 - Lower middle class/upper working class
    C2 - Lower working class
    D - Unemployed
    E - Disabled ECT...

    Until the 70's their was a strong class to political alignment with the Tories and Labour.

    Since then though the next decade saw a rapid class dealignment culminating in Thatcher getting 45% of C2 votes in 87 and major getting 52% of ABC1 votes in 92. Blair got a plurality of B voters in his victories.

    In 2010 Cameron got 39% of C2 voters and even 30% of E voters (probably the anti immigrant and welfare rhetoric).

    ...

    So to expand my thoughts, Cameron will probably do a major and keep the ABC1 votes but the stuff like the bedroom tax will decimate the Tory vote in the C2DE classes.

    Hence, neither party will get a majority.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sluggish Western Capitalism will never be permanently fixed, we're just in a state of waiting for the next bust in the boom/bust cycle. The two-party system ensures that we're consistently subjected to the same centre-right politics so, in effect, it's the upper and upper-middle classes who have "won", not necessarily just the Tories, although for how long is always uncertain.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miscounted_time)
    GDP per capita hasn't returned to normal though so this essentially means nothing.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    GDP per member of the working age population has.

    Not that GDP means much anyway.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jack93o)
    The next general election is in 2015. Over 5 years since 2010 (7 years since the financial crash), it was always more than likely that the economy would have recovered back to pre-recession levels regardless of what the government did, certainly under labour, the same would've happened, considering how there was so little difference between both of their plans.

    I think we're now seeing the REAL reason why one of the first things this coalition government did when they came to power, was to create fixed 5 year parliament terms. They wanted to give themselves to maximum amount of time for the economy to recover, they knew the economy probably wouldn't have recovered until about now or later. If they didn't have these 5 year fixed term, they would've had have a general election a few months ago. Of course, they could've done what gordon brown and john major did, by clinging onto power into the 5th year of parliament, but that would've been seen as desperate and negative. Now, david cameron could go into the general election next year 'just as planned', claiming to have fully repaired the economy within his 5 year term.
    Curious how you've got so much neg rep since you can make a post as good as this one.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Curious how you've got so much neg rep since you can make a post as good as this one.
    haha dunno mate
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Total GDP going back to pre recession levels is almost irrelevant. The population has increased by 4.5% since then. Which means that total wealth has increased, wealth per person (GDP per capita) has not increased. With the rate we're going, it'll be 2020 before we reach pre recession GDP per capita.

    Same with wages, Real Wages are not increasing, even with growth in the economy. So even with increased employment; wages and productivity are stagnating. We won't get increased GDP per capita until we increase real wages and productivity.

    Long, long way to go before you can say "Tories have won".
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.