Why do most poor people vote conservative? Watch

This discussion is closed.
United1892
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by an_atheist)
Because the way the labour party works is to keep people on benefits, thus keeping them reliant on the state. People, when they want to get off of benefits, cannot nder labour because that defeats the purpose of the labour party. Therefore, people will vote conservatives becasue long term it is better for them and their children, because it reduces the number of people on benefits and, as other people have said, are better for the economic helath of this country
How does people not being on benefits defeat the purpose of the Labour Party. The Labour Party is (was) the party for the good of the worker naturally they want people in work and getting paid well for that work.
1
The two eds
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by RFowler)
I have major issues with all the parties, so it's not like I'm a disappointed diehard Labour supporter angry at the Tories. I'd be just as mistrustful of Labour if they got in.

I will watch and wait to see what the Conservatives do. Particularly on the environment, an area they've performed very poorly over the last 5 years.
I always find it weird how greens and environment fanatics also passionately support uncontrolled mass migration in the 10s of millions. They love the environment but do not care one bit about covering every inch of it with housing. Id say UKIP would be the least disastrous out the lot because by reducing demand you reduce need.
0
United1892
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
(Original post by The two eds)
I always find it weird how greens and environment fanatics also passionately support uncontrolled mass migration in the 10s of millions. They love the environment but do not care one bit about covering every inch of it with housing. Id say UKIP would be the least disastrous out the lot because by reducing demand you reduce need.
I get your point but they also want to stop investment in green energy which wouldnt be good for the environment.
0
Drunk Punx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24
(Original post by william walker)
UKIP wasn't likely to win. The Conservative were. People maybe poor, but they aren't dumb.
Considering that "the poor" are the ones who suffer the most under Tory rule, I question that last sentence. I wouldn't say "dumb", but I'd certainly suggest "ignorantly optimistic".
1
habibasaid
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
if ed miliband was not the leader of labour then they would have won , the media portrayed him as stupid and not serious enough to run a country.
0
RF_PineMarten
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
(Original post by The two eds)
I always find it weird how greens and environment fanatics also passionately support uncontrolled mass migration in the 10s of millions. They love the environment but do not care one bit about covering every inch of it with housing. Id say UKIP would be the least disastrous out the lot because by reducing demand you reduce need.
Was that aimed specifically at me? Because I never said I support relaxed immigration controls. I do feel the Green party's immigration policy is at odds with its environmentalism.

UKIP's has some good policies on housing, but their climate change denial and ideological opposition to regulations means I can't take them seriously as a pro-environment party.
0
United1892
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
(Original post by habibasaid)
if ed miliband was not the leader of labour then they would have won , the media portrayed him as stupid and not serious enough to run a country.
I disagree Labours failure to defend its economic record was more important. Even if you believe Labour spent too much it didnt cause the reccession and their failure to refute this enabled the conservatives to gain large scale support on the economy which was more important than the leader.
0
habibasaid
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 years ago
#28
(Original post by Markt1998)
I disagree Labours failure to defend its economic record was more important. Even if you believe Labour spent too much it didnt cause the reccession and their failure to refute this enabled the conservatives to gain large scale support on the economy which was more important than the leader.
i have to admit its true.
0
TimmonaPortella
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 years ago
#29
(Original post by Markt1998)
Because all Ed Millibands policies were so left wing...
As various figures in labour have pointed out, notably Chuka Umunna (who thankfully is out of the leadership race, because he could actually have been quite popular), it's as much about tone as substance.
0
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 years ago
#30
(Original post by Michael P)
During the time of the election, I noticed a lot of poor unemployed people voting for the conservative party. Why did these people shoot themselves in the foot by making their life (and their children's life) so much more difficult?
I don't think it's clear that that is what they did. Unemployment dropped significantly under the coalition is now the third lowest in the EU. So if your main life problem is unemployment the Conservatives actually have a very good record on fixing that.

Ed Miliband's policy offerings mostly involved price controls that would have led to rationing, of jobs, rental flats, and energy. That would have hurt the poor and unemployed the most, since they can least afford to do without those things, and the most likely to lose them when there is scarcity.

I think you have fallen into the trap of confusing emotively stated intentions, on which Labour maybe come out ahead for the poor, with performance in practice, where the Conservatives have done very well.
0
anonlad
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 years ago
#31
(Original post by RFowler)
Fast paced recovery? This recovery has been one of the slowest ever recorded, and some economic indicators are still below pre-crisis levels (e.g. GDP per capita). The Conservative government have missed a lot of their own targets with things like the deficit, debt and maintaining our AAA credit rating (which failed, as it was downgraded), and has presided over quite a big decline in wages.
Sorry I have only just come across this reply

Relative to the rest of the world - yes fast paced. The UK is credited with being the fastest growing advanced economy (2.6% 2014), which has generated millions of jobs and incomes. As for previous recoveries, different recessions are of different sizes and thus have different effects on output and employment, especially with the 2008/09 recession which I believe has been the worst global recession since the Great Depression(?). Naturally, a deeper recession will be followed by a slower recovery.

As for missed targets, I believe that the Conservative government over-promised for the sake of the election and never truly expected to achieve their targets. It's ****ty I know but that seems to be the case with British politics.

Oh and for the record I'm not particularly conservative in my viewpoints, just trying to give a perspective for the OP's question. I think it's really sad the way the poorest people were hit hardest by the recession despite having nothing to do with the banking crisis which preceded it, and that certain aspects of human & social welfare were wrongly pushed aside for the sake of the recovery.
1
saayagain
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 years ago
#32
They believe in the dream and too stupid to identify the true source of their suffering...
0
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 years ago
#33
Largely because of the media and press agenda.
When myths surrounding immigration and 'benefit cheats' are consistently repeated again and again.
Joseph Goebells said 'if you tell a lie often enough people start to believe it'.

As long as the press keep harping on about immigrants stealing our jobs, Labour crashing the economy and causing crime and benefit fraud people will foolishly believe it.

Unless you're exceptionally wealthy, you really have pissed on your own leg voting tory. I can understand a millionaire doing it, but not anyone else.
1
The two eds
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 years ago
#34
(Original post by Bornblue)
Largely because of the media and press agenda.
When myths surrounding immigration and 'benefit cheats' are consistently repeated again and again.
Joseph Goebells said 'if you tell a lie often enough people start to believe it'.

As long as the press keep harping on about immigrants stealing our jobs, Labour crashing the economy and causing crime and benefit fraud people will foolishly believe it.

Unless you're exceptionally wealthy, you really have pissed on your own leg voting tory. I can understand a millionaire doing it, but not anyone else.
I hope tories cut even more welfare so the scroungers get hit hard. God I can't wait. The next 5 years watching these people be punished will give me such joy and satisfaction.

P.S. Tory majority
0
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 years ago
#35
(Original post by The two eds)
I hope tories cut even more welfare so the scroungers get hit hard. God I can't wait. The next 5 years watching these people be punished will give me such joy and satisfaction.

P.S. Tory majority
The idea we have more than a handful of scroungers is a pure myth.
So disabled people having their benefits cut which they need to afford to live excites you?
So single mothers who can't afford to feed their child being hit and losing their house excites you? You're disgusting.
And you claim to believe in God? Shame on you.
One day maybe you'll go bankrupt and for your own sake it will be hilarious if there's no safety net to catch you. Maybe then you'll learn.
0
The two eds
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 years ago
#36
(Original post by Bornblue)
The idea we have more than a handful of scroungers is a pure myth.
So disabled people having their benefits cut which they need to afford to live excites you?
So single mothers who can't afford to feed their child being hit and losing their house excites you? You're disgusting.
And you claim to believe in God? Shame on you.
One day maybe you'll go bankrupt and for your own sake it will be hilarious if there's no safety net to catch you. Maybe then you'll learn.
There are many scroungers out there and you know it, all Labour supporters as well, who would of thought

Women should not have a child if they can not afford one, plain and simple, unless they are raped ofcourse. The whole right to have children idea only applies if that means you intend to support the child yourself.

Disabled people will actually not have any of their benefits cut, it is in the bill. The bedroom tax however will rightly stand and so it should. Taxpayers should not pay towards your housing benefit for rooms unoccupied.

I have an idea though. Since a significant number of the population want to fund these people, how about the government set up a fund where people like you voluntarily pay into it to help support the scroungers? Surely that would be exactly what you want? It will suit both our needs.
0
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 years ago
#37
(Original post by The two eds)
There are many scroungers out there and you know it, all Labour supporters as well, who would of thought

Women should not have a child if they can not afford one, plain and simple, unless they are raped ofcourse. The whole right to have children idea only applies if that means you intend to support the child yourself.

Disabled people will actually not have any of their benefits cut, it is in the bill. The bedroom tax however wil rightly stand and so it should. Taxpayers should not pay towards your housing benefit for rooms unoccupied.

I have an idea though. Since a significant number of the population want to fund these people, how about the government set up a fund where people like you voluntarily pay into it to help support the scroungers? Surely that would be exactly what you want? It will suit both our needs.
Actually 'scrongers' from poorer background form UKIPs core support. Hence UKIP did very well in poor areas.
But 'scroungers' is a myth. There a few for sure but it costs this country pittance. Less than a hundreth of what we lose through tax avoidance and evasion yet that seems perfectly okay?

So what happens when a woman has a child? Do we let it starve? You can't wait for children to starve?

What happens when you become unemployed? Would you be okay with being kicked out on to the street? I hope then you appreciate welfare cuts.
0
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#38
Report 4 years ago
#38
(Original post by Bornblue)
Unless you're exceptionally wealthy, you really have pissed on your own leg voting tory. I can understand a millionaire doing it, but not anyone else.
Why is it bad for someone on £30, 40, 50k?
Or someone with assets of 700k?
0
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 years ago
#39
(Original post by Quady)
Why is it bad for someone on £30, 40, 50k?
Or someone with assets of 700k?
Because they massively work towards a handful of people at the top. If you're not one of those then you're pissing on your own leg. If you're poor especially.
Someone on £40k for example who can't afford private healthcare would have benefited from a mansion tax which would have pumped more money into the NHS, for example.
0
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#40
Report 4 years ago
#40
(Original post by Markt1998)
Because all Ed Millibands policies were so left wing...
Yeah, a pro-austerity manifesto which advocated for welfare cuts was really left wing.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Do you work while at uni?

Yes I work at university (43)
33.08%
No I don't (61)
46.92%
I work during the holidays (26)
20%

Watched Threads

View All