What causes the skew in ideology between age groups?

Watch this thread
MrSuavetopia
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
Election Maps UK (great account that you guys should throw a follow) have put out two very interesting maps in the recent week, looking at what would happen if A) You only let Over 65s vote in a GE, and b) You only let 18-24s vote in a GE.

Unsurprisingly, there's a very large difference:

Over 65s only: https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/s...82320523431936

CON: 62%, 575 seats
LAB: 18%, 32 seats
LDM: 9%, 7 seats
UKIP: 6%, 0 seats
SNP: 3%, 15 seats
GRN: 1%, 1 seat
PLC: 0.5%, 2 seats

18-24s only: https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/s...00674573934592

LAB: 66%, 600 Seats
LDM: 13%, 21 Seats
CON: 12%, 0 Seats
GRN: 4%, 1 Seat
SNP: 3%, 9 Seats
PLC: 0.4%, 1 Seat

So the question is what causes this polarisation? It's quite well documented that older people tend towards conservative viewpoints, whereas youngsters are more left wing, but why do you think that is?
0
reply
I'm God
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
The left wing offers reduced/free tuition fees?

But I don't really go into politics...
2
reply
hello_shawn
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
Older people are fine with having less
Younger people want everything & they want it now!
1
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
Older people are less able/willing to adapt to modern views - while their views are considered conservative now, when they were young that sort of thought was relatively left wing. It's the same as how the likes of Germaine Greer now comes across as an out dated relic (see her comments on the MeToo movement) when in her day she was a heavy weight of feminist discourse
7
reply
Wired_1800
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by MrDystopia)
Election Maps UK (great account that you guys should throw a follow) have put out two very interesting maps in the recent week, looking at what would happen if A) You only let Over 65s vote in a GE, and b) You only let 18-24s vote in a GE.

Unsurprisingly, there's a very large difference:

Over 65s only: https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/s...82320523431936

CON: 62%, 575 seats
LAB: 18%, 32 seats
LDM: 9%, 7 seats
UKIP: 6%, 0 seats
SNP: 3%, 15 seats
GRN: 1%, 1 seat
PLC: 0.5%, 2 seats

18-24s only: https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/s...00674573934592

LAB: 66%, 600 Seats
LDM: 13%, 21 Seats
CON: 12%, 0 Seats
GRN: 4%, 1 Seat
SNP: 3%, 9 Seats
PLC: 0.4%, 1 Seat

So the question is what causes this polarisation? It's quite well documented that older people tend towards conservative viewpoints, whereas youngsters are more left wing, but why do you think that is?
It is down to what is owned and the economic situation of the groups.

Many 65+ would have a property and some money in the bank they want to pass on to their children or grandchildren, so they want it protected. Voting Conservative would help them with lower tax regimes and less government interference in their lives.

Many 16-24 year olds have nothing to lose, so they want a redistribution of the wealth. Higher taxes for the rich, who would be older, and more free services for the poor and young groups. This is what the Labour Party generally offers.

The gap comes from a mix of socioeconomic conditions of both groups. Young people voting tory are mostly from wealthier backgrounds and want to enjoy mummy and daddy’s wealth. Older people voting labour are mostly poorer and want a share of the national cake.
1
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
(Original post by hello_shawn)
Older people are fine with having less
Younger people want everything & they want it now!
*cough* triple lock *cough*
4
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
The hypothesis that young people have nothing to lose but older people do because they own property is mistaken. Who exactly inherits this property? The younger generation. In a sense the elderly have less to lose than the younger, since having already lived most of their life they know their future is unlikely to be as long.

There are two better hypotheses.

The first is that older people are more insecure, this is because they are more aware of their mortality, they fear that change may leave them desperate and vulnerable and may effect any access to health services they have. They rely on predictability to get them through the difficulties of old age, the Conservatives promise not to change much.

The second is that the older generation are not very educated. How many over 65s received tertiary education? How many have A-levels or equivalent? How many even have anything equivalent to GCSEs? For the older generation reliance on family is far more important as a means of knowledge. Rich older people will want things to stay the same, but poor older people can be fooled easily due to ignorance.
0
reply
Wired_1800
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by tashkent46)
The hypothesis that young people have nothing to lose but older people do because they own property is mistaken. Who exactly inherits this property? The younger generation. In a sense the elderly have less to lose than the younger, since having already lived most of their life they know their future is unlikely to be as long.

There are two better hypotheses.

The first is that older people are more insecure, this is because they are more aware of their mortality, they fear that change may leave them desperate and vulnerable and may effect any access to health services they have. They rely on predictability to get them through the difficulties of old age, the Conservatives promise not to change much.

The second is that the older generation are not very educated. How many over 65s received tertiary education? How many have A-levels or equivalent? How many even have anything equivalent to GCSEs? For the older generation reliance on family is far more important as a means of knowledge. Rich older people will want things to stay the same, but poor older people can be fooled easily due to ignorance.
I have to respond because you mentioned my comment.

Yes, I agree with one of your hypothesis that older people’s view on imminent mortality can influence their decisions including voting pattern.

The point on what to lose is stronger within the older generation. If you actually follow the news, you would see that any suggestion of incremental taxes has been first attacked by the older generation, whether it was the bedroom tax, social care tax or whatever. Older people are against any form of taxation that takes away from their “hard earned finances”. It is the reason for their support to the tories.

Young people, to an extent, don't really care. Many 16-24 year olds are not thinking of the large mansion in the country that they would inherit once their parents are no more. They are more focused on uni, enjoying life, travelling and doing what young people do. it is a major reason that the older generations attack the young for not being serious.

Young people, IMO, tend to care when they get to their 30s or 40s. They have enjoyed their youth and are now married with children. So they then want to protect what they own, so they can pass it on.

There is a trend that was published some time ago that showed the gradual change in political attitudes of people as they get older. From Labour to Liberal Democrats then Conservative. In some extreme cases, further to UKIP or BNP.
0
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by Wired_1800)
I have to respond because you mentioned my comment.

Yes, I agree with one of your hypothesis that older people’s view on imminent mortality can influence their decisions including voting pattern.

The point on what to lose is stronger within the older generation. If you actually follow the news, you would see that any suggestion of incremental taxes has been first attacked by the older generation, whether it was the bedroom tax, social care tax or whatever. Older people are against any form of taxation that takes away from their “hard earned finances”. It is the reason for their support to the tories.

Young people, to an extent, don't really care. Many 16-24 year olds are not thinking of the large mansion in the country that they would inherit once their parents are no more. They are more focused on uni, enjoying life, travelling and doing what young people do. it is a major reason that the older generations attack the young for not being serious.

Young people, IMO, tend to care when they get to their 30s or 40s. They have enjoyed their youth and are now married with children. So they then want to protect what they own, so they can pass it on.

There is a trend that was published some time ago that showed the gradual political attitudes of people as they get older. From Labour to Liberal Democrats then Conservative. In some extreme cases, further to UKIP or BNP.
You speak of the older generation wanting to leave large mansions in the country, this seems a highly antiquated view since the people who would leave these kinds of estates probably make up less than 1% of the population, and therefore a very small amount of the electorate.
0
reply
Wired_1800
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by tashkent46)
You speak of the older generation wanting to leave large mansions in the country, this seems a highly antiquated view since the people who would leave these kinds of estates probably make up less than 1% of the population, and therefore a very small amount of the electorate.
That was just an example. It is not just large mansions but whatever they can pass on to their children.

For example, the tories introduced a policy that stated that if an ailing OAP required social care services, then they would have to contribute towards the costs. So if they owned a property, then the value of the property would be included as aiding in offsetting the cost to a maximum amount. This angered many old people who wanted to pass on their properties. There is even a claim that this policy cost the tories votes during the last election.
0
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by Wired_1800)
That was just an example. It is not just large mansions but whatever they can pass on to their children.

For example, the tories introduced a policy that stated that if an ailing OAP required social care services, then they would have to contribute towards the costs. So if they owned a property, then the value of the property would be included as aiding in offsetting the cost to a maximum amount. This angered many old people who wanted to pass on their properties. There is even a claim that this policy cost the tories votes during the last election.
It also seems to undermine the view that old people vote Tories for security - what Labour policy could be described as being more detrimental than this?
0
reply
Wired_1800
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
(Original post by tashkent46)
It also seems to undermine the view that old people vote Tories for security - what Labour policy could be described as being more detrimental than this?
Can you expand on that point?
0
reply
ThomH97
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
When you're young you get given necessities for free by your parents, get rewarded in some fashion for working hard, get taught to share and be friends. And this works fine as long as a majority do this, because it's pretty easy for someone to take advantage of such goodwill. As you grow older you find more people who are taking advantage of this, and you yourself will be let down by the system and society so it pushes you towards prioritising yourself more and more.

We also have that younger people are poorer so want/need more safety nets and benefits, and older people are richer and have become dependent on stuff they have accumulated (as opposed to being able to go and get a job).
1
reply
Joleee
Badges: 19
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
it's a well known fact that the older you get, the less you like change. that's why the conservative party attracts older people and why Trump's campaign slogan was 'Make American Great Again' - 'Again' being the operative word, as though the country is returning to the good ol' days. meanwhile liberals are all about progress and keeping up with times, which is why they attract younger people and why Obama's campaign slogan was 'Change We Need'.
1
reply
Gwilym101
Badges: 17
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
Depends which topics or ideaologies you're discussing.

In general I've got 2 comments the first is the way generations view new techology that applies fairly easily to generation divides in politics:
1)
If a piece of technology is developed when you're under 15, it's just how things are.
If its developed when you're between 15-35 its an exciting new field you could potentially get a career in.
If it is developed after you're 35, it violates the natural order of things.

For politics its much the same. Take the gay marriage topic. Under 15s now probably don't think regard gay marriage as controversial, it was legalled 2 parliaments ago and there was civil partnerships before that. It's just part of life.
Next generations up though, it was probably one of the big societal struggles for that generation.
You take the oldest generations of the country and they grew up when homosexuality was a crime.

2)
Continuing from one, you have the left/right divide in a society. Particularly for social change (womens sufferage, gay rights, etc), eventually the left will win, ideas become more tolerates, traditions become more outdated, new evidence or ideas come to light, and the "centre" moves. The next generation comes along that new "centre" is their starting point to go left or right but their whole divide is left of the previous generations.

This does only really apply to societal issues, if you talk economics you can get all sorts of differing views across generations. If both left and right economics are run pragmatically they both have merit, left tends to be more about investment in services but with potentially high taxes whilst right is the inverse (very oversimplified I know). Don't look at today's tories on pragmatic austerity measures, they are completely ideological.
3
reply
username1799249
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by MrDystopia)
So the question is what causes this polarisation? It's quite well documented that older people tend towards conservative viewpoints, whereas youngsters are more left wing, but why do you think that is?
Quite simple really. When you are young, you are more of a risk taker by nature and have little in the way of resources or finances. Naturally, you are going to be more socialist because a socialist ideology sees wealth handed down and redistributed amongst those who have less i.e. youngsters.

Over time, you get work, you get paid more, you buy a house, you accumulate wealth, you inherit wealth, become more risk adverse and become more conservative in your outlook. You also become polarised and marginalised as you grow older as social circles become smaller and stagnant and influences less diverse.
3
reply
Wired_1800
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
(Original post by Gwilym101)
Depends which topics or ideaologies you're discussing.

In general I've got 2 comments the first is the way generations view new techology that applies fairly easily to generation divides in politics:
1)
If a piece of technology is developed when you're under 15, it's just how things are.
If its developed when you're between 15-35 its an exciting new field you could potentially get a career in.
If it is developed after you're 35, it violates the natural order of things.

For politics its much the same. Take the gay marriage topic. Under 15s now probably don't think regard gay marriage as controversial, it was legalled 2 parliaments ago and there was civil partnerships before that. It's just part of life.
Next generations up though, it was probably one of the big societal struggles for that generation.
You take the oldest generations of the country and they grew up when homosexuality was a crime.

2)
Continuing from one, you have the left/right divide in a society. Particularly for social change (womens sufferage, gay rights, etc), eventually the left will win, ideas become more tolerates, traditions become more outdated, new evidence or ideas come to light, and the "centre" moves. The next generation comes along that new "centre" is their starting point to go left or right but their whole divide is left of the previous generations.

This does only really apply to societal issues, if you talk economics you can get all sorts of differing views across generations. If both left and right economics are run pragmatically they both have merit, left tends to be more about investment in services but with potentially high taxes whilst right is the inverse (very oversimplified I know). Don't look at today's tories on pragmatic austerity measures, they are completely ideological.
I agree
0
reply
username1799249
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by tashkent46)
You speak of the older generation wanting to leave large mansions in the country, this seems a highly antiquated view since the people who would leave these kinds of estates probably make up less than 1% of the population, and therefore a very small amount of the electorate.
Not really. I think he was being a bit hypothetical. A lot of people now own property outright. Certainly more than in previous generations. And that property is worth an awful lot. In sh1tty parts of London like Islington, Hackney and Knotting Hill, that small three bed semi-detached house bought by parents the 70s and early 80s is now worth getting on for a million quid. Although inheritance is kind of irrelevant in this thread because it isn't young people who tend to inherit. With life expectancy still rising, it is actually middle to later aged people who are inheriting.
1
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
The simple answer to this question is generally that the older one is, the more they have to lose.

Whether it is property, savings or simply a happy life age and opportunities gives you more to lose from change or taxation, both relatively un-conservative things.

Property is probably the largest factor though given the degree to which home ownership and voting Tory is corelated.

The second factor though is also turnout. Turnout among the young is heavily split between primarily students (typically liberal) who vote and those from poorer backgrounds (typically less liberal) who dont.
1
reply
RobinKent
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
A great many of those Conservative voters started out as young Labour voters...

They soon learned that socialism works fine until you run out of other people's money to spend. Labour always end up with higher unemoyment and debts.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
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

How did your AQA A-level Psychology Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (223)
42.16%
The paper was reasonable (227)
42.91%
Not feeling great about that exam... (48)
9.07%
It was TERRIBLE (31)
5.86%

Watched Threads

View All