Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
rantnrave

Telegraph: The Conservative Party Should Be Worried About Its Long-Term Prospects

Recommended Posts

Lord Tebbit starting to join some dots.


Ever since party politics resumed after the Second World War, I have found a strong correlation between certain social and economic characteristics and the propensity to vote either Conservative or Labour. If an elector lived in a home he owned, or was buying, had enjoyed a grammar school education, lived an orderly family life and worked in the private sector or was a beneficiary of company pension scheme, he was highly likely to vote Conservative.

Conversely, those with disorderly lives, tenants, rather than home owners, educated at secondary modern or comprehensive schools, working in the public sector, reliant on welfare or the state pension, were highly likely to be Labour voters. In modern Britain, more and more middle-class adults are forced to live in rented housing and recent government policy isn't making it noticeably easier for first-time buyers, even those whose parents are willing to lend a hand.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/12071888/The-Conservative-Party-should-be-worried-about-its-long-term-prospects.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well he's very much of the Thatcher era where widespread Right to Buy and privatisation of public utilities was arguably part of a strategy to create more Tory voters. But it's not like it was the first time there had been a Conservative government - in fact I'd probably suggest it was the default option for the UK population.

Trouble is, a few decades on and that wealth has trickled up into BTL, large corporations and banks - and there's little growth in the private sector (which has also largely gutted company pension schemes) while they are arguably the face of huge cuts in the public sector and putting the squeeze on small business.

The trick will be to keep enough of the population scared enough to believe their situation would be even worse under Labour, or find a nice war to get into.

Ultimately it doesn't matter though as Labour and the Conservatives both serve the same masters.

Edited by StainlessSteelCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tory party is, like most businesses, short termist. They arent worried because its chock full of Grant Shapps types who'll simply move to scamming morons out of cash when they lose their seats.

The 'conservative future' (suicide) reports are very interesting. Its not a party with any ideological grounding. Its a bunch of money grabbing opportunists and not much else.

I think the labour base is full of totalitarian mentalists and loons, but they are actually devoted to a cause with a goal, other than personal enrichment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble is, a few decades on and that wealth has trickled up into BTL, large corporations and banks - and there's little growth in the private sector (which has also largely gutted company pension schemes) while they are arguably the face of huge cuts in the public sector and putting the squeeze on small business.

Ultimately it doesn't matter though as Labour and the Conservatives both serve the same masters.

And indeed Osborne is trying every trick to stop people saving for a decent pension. I hold as exhibit A his withdrawal of tax relief on pensions, whilst making it harder for families by removing child benefit for those on over £60k and removal of the personal allowance from £100k.

Meanwhile we push on with inheritance tax changes and don't touch trust funds.

It is a bit like the Government is only interested in protecting those with inherited wealth or trust funds and can't stand the prospect of the middle classes starting to bite at their heals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the current Conservatives are that liberal/small state.

Part of that is down to the normal political rate of change i.e. at the current rate, it'll take 20 years to undo Gordies 'Vote for me schemes'.

Part of it is that most politician have only been politicians - they struggle to to see a country where they are not central to the peoples life.

I don't think Tebbit is a big thinker. This article is another example of it.

The core of the problem with leveraged BTL is purely down to gross mis-pricing and mis-regulation of BTL loans. They are business loan and should be taxed and regulated as such.

On the wider issue, banks should not have a free, implicit guarantee from the host state, If one thing 2008 showed us, it was this. Regulation and charges still needs further work - any sane regulation would have seen IO BTL been shutdown years ago. FFS what do you think brough down B+B? The fact that the BTL loans are being provided by the likes of Nationwide - a mutual with limited means of raising new capital is fcking nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No really???

Borrows more than GORDON BROWN!!!

Well, I would say the Cons got a super tanker that was steered by Gordy.

On one level, the budget deficit reductions are pretty impressive - reduction of a 12% GDP deficit in 2010 (fro that reason alone, the bodies of the Labour party should be hanging from lampposts - either for spending it - Browns and his idiots, or letting Brown and his idiots spend it - the rest).

On another level, we are still running an almost 6% GDP deficit. A figure that you'd think the IMF wold be moving in on.

Me? I think tax credits are at the root of the budget deficit. The one-eyed loon has dragged low and middle income eaners into the benefit state, switching people from paying tax to swallowing ~2k/month/household in benefits. And then dragging most of Eastern Europe over to do the same FFS.

Gidiot is using Brown's perma-deficit sttae to gut/restructure the public sector workforce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The inherent problem with politics in this country is that elections at typically 4-5 year intervals inevitably result in short termism due to the need to win the next election as winning and maintaining power are dependent on political parties being popular. Any party that tries to implement long term policies that would be of benefit to the country but bring short term pain is liable to be voted out so they fall into the trap of chasing popularity through short term quick fixes - which fail to address the real problems and usually create additional unintended problems. Its the main failing with democracy, what the voters want and what is best for the voters will frequently fail to match up. (There are of course massive downsides with other forms of government - I'm not suggesting we go down the dictatorship route or anything else).

If one of the parties proposed policies that would produce the much needed HPC, would it be voted for in the first place & what might end up going wrong? The fall out would be massive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to be the most idealistic of idealists but I've become a lot more right wing as I've aged. On immigration, for example.

But even so the idea of voting Conservative is not at all appealing.

Their policies have ensured the continuation of an unfair system which restricts me to only the most minimal of stakes in this country. I have no land. Despite a decade of working I have no assets. My pension prospects worsen every year. Continued support for the banking industry and for landowners ensures that there's no way I can better my lot in life. And the opportunities enjoyed by previous generations continue to be stripped away - no jobs for life, no free education, state pension age rising, private pensions taxed.

Their only ideological instinct appears to be privatise, privatise, privatise - everything from mail delivery to the criminal justice system, ffs. And inevitably I end up paying extra for the same services my parents got as part of their contribution to the state.

All that's on offer from these Tory governments has been the opportunity to be 'helped' into massive, irresponsible debt in order to fiddle the GDP figures.

Their recent attacks on BTL are welcome but do not go nearly far enough, especially considering the utter failure of their wider housing policy and the continuing 'nice little boom' of 10% rises per year in London. They had a golden opportunity in 2010 to clear out the dead wood and start a proper recovery, but they bottled it.

If they want me to vote Tory in 2020 they have a lot of convincing to do. As it is I may as well vote for Corbyn and McDonnel's little red book - there's not much for me in the current system, so may as well vote to change it.

The continued failure of energy policy, and the failure to plan for climate change and invest in proper flood prevention hasn't helped them any, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I would say the Cons got a super tanker that was steered by Gordy.

On one level, the budget deficit reductions are pretty impressive - reduction of a 12% GDP deficit in 2010 (fro that reason alone, the bodies of the Labour party should be hanging from lampposts - either for spending it - Browns and his idiots, or letting Brown and his idiots spend it - the rest).

God these Tory cultists who forever talk of ONE YEAR of huge borrowings by Labour. It was to bail out the banks by the way - something the Tories would have done too.

They're all the same.

Tories are Socialists just like Labour. #bringbackThatcher #bringbackCapitalism

Edited by Killer Bunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I would say the Cons got a super tanker that was steered by Gordy.

On one level, the budget deficit reductions are pretty impressive - reduction of a 12% GDP deficit in 2010 (fro that reason alone, the bodies of the Labour party should be hanging from lampposts - either for spending it - Browns and his idiots, or letting Brown and his idiots spend it - the rest).

On another level, we are still running an almost 6% GDP deficit. A figure that you'd think the IMF wold be moving in on.

Me? I think tax credits are at the root of the budget deficit. The one-eyed loon has dragged low and middle income eaners into the benefit state, switching people from paying tax to swallowing ~2k/month/household in benefits. And then dragging most of Eastern Europe over to do the same FFS.

Gidiot is using Brown's perma-deficit sttae to gut/restructure the public sector workforce.

Remarkable range of accomplishments for one man. Running first Labour and the City of London and then the Conservative Party by proxy years after he was thrown out of office! He was indeed a colossus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty obvious when you look at other countries that the financial crash was more to blame for the worsening debt than Labour. Without reforming how debt is created by private banks it will never be paid off. Bank lends money to idiot that can't pay it back, bank gets bailout, state gets debt. The way to fix this mess is not to kick the shit out of the sick, disabled and poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty obvious when you look at other countries that the financial crash was more to blame for the worsening debt than Labour. Without reforming how debt is created by private banks it will never be paid off. Bank lends money to idiot that can't pay it back, bank gets bailout, state gets debt. The way to fix this mess is not to kick the shit out of the sick, disabled and poor.

Or not.

Deficits-by-chancellor-001_zpsvbajicsy.j

Edited by XswampyX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or not.

Deficits-by-chancellor-001_zpsvbajicsy.j

Not sure that shows what you think it does, care to explain?

In any case, when private wealth and inequality have got the the levels they have it acts as a huge anchor on demand... unless that demand is debt fuelled. So either we need more debt or less inequality.

A massive debt jubilee wouldn't go amiss either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't and didn't vote for either.

What do Labour have to offer me as a white professional on above the national average salary? I'm as far down their list of priorities as is possible to be. No generous sized council house. No tax credits for doing a non-job. Effectively with Labour its a vote to selflessly donate my own standard of living to someone else, hell, they don't even have to be British.

Conservatives preach the free market and most people buy the sermon. However, for those of us who work for a living and are not a member of the filthy rich elite then they're a wasted vote. They can purport to represent the middle class but are doing a pretty good job of destroying it IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God these Tory cultists who forever talk of ONE YEAR of huge borrowings by Labour. It was to bail out the banks by the way - something the Tories would have done too.

They're all the same.

Tories are Socialists just like Labour. #bringbackThatcher #bringbackCapitalism

I'm blue-collar Labour type.

I'm about as rare as a Blue Whale in the party full of loons, trots, and public sector wimmin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or not.

Deficits-by-chancellor-001_zpsvbajicsy.j

What you have to realise is that this chart only the massive ramp up in public sector deficit.

There was an euqally scarey ramp up in in private debt occuring at the same time.

2002-2007 saw private sector debt increasing by about 10% GDP each.

Again, Brown has destroyed everything - Northern building societies, work for the low + middle income sector, the UK economy, the public sector.

People have not cottoned on to how much Brown threw on the fire to get himself elected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether you liked them or not Tebbitt, Thatcher and the politicians pre the 1990s were in politics because they wanted to change things and because they believed in a certain political philosophy. They had done real jobs outside parliament, fought in wars and weren't career politicians.

Osborne really doesn't care about the future post May 2020 - that is someone else's problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article, though takes in a lot of HPC type themes.

What is interesting is how hooked on the state everyone is now, even with a Conservative government.

For example, know a few people who are solidly middle class, in private sector jobs. They might be working for some consultancy, but the project they are working on is for the state, so are they really in private sector employment?

My suggestion to the Tories would be to concentrate on making life better for people in the £20-40k pay bracket (I.e. the real middle earners)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Osborne really doesn't care about the future post May 2020 - that is someone else's problem.

Osborne wants to take over as PM when Dave steps down in 2019 and would then fight the general election in 2020 hoping to be re-elected and serve at least a full Parliament as PM. I think he very much cares about what happens after May 2020 as he's hoping to be in charge then. His personal career ambition is probably a big factor in why he's going after BTL. If the housing situation for the post-1980 babies isn't improving by the early 2020s it could make governing the country very difficult as this age group will be 40-45% of the electorate by that point, not a demographic that can be ignored even under FPTP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the end of the piece (emphasis added):

That being so, however, in the face of social and economic change, the long term prospects for the Conservative Party are still not too favourable. The Tory poll of 13.3 million in 2015 was far short of its post war average and that leads me to believe that unless at least some of the adverse social and economic changes of recent years can be reversed, the greatest days of the party I knew may well be behind us.

Mr Cameron has pledged himself to stand down by 2020.
Is there a potential leader who could now define anew what makes an elector a Conservative voter?

I don't think that it is a big stretch to read into the his Telegraph article that Tebbit figures the Tory party ought to pick a leader willing to openly eviscerate the BTL sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   43 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.