The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[doubleup]

They've made their money, had their families, bought their houses and got money in the bank.

They don't need tax breaks, boosts on savings rates or reduction on inheritance tax.

Young people need the money spent on bribing old people for their votes to help to buy their first house, improve education for their children and improve the NHS.

The focus of governemnt should be on the future and young people ARE the future.

I think you'll find that the reduction in inheritance tax doesn't do much for the relevant old person.

Think that the tax break (age allowance) have been reduced?

Savings rates have been risible since the financial crisis.  The main beneficiary of low interest rates are those with mortgages.  Unfortunately this has also encouraged the BtL market but the government is taking action there.

[The Camel]

They've made their money, had their families, bought their houses and got money in the bank.

They don't need tax breaks, boosts on savings rates or reduction on inheritance tax.

Young people need the money spent on bribing old people for their votes to help to buy their first house, improve education for their children and improve the NHS.

The focus of governemnt should be on the future and young people ARE the future.

I think you'll find that the reduction in inheritance tax doesn't do much for the relevant old person.

Think that the tax break (age allowance) have been reduced?

Savings rates have been risible since the financial crisis.  The main beneficiary of low interest rates are those with mortgages.  Unfortunately this has also encouraged the BtL market but the government is taking action there.

Of course it does, they want to keep their money in their family. That's what they worry about. That's what they vote for.

I must admit was pleasantly surprised when Osborne increased the stamp duty on BtL owners.

Didn't go nearly far enough (obv) but it was a start.

[doubleup]

They've made their money, had their families, bought their houses and got money in the bank.

They don't need tax breaks, boosts on savings rates or reduction on inheritance tax.

Young people need the money spent on bribing old people for their votes to help to buy their first house, improve education for their children and improve the NHS.

The focus of governemnt should be on the future and young people ARE the future.

I think you'll find that the reduction in inheritance tax doesn't do much for the relevant old person.

Think that the tax break (age allowance) have been reduced?

Savings rates have been risible since the financial crisis.  The main beneficiary of low interest rates are those with mortgages.  Unfortunately this has also encouraged the BtL market but the government is taking action there.

Of course it does, they want to keep their money in their family. That's what they worry about. That's what they vote for.

I must admit was pleasantly surprised when Osborne increased the stamp duty on BtL owners.

Didn't go nearly far enough (obv) but it was a start.

So the money goes to their young children and grandchildren - isn't that what you want?

[david3103]

Q of the day


Saw some stuff in the news today about trying to reduce the voting age to 16. I actually think it makes more sense to increase the age to 25 (Or later). You know nothing about life at age 18, I find it horrifying that 18 year old me was able to have any influence on the way the country is ran.

What should the voting age be?

I find it horrifying that people over 70 have such a big influence on the way the country is run.

They've lived their lives, yet continually vote for self interest rather than attempting to improve things for the future.

Haha. We get some pretty short sighted and insulting blanket statements on here but this one is a doozy.

Lived their lives? What the Hell does that mean? If that's true they can't benefit from anything they vote for can they?

What's that sir, you served in the army, fought in the Falklands, started your own business and paid all your taxes for the last 30 years, and now you want to vote as well? Sorry mate, up yours.


Tell me Keith, which age group do you consider to be totally altruistic? It wouldn't be yours would it?

They've made their money, had their families, bought their houses and got money in the bank.

They don't need tax breaks, boosts on savings rates or reduction on inheritance tax.

Young people need the money spent on bribing old people for their votes to help to buy their first house, improve education for their children and improve the NHS.

The focus of governemnt should be on the future and young people ARE the future.

Run that bit past me again please. You are saying that all people over 70 fall into this classification?

Would you prefer it if we just euthanised the over-70s? After all, they are occupying space that the young people should have.

I don't believe that you really hold these views. But you are definitely boosting the post count by pretending that you do.

[arbboy]

Q of the day


Saw some stuff in the news today about trying to reduce the voting age to 16. I actually think it makes more sense to increase the age to 25 (Or later). You know nothing about life at age 18, I find it horrifying that 18 year old me was able to have any influence on the way the country is ran.

What should the voting age be?

I find it horrifying that people over 70 have such a big influence on the way the country is run.

They've lived their lives, yet continually vote for self interest rather than attempting to improve things for the future.

Haha. We get some pretty short sighted and insulting blanket statements on here but this one is a doozy.

Lived their lives? What the Hell does that mean? If that's true they can't benefit from anything they vote for can they?

What's that sir, you served in the army, fought in the Falklands, started your own business and paid all your taxes for the last 30 years, and now you want to vote as well? Sorry mate, up yours.


Tell me Keith, which age group do you consider to be totally altruistic? It wouldn't be yours would it?

They've made their money, had their families, bought their houses and got money in the bank.

They don't need tax breaks, boosts on savings rates or reduction on inheritance tax.

Young people need the money spent on bribing old people for their votes to help to buy their first house, improve education for their children and improve the NHS.

The focus of governemnt should be on the future and young people ARE the future.

Run that bit past me again please. You are saying that all people over 70 fall into this classification?

Would you prefer it if we just euthanised the over-70s? After all, they are occupying space that the young people should have.

I don't believe that you really hold these views. But you are definitely boosting the post count by pretending that you do.

I would say the majority of over 70s are struggling.  Certainly not larging it like camel makes out.  A decent % of people in their 70s are massively under the cosh.

[RED-DOG]

Q of the day


Saw some stuff in the news today about trying to reduce the voting age to 16. I actually think it makes more sense to increase the age to 25 (Or later). You know nothing about life at age 18, I find it horrifying that 18 year old me was able to have any influence on the way the country is ran.

What should the voting age be?

I find it horrifying that people over 70 have such a big influence on the way the country is run.

They've lived their lives, yet continually vote for self interest rather than attempting to improve things for the future.

Haha. We get some pretty short sighted and insulting blanket statements on here but this one is a doozy.

Lived their lives? What the Hell does that mean? If that's true they can't benefit from anything they vote for can they?

What's that sir, you served in the army, fought in the Falklands, started your own business and paid all your taxes for the last 30 years, and now you want to vote as well? Sorry mate, up yours.


Tell me Keith, which age group do you consider to be totally altruistic? It wouldn't be yours would it?

They've made their money, had their families, bought their houses and got money in the bank.

They don't need tax breaks, boosts on savings rates or reduction on inheritance tax.

Young people need the money spent on bribing old people for their votes to help to buy their first house, improve education for their children and improve the NHS.

The focus of governemnt should be on the future and young people ARE the future.

Answer this if you will then please Keith.

Are you saying that you don't want old people to vote because they don't vote the way you want them to and you're scared that they will be in the majority?

[DaveShoelace]

Must say I've never thought about the idea of having a maximum age limit on voting. Maybe we should lay off Keith a bit, because it's certainly an interesting idea and as worthy of debate as anything else. I've heard people say only current taxpayers should be allowed to vote, which is effectively the same thing but probably not quite as controversial (But still obviously controversial).

I've actually read a lot of research on voter habits, and as well as anecdotal evidence, my view is that people tend to vote for the party the identify with most, rather than necessarily the one that would benefit them most in the immediate future. Whenever I talk to an older person about voting, this comes across even more so. I remember talking to my Grandfather shortly before he died, well into his 80s, that he was voting Conservative because he believed they would create more jobs at the time. Obviously he was well past a point where getting a job matters.

Obviously from the tone of my question, I have a low opinion on young voters. I guess by process of elimination that means I consider older voters to be better informed and more virtuous.

[TightEnd]

there is set to be a big increase, as a % of the total, in the grey voter as the baby boomers of 1955-1970 are just beginning to reach retirement now and birth rates had fallen substantially by the 1990s so there are fewer new 18 year olds than there are new pensioners

this has big implications for health and pensions policy (not really been addressed as its politically difficult to do so)

practically, it also has big implications for policy at different stages of the electoral cycle too

this, in addition to boundary changes and expatriate voting, is another reason why Labour is going to find it very difficult in 2020 and 2025 as older voters get more "conservative" with a small "c" as they get older

[Woodsey]

Must say I've never thought about the idea of having a maximum age limit on voting. Maybe we should lay off Keith a bit, because it's certainly an interesting idea and as worthy of debate as anything else. I've heard people say only current taxpayers should be allowed to vote, which is effectively the same thing but probably not quite as controversial (But still obviously controversial).

I've actually read a lot of research on voter habits, and as well as anecdotal evidence, my view is that people tend to vote for the party the identify with most, rather than necessarily the one that would benefit them most in the immediate future. Whenever I talk to an older person about voting, this comes across even more so. I remember talking to my Grandfather shortly before he died, well into his 80s, that he was voting Conservative because he believed they would create more jobs at the time. Obviously he was well past a point where getting a job matters.

Obviously from the tone of my question, I have a low opinion on young voters. I guess by process of elimination that means I consider older voters to be better informed and more virtuous.

Don't really see why it's important to know the reason why anyone votes for a particular party, it's basically nobody else's business unless those people want to volunteer their opinions.

[4KSuited]

If I'm not mistaken, I believe there was some research indicating that the vast majority of the electorate establish their political allegiances through their parents/upbringing/peer-group - and largely remain unchanged. I'm thinking c.80% of the population.

Thus, it's the 20% (doesn't have to be the same 20% of course) that are open to change that decide the outcome of the 5-yearly elections.

I think Cameron was trying to get the vote for 16-17 year-olds in order to improve the chances of a Yes vote for staying in the EU. He didn't get it through. The case for inclusions & exclusions for young and old are interesting. I worry about the inclusion of teenagers; someone else has already made the point about them being idealistic rather than realistic, and a little short of real-life-experience. As far as the 70+ brigade goes, I think it's unfair to make broad statements about them all voting for self-interest only. Tbf, even if they did, I can't see there being too much wrong with that, since it's also likely that those living off the state (for example) will be doing the same.

Inheritance Tax is a tax on property that has already been bought with income that has already been taxed. I struggle to find the justification for it. These are the people who have mostly worked all their lives, paid their taxes and their bills, and after 25+ years have finally got to the point where they own their house. Then, when they expire, their families must liquidate the assets in order to pay the tax bill - if they haven't already had to sell up in order to pay for care. Given the rise in property prices, and the relative freeze on the allowance, more & more "working class" families are being caught by this tax. Meanwhile, the less fortunate in society have none of these worries: the state pays for the lot. So where's the incentive to work hard, pay your own way, and save for your financial security in retirement?

Shit, I came on Blonde to do a HH....

[MintTrav]

I'm warming to this idea. Old people aren't affected, by and large, by employment policies, mortgages, interest rates, crime (most victims are young, not old). Things like the environment, foreign relations and defence don't matter to them, cos they're going to die soon anyway. The only issues that affect them are things like healthcare, social care and pensions, ie things that the Tories are forever cutting. Yet they go and vote overwhelmingly for the Tories. As they clearly vote for the wrong people, there is a case for not having a vote after you retire.

[doubleup]

this has big implications for health and pensions policy (not really been addressed as its politically difficult to do so)

Pensions has been addressed to some extent as the new State Pension will over time replace pension credit.  Increased NI contributions as a result of abolishing contracting out and later retirement ages will also help to pay the cost.

[Woodsey]

I'm warming to this idea. Old people aren't affected, by and large, by employment policies, mortgages, interest rates, crime (most victims are young, not old). Things like the environment, foreign relations and defence don't matter to them, cos they're going to die soon anyway. The only issues that affect them are things like healthcare, social care and pensions, ie things that the Tories are forever cutting. Yet they go and vote overwhelmingly for the Tories. As they clearly vote for the wrong people, there is a case for not having a vote after you retire.

Clearly   That's funny mate, thanks for the good belly laugh.

[DaveShoelace]

I'm warming to this idea. Old people aren't affected, by and large, by employment policies, mortgages, interest rates, crime (most victims are young, not old). Things like the environment, foreign relations and defence don't matter to them, cos they're going to die soon anyway. The only issues that affect them are things like healthcare, social care and pensions, ie things that the Tories are forever cutting. Yet they go and vote overwhelmingly for the Tories. As they clearly vote for the wrong people, there is a case for not having a vote after you retire.

This comment may have single handedly reversed my opinion that young people should get the vote later in life, as the likelihood is that the same silly logic would be applied of 'since young people vote left wing, let's get get rid of their right to vote'. I'd rather live in a democracy than in a dictatorship, even if the dictatorship mirrored closely my own political leanings.

[nirvana]

I'm warming to this idea. Old people aren't affected, by and large, by employment policies, mortgages, interest rates, crime (most victims are young, not old). Things like the environment, foreign relations and defence don't matter to them, cos they're going to die soon anyway. The only issues that affect them are things like healthcare, social care and pensions, ie things that the Tories are forever cutting. Yet they go and vote overwhelmingly for the Tories. As they clearly vote for the wrong people, there is a case for not having a vote after you retire.

Exactly, we pretty much become healthcare absorbing retards at 65 (or whenever we retire) - personally I'd go further in marginalising this worthless bunch.