Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YouGov
Nov 14, 2019 13:43:26 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2019 13:43:26 GMT
Basically: a) the MRS 'social grade' system was faulty even in the 1970s and is a complete disaster now; it in no way reflects the realities of a service sector economy with a very large elderly population (it is true, by the way, pensioners are routinely rolled into category DE). I can go into far too much detail about this if anyone is interested: I have done before. b) even were this not so, YouGov's peculiar polling methods happen to make their internal numbers completely worthless anyway. It's some real voodoo nonsense. c) even were this not so, different polling firms internals show very different figures and patterns, not just from YouGov but from each other. d) this actually takes us back to a) because there are serious issues with sampling for some of the categories, particularly C2 which is a notorious disaster. e) even were all of this not so, poll internals are not polls or surveys themselves, but a way of making sure that the poll was conducted with an appropriately balanced sample. The way they are thrown around by people who know this but have commercial reasons to ignore that fact amounts to the pollution of public discourse. f) you wouldn't give your bank details to a 'Nigerian Prince', you don't believe anything hawked by Matthew Badwin. My understanding was that Category E includes state pensioners with no other source of income, but that private pensioners are graded according to their previous occupation. No?
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,301
Member is Online
|
YouGov
Nov 14, 2019 14:16:47 GMT
Post by Sibboleth on Nov 14, 2019 14:16:47 GMT
My understanding was that Category E includes state pensioners with on other source of income, but that private pensioners are graded according to their previous occupation. No? Theoretically. But we know that a lot of polling firms do not bother and there are reasons to be a mildly dubious as to how thorough the ones that say they do actually are.
|
|
|
Post by London Lad on Nov 14, 2019 14:45:05 GMT
Not sure how it makes the results any better for Labour even if you explain it away by Pensioners being included as working class. When I was growing up, Labour were a very popular choice for Pensioners to vote for.
Why have they lost that demographic?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2019 15:04:31 GMT
Presumably this is using the now pretty discredited ABC1C2DE categorisations - when the "working class" ranks are stuffed with well off pensioners? And conversely, huge numbers of younger people get classified as B or C1 because they have 'white collar' occupations, despite having very little prospect of becoming homeowners in at least the medium term, and often having limited job security.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2019 15:06:04 GMT
And, right on cue (six part thread) -
|
|
|
Post by Strontium Dog on Nov 14, 2019 15:14:51 GMT
Not sure how it makes the results any better for Labour even if you explain it away by Pensioners being included as working class. When I was growing up, Labour were a very popular choice for Pensioners to vote for. Why have they lost that demographic? Older people remember communism from the first time around.
|
|
bore
Labour
Posts: 53
|
Post by bore on Nov 14, 2019 15:16:50 GMT
It's expected from the innumerate take pedlars in the press and on twitter dot com, but it's disappointing to see posters on this website, which so often pats itself on the back about its psephological rigour and analytical thinking, proclaiming that the conservatives are now the party of the (implicitly white) working classes.
So, once again, the time has come to post the chart:
It's really very simple- it comes down to whether you believe some guy stitching together dubious poll subsamples or your lying eyes. We all know that there is a very strong correlation between income and support for the labour party, we know that at this election there is a 0 per cent chance of Bootle, or Merthyr Tydfil, or Glasgow Northeast or South Shields, voting for the conservatives, we know that the home counties will once again be a ring of blue surrounding london. Why on earth then would we give credence to this idea that in british politics up is suddenly down?
Obviously classes aren't monolithic, there are some rich areas (especially around universities) who are very hostile to the conservatives, there are some working class areas which vote conservative (and in the midlands especially, more are trending that way) but the patterns are basically so strong that you have to know nothing of geography or elections to dispute them.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Nov 14, 2019 15:23:43 GMT
Not sure how it makes the results any better for Labour even if you explain it away by Pensioners being included as working class. When I was growing up, Labour were a very popular choice for Pensioners to vote for. Why have they lost that demographic? Older people remember communism from the first time around. Older people remember the Paris Commune?
|
|
nelson
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,645
|
YouGov
Nov 14, 2019 15:26:52 GMT
Post by nelson on Nov 14, 2019 15:26:52 GMT
Not sure how it makes the results any better for Labour even if you explain it away by Pensioners being included as working class. When I was growing up, Labour were a very popular choice for Pensioners to vote for. Why have they lost that demographic? It's not a matter of "explaining away" anything.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,174
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Nov 14, 2019 15:45:52 GMT
Not sure how it makes the results any better for Labour even if you explain it away by Pensioners being included as working class. When I was growing up, Labour were a very popular choice for Pensioners to vote for. Why have they lost that demographic? You could also ask why the Conservatives have lost out amongst younger professionals, which is a bit of a departure from the 1980s. Note for example that my mother got a mortgage for a house in Birmingham Selly Oak as a newly qualified nurse in the early 1980s when she was about 24, and that wasn't considered particularly unusual. It's hard to imagine many people in that position being able to do so now. I bought my first house when I was 26 in 1988. I was single, working in the voluntary sector, not well paid - but affording a terraced house in Yorkshire wasn't out of the question Now it would be very unlikely.
|
|
|
YouGov
Nov 14, 2019 16:00:29 GMT
via mobile
Post by andrew111 on Nov 14, 2019 16:00:29 GMT
You could also ask why the Conservatives have lost out amongst younger professionals, which is a bit of a departure from the 1980s. Note for example that my mother got a mortgage for a house in Birmingham Selly Oak as a newly qualified nurse in the early 1980s when she was about 24, and that wasn't considered particularly unusual. It's hard to imagine many people in that position being able to do so now. I bought my first house when I was 26 in 1988. I was single, working in the voluntary sector, not well paid - but affording a terraced house in Yorkshire wasn't out of the question Now it would be very unlikely. You can buy a back to back down the road from me in the catchment area of one of the best primary and best secondary schools in Kirklees for about £80k. That is within reach for many people in a few years if they are careful
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Nov 14, 2019 16:32:30 GMT
I would argue income is much less relevant if you own property, considering 70% of wealth in Britain is inherited these days.
Class itself is to a large extent about culture, so the measure works, but it's not entirely a measure of one's line of work or the poverty/wealth into which one is born. Personally, I find breakdowns amongst people who are actually in work to be a bit more enlightening - I appreciate that's a subjective value-judgement, but pensioners are insulated from the economy to the extent that most people are not by a ponzi scheme.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
YouGov
Nov 14, 2019 16:58:40 GMT
Post by Adrian on Nov 14, 2019 16:58:40 GMT
Presumably this is using the now pretty discredited ABC1C2DE categorisations - when the "working class" ranks are stuffed with well off pensioners? The thing is though, you can't really deny there's a shift going on. Labour is abandoning the working class for the middle class university towns and inner cities. Thing is, I don't get why you're giving many of us on the right what we've always wanted, an alliance between the upper class shires and the working classes. A true coalition of the socially conservative right. Labour isn't abandoning the working class, it's the other way round. You can hardly claim that Labour policy favours the well-off or the middle class. And if you ask them their opinions, most working-class people are far from "socially conservative". What's drawn a lot of WC voters away from Labour is chauvinism - if you want a true coalition of chauvinists you're welcome to it.
|
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 22,376
Member is Online
|
YouGov
Nov 14, 2019 17:08:23 GMT
Post by mboy on Nov 14, 2019 17:08:23 GMT
The thing is though, you can't really deny there's a shift going on. Labour is abandoning the working class for the middle class university towns and inner cities. Thing is, I don't get why you're giving many of us on the right what we've always wanted, an alliance between the upper class shires and the working classes. A true coalition of the socially conservative right. Labour isn't abandoning the working class, it's the other way round. You can hardly claim that Labour policy favours the well-off or the middle class. And if you ask them their opinions, most working-class people are far from "socially conservative". What's drawn a lot of WC voters away from Labour is chauvinism - if you want a true coalition of chauvinists you're welcome to it. The Labour Party's recent conversion to de-facto open borders can fairly be described as abandoning the working class for the middle class university towns and inner cities. (Blair started it, of course, but it has ramped up far beyond what he envisaged recently.)
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Nov 14, 2019 17:24:29 GMT
Much as I'll agree Labour's platform is economically illiterate and off-putting to some voters, I don't think the 'The left must pivot to where we are, as we continue to drift in one direction, because the working class are with us!' is necessarily the correct take (although less incorrect in the context of British politics than, say, US politics). When the working class (as we understand it in terms of income, not wealth) have switched specifically to the populist right, that's often an indicator of how little social support there's been for them and how much the economy has been stacked against them - this essentially leads to alienation for a lot of people. Part of why it's a lot more commonly seen in rural areas as opposed to cities has to do with the relative lack of organisation there.
I'm a liberal individualist, but the absence of governmental structures, unions, co-ops etc. does not mean the absence of social structures. Corbyn's solutions are outdated and wrong, but the answers to the problems that may lead to the acceptance of a fairly nasty strain of populist (and I'll defend Boris Johnson here - he is one of the most palatable out there and a far cry from Modi or Trump) should include something to facilitate the growth of local support networks. Practising the politics of Blair (under whom inequity grew, and poverty fell primarily because of PFIs and tax/benefit schemes) does not seem a particularly effective way to combat the problems of the present.
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Nov 14, 2019 18:07:54 GMT
The thing is though, you can't really deny there's a shift going on. Labour is abandoning the working class for the middle class university towns and inner cities. Thing is, I don't get why you're giving many of us on the right what we've always wanted, an alliance between the upper class shires and the working classes. A true coalition of the socially conservative right. Labour isn't abandoning the working class, it's the other way round. You can hardly claim that Labour policy favours the well-off or the middle class. And if you ask them their opinions, most working-class people are far from "socially conservative". What's drawn a lot of WC voters away from Labour is chauvinism - if you want a true coalition of chauvinists you're welcome to it. No. Mass migration has abandoned wc people. A soft on crime attitude has abandoned wc people. A soft on benefit thieves culture has abandoned wc people. Labour letting working class areas turn into shit holes and sinks of moral depravity have abandoned wc people. WC people, and I'm one, are decent, aspirational, hard working, family orientated and patriotic people and we are continually denigrated as "racist, xenophobic chauvinists" by bigoted people like you and it's time for revolt.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Nov 14, 2019 18:09:56 GMT
Labour isn't abandoning the working class, it's the other way round. You can hardly claim that Labour policy favours the well-off or the middle class. And if you ask them their opinions, most working-class people are far from "socially conservative". What's drawn a lot of WC voters away from Labour is chauvinism - if you want a true coalition of chauvinists you're welcome to it. No. Mass migration has abandoned wc people. A soft on crime attitude has abandoned wc people. A soft on benefit thieves culture has abandoned wc people. Labour letting working class areas turn into shit holes and sinks of moral depravity have abandoned wc people. WC people, and I'm one, are decent, aspirational, hard working, family orientated and patriotic people and we are continually denigrated as "racist, xenophobic chauvinists" by bigoted people like you and it's time for revolt. Migrants, prisoners, and people on benefits are disproportionately working class. Classes are sets of extremely complex people. Generally speaking, though, economic right-wingers in government should not look forward to working class revolt.
|
|
|
YouGov
Nov 14, 2019 18:13:44 GMT
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Nov 14, 2019 18:13:44 GMT
No. Mass migration has abandoned wc people. A soft on crime attitude has abandoned wc people. A soft on benefit thieves culture has abandoned wc people. Labour letting working class areas turn into shit holes and sinks of moral depravity have abandoned wc people. WC people, and I'm one, are decent, aspirational, hard working, family orientated and patriotic people and we are continually denigrated as "racist, xenophobic chauvinists" by bigoted people like you and it's time for revolt. Migrants, prisoners, and people on benefits are disproportionately working class. Classes are sets of extremely complex people. Generally speaking, though, economic right-wingers in government should not look forward to working class revolt. Boris's ascendency shows that we're willing to forgo a lot of economic liberalism for gains elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Nov 14, 2019 18:15:30 GMT
Migrants, prisoners, and people on benefits are disproportionately working class. Classes are sets of extremely complex people. Generally speaking, though, economic right-wingers in government should not look forward to working class revolt. Boris's ascendency shows that we're willing to forgo a lot of economic liberalism for gains elsewhere. You haven't forgone it, though. You've just embraced expansionary economic policy. Where's the new revenue generation? It's not coming from the tax cuts for high earners, one of the first pledges he made. He doesn't subscribe to modern monetary theory, so it's got to come from somewhere. At the moment, it looks like he just plans to run up a deficit in the sunnier part of the economic cycle, which we should know by now is a terrible idea. I doubt he'll fulfill half of these spending pledges. If he does, expect them all to be reversed - and worse - when recession hits. There will be no stimulus package built up for that time.
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Nov 14, 2019 18:20:28 GMT
Boris's ascendency shows that we're willing to forgo a lot of economic liberalism for gains elsewhere. You haven't forgone it, though. You've just embraced expansionary economic policy. Where's the new revenue generation? It's not coming from the tax cuts for high earners, one of the first pledges he made. He doesn't subscribe to modern monetary theory, so it's got to come from somewhere. At the moment, it looks like he just plans to run up a deficit in the sunnier part of the economic cycle, which we should know by now is a terrible idea. I doubt he'll fulfill half of these spending pledges. If he does, expect them all to be reversed - and worse - when recession hits. There will be no stimulus package built up for that time. I expect taxes to rise and for us to start to end the ludicrous .7% foreign aid budget if we win a majority. The grassroots of the party are less economically liberal than those MP's who've left and we're the ones in the driving seat now.
|
|