Comments on: Why the Conservatives may be nervous; most of us will be better off in 2009

By: Blimpish

Blimpish — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 22:20:58 +0000

Matthew: just one point in reply to your reply, which is that the two groups being directly helped (pensioners and benefit recipients) probably aren’t that help. Pensioners’ votes are quite difficult to move, and benefit recipients probably vote Labour in safe Labour seats if they vote at all. The other problem, in terms of reducing the subjective-objective lag is that the (broad) middle class won’t take their cues from these groups in setting their own mind – in fact, if they feel benefit recipients are prospering, it might confirm their worst prejudices, that “the Gov’ment” is on the side of “them” against “us”.

By: matthewtaylor

matthewtaylor — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:00:34 +0000

I guess it’s me personally (and i should be cleaer about flagging this) . But the RSA is committed to informed debate as part of our broader mission of encouraging citiizens to engage with decision making.

Not only do we have a wide variety of speakers here (more Tory front benchers than Labour since I became CEO) but I encourage many colleagues here to blog. Over the years I think I have had as many complaints from former colleagues (see, for example, my second blog today questioning the Government’s commitment to social mobility) as from those on the right. But it is always useful to be warned if I might be crossing the line.

So thanks again for your comment

By: Different route; same destination - Common Endeavour

Different route; same destination - Common Endeavour — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:59:12 +0000

[...] Matthew Taylor of the RSA reaches a similar conclusion to me here, but for different reasons. This entry was written by admin, posted on 12Jan09 at 20:47, filed under Strategy, Tories and tagged 2009, economics, Matthew Taylor, RSA. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Is Crossrail safe in the Tories hands? [...]

By: matthewtaylor

matthewtaylor — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:54:17 +0000

Hi Blimpish

Thanks for this. You are actually making points very similar to the ones I just heard from the incoming Chair of the RSA (and FT columnist), Luke Johnson; when it comes to voters attitudes, it’s wealth rather than income that matters. I suspect you are right. But one thing that could give Labour cause for hope; if incomes have been rising for several months any improvement in the economy late in 2009 could lead to an earlier feel good factor that we would normally expect. So the one off factors – like the pensions and benefit uplift – could help Labour avoid the lag between objective and subjective recovery.

Thanks for the really useful comments, and I say, I suspect you are right about wealth

Matthew

By: J H Holloway

J H Holloway — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:49:42 +0000

Thanks for the reply – perhaps you could explain how this blog relates to what the RSA is trying to do, or is this you speaking personally?