Jump to content

Why do Urban people vote Left, but Rural people vote Right?


August1991

Recommended Posts

By my count, there are 10 federal seats on the island of Montreal and 25 in Toronto. The federal Conservatives have none. Moreover, the CAQ has no seats in Montreal (but the QS wonders how to win outside cities.)

In the US this is obvious. But elsewhere, it is also true.

Some argue that urban people are progressive-thinkers while rural people are backward .

Others argue that most urban people are rent-seekers living beside a few limousine-liberal, wealth creators.

========

If I were a gay man, or a single young woman, where would I live?

===

Is it better to be ambitious in a small town or in a large city?

===

If you have nothing, where is it better to live on the street?

 

 

    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, August1991 said:

By my count, there are 10 federal seats on the island of Montreal and 25 in Toronto. The federal Conservatives have none. Moreover, the CAQ has no seats in Montreal (but the QS wonders how to win outside cities.)

In the US this is obvious. But elsewhere, it is also true.

Some argue that urban people are progressive-thinkers while rural people are backward .

Others argue that most urban people are rent-seekers living beside a few limousine-liberal, wealth creators.

========

If I were a gay man, or a single young woman, where would I live?

===

Is it better to be ambitious in a small town or in a large city?

===

If you have nothing, where is it better to live on the street?

 

 

    

It's more like the urban and rural are at odds.  But it's only been that way for 10,000 years or so.  See Claim and Abel.

 

More recently Alberta would vote 100% Liberal and Texas 100% Democrat and the cities otherwise.

 

Things change...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't speak for Canada, but in the US this question isn't much of a mystery. Urban voters are younger, better educated, have higher incomes, more racial and social diversity, more immigrants, arts and culture, etc.

Rural areas are older, whiter, less educated. There's nothing wrong with enjoying a rural lifestyle, but choosing it is sort of like saying "I don't want to change, I don't want things to change, I don't want new and different, so I'm staying right here." It's why small towns suffer from brain drain. The people who grow up there who are interested in new experiences and challenges leave. Sometimes they come back, but in general it's a shrinking, aging population.

They just don't have much in common and are looking in different directions.

Edited by Hodad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hodad said:

I can't speak for Canada, but in the US this question isn't much of a mystery. Urban voters are younger, better educated, have higher incomes, more racial and social diversity, more immigrants, arts and culture, etc.

Rural areas are older, whiter, less educated. There's nothing wrong with enjoying a rural lifestyle, but choosing it is sort of like saying "I don't want to change, I don't want things to change, I don't want new and different, so I'm staying right here." It's why small towns suffer from brain drain. The people who grow up there who are interested in new experiences and challenges leave. Sometimes they come back, but in general it's a shrinking, aging population.

They just don't have much in common and are looking in different directions.

Urban voters typically have  more crime as well. Homelessness.

There are pros and cons to each side.

'Floating in a trash pit': tenters remain at Hastings camp | CBC News

This is what can happen when progressives run amok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/17/2023 at 11:51 PM, August1991 said:

If you have nothing, where is it better to live on the street?

You pointed out most of the differences already. In my view the big city is where big business goes. There's a lot more money around. There is also the ghetto. People who need welfare are attracted to city life where rent and odd jobs are more available. Plus social services.

It's pretty obvious when living in big cities why you need welfare.

Small towns don't have as much wealth, but also not as much poverty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a general rule of thumb, the more self reliant you are then the more you'll tend to be right wing. People are more self reliant in the country away from services. The easier you have things and the more things are done FOR you the more you will tend to be socialist or left wing. And that is definitely more to be found in teh cities. Also the more money you have the more you tend to be on the left leaning side of the spectrum historically.

People in the country want to be left alone to do their own thing. They use firearms to hunt and protect themselves and their property and animals against all sorts of threats, and they don't appreciate being told they are evil people for that. 

They are less interested in funding health care for drug addicts while they don't even have a doctor or medical emergency room in their entire community for people who DON"T make horrible life choices.

They tend to be focused on actual solutions, not just lip service and virtue signalling.  You can't talk a fence into repairing itself. The left tends to focus on issues where their talk and what action they do take doesnt' fix anything. The carbon tax for example hasn't reduced pollution but it has driven up costs especially in places where there IS no public transit.

And because left wing people tend to congregate in cities for various reasons it is common for the left to ignore or even hurt those outside those regions IF they feel it will win them votes IN those vote rich areas. The 'us vs them' tactic is prevalent in today's politics but it's always been there somewhat.

Also people in cities tend to be more formally educated - and our colleges and universities are extremely left wing focused. They work VERY hard to repress right wing viewpoints of any kind and highlight left wing thinking. This is not as bad in Canada as it is in the states yet, but it is bad.

Anyway, those are some of the main reasons. Obviously that's making simple of a complex issue.

Edited by CdnFox
(left out a few things)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2023 at 12:29 AM, Hodad said:

I can't speak for Canada, but in the US this question isn't much of a mystery. Urban voters are younger, better educated, have higher incomes, more racial and social diversity, more immigrants, arts and culture, etc.

Rural areas are older, whiter, less educated.

....

Huh? As an urban Canadian, I can't speak for all of America.

=====

IME, rural people, local communities, rely on word-of-mouth for trust.

Urban voters, as you describe them, have a different system of trust. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/17/2023 at 11:51 PM, August1991 said:

By my count, there are 10 federal seats on the island of Montreal and 25 in Toronto. The federal Conservatives have none. Moreover, the CAQ has no seats in Montreal (but the QS wonders how to win outside cities.)

In the US this is obvious. But elsewhere, it is also true.

Some argue that urban people are progressive-thinkers while rural people are backward .

Others argue that most urban people are rent-seekers living beside a few limousine-liberal, wealth creators.

========

If I were a gay man, or a single young woman, where would I live?

===

Is it better to be ambitious in a small town or in a large city?

===

If you have nothing, where is it better to live on the street?

 

 

    

Urban areas attract more welfare bums and criminals. They tend to be more liberal. Rural areas are more family oriented, more common sense and logic.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, reason10 said:

Urban areas attract more welfare bums and criminals. They tend to be more liberal. Rural areas are more family oriented, more common sense and logic.

Reason: Correlation is not causation.

If many welfare bums and criminals live in an urban area is not because the urban area is liberal.  

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Reason: Correlation is not causation.

If many welfare bums and criminals live in an urban area is not because the urban area is liberal.  

I think you got that backwards - i think he was saying the area was liberal because the bums and criminals were there, not that they were there because it was liberal.

Although certainly it doesn't hurt that these areas are more liberal. In more conservative areas they may be tolerated less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/17/2023 at 11:51 PM, August1991 said:

Some argue that urban people are progressive-thinkers while rural people are backward .

 

 

    

It's not that rural people are backwards, it's just that they're more susceptible to right-wing propaganda. Propaganda is based in fear, usually of different people. If you live in a rural area, you're far less likely to meet any of the people you're told to be afraid of. Whereas if you live in a big city, you probably have friends that right-wing media says are trying to kill you.

So when Fox tells you to be afraid of Atheists, Muslims, gay people, trans people, that's probably not going to work on someone who lives in Los Angelus or New York City. But a dude in the sticks might never have met someone who is LGBT or not Protestant. There's also less economic opportunity in rural areas, which means recessions hurt rural people more. And when times are bad, people become open to radical solutions. Which isn't always a bad thing, but the radical solution being pushed by the billionaire class is basically Fascism.

The same thing is going on in Europe. Fascism is on the rise in regions that are rural and poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/5/2023 at 1:17 AM, Americana Antifa said:

It's not that rural people are backwards, it's just that they're more susceptible to right-wing propaganda. Propaganda is based in fear, usually of different people. If you live in a rural area, you're far less likely to meet any of the people you're told to be afraid of. Whereas if you live in a big city, you probably have friends that right-wing media says are trying to kill you.

So when Fox tells you to be afraid of Atheists, Muslims, gay people, trans people, that's probably not going to work on someone who lives in Los Angelus or New York City. But a dude in the sticks might never have met someone who is LGBT or not Protestant. There's also less economic opportunity in rural areas, which means recessions hurt rural people more. And when times are bad, people become open to radical solutions. Which isn't always a bad thing, but the radical solution being pushed by the billionaire class is basically Fascism.

The same thing is going on in Europe. Fascism is on the rise in regions that are rural and poor.

No, that's just a very bigoted and prejudiced reply.  It really is just a variant on 'rural people are backwards'.  There's several problems with it - lets go through them.

1 - rural people hate/fear those who are different.

In fact rural people are far more welcoming of strangers than the urban folk these days, at least in Canada.  THere's a long long tradition that supports this acceptance. There's also a real attitude of 'if it's not affecting me, i don't really care'.

Your premise also supposes that there's no chance to meet "different" people. I really hate to break it to you but there's a solid representation of different religions and sexualities in the prairies. Your idea that there isn't is just weird. They may not hold as many big parades but then neither do the "normal" people.

2 - and this is the biggie - Conservatives are all about hating other people. THat's why they vote for them.

This is just you being a bigot straight out. The Conservative party  didn't attack gays or muslims or anyone else while they were in power and no proposals to do so are on the table. THey may not support laws that are all about virtue signalling to various groups but they're pretty much against virtue signalling as a waste of time in general. 

So you imagine all these people sitting in their rural homes petrified and furious at muslims or something and so they'll vot cpc because the cpc will....  do what? They're not going to do anything against the muslims. If anything they're more likely than the libs to stand up for religious freedoms.

So the premise is flawed in the first place - even if rural folk all lived in fear and anger over different people as you surmise (which is REALLY weird) then voting cpc wouldn't help them.

Sorry - but could we get you to reign that bigotry in a little bit?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

No, that's just a very bigoted and prejudiced reply.  It really is just a variant on 'rural people are backwards'.  There's several problems with it - lets go through them.

1 - rural people hate/fear those who are different.

In fact rural people are far more welcoming of strangers than the urban folk these days, at least in Canada.  THere's a long long tradition that supports this acceptance. There's also a real attitude of 'if it's not affecting me, i don't really care'.

Your premise also supposes that there's no chance to meet "different" people. I really hate to break it to you but there's a solid representation of different religions and sexualities in the prairies. Your idea that there isn't is just weird. They may not hold as many big parades but then neither do the "normal" people.

First, I didn't say rural people hate/fear people who are different. I said they're more likely to be susceptible to right-wing propaganda about how different people are scary. This doesn't mean they all fall for it, only that more of them do then city people.

Secondly, I didn't say there's "no chance" to meet different people. I said that in a rural area, you're less likely to meet different people. The less people you have living in a region, the less diversity there's going to be. 

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

2 - and this is the biggie - Conservatives are all about hating other people. THat's why they vote for them.

I can give you the benefit of the doubt that it's different in Canada, but in America, Republicans pretty much only talk about culture war nonsense. Also, the Right has used fear of the other to justify their opposition to every social justice movement from freeing the slaves to allowing gender affirming care. It hasn't always been as weird as it is today, conservatives used to also talk about economics and foreign policy. But even when they weren't completely insane, they still relied on fear of different people.

 

 

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

First, I didn't say rural people hate/fear people who are different. I said they're more likely to be susceptible to right-wing propaganda about how different people are scary.

And you're offering that as a genuine distinction? Especially when you're saying it explains why they are conservative?

So they find other people scary and vote conservative'. That's what you're saying. That's pretty much the same thing.

And what conservative propaganda are you referring to? This is canada - give examples of propaganda the conservative party has put out suggesting we should be afraid of 'different' people.

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

can give you the benefit of the doubt that it's different in Canada, but in America, Republicans pretty much only talk about culture war nonsense.

As an outsider looking in let me assure you there's no apparent difference between either party in the states in that respect. They both talk culture war stuff non stop. I'm sure dems think the republicans are worse and the republicans think the dems are worse but they're both pretty darn bad.

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

Also, the Right has used fear of the other to justify their opposition to every social justice movement from freeing the slaves to allowing gender affirming care.

It was the left and the democrats who were against freeing the slaves, if we feel like going back that far. Lincoln was a republican. The KKK was the militant arm of the dems back in those days.

As to these days i don't think it's 'fear of the other' that the republicans go on about when looking at gender affirming care such as surgeries. As near as can be told looking at american media they seem mostly honked about the use of language and or having to actually pay for such medical processes through orgs like the army and such.

I'm sorry but your point of view was largely driven by your clear preference for the left wing of the us parties. It was a very biased and inaccurate statement, at the very least for Canada. The people in most of the rural areas in Canada are pretty good people and they don't vote conservative out of fear of anyone. They tend to vote that way because they believe in minimal gov't, lower taxes and don't care about social programs they're never going to see or benefit from anywhere in their communities. And even then there's parts that don't - look at rural newfoundland (which is all of it). or sometimes rural manitoba, etc. Rural bc often goes NDP.  But if there's a tendency to go cpc then they do so for reasons OTHER than fears about other people.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And you're offering that as a genuine distinction? Especially when you're saying it explains why they are conservative?

So they find other people scary and vote conservative'. That's what you're saying. That's pretty much the same thing.

That's a child's understanding of what I said. What I'm actually saying is that certain material/environmental conditions make people more likely to fall for propaganda about "the other" being dangerous. Humans, in general, are afraid of what they don't understand. But even if you don't understand the whole transgender thing, you're less likely to be transphobic if you know trans people.

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And what conservative propaganda are you referring to? This is canada - give examples of propaganda the conservative party has put out suggesting we should be afraid of 'different' people.

Like I said, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that Canada is different. I'm talking about America here.

Although, I saw that Canadian trucker insanity. They were repeating many of the same talking-points we hear in America. Plus, Steven Crowder and Jordan Peterson are Canadian and they fear-monger about trans people constantly. Is that normal in Canada?

 

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It was the left and the democrats who were against freeing the slaves, if we feel like going back that far. Lincoln was a republican. The KKK was the militant arm of the dems back in those days.

At the time, the Republicans were left-leaning, and the Democrats were right-leaning. Since then, the parties have switch politics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

As to these days i don't think it's 'fear of the other' that the republicans go on about when looking at gender affirming care such as surgeries. As near as can be told looking at american media they seem mostly honked about the use of language and or having to actually pay for such medical processes through orgs like the army and such.

It's much more than that. Right-wing media lies constantly about trans people. A super common lie is that doctors all across the country are performing trans surgeries on children. Moral panics always use the "think of the children" fear. There's also the lie that in schools, they're grooming kids to be trans or gay. People like Matt Walsh, Tucker Carlson, Michael Knowles, Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens and so on are obsessed with this. Oh, and there's also the talking-point that if this continues, everyone will be trans. Basically, all of the anti-gay arguments have been recycled into anti-trans arguments.

Again, if you have trans friends, you're less likely to fall for this. But if you've never even met a trans person, you are at least more likely to be tricked.

Edited by Americana Antifa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

That's a child's understanding of what I said.

What you said was childish. Trying to justify it or dress it up is no less so.

13 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

Like I said, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that Canada is different. I'm talking about America here.

Although, I saw that Canadian trucker insanity. They were repeating many of the same talking-points we hear in America. Plus, Steven Crowder and Jordan Peterson are Canadian and they fear-monger about trans people constantly. Is that normal in Canada?

There was no fear mongering about trans people during the convoy protests. Sorry. And the only one here spouting talking points is you.

And even if we relegate your nonsense to the states it doesn't hold water. Like i said, it's just bigotry and hatred - as if the only reason to vote republican is because you hate trans people.

13 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

 

At the time, the Republicans were left-leaning, and the Democrats were right-leaning. Since then, the parties have switch politics.

You literally were the one who brought up slavery and that era as an example of the republicans current behavior.

13 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

It's much more than that. Right-wing media lies constantly about trans people. A super common lie is that doctors all across the country are performing trans surgeries on children. Moral panics always use the "think of the children" fear.

Well, i'm sure it's blown out of proportion just as the left blows it's talking points out of proportion but they're not entirely wrong.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/

there's no doubt that an increasing number of children are receiving hormone therapy and surgery. That should be a little concerning at least for people on all sides of the political spectrum and is worthy of conversation.

13 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

 

There's also the lie that in schools, they're grooming kids to be trans or gay. People like Matt Walsh, Tucker Carlson, Michael Knowles, Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens and so on are obsessed with this. Oh, and there's also the talking-point that if this continues, everyone will be trans. Basically, all of the anti-gay arguments have been recycled into anti-trans arguments.

Doing a few web searches and a little reading combined with my previous experiences suggests strongly that you're grossly overexaggerating. Sure - they do raise concerns that drag storytime is a grooming exercise. In fairness the way it ws portrayed gives that impression pretty clearly so it's not unreasonable even if the reality is not that way. And seriously - what' s the point of specifically having 'drag childrens story time'  other than to expose children to that alternative lifestyle. so pretending it has nothing to do with that is silly.

And of course they exaggerate and call it grooming and you exaggerate and pretend there's absolutely ZERO interest in getting kids comfortable with the idea of alternative lifestyles. 

Still not seeing a lot of daylight between the two sides.

13 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

Again, if you have trans friends, you're less likely to fall for this. But if you've never even met a trans person, you are at least more likely to be tricked.

Hogwash. That's just plain nonsense.

This is just tribalism.  Anything you see as contrary to your echo chamber you're trying to dismiss entirely as invalid, which it is not. Meanwhile the tucker's of the world go the other way and try to dismiss any concerns you bring up.

The majority of people aren't that childish or brainwashed. They can understand that trans people want to have a place in society AND understand there's concersn about youth getting life altering medical treatments that early. They can think drag is fine - while still questioning if its appropirate to expose children to complex sexual ideas at a young age.

Maybe YOU choose to be a democrat out of hatred and anger (sure sounds like it) and maybe tucker calrson chooses to be a republican out of fear and anger (or so you say) but that's not the average person.

Honestly - how are you ANY better than they are

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2023 at 11:51 AM, CdnFox said:

There was no fear mongering about trans people during the convoy protests. Sorry. And the only one here spouting talking points is you.

Not what I said. What I said was: "They were repeating many of the same talking-points we hear in America."

On 3/10/2023 at 11:51 AM, CdnFox said:

And even if we relegate your nonsense to the states it doesn't hold water. Like i said, it's just bigotry and hatred - as if the only reason to vote republican is because you hate trans people.

It's not the only reason, but considering the Right is cartoonishly obsessed with transphobia, you'd be dishonest to say that's not a major reason. And the other things they talk about are all fear-based too. It's all about the fear of change, which is also why older people are more likely to be conservative.

On 3/10/2023 at 11:51 AM, CdnFox said:

You literally were the one who brought up slavery and that era as an example of the republicans current behavior.

No, I was talking about conservatives. I was saying that conservative politicians have been against every social justice change, from slavery to trans rights.

On 3/10/2023 at 11:51 AM, CdnFox said:

there's no doubt that an increasing number of children are receiving hormone therapy and surgery. 

Yes. And after it became socially acceptable to be left-handed, there was an increase in left-handed use. After homosexuality became acceptable, there was an increase in homosexuality. In both cases, people who have always been that way were now able to be that way publicly. And in both cases, the increase was only in the beginning. But, because right-wing politicians rely on fear, they started saying "soon everyone will be GAY!"

On 3/10/2023 at 11:51 AM, CdnFox said:

And of course they exaggerate and call it grooming and you exaggerate and pretend there's absolutely ZERO interest in getting kids comfortable with the idea of alternative lifestyles. 

Absolutely not! Of course schools are teaching kids that it's okay to be gay or trans. I never said there was no interest in getting kids comfortable with different people or lifestyles. What I'm saying is that this is ok, but right-wing politicians are using this as fear porn. They're trying to scare parents into thinking this is a bad thing, plus they're lying about all these teachers being pedos.

On 3/10/2023 at 11:51 AM, CdnFox said:

Maybe YOU choose to be a democrat out of hatred and anger (sure sounds like it) and maybe tucker calrson chooses to be a republican out of fear and anger (or so you say) but that's not the average person.

I'm not a Democrat, I just vote that way because I believe in harm-reduction.

Saying people vote for student debt cancelation, a higher minimum wage, and more affordable healthcare all out of fear and anger is insane. People vote Democrat to improve society. People vote Republican because they're scared of trans rights and they want to OWN THE LIBS.

And Tucker Carlson? Really?! That's the example you choose? How many times does Carlson need to admit that he doesn't believe the things he says on TV? He's a fraud who pushes fear porn that he knows is nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This thread has missed that in recent times, historically, since the Industrial Revolution, and in democracies, rural peoples tend to be more land-owning; and urban areas tend to have a much higher proportion of renters. 

Land owners overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to land and property ownership rights.

Renters overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to government intervention to maintain lower prices and good upkeep of their dwellings, subsidize added urban costs such as sidewalks, municipal water and sewage, and the more complex transportation infrastructure requirements of cities.

This is of course very basic and overly generalized.

Political culture plays the part of explaining the outliers to this generalization, as explanations do exist for why certain suburbs always vote Liberal rather than Conservative, and certain rural ridings NDP. Historical traditions and values including religion, revered past party leaders and corporatism (the issues and lobby groups a political party is associated with) are the most common reasons.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 500channelsurfer said:

This thread has missed that in recent times, historically, since the Industrial Revolution, and in democracies, rural peoples tend to be more land-owning; and urban areas tend to have a much higher proportion of renters. 

Land owners overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to land and property ownership rights.

Renters overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to government intervention to maintain lower prices and good upkeep of their dwellings, subsidize added urban costs such as sidewalks, municipal water and sewage, and the more complex transportation infrastructure requirements of cities.

This is of course very basic and overly generalized.

Political culture plays the part of explaining the outliers to this generalization, as explanations do exist for why certain suburbs always vote Liberal rather than Conservative, and certain rural ridings NDP. Historical traditions and values including religion, revered past party leaders and corporatism (the issues and lobby groups a political party is associated with) are the most common reasons.

 

It has a slight ring of truth to it that makes it believable  but - i dont' see the liberals OR the conservatives really doing anything for land ownership. So i'm not sure i see how it would impact us here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/5/2023 at 10:17 AM, Americana Antifa said:

...  The same thing is going on in Europe. Fascism is on the rise in regions that are rural and poor.

Fascism is on the rise just because of high level of immigration

New immigrant are a formidable attraction to vote far right for people never did. They are their last resource. Workes are the new voters of far right movements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It has a slight ring of truth to it that makes it believable  but - i dont' see the liberals OR the conservatives really doing anything for land ownership. So i'm not sure i see how it would impact us here?

If you own land/property or are in the process of owning it (mortgage) you either likely consider the financial industry and easy facilitation of financial transactions important for your mortgage, or for investments if you are mortgage-free (parties more on the right).

Farmers are typically land owners and also typically vote right, and particulars of right-wing parties such as the PPC's anti-supply management policy cater to certain farmers. Generally, the agriculture industry and lobbies are tied to right-wing parties. 

The right broadly is more law-enforcement oriented (protection of private property) whereas extreme leftists are more associated with redistribution.

Liberals have made significant policy moves to encourage home-ownership through new first-time-buyer incentives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,746
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...