Past studies have found that greater education reduces support for redistribution and welfare, potentially making it harder for left parties to win support for these policies as societies become better educated. In this paper we argue that highly-educated (and also younger) people are in fact the strongest supporters of welfare. Instead, the problem for the left is that education now structures political competition geographically. We present evidence for our argument from Great Britain using multilevel regression and post-stratification based on historical social survey data and an original representative survey, comparing support for welfare and redistribution at the lowest level of local government (local authorities) in the mid-1990s to support in 2020. We show that areas' average incomes and unemployment rates have become less important as drivers of social policy support while educational attainment and age profiles have become considerably more important. This new geographic alignment of support along age and education lines is similar to 'second-dimension' divides over social issues and Brexit. It complicates the left's task in winning a majority for redistribution and welfare because relatively few places are very young or very highly-educated. Using data on vote shares we find that the Labour party is struggling to win moderately-educated and moderately-young areas, whereas it succeeded in moderate-income and unemployment areas in the 1990s. In geographic terms the education divide is now a redistributive divide too, but the left is only winning in the youngest and most-educated places.