- Thread starter Barry98
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
Welcome to the forum. Although you can post in any forum, the USA forum is here in case of local regs or laws
J
julesverne
i was in born in 71. i hate all politicians as they are only politicians to serve their Ego's i also hate trade unions for the same reason. and whilst i totally blame thatcher for decimating british manufacturing trade unions must also take equal blame as they did just as much damage to british manufacturing.
My old man was a very active member of the Militant tendancy during the miners strike and i was with him as a small child when he met Scargill. Christ if i was too meet him today i think i would chin the ****.
Its People like him and his ilk that ruined the mining industry just as much as thatcher did for fighting a battle that could not be won. promising the miners something that was never going to happen.
My old man was a very active member of the Militant tendancy during the miners strike and i was with him as a small child when he met Scargill. Christ if i was too meet him today i think i would chin the ****.
Its People like him and his ilk that ruined the mining industry just as much as thatcher did for fighting a battle that could not be won. promising the miners something that was never going to happen.
J
julesverne
still this made laugh ant and decs impression of maggie thatcher
best ever spitting image part 1 of 7 - YouTube
best ever spitting image part 1 of 7 - YouTube
K
kirkgas
P
petercj
The BBC have been sucking up this morning to the memory of Thatcher (fawning as they do to those in positions of power), they played a recording of Carol Thatcher made a few years ago, and she made comment on how single-minded her mother was - she used the term "tunnel vision" and "blinkered" to describe the way her mother powered and applied her determination to get things done - she wasn't being critical of her mother, just describing her as she saw her.
Having lived through (survived) the Thatcher years, I think her daughter's description of her was very accurate and insightful.
Thatcher drove her policies through with a complete disregard for the collateral damage she wreaked on people, and also whole communities.
She trained in the physical sciences, and she analysed things from the whole down to the elements - as is the way in the physical sciences. I've always thought that partly explained why she was such a champion for individualism, and so opposed to collectivism. This was reflected in her idea that there is no such thing as society, just many individuals who should follow their own best interests, which would work out as the best option for running the country based on the overall balance sheet.
It might be something of a parody to say that Thatcher saw "society" as a jungle where the fittest would survive, but that was the core model she so often followed. Her ideas have now become a political bible for the Tory hard Right to follow. Shrink the State and reel in anything that smacks of a social service and hand it over to the private sector.
Her simplistic and dogmatic ideas were very easy for a lot of working people to take up - her talk of: "Victorian values" connected with many of the older generation around in that era. Although in many ways she distorted history to suite her own political ends, or at least her advisers did, because seen in context of the period, the Victorians did much to civilize society and support the poor.
Some of the posts on here suggest that the folk writing them seem to take the attitude that British industry was finished anyway, and that Thatcher just dismantled the outdated structures and swept away the debris. Having read many a post on this forum over the past year, I have the impression that very few people on here have any idea of what the Trade Union movement was really about. Which for a website visited by so many tradesmen is incredible, while also understandable, but never-the-less, very sad.
We live in a society where history is written by the media, and the media have the power to create and spread narratives that many people take to represent an accurate record of earlier times. Mention Trade Unions, and for many people those two words conjure up images of miners battling with the police, restricted power supplies, and perhaps the most emotive image, the unburied dead of that period.
I can't remember seeing a documentary on the role of the Trade Unions in the training of craftsmen; or the development of safe working practices through the ages of British industry; or the general improvement in working conditions, and pay, that the Unions fought for over many decades, long before Thatcher was even born.
The high profile Trade Union leaders that battled with Thatcher were labelled militant because they stood up for what had been achieved by the Trade Union movement over time. Most of the moderate Trade Unionists who also tried to protect people's jobs and working conditions during that period have never been heard of by the general public.
Scargill and Thatcher were theatre, and the media loved it, because it was the stuff headlines are made of. Very little has changed in that respect over the past 50 years.
The details of the problems involved, of which there were many, were lost in what was a living soap opera.
Thatcher became an icon because so many people needed something simple to hang on to. One of her talents was to convert complex issues into simple black and white concepts that many people found easy to get a handle on. Thatcher frequently referred to the national economy as a: "cake", of which there was only so much to go round. Trade Unionists were "greedy people” who didn't care about other people having a slice of the cake, they'd eat the lot if mummy Thatcher didn't stop them.
It was all nonsense, but a lot of people related to the simplicity of it all. There was a battle on between US, and THEM, and Thatcher was on the side of "US", i.e. fighting against the bad guys! She was like the Lone Ranger without a mask, fighting for the greater good and firing her silver bullets at anyone who opposed her - including those in her own Government when it suited her (which eventually was to be her folly)
Yes, there were lots of problems around re continuity and change in British industry, but had it not been for the trigger-happy Mrs Thatcher blazing away to get her self in the headlines, Britain could have had a much smoother transition through some difficult times.
At that time, and also when looking back, it's easy to think that Scargill could have handled things much better too. The theatre of that period was about power, and I do think Scargill got caught up in the drama of it all. But then, if he'd been a quietly spoken, mild-mannered moderate man, Thatcher would have steam-rollered over him, i.e. he would never have been heard of by the general public, like most other Trade Union leaders of that time. If you are going to get in the ring with someone like Thatcher,you need to be able to throw a punch, as well as deflect them. Scargill wasn't very good at deflecting, he actually led with his chin on most public occasions. Thatcher claimed the Trade Unions wanted to run the country, which was a load of nonsense, but the media added it to the drama and sold it to a lot of people.
However, getting too caught up with the individuals involved is to miss the bigger picture.
A lot the mines that were closed down in the Thatcher years were still profitable. Which is not to suggest building a future on coal (to suggest that is a classic example of how Thatcher would polarise issues to suite her purpose). With hindsight, making the best of the energy resources we had at that time would have made sense in so many ways. However,at the time, North Sea gas seemed like an easy option, and so in Thatcher's eyes, coal was an outdated source. Accepting that some transition needed to be made at some point in the future to other sources, it would have made sense to have gradually run down some of the mines, while providing transitional training for miners into other occupational fields. Such a move would have offered miners some hope of financial security, and the radicals around the Trade Union movement would not have had a mandate for doing battle.
British Leyland was another mess - which is probably another post.
What I have a vivid memory of from that period is of British workers being accused of being "lazy and incompetent" and statistics being banded about by the Press to the effect that Japanese workers could turn out three cars to every one made by British workers. What they failed to mention was that the Japanese workers were operating state-of-the-art equipment in car manufacturing plants that had received massive investment.
If British workers were so lazy and incompetent, why did Japanese car manufactures come to Britain to set up car plants, and why did those plants do so well?
Why didn't the Japanese swallow 'the narrative' that British workers are hopeless, and that Britain is a country unsuited to making things?
Why is it that we have so many foreign manufacturers willing to invest in British based industry, and so little investment by British capitalists? Many of whom would rather transport their wealth to invest in China and other high-return areas of the world. Ironically,China’s prosperity flows from collectivism, and not the individualism inherent in Thatcherism.
Thatcherites who use the narrative to say: "well this is just how it is", should be asked to explain why Germany has not been subject to the same "inevitable global forces", having not dropped their industries as we did.
No doubt the legacy of Thatcher will live on for many years to come.
Thatcherism as an ideology has become every-day commonsense for most of us in Britain, i.e. love her, or hate her,she has shaped all of our lives. Personally, I would say for the worst, others will say for the better. Possibly, my views are different because I remember a Britain where people did care about each other, and they didn't see their neighbour as a competitor to be defeated in a jungle that will swallow you up if you take your eye off the ball. A Britain where people didn't get a kicking when they were down, i.e. people who were out of work were seen as unfortunate, and not as scroungers. A Britain in which people were proud to be British, and proud of the skills British people had, and the things that they made. Nowadays, so many people seem happier running down Britain, then finding something good to say about it.
Some people have compared Thatcher to Churchill, which imo is a huge mistake, because whereas Churchill united British people in: 'the hour of need', Thatcher divided people, and such divisions will live on long after her demise.
The most powerful industrial nation in the world today is China, and their culture is based on collectivism, not the individualism that has pulled Britain apart in so many ways.
I often wonder how different things might have been for Britain if we had held on to the collectivist culture that Britain had after WW2, i.e. if we had sorted out Britain's industrial evolution with more diplomacy and care, and with less drama and strife.
Good-bye Mrs Thatcher - unfortunately, a lot of us will remember you for a long time to come.
Having lived through (survived) the Thatcher years, I think her daughter's description of her was very accurate and insightful.
Thatcher drove her policies through with a complete disregard for the collateral damage she wreaked on people, and also whole communities.
She trained in the physical sciences, and she analysed things from the whole down to the elements - as is the way in the physical sciences. I've always thought that partly explained why she was such a champion for individualism, and so opposed to collectivism. This was reflected in her idea that there is no such thing as society, just many individuals who should follow their own best interests, which would work out as the best option for running the country based on the overall balance sheet.
It might be something of a parody to say that Thatcher saw "society" as a jungle where the fittest would survive, but that was the core model she so often followed. Her ideas have now become a political bible for the Tory hard Right to follow. Shrink the State and reel in anything that smacks of a social service and hand it over to the private sector.
Her simplistic and dogmatic ideas were very easy for a lot of working people to take up - her talk of: "Victorian values" connected with many of the older generation around in that era. Although in many ways she distorted history to suite her own political ends, or at least her advisers did, because seen in context of the period, the Victorians did much to civilize society and support the poor.
Some of the posts on here suggest that the folk writing them seem to take the attitude that British industry was finished anyway, and that Thatcher just dismantled the outdated structures and swept away the debris. Having read many a post on this forum over the past year, I have the impression that very few people on here have any idea of what the Trade Union movement was really about. Which for a website visited by so many tradesmen is incredible, while also understandable, but never-the-less, very sad.
We live in a society where history is written by the media, and the media have the power to create and spread narratives that many people take to represent an accurate record of earlier times. Mention Trade Unions, and for many people those two words conjure up images of miners battling with the police, restricted power supplies, and perhaps the most emotive image, the unburied dead of that period.
I can't remember seeing a documentary on the role of the Trade Unions in the training of craftsmen; or the development of safe working practices through the ages of British industry; or the general improvement in working conditions, and pay, that the Unions fought for over many decades, long before Thatcher was even born.
The high profile Trade Union leaders that battled with Thatcher were labelled militant because they stood up for what had been achieved by the Trade Union movement over time. Most of the moderate Trade Unionists who also tried to protect people's jobs and working conditions during that period have never been heard of by the general public.
Scargill and Thatcher were theatre, and the media loved it, because it was the stuff headlines are made of. Very little has changed in that respect over the past 50 years.
The details of the problems involved, of which there were many, were lost in what was a living soap opera.
Thatcher became an icon because so many people needed something simple to hang on to. One of her talents was to convert complex issues into simple black and white concepts that many people found easy to get a handle on. Thatcher frequently referred to the national economy as a: "cake", of which there was only so much to go round. Trade Unionists were "greedy people” who didn't care about other people having a slice of the cake, they'd eat the lot if mummy Thatcher didn't stop them.
It was all nonsense, but a lot of people related to the simplicity of it all. There was a battle on between US, and THEM, and Thatcher was on the side of "US", i.e. fighting against the bad guys! She was like the Lone Ranger without a mask, fighting for the greater good and firing her silver bullets at anyone who opposed her - including those in her own Government when it suited her (which eventually was to be her folly)
Yes, there were lots of problems around re continuity and change in British industry, but had it not been for the trigger-happy Mrs Thatcher blazing away to get her self in the headlines, Britain could have had a much smoother transition through some difficult times.
At that time, and also when looking back, it's easy to think that Scargill could have handled things much better too. The theatre of that period was about power, and I do think Scargill got caught up in the drama of it all. But then, if he'd been a quietly spoken, mild-mannered moderate man, Thatcher would have steam-rollered over him, i.e. he would never have been heard of by the general public, like most other Trade Union leaders of that time. If you are going to get in the ring with someone like Thatcher,you need to be able to throw a punch, as well as deflect them. Scargill wasn't very good at deflecting, he actually led with his chin on most public occasions. Thatcher claimed the Trade Unions wanted to run the country, which was a load of nonsense, but the media added it to the drama and sold it to a lot of people.
However, getting too caught up with the individuals involved is to miss the bigger picture.
A lot the mines that were closed down in the Thatcher years were still profitable. Which is not to suggest building a future on coal (to suggest that is a classic example of how Thatcher would polarise issues to suite her purpose). With hindsight, making the best of the energy resources we had at that time would have made sense in so many ways. However,at the time, North Sea gas seemed like an easy option, and so in Thatcher's eyes, coal was an outdated source. Accepting that some transition needed to be made at some point in the future to other sources, it would have made sense to have gradually run down some of the mines, while providing transitional training for miners into other occupational fields. Such a move would have offered miners some hope of financial security, and the radicals around the Trade Union movement would not have had a mandate for doing battle.
British Leyland was another mess - which is probably another post.
What I have a vivid memory of from that period is of British workers being accused of being "lazy and incompetent" and statistics being banded about by the Press to the effect that Japanese workers could turn out three cars to every one made by British workers. What they failed to mention was that the Japanese workers were operating state-of-the-art equipment in car manufacturing plants that had received massive investment.
If British workers were so lazy and incompetent, why did Japanese car manufactures come to Britain to set up car plants, and why did those plants do so well?
Why didn't the Japanese swallow 'the narrative' that British workers are hopeless, and that Britain is a country unsuited to making things?
Why is it that we have so many foreign manufacturers willing to invest in British based industry, and so little investment by British capitalists? Many of whom would rather transport their wealth to invest in China and other high-return areas of the world. Ironically,China’s prosperity flows from collectivism, and not the individualism inherent in Thatcherism.
Thatcherites who use the narrative to say: "well this is just how it is", should be asked to explain why Germany has not been subject to the same "inevitable global forces", having not dropped their industries as we did.
No doubt the legacy of Thatcher will live on for many years to come.
Thatcherism as an ideology has become every-day commonsense for most of us in Britain, i.e. love her, or hate her,she has shaped all of our lives. Personally, I would say for the worst, others will say for the better. Possibly, my views are different because I remember a Britain where people did care about each other, and they didn't see their neighbour as a competitor to be defeated in a jungle that will swallow you up if you take your eye off the ball. A Britain where people didn't get a kicking when they were down, i.e. people who were out of work were seen as unfortunate, and not as scroungers. A Britain in which people were proud to be British, and proud of the skills British people had, and the things that they made. Nowadays, so many people seem happier running down Britain, then finding something good to say about it.
Some people have compared Thatcher to Churchill, which imo is a huge mistake, because whereas Churchill united British people in: 'the hour of need', Thatcher divided people, and such divisions will live on long after her demise.
The most powerful industrial nation in the world today is China, and their culture is based on collectivism, not the individualism that has pulled Britain apart in so many ways.
I often wonder how different things might have been for Britain if we had held on to the collectivist culture that Britain had after WW2, i.e. if we had sorted out Britain's industrial evolution with more diplomacy and care, and with less drama and strife.
Good-bye Mrs Thatcher - unfortunately, a lot of us will remember you for a long time to come.
J
julesverne
What i dont get and to be honest this is another subject entirely power stations could be built to burn coal just as cleanl as gas. Based on the fact we have at least 1000 years worth under the ground it seems stupid and short sighted to have a reliance on gas and nuclear. If they can make a nuclear surely they can make a clean burning coal powered station.
It seems short terms gains are always in the politicians eye rather looking at the bigger pictures and just think of how much employment it would create and best of all its ours.
It seems short terms gains are always in the politicians eye rather looking at the bigger pictures and just think of how much employment it would create and best of all its ours.
P
petercj
there were more pit closures under Harold Wilson (labour) than under Thatcher. For comparison: 406 pits closed in the 1960s, with 315,000 job losses; only 146 closed in the 1980s, with 173,000 jobs lost. The damage was already done.
British manufacturing fell as a % of gdp mostly under Blair. Just because one group of journalists say something is true, don't make it true. Anyway for my money as far as our politicians go, she was by far the best of a bad bunch.
British manufacturing fell as a % of gdp mostly under Blair. Just because one group of journalists say something is true, don't make it true. Anyway for my money as far as our politicians go, she was by far the best of a bad bunch.
P
petercj
Well that misses the point by a wide mile. The issue was about the loss of jobs, and the closing down of an industry with little regard to the consequences for the people who worked in the industry.
It needed to be managed in stages, with some effort being made to retrain people for other industries.
Throwing people on to the dole, and then creating a new benefit (Incapacity Benefit) to cover up the huge increase in unemployment put a huge strain on the economy. Being a Thatcher legacy that has carried on over three decades. Thatcher wasn't interested in any part of the State playing a role in the industrial transition - she closed down the Manpower / Skills Centres, which was the training side of the Manpower Services Commission.
Blair was more of the same in diluted form. He could see that Thatcher had managed to instill her ideology into any people's minds as a form of: "common-sense", so rather than try to return to anything that might seem like socialism (i.e. collectivism) he ran with Thatcherism lite, i.e. New Labour's own version of individualism, but based on a core of Thatcherism.
The irony now is that while Cameron & Co rattle on and blame everything on New Labour, many of the policy decisions they took were a continuation of what Thatcher started. The lack of control over the Bankers and their casino dealings was classic Thatcherite thinking. PFI in the NHS, and the introduction of an internal system of competition, was classic Thatcherism. NL sat on the sidelines as house prices escalated (another legacy of Thatcher) because it created the illusion of wealth, and gave homeowners access to credit.
The current Government constantly blame NL for the huge increase in Benefits during their time in power, but much of it was about the Thatcher legacy they inherited, i.e. Incapacity Benefit and Housing Benefit being two prime examples.
The radical free market favoured by Thatcher has seen job after job exported to China, while cheap labour has been imported from Europe to maximise the profits of service industry.
Anyway I can't spend any more time trying to educate people who just google for Daily Mail propaganda - you'll learn the hard way as your standard of living gradually slips lower and lower. Gas and plumbing experienced a hike due to the skills shortage Thatcher created by closing down MPS and throwing training over to the private sector. However, due to time, and the recession, supply and demand have turned around, and the private sector will just carry on training anyone who has the money to pay their fees, so the basic laws of the labour market will prevail as there are more and more people chasing less and less work.
Seeing the bigger picture, and coordinating the economy worked before Thatcher came along, and I don't doubt that eventually Britain will return to that kind of economic management.
At the moment, I don't see a political party with the gumption or the guts to take such a task on.
It needed to be managed in stages, with some effort being made to retrain people for other industries.
Throwing people on to the dole, and then creating a new benefit (Incapacity Benefit) to cover up the huge increase in unemployment put a huge strain on the economy. Being a Thatcher legacy that has carried on over three decades. Thatcher wasn't interested in any part of the State playing a role in the industrial transition - she closed down the Manpower / Skills Centres, which was the training side of the Manpower Services Commission.
Blair was more of the same in diluted form. He could see that Thatcher had managed to instill her ideology into any people's minds as a form of: "common-sense", so rather than try to return to anything that might seem like socialism (i.e. collectivism) he ran with Thatcherism lite, i.e. New Labour's own version of individualism, but based on a core of Thatcherism.
The irony now is that while Cameron & Co rattle on and blame everything on New Labour, many of the policy decisions they took were a continuation of what Thatcher started. The lack of control over the Bankers and their casino dealings was classic Thatcherite thinking. PFI in the NHS, and the introduction of an internal system of competition, was classic Thatcherism. NL sat on the sidelines as house prices escalated (another legacy of Thatcher) because it created the illusion of wealth, and gave homeowners access to credit.
The current Government constantly blame NL for the huge increase in Benefits during their time in power, but much of it was about the Thatcher legacy they inherited, i.e. Incapacity Benefit and Housing Benefit being two prime examples.
The radical free market favoured by Thatcher has seen job after job exported to China, while cheap labour has been imported from Europe to maximise the profits of service industry.
Anyway I can't spend any more time trying to educate people who just google for Daily Mail propaganda - you'll learn the hard way as your standard of living gradually slips lower and lower. Gas and plumbing experienced a hike due to the skills shortage Thatcher created by closing down MPS and throwing training over to the private sector. However, due to time, and the recession, supply and demand have turned around, and the private sector will just carry on training anyone who has the money to pay their fees, so the basic laws of the labour market will prevail as there are more and more people chasing less and less work.
Seeing the bigger picture, and coordinating the economy worked before Thatcher came along, and I don't doubt that eventually Britain will return to that kind of economic management.
At the moment, I don't see a political party with the gumption or the guts to take such a task on.
Doesn't miss the point at all. Coal mines were getting closed down because our country no longer ran on coal (no steam trains, new gas central heating etc). and our mines were so inefficient Australian coal was actually cheaper. Weirdly closing them is not a problem at all if it's a labour PM but if it's your own personal pantomime villain then it's suddenly the root of all evil. If I'm honest I didn't read the rest of your overly long monologue, I think you need to go and take a valium or something.
G
Guest123
Whether the mining and steel industry was profitable or not, 350,000 miners lost their only source of income with no help or alternative from the government except unemployment benefit. It was done with a ruthlessness that was unparamount in a so called modern democratic society. The bill from unemployment benefit from that period was horrific with over 3 million unemployed. Imagine being told that the job you've been trained for and worked all your life is being taken away and there was nothing else put in place for you. Wouldn't you want to protect that job and the means to support your family?
Thatcher was an evil ruthless tyrant and loathed by everyone in my country. Even her own party kicked her out in the end as a liability.
Thatcher was an evil ruthless tyrant and loathed by everyone in my country. Even her own party kicked her out in the end as a liability.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's fair comment. But lets be honest, what else was she going to do? Politicians from all parties had tried reform, had tried all sorts to modernise our country and get manufacturing working again and they had all failed. Thatcher didn't close those industries down, what she did was remove state subsidies from them. They were already totally inefficient and making a loss. You can't blame her for that. Britain was called the "sick man of Europe", our economy had "the British disease". Remember when she came into power our country was in such a crisis that it was illegal to take more than £30 out of the country. And even to do that you needed to ask permission. Why does no one blame the people that got us into that mess? Why is no one angry with those people? They get angry with the Woman who actually fixed it.
For some reason I can't edit my post. Before you edited yours I said it was fair comment. I'll take that back since you've gone down the "evil tyrant" route. We are all lucky in this country never to have really lived under one. The idea that she was one for not supporting industries that had refused to modernise for forty years by printing money endlessly, which trashed the rest of the economy is pretty lame imo. I'll leave it at that. Best of luck with your referendum, we all want the same result on that one at least.
I read that the miners were offered re training packages the lot but Scargill rejected it
G
Guest123
350, 000 retraining packages? Lol So what were all these coal miners supposed to retrain as?
The same ones that are defending Thatchers policy against the working people in this country are the ones moaning about former bankers and clerks going on fast track courses and taking jobs off plumbers. Have they not got a right to retrain?
She only helped the affluent South of England and she definitely hated Scotland almost as much as we hated her in return.
And your right, we're praying for a YES vote because at least we'll get a government that we actually voted for and not Tory toffs who don't have a clue what its like to be working class.
The same ones that are defending Thatchers policy against the working people in this country are the ones moaning about former bankers and clerks going on fast track courses and taking jobs off plumbers. Have they not got a right to retrain?
She only helped the affluent South of England and she definitely hated Scotland almost as much as we hated her in return.
And your right, we're praying for a YES vote because at least we'll get a government that we actually voted for and not Tory toffs who don't have a clue what its like to be working class.
Well since they were mostly Scottish banks, probably not if system 3 is correct. But then we probably never would have needed to save them if it hadn't been for Gordon Brown creating the fsa and his "light touch" regulation.
Maybe they could have built cars like they do in the midlands or the North East, or aircraft or electronics or I.T. or any of the hundreds of other industries that have started up and flourished in other parts of Britain. But hey it's much easier to just blame everyone else.
If sorry when Scotland vote yes I might emigrate there! Especially if they do what Iceland did
Emigrate? Have you seen the restrictions on immigration if the yes vote goes through. You'd have more chance of getting into North Korea.
G
Guest123
Wrong. Northern Rock started the ball rolling and the RBS is owned by Nat West an English bank as are the majority of bailed out banks.
Both Brown and Blair were using Thatcherite policies and embraced her in the guise of New Labour.
You remember hearing in the news when everything went **** up that they where not paying back money owed to our banks?
Well what wasn't reported was the fact the Icelandic people stuck 2 fingers up to Europe, there goverment and the too big to fail banks when told they would have to bail out the banks.
So instead of bearing the load of greedy bankers they peacefully overthrew the government rewrote the constitution sent the banks packing and are living happily ever after.
Funny how a government was overthrown so close and not a single mention on the news!
Good luck Scotland you will be better off out of this dictatorship we call a democracy.
No they weren't. Lots of people will say that becuase they would like that to be true. Brown completely re structured the banking regulator, with Ed Balls help. They took regulation away from the bank of England who had done it successfully for three hundred years and basically told the bankers to look after themselves. The massive injection of loose money injected into the economy is pretty much the exact opposite of Thatchers handbag economics of "you can only spend what you earn". Loads of people like to try and blame Thatcher for the banks because they like to blame everything on her. Her big bang was a different story though.
And isn't it funny that Alex Salmond was claiming HBOS and RBS were Scotlands great success story, until the British tax payer bailed them out
J
julesverne
i fail to see to how any politician from the last half century can be seen or thought of with any affection or nostalgia whatsoever from any political party.
the expenses scandal shows what utter contempt all politicians from all sides have for us and our money.
and bailing out banks what a crock of shiiiite they should have been left to fail.
human civilisation has been going for thousands of years, a few banks failing wouldnt stop us. would be good to sort the wheat from chaff.
i also wish the europeans would stop putting off the inevitable and cast out those countries from the euro that shouldnt have been in it in the first place.
yes there might be a financial meltdown but only for the elite who stand to lose their precious pennies that they guard like a dog guarding its bone. life goes on there just delaying the inevitable.
the expenses scandal shows what utter contempt all politicians from all sides have for us and our money.
and bailing out banks what a crock of shiiiite they should have been left to fail.
human civilisation has been going for thousands of years, a few banks failing wouldnt stop us. would be good to sort the wheat from chaff.
i also wish the europeans would stop putting off the inevitable and cast out those countries from the euro that shouldnt have been in it in the first place.
yes there might be a financial meltdown but only for the elite who stand to lose their precious pennies that they guard like a dog guarding its bone. life goes on there just delaying the inevitable.
G
Gray0689
She was an amazing woman and the best prime minister in my time without a doubt imho
D
Dotty
wrong wrong wrong.
Natwest is PART of the RBS group. Yet another bit of SNP misinformation! 😛
J
julesverne
totally agree the biggest waste of money going. sooner we have a referendum on that the better.
G
Guest123
Both have headquarters in London. The bulk of the bank bailouts went on English based banks not Scottish.
Not SNP misinformation. I live here, breathe the air and know what is going on here in my own country. I could easily spend all night putting the misinformation that you've weaned from the NO campaign and it's blood money funded non Scottish benefactors.
We are spoonfed bulk**** on a daily basis! As i say no mention of iceland on the news no mention of bulgaria doing a similar thing!
D
Dotty
t
So the Scottish people running the no campaigns are suddenly English? What will happen IF that tosspot salmond wins? Would they be deported?
I'd just like to add that im not defending thatcher I don't know nearly enough about it all to have a fair or unbiased opinion, I'm too young and it seems to 'Southern'.
just seems to me a lot of people dislike her because its the done thing,and blame her for being poor in the same way that lazy scumbags who sit on benefits for life blame 'foreigners' for not being able to get a job!
just seems to me a lot of people dislike her because its the done thing,and blame her for being poor in the same way that lazy scumbags who sit on benefits for life blame 'foreigners' for not being able to get a job!
J
julesverne
You will have to have lived under her reign to understand the vitriol felt towards her
Agreed. Although I know a lot of people who did (northern and southern) and they are in the majority that they like her. Again though its not really fair for me to comment without knowing fark all about it
G
Guest123
The majority of donors giving large donations are from South of the Border. Why the hell would anyone be deported, grow up.
Alex Salmond has done more for Scotland than any other political leader. He was elected in a landslide victory and every poll since has shown that the SNP would win again with an increased majority. You know nothing about Scottish politics, don't live here and are quoting the nonsense straight out of the Tory funded NO campaign. Your better spending time trying to get a better deal for England than worrying about us.
D
Dotty
So basically if you don't go along with the yes campaign, you're a Tory. Grow up yourself.
I grew up under Thatcher. I became politically aware during her reign.
I will never EVER vote Tory.
Bored with baiting you now Colin. Go ahead and blindly follow Salmond with his 'grass is greener' rhetoric. I reckon you'd be in for a nasty shock.
I grew up under Thatcher. I became politically aware during her reign.
I will never EVER vote Tory.
Bored with baiting you now Colin. Go ahead and blindly follow Salmond with his 'grass is greener' rhetoric. I reckon you'd be in for a nasty shock.
G
Guest123
Who said that if you don't go along with the YES campaign then you're a Tory? Not me. What I said was that the NO campaign is being largely funded from those South of the Border who are not even eligible to vote in the referendum. Most of these are Tory sympathisers.
http://3meninablog.wordpress.com/20...tory-millionaire-bankrolling-better-together/
The grass is not greener but it will be a hell of a lot fairer and better than it is just now. The YES campaign is not all about Alex Salmond and the SNP. There are a wide range of political and non political groups supporting it.
There will be no border controls, no foreign embassy based in London an no one will be getting deported. This is the scaremongering we've come to expect from the NO campaign. Not a lot will change except political independence and the right to take decisions in Scotland by the people who care most about it, the Scottish people themselves.
If you want real equality in the UK, campaign for an English parliament to deal solely with affairs in England and for the benefit of the English people. That is only fair.
Last edited by a moderator:
G
Guest123
Most Scots don't agree with the fact that Scottish MP's can still vote on English matters, that's not fair. It was in fact a Scottish MP that raised this point in Westminster a few years back and it became known as the famous "West Lothian" question.
Whatever the outcome of the Scottish Referendum, it is only just that England should have its own parliament to represent the needs of its own people and as the Scots and Welsh both have parliaments where devolved policy cannot be voted on my English politicians. But this is an issue for England to decide on, much as the Scottish Referendum is for Scotland to decide on.
R
Ray Stafford
That's not necessarily for Scotland to decide.
There are two sides to a border, and deportation can work both ways. For example, if Scotland were to join the EU, and the remainder of the UK were to vote to withdraw (not likely, I concede, but by no means as inconceivable as it would have been 5 years ago) then its entirely possible that England/Wales/Ni would want border controls.
I'm not against Scottish independence - I can see strong arguments in favour of both sides. On balance, if I still lived in Scotland, I might very well vote for it.
What annoys me is when either side make ridiculous claims for their point of view, or rubbish the reasonable arguments of their opponents. There are good and substantial arguments on both sides.
Like Mike, I am also narked that the rest of us don't get a vote on whether to allow Scotland to remain in the union.
Lets just remember that she also shut all the mines in KENT apparently the affluent south, shut down GCHQ in Cheltenham as well as the South Wales mines, football she wanted rid of with the puppet moniyhan and Evans the Luton chairman as spokesman....my old man was from easington colliery which she had shut years ago on the same day that she died....Nottingham scabs will probably mound her,,,
G
Guest123
Ray, that only highlights the political differences between our 2 countries. The majority of Scots want to remain in the EU whether or not independence happens and if England votes to leave the EU through the planned referendum, then we will be dragged out of it against our will. It's much the same with the Tory/Lib Dem coalition, Scotland didn't vote for it. The majority, i.e the country with the highest population and votes will always have the greater say.
Scottish Independence is about political independence. We will then be equal partners as we can both run our own affairs for the benefit of our own countries.
As to border controls, there are none in the CTA including Isle of Man which is independent and none are ever planned for the future, even with the EU membership question. Full information can be found here.
UK Border Agency | If you are travelling to or from the Republic of Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man
Scottish Independence is about political independence. We will then be equal partners as we can both run our own affairs for the benefit of our own countries.
As to border controls, there are none in the CTA including Isle of Man which is independent and none are ever planned for the future, even with the EU membership question. Full information can be found here.
UK Border Agency | If you are travelling to or from the Republic of Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man
G
Guest123
Again, your poll is by the Guardian which is not widely read up here. I wonder what the results would be for Thatcher in a Scottish only poll! LOL
R
Ray Stafford
I don't think they did the poll, I think they commissioned it from ICM.
Bearing in mind the readership profile of the Guardian, I would be gob-smacked if their readership voted 50% for Thatcher=good.
Lets face it thatcher sorted the mess out from the seventies and ruined the 80's bit like a worcester has its good points but also has its bad .What i am surprised at is how many under 35 year olds whom never really lived under thatcher think she was amazing , amazing what a bit of propaganda can do .
I remember the mess we were in during the 70s with fuel shortages, unrest and power cuts.
Like anyone of a similar standing it's not black and white. The country needed modernising or we would have slid further behind the rest of Europe and would have been a lot worse off during the long run. Supposing the situation in the 70s had just manifested on to the present day?
The problem is that we have lost nearly all of our manufacturing base altogether. Low paid volume manufacturing work had it not gone during the 1980s would have died a death anyway due to cheap manufacturing costs of the Far East so it was probably better short and quick than a long agonising slow death. However the high tech stuff also went which should have been pushed like the Germans have done.
Again, coal was becoming a less important fuel source and decline was inevitable whether short and sharp or gradual.
In short, I think that the early Thatcher years were generally for the good of the country, but the later ones were to the detriment.
I agree that the old ways had to change and the unprofitable and weak industries had to go. However the big mistake was that dealing with the aftermath wasn't planned for and there was nothing of substance to take their place which decimated huge areas formerly dependent on heavy industry.
The other thing is that a side effect of the more go-getting attitude of the 1980s ended up with a more selfish and hedonistic culture, which has contributed to the behaviour of the bankers and partly responsible for the banking crisis.
However again it's more complex as we operate in a global market and are entirely at the mercy of global market forces and so must compete on a global level.
Like anyone of a similar standing it's not black and white. The country needed modernising or we would have slid further behind the rest of Europe and would have been a lot worse off during the long run. Supposing the situation in the 70s had just manifested on to the present day?
The problem is that we have lost nearly all of our manufacturing base altogether. Low paid volume manufacturing work had it not gone during the 1980s would have died a death anyway due to cheap manufacturing costs of the Far East so it was probably better short and quick than a long agonising slow death. However the high tech stuff also went which should have been pushed like the Germans have done.
Again, coal was becoming a less important fuel source and decline was inevitable whether short and sharp or gradual.
In short, I think that the early Thatcher years were generally for the good of the country, but the later ones were to the detriment.
I agree that the old ways had to change and the unprofitable and weak industries had to go. However the big mistake was that dealing with the aftermath wasn't planned for and there was nothing of substance to take their place which decimated huge areas formerly dependent on heavy industry.
The other thing is that a side effect of the more go-getting attitude of the 1980s ended up with a more selfish and hedonistic culture, which has contributed to the behaviour of the bankers and partly responsible for the banking crisis.
However again it's more complex as we operate in a global market and are entirely at the mercy of global market forces and so must compete on a global level.
G
Guest123
G
Guest123
I doubt very much if Blair would get a funeral like Thatchers. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath didn't get one.
She should not have been given a 10 million pound state funeral, moreso in hard economic times such as these. 10 million could have helped your ailing national health service or helped cancer research.
She should not have been given a 10 million pound state funeral, moreso in hard economic times such as these. 10 million could have helped your ailing national health service or helped cancer research.
G
Guest123
G
Guest123
My comments are not meant as disrespect to her family. I am angry that her funeral is costing 10 million quid when this government is inflicting so much pain and suffering through their cuts.
I am entitled to my opinion too and in my opinion she was not a great British lady. That accolade I'd gladly give to Her Majesty the Queen who IS a real great British lady, who has hardly put a foot wrong during her reign, and not Thatcher.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, either that or you'd need to shut down every social media site on the internet until her funeral is over.
I am entitled to my opinion too and in my opinion she was not a great British lady. That accolade I'd gladly give to Her Majesty the Queen who IS a real great British lady, who has hardly put a foot wrong during her reign, and not Thatcher.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, either that or you'd need to shut down every social media site on the internet until her funeral is over.
R
Ray Stafford
My mother didnt cover up the deaths of 96 people and allow the media to tell horrible lies for 26 years. The woman doesnt deserve any respect as far as im concerned
G
Gray0689
Yes you are mate
at end of the day it's not bareness thatcher who is spending this money on her funeral that is the governments decision not hers or her family's
Some people loved her politics some people hated them hated them and that will always be in politics and you for one Colin are aware of that!
G
Guest123
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, either that or you'd need to shut down every social media site on the internet until her funeral is over.
G
Gray0689
G
Guest123
Right guys....AS A MATTER OF RESPECT, I'm closing this thread temporarily until after the funeral, despite my own personal views.
The debate can continue afterwards.
The debate can continue afterwards.
Official Sponsors of Plumbers Talk
Similar plumbing topics
- Billy Bob Bob
- UK Plumbers Forums
- newcastle phill
- UK Plumbers Forums
- Billy Bob Bob
- UK Plumbers Forums
We recommend City Plumbing Supplies, BES, and Plumbing Superstore for all plumbing supplies.
