PDA

View Full Version : Should Thatcher get a state funeral?



BrilloPad
5th January 2012, 14:38
A Thatcher state funeral would be bound to lead to protests | Seumas Milne | Comment is free | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/04/margaret-thatcher-state-funeral-protests)

IMO no - though I would like her to be homoured there are plenty who think she should not. Compare her reputation to that of Churchill for instance.

SimonMac
5th January 2012, 14:40
By the same conditions as Chruchill she lead us through a successful war so yes

AtW
5th January 2012, 14:41
Compare her reputation to that of Churchill for instance.

Are you serious comparing one of the greatest UK Prime Ministers with a big gob rude failed ex-marine without sense of humour posting on CUK? :confused:

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 14:42
Are you serious comparing one of the greatest UK Prime Ministers with a big gob rude failed ex-marine without sense of humour posting on CUK? :confused: :laugh

DimPrawn
5th January 2012, 14:44
Are you proposing burying her now, or are we waiting till she pops her cloggs?

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 14:44
Yes. and the sooner the better.

gingerjedi
5th January 2012, 15:10
I propose the US Navy dispose of the body at sea within 24 hours.

Zippy
5th January 2012, 15:27
No chance. Even dead she'd terrify the gun carriage horses.

Lockhouse
5th January 2012, 15:37
I voted no.

As much as I admire her, she was a divisive figure. State funerals are only for those people who unite us as a nation.

gingerjedi
5th January 2012, 15:45
I propose the US Navy dispose of the body at sea within 24 hours.

Just thought... she'd float :laugh

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 15:45
I voted no.

As much as I admire her, she was a divisive figure. State funerals are only for those people who unite us as a nation.

She was too busy saving the nation from the evils of socialism than to worry about the middle class liberals who like to pretend that they have a conscience

Lockhouse
5th January 2012, 15:52
She was too busy saving the nation from the evils of socialism than to worry about the middle class liberals who like to pretend that they have a conscience

I'm as right wing as they come, but even I realise she made some pretty serious mistakes when it came to Scotland and 'Oop North.

darmstadt
5th January 2012, 15:55
She was too busy saving the nation from the evils of socialism than to worry about the middle class liberals who like to pretend that they have a conscience

Which she ****ed up completely as she turned that socialism into a wannabe Tory style party which is why the country is in the state it is now.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 16:05
Which she ****ed up completely as she turned that socialism into a wannabe Tory style party which is why the country is in the state it is now.

The country was f**ked up by your socialist friends. What she did was to administer the medicine. She also introduced the notion of self reliance and personal responsibility by breaking up the Unions, freeing up the banking and energy and airline and every other "protected industry" sector.

No one ever thinks of the misery and totalitarianism of what went before her, the bankrupting of the economy, the three day week.

there are many things that she did (in hindsight) that could have been done better, but most of these would have involved borrowing money (there was none) , for for example infrastructure investment.

I know its fashionable to resent her - "oh I am so caring, so liberal" but most of us especially contractors have been freed from the grasp of the state and its institutions to live our own lives and take our own responsibilities - which the liberals choose to call greed.

AtW
5th January 2012, 16:10
The country was f**ked up by your socialist friends.

It still is.

If the Iron Lady had guts to disband Labour party then the country would not be in the mess it is now.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 16:11
It still is.

If the Iron Lady had guts to shoot Labour party then the country would not be in the mess it is now.

FTFY

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 16:30
If you were not living oop north during the Thatcher era then I'm sorry, but you have nothing to say.

I voted for her once. The 150 year-old factory I was working at then (which built the diesel power units for most of Britain's railway locomotives) is now a shoddy shared-ownership housing estate. There is literally no trace...nothing to show that there was ever a factory there.

We still buy plenty of diesel locomotives, but there is really nobody in Britain left to build them. We used to ship them to the world, but now we import them. like the third world used to do from us.

Zippy
5th January 2012, 16:31
Just thought... she'd float :laugh

:rollin:

AtW
5th January 2012, 16:44
We still buy plenty of diesel locomotives, but there is really nobody in Britain left to build them. We used to ship them to the world, but now we import them. like the third world used to do from us.

To be fair Thatcher did what other successive Govts also did - including so called Labour!

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 16:44
If you were not living oop north during the Thatcher era then I'm sorry, but you have nothing to say.

I voted for her once. The 150 year-old factory I was working at then (which built the diesel power units for most of Britain's railway locomotives) is now a shoddy shared-ownership housing estate. There is literally no trace...nothing to show that there was ever a factory there.

We still buy plenty of diesel locomotives, but there is really nobody in Britain left to build them. We used to ship them to the world, but now we import them. like the third world used to do from us.

So what exactly should she have done? Our manufacturing was inefficient and the rest of the country went to work to pay taxes to subsidise the likes of British leyland, The miners, the airlines, the power companies and every other trade union run organisation. By the time the game was up and we could no longer afford to subsidise your northern "entitlement" the country had gone bust and someone needed to come in and administer the medicine.
How hard is it to understand? It is the Trade Unions, The labour governments and Edward heath's placatory wettishness that you need to blame not Thatcher. The Soviet Union collapsed for exactly the same reasons

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 16:53
"So what exactly should she have done? Our manufacturing was inefficient "

The answer must be "make it efficient". Just destroying it was not the answer.

Don't get me wrong...not all that she did was bad. Reform was long overdue - especially regarding outdated attitudes and working practices, but she only did half a job.

She destroyed the old without doing anything to replace it with the new. 'The new' is now all overseas.

The only 'new' that we got was a runaway spiv-driven service sector and various pigs with their snouts in the trough...and look where that has brought us to now.

Zippy
5th January 2012, 16:53
So what exactly should she have done? Our manufacturing was inefficient and the rest of the country went to work to pay taxes to subsidise the likes of British leyland, The miners, the airlines, the power companies and every other trade union run organisation. By the time the game was up and we could no longer afford to subsidise your northern "entitlement" the country had gone bust and someone needed to come in and administer the medicine.
How hard is it to understand? It is the Trade Unions, The labour governments and Edward heath's placatory wettishness that you need to blame not Thatcher. The Soviet Union collapsed for exactly the same reasons

True. We sold all state-owned industries off, and now we go to work to subsidise the train operators "profits" and pay vast sums to foreign owned utility companies for basic necessities. Except that there are now fewer people paying tax.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 17:01
True. We sold all state-owned industries off, and now we go to work to subsidise the train operators "profits" and pay vast sums to foreign owned utility companies for basic necessities. Except that there are now fewer people paying tax.

And who says transport or power would be any cheaper under the control and ownership of the UK government?

Her greatest achievement was that showed that women were as capable if not more capable than men at running things. many men loathe her for this reason alone, and funnily enough so do some women who enjoy playing the helpless woman role.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 17:03
"So what exactly should she have done? Our manufacturing was inefficient "

The answer must be "make it efficient". Just destroying it was not the answer.

Don't get me wrong...not all that she did was bad. Reform was long overdue - especially regarding outdated attitudes and working practices, but she only did half a job.

She destroyed the old without doing anything to replace it with the new. 'The new' is now all overseas.

The only 'new' that we got was a runaway spiv-driven service sector and various pigs with their snouts in the trough...and look where that has brought us to now.

So the country is now poorer than it was pre Thatcher? And your so called spiv driven sector (of which you are one) is the envy of the rest of the world.

Troll
5th January 2012, 17:07
IMO no - though I would like her to be homoured there are plenty who think she should not. Compare her reputation to that of Churchill for instance.
Any particular reason you made it a multiple choice poll?

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 17:11
"And by the way - the agent isn't taking 21.5% of your rate - you're taking 78.5% of his/hers."

Well, do you remember the days when you used to go to the state-run PER (Professional and Executive Recruitment) to get your next job. Apply for job...get job...that was it.

Post-Thatcher, we now all have privately-run snouts in our troughs, forever.

Zippy
5th January 2012, 17:11
And who says transport or power would be any cheaper under the control and ownership of the UK government?

Her greatest achievement was that showed that women were as capable if not more capable than men at running things. many men loathe her for this reason alone, and funnily enough so do some women who enjoy playing the helpless woman role.

I'm not saying it would be any better because I can't be sure it would be. I'm suggesting that the lifetime-of-dole culture may have been reduced because people would have had a job to go to (and would have been paying tax, having some reason to get up every day etc etc.)

Your second comment is - frankly - pathetic.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 17:20
I'm not saying it would be any better because I can't be sure it would be. I'm suggesting that the lifetime-of-dole culture may have been reduced because people would have had a job to go to (and would have been paying tax, having some reason to get up every day etc etc.)

Your second comment is - frankly - pathetic.

Firstly it is possible in modern times to borrow money and invest in infrastructure, whether it was in Thatchers day I dont know. In hindsight I would agree that the economy would have been better served by investment and support in creating more efficient manufacturing businesses. To blame her though is dishonest - the real fault lies with the people who voted and supported the previous regimes. If these people had not destroyed the UK economy then Thatcher would never have got to power
If my second comment is so pathetic then you should have no trouble explaining why.?

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 17:34
Anyway, the answer to the question is no...Mrs Thatcher does not merit a state funeral because she was only a Prime Minister...a civil servant.

An exception was made in the case of Winston Churchill probably because of public demand from the sheer number of war veterans that were around at that time. Churchill never wanted one, and he had his remains buried in the family plot near his birthplace, after having turned down the offer of a grander burial place.

The problem is, where to bury her?. I take the view - regardless of how much I hated her at the time - that she is now a very old lady. If she wasn't batty then, then she certainly is now, and she is too old to pursue vengeance on.

Many will not see it that way. Wherever she is buried will need a 24 hour grafitti/spit/urine watch for many years to come.

Best to just leave it up to the Thatcher family.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 17:37
Anyway, the answer to the question is no...Mrs Thatcher does not merit a state funeral because she was only a Prime Minister...a civil servant.

An exception was made in the case of Winston Churchill probably because of public demand from the sheer number of war veterans that were around at that time. Churchill never wanted one, and he had his remains buried in the family plot near his birthplace, after having turned down the offer of a grander burial place.

The problem is, where to bury her?. I take the view - regardless of how much I hated her at the time - that she is now a very old lady. If she wasn't batty then, then she certainly is now, and she is too old to pursue vengeance on.

Many will not see it that way. Wherever she is buried will need a 24 hour grafitti/spit/urine watch for many years to come.

Best to just leave it up to the Thatcher family.

Rules are rules after all

AtW
5th January 2012, 17:37
And who says transport or power would be any cheaper under the control and ownership of the UK government?

That's not the problem.

Problem is that successive UK govts fecked up industry in favour of the City, so now a lot less taxpayers doing actual jobs that are in demand.

Germany and France kept to their industry so they still have jobs and exports.

Thatcher is no Churchill, on this basis I vote NO.

darmstadt
5th January 2012, 17:59
blah blah blah

I see her current party aren't following her influences then:


She was influenced at university by political works such as Friedrich von Hayek's The Road to Serfdom, which condemned economic intervention by government as a precursor to an authoritarian state.

Mind you she was part of that 'Tunbridge Wells' mindest of Daily Mail/Telegraph/etc:


In confidential official documents she objected to the number of Asian immigrants in July 1979, in the context of limiting the number of Vietnamese boat people allowed to settle in the UK. Her stance on these issues was perceived as part of a rising racist public discourse, which professor Martin Barker called "new racism".

Eh, whats this, I knew it all along:


Milton Friedman claimed that "the thing that people do not recognise is that Margaret Thatcher is not in terms of belief a Tory. She is a nineteenth-century Liberal." Thatcher herself stated in 1983: "I would not mind betting that if Mr Gladstone were alive today he would apply to join the Conservative Party"

And more quotes:


Industrial production fell sharply during Thatcher's government, which critics believe was the reason for increased unemployment during her early years as prime minister. There were nearly 3.3million unemployed in Britain in 1984, compared to 1.5million when she first came to power in 1979, though that figure had fallen to some 1.6million by the end of 1989.

When she resigned in 1990, 28% of the children in Great Britain were considered to be below the poverty line, a number that kept rising to reach a peak of 30% in 1994 during the Conservative government of John Major, who succeeded Thatcher.

While credited with reviving Britain's economy, Mrs. Thatcher also was blamed for spurring a doubling in the poverty rate. Britain's childhood-poverty rate in 1997 was the highest in Europe.

So maybe by destroying the unions she also decimated the workforce, compromise might have been better.

I remember going on this due to Thatcher destroying the job market:

http://unionbadges.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/peoplesmarch.jpg?w=468

Zippy
5th January 2012, 18:06
Her greatest achievement was that showed that women were as capable if not more capable than men at running things. many men loathe her for this reason alone, and funnily enough so do some women who enjoy playing the helpless woman role.



If my second comment is so pathetic then you should have no trouble explaining why.?

Barbara Castle showed how women could "run things" with a great deal more thought and intellect (whether you beleved in what she had to say or not) a mere few years before. And she was by no means unique.
I think you do many men and women a disservice by implying that anyone who criticised (or continue to criticise) Baroness T was jealous or sexist. Maybe they just disagreed with her?

AtW
5th January 2012, 18:07
Agents would not be making any money if everybody had a happy job for life ...

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 18:15
Another problem is that we have now lost the 'manufacturing ethic' here. Even if David Cameron's new-found love of manufacturing bears fruit, we simply do not have the old skilled engineers any more.

In my youth it was "Work in a dull factory, or go to night school and become an 'x'). For many years now, an engineering qualification has been largely useless in the jobs market, so our youngsters have been left behind and don't even have the option of the dull factory any more.

I have spent too much time at my local job centre recently, and the people I meet there are, frankly, unemployable. I wouldn't build a paper-clip factory where I live, you would need to have somebody stood behind every one of them to keep telling them to put the second and third bends in.

All we are fit for is working in sweat shops for foreigners, and that is all we will get.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 18:38
Barbara Castle showed how women could "run things" with a great deal more thought and intellect (whether you beleved in what she had to say or not) a mere few years before. And she was by no means unique.
I think you do many men and women a disservice by implying that anyone who criticised (or continue to criticise) Baroness T was jealous or sexist. Maybe they just disagreed with her?

The negative views on Thatcher are very personal which suggests that criticisms of her were driven by more than an assessment of her policies. She polarised the left and the right and exposed the left as nothing more than a self serving economy destroying kleptocratic ideology - incapable of creating wealth and incapable of providing any sort of decent public service.

After Thatcher, no longer was the state a virtuous institution, and no longer did money grow on trees - infact no longer were people fooled into thinking that the paying of taxes was morally good. because of her we realised that there was more to life than working to subsidise industries and feed inefficiency. People were forced to face realities that even today her critics refuse to face.
She introduced the concepts of individual choice and personal responsibility and when she tried to apply these to the working classes the left howled with rage (after all who would the left pretend to act in the interests for and further their own agenda if there were no longer any state dependent working classes) and screamed "greed and selfishness".

You will be surprised at just how much emotion is behind people's views on Thatcher. its cool to hate her because some sort of twisted logic shows you care about other people- well to those of you who pretend to care let me tell you - you don't. you hate her because she has exposed the hypocrisy of your "social consciences".

I hugely admire anyone who stands up to bullies - Churchill to Hitler, Thatcher to the Trade Unions and to the Tory party and Barbara Castle because (despite her idiotology) of the reasons you explain.

You will find that a lot of people base their views on the buttons that are pushed by the activities of people like Thatcher. Very few people form opinions from objective assessments of facts and events (except me of course :happy)

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 18:40
Another problem is that we have now lost the 'manufacturing ethic' here. Even if David Cameron's new-found love of manufacturing bears fruit, we simply do not have the old skilled engineers any more.

In my youth it was "Work in a dull factory, or go to night school and become an 'x'). For many years now, an engineering qualification has been largely useless in the jobs market, so our youngsters have been left behind and don't even have the option of the dull factory any more.

I have spent too much time at my local job centre recently, and the people I meet there are, frankly, unemployable. I wouldn't build a paper-clip factory where I live, you would need to have somebody stood behind every one of them to keep telling them to put the second and third bends in.

All we are fit for is working in sweat shops for foreigners, and that is all we will get.

But you are quite happy to take home the wealth that Thatcher enabled you to earn - hypocrite.

Zippy
5th January 2012, 18:55
I hugely admire anyone who stands up to bullies - Churchill to Hitler, Thatcher to the Trade Unions and to the Tory party and Barbara Castle because (despite her idiotology) of the reasons you explain.

You will find that a lot of people base their views on the buttons that are pushed by the activities of people like Thatcher. Very few people form opinions from objective assessments of facts and events (except me of course :happy)

Of course dear, of course. Now - what about that Boris Johnson chappie? Serious politician or comedy gold?

Or both ...?

Paddy
5th January 2012, 18:55
By the same conditions as Chruchill she lead us through a successful war so yes

The country did well despite Thatcher’s intervention and not because of it. Don’t forget that the only industry that Thatcher saved by giving a subsidy was Burma Oil run by her husband Dennis and Cementation of which a son miraculously became a director.

Governments should merely run the infrastructure, healthcare and education so that business can get on and do there own thing and every person has the basics of be able to have heat, water and food and be educated a have cheap travel. The rest will follow.

BTW. It was Thatchers cutbacks in the South Atlantic that gave the OK for the Argies to invade.

doodab
5th January 2012, 18:59
You will be surprised at just how much emotion is behind people's views on Thatcher. its cool to hate her because some sort of twisted logic shows you care about other people- well to those of you who pretend to care let me tell you - you don't. you hate her because she has exposed the hypocrisy of your "social consciences".


Those who despise her, despise her because she acted without humanity. Whole communities have been blighted by long term unemployment on a massive scale. She created the conditions for whole generations of whole families to simply not know what it's like to work or to be in a position to take personal responsibility for oneself, a vacuum which was ultimately filled by the culture of entitlement you profess to despise. Do you really think these people or their parents chose to be stripped of work, stripped of dignity and encouraged to suckle at the teat of the state? Cos lets be clear, history shows that many communities fought her tooth and nail to try and prevent it.

You criticise the welfare state for creating a culture of dependency and entitlement yet refuse to see that Thatcher's slash and burn approach is the reason it exists.

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 19:15
"But you are quite happy to take home the wealth that Thatcher enabled you to earn - hypocrite".

Sorry, but I really don't understand that comment ???

How did Mrs Thatcher enable me to take home 'wealth' that I would still be earning even if she had never been born???

Probably more, in fact. I work in Engineering - not IT, and I know that there were a hell of a lot more customers around in my field before her than after her.

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 19:37
"But you are quite happy to take home the wealth that Thatcher enabled you to earn - hypocrite".

Sorry, but I really don't understand that comment ???

How did Mrs Thatcher enable me to take home 'wealth' that I would still be earning even if she had never been born???

Probably more, in fact. I work in Engineering - not IT, and I know that there were a hell of a lot more customers around in my field before her than after her.

Also, please note that there was no insult tagged onto my reply to you.....

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 19:42
Those who despise her, despise her because she acted without humanity. Whole communities have been blighted by long term unemployment on a massive scale. She created the conditions for whole generations of whole families to simply not know what it's like to work or to be in a position to take personal responsibility for oneself, a vacuum which was ultimately filled by the culture of entitlement you profess to despise. Do you really think these people or their parents chose to be stripped of work, stripped of dignity and encouraged to suckle at the teat of the state? Cos lets be clear, history shows that many communities fought her tooth and nail to try and prevent it.

You criticise the welfare state for creating a culture of dependency and entitlement yet refuse to see that Thatcher's slash and burn approach is the reason it exists.

I knew the money grows on trees brigade would come out with their patronising cliches about "communities" . If you bother to look you will see that your precious communities were protected by the trade unions and subsidised by the rest of us. They produced coal and cars uncompetitively and developed a sense of invincible entitlement. The country could no longer afford to continue to subsidise these communities and rather than modernise their closed shop monoplistic practices they went to the wall. Not because of Thatcher but because of hard economics.

As far as your assertion that she created generations of unemployment then bollocks. It was the ensuing welfare that stopped these people fom working and kept them living in the past. A similar event happened in Poland but fortunately the Poles had no welfare so what did they do? they came here to find work. Those that got off their backsides and adapted are now the ones who have good jobs. it may be harsh but harshness is so often the best way to deal with problems.

Her policies were indeed crude. Slash and burn maybe, but who is to say that killing the Unions and privatising the Nationalised Industries quickly wasnt the best way to handout the medicine. The economy has recovered and despite labours attempts to kill it, it has enriched the lives of millions of people in a way that would not have happened had Thatcher not been around.

The communities chose to vote labour and they chose to vote for their union leaders and they chose to go on strike, they therefore need to take responsibility for what they did.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 19:45
"But you are quite happy to take home the wealth that Thatcher enabled you to earn - hypocrite".

Sorry, but I really don't understand that comment ???

How did Mrs Thatcher enable me to take home 'wealth' that I would still be earning even if she had never been born???

Probably more, in fact. I work in Engineering - not IT, and I know that there were a hell of a lot more customers around in my field before her than after her.

What sort of engineer are you? (apologies for the insult by the way - you use the word "hate" so I will crudely point out irregularities in the premise of your argument.) I would wager that the freedom to earn and take home the pay that you take home are by virtue of the Thatcher reforms. If you are freelancer particularly so.

MarillionFan
5th January 2012, 19:47
Choose your t-shirts carefully

For girly lefties who think they're hard.

http://www.beforeshegoes.co.uk/Images/new-gif-thatcher.gif

Or for right wing IT Contractors

http://i.ebayimg.com/10/!BYVEj0w!2k~$(KGrHgoOKkUEjlLmTeZqBKg91MbZh!~~_35.J PG

or for Dodgy Agents

http://www.wit-t-shirts.com/funny_Tshirts/pictures/political/thatcher.jpg

or especially for Nick Fitz

http://www.bathroomwall.co.uk/store/images/medium/t-shirts/bw-dailymail-325x325.jpg

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 19:58
What sort of engineer are you? (apologies for the insult by the way - you use the word "hate" so I will crudely point out irregularities in the premise of your argument.) I would wager that the freedom to earn and take home the pay that you take home are by virtue of the Thatcher reforms. If you are freelancer particularly so.

Than You. Gracious apology graciously accepted..end of.

I am a Technical Author. I compile operating and maintenance, repair/service manuals, safety case/risk assessments etc.

I don't think that Mrs Thatcher affected the nature of my work, although it is probably true, as you say' that there are more freelancers and contractors than before. This is probably not voluntary in most cases, as we all used to work as staff for manufacturing companies, many of which went to the wall during the 'holocaust' in manufacturing which followed her election.

If these old-style manufacturers with their outdated work practices and equipment had been physically modernised and reformed union-wise, we would not be in the pickle we are in now, where we rely to much on 'virtual' paper jobs in the city etc rather than 'hard' jobs in physically creating stuff.

There are more ships, cars, planes and trains in the world now than there ever were...we just had to re-align ourself in these markets.

TimberWolf
5th January 2012, 20:01
Weren't we once called "the sick man of Europe"? If so, does that mean we were worse off than the Greeks, Spanish, Portuguese, etc? And without the sunshine too :(

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 20:04
Weren't we once called "the sick man of Europe"? If so, does that mean we were worse off than the Greeks, Spanish, Portuguese, etc? And without the sunshine too :(

Plenty of sunshine here ;

:moon:

MarillionFan
5th January 2012, 20:05
Plenty of sunshine here ;

:moon:

Like a hot and runny afternoon in Bangalore. :puke:

Paddy
5th January 2012, 20:06
Weren't we once called "the sick man of Europe"? If so, does that mean we were worse off than the Greeks, Spanish, Portuguese, etc? And without the sunshine too :(

In the 70s it was the running joke in Europe that the GB stickers on cars stood for Gone Bankrupt.

BrilloPad
5th January 2012, 20:16
Are you serious comparing one of the greatest UK Prime Ministers with a big gob rude failed ex-marine without sense of humour posting on CUK? :confused:

I do hope I am there when he attends the next Birmingham meet up.

Pondlife
5th January 2012, 20:29
I would wager that the freedom to earn and take home the pay that you take home are by virtue of the Thatcher reforms. If you are freelancer particularly so.

Apologies Dodgy, but I still don't follow this argument. Which reforms are you referring to?

None of the companies I have ever worked for either permie or contract were ever state owned, in fact most can be traced back to late 1800s in some form. All have had manufacturing/supply chain as their core business. All have or had unions/staff councils and all have used consultancies and independent contractor since IT became a major requirement for running their business.

It don't see how what she reformed enabled me to work for or at these companies. Her main impact as I see it is that there are significantly less of them these days in the UK.

darmstadt
5th January 2012, 20:40
I knew the money grows on trees brigade would come out with their patronising cliches about "communities" . If you bother to look you will see that your precious communities were protected by the trade unions and subsidised by the rest of us. They produced coal and cars uncompetitively and developed a sense of invincible entitlement. The country could no longer afford to continue to subsidise these communities and rather than modernise their closed shop monoplistic practices they went to the wall. Not because of Thatcher but because of hard economics.

When will the country then no longer be able to subsidise the financial sector then?


As far as your assertion that she created generations of unemployment then bollocks. It was the ensuing welfare that stopped these people fom working and kept them living in the past. A similar event happened in Poland but fortunately the Poles had no welfare so what did they do? they came here to find work. Those that got off their backsides and adapted are now the ones who have good jobs. it may be harsh but harshness is so often the best way to deal with problems.

No, possibly not but its a fact that unemployment went up while she was in power and like the Poles I got off my backside, adapted, moved away from the country and have a very good lifestyle...


Her policies were indeed crude. Slash and burn maybe, but who is to say that killing the Unions and privatising the Nationalised Industries quickly wasnt the best way to handout the medicine. The economy has recovered and despite labours attempts to kill it, it has enriched the lives of millions of people in a way that would not have happened had Thatcher not been around.


Yes they were crude and sometimes they worked but for many people here idea of 'getting rich quick' didn't. How many people decided to go into business for themselves yet quickly went bankrupt trying to live the Thatcher dream?

Thatcher's core manifesto was:

- curb trade union power
it was curbed but she should have put into place an alternative such as works councils so that employees do still have some rights. What she wanted was an American style of workplace ethos (much like here economics were inspired by Reagonomics)
- end nationalised industry
she did this but is it any better and as it stands a lot of it is subsidised heavily by the state anyway
- curb chronic inflation
inflation actually doubled by controlling the amount of money in circulation up to around 10%.
- curb high rates of tax
the basic rate fell from 33p to 25p
the top rate from 84p to 40p
the average salary went up nearly 300%
but to curb inflation VAT went up from 8% to 15%, interest rates went up to a staggering 17% at one point and subsidies to industry were cut causing the massive unemployment figures (1 in 8 unemployed)
- free market economy
there has always been this, that's the point of a democratic/capitalist society just that she wanted everyone to be a business (does the word contractor to come to mind here?) which ain't going to work
- end socialism
just turned into 'New Labour' which espoused Conservative values with a Socialist bent

Very quickly in the face of her Reagan-inspired "hard economics" and austerity treatment we saw every possibility of employment evaporate. 3.3 million were unemployed with no hope of a job. The economy went into recession and the dole was being withdrawn unless you could "prove" you were actively searching for work.


It ruined millions of people's lives and put millions more into unproductive boredom and hardship. It cost the country £40b in lost productivity and the only thing Margaret did was make it worse.


Norman Lamont told us that "If it ain't hurting it ain't working", but the truth was it was just hurting.Meanwhile as the City of London got richer on public share sell-offs and massive bonuses for cost-cutting, the Yuppie was born into a "me first" society.Many people who admire her are the same: 'me first!'


The prosperity Mrs Thatcher brought to Britain was selective, antagonistic and temporary. She did indeed leave Britain “very, very much better”, but only for some. She also left it in recession, with unemployment, inflation and interest rates rising.

Above all, not only was she bad for the country during her premiership, she continues to be bad for the country today. The causes of the present slump - unrestricted credit, deregulation and too much financial speculation - all date back to the 1980s. No successive government dared reverse these decisions: a blessing to her legacy, but a curse we must now all share.

darmstadt
5th January 2012, 20:52
In keeping with the great lady’s legacy, Margaret Thatcher’s state funeral should be funded and managed by the private sector to offer the best value and choice for end users and other stakeholders. The undersigned believe that the legacy of the former PM deserves nothing less and that offering this unique opportunity is an ideal way to cut government expense and further prove the merits of liberalised economics Baroness Thatcher spearheaded. Surely she would approve of this?

You can sign it here... (https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/18914)

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 20:59
Yes, let the private sector bury her. That will save money which I would not want to pay for that purpose.

Left to me, they would still be trying to dig her out of the basement of the Grand Hotel in Brighton.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 21:09
Yes, let the private sector bury her. That will save money which I would not want to pay for that purpose.

Left to me, they would still be trying to dig her out of the basement of the Grand Hotel in Brighton.

So you are an IRA appeaser too?

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 21:11
When will the country then no longer be able to subsidise the financial sector then?



No, possibly not but its a fact that unemployment went up while she was in power and like the Poles I got off my backside, adapted, moved away from the country and have a very good lifestyle...



Yes they were crude and sometimes they worked but for many people here idea of 'getting rich quick' didn't. How many people decided to go into business for themselves yet quickly went bankrupt trying to live the Thatcher dream?

Thatcher's core manifesto was:

- curb trade union power
it was curbed but she should have put into place an alternative such as works councils so that employees do still have some rights. What she wanted was an American style of workplace ethos (much like here economics were inspired by Reagonomics)
- end nationalised industry
she did this but is it any better and as it stands a lot of it is subsidised heavily by the state anyway
- curb chronic inflation
inflation actually doubled by controlling the amount of money in circulation up to around 10%.
- curb high rates of tax
the basic rate fell from 33p to 25p
the top rate from 84p to 40p
the average salary went up nearly 300%
but to curb inflation VAT went up from 8% to 15%, interest rates went up to a staggering 17% at one point and subsidies to industry were cut causing the massive unemployment figures (1 in 8 unemployed)
- free market economy
there has always been this, that's the point of a democratic/capitalist society just that she wanted everyone to be a business (does the word contractor to come to mind here?) which ain't going to work
- end socialism
just turned into 'New Labour' which espoused Conservative values with a Socialist bent

Very quickly in the face of her Reagan-inspired "hard economics" and austerity treatment we saw every possibility of employment evaporate. 3.3 million were unemployed with no hope of a job. The economy went into recession and the dole was being withdrawn unless you could "prove" you were actively searching for work.


It ruined millions of people's lives and put millions more into unproductive boredom and hardship. It cost the country £40b in lost productivity and the only thing Margaret did was make it worse.


Norman Lamont told us that "If it ain't hurting it ain't working", but the truth was it was just hurting.Meanwhile as the City of London got richer on public share sell-offs and massive bonuses for cost-cutting, the Yuppie was born into a "me first" society.Many people who admire her are the same: 'me first!'


The prosperity Mrs Thatcher brought to Britain was selective, antagonistic and temporary. She did indeed leave Britain “very, very much better”, but only for some. She also left it in recession, with unemployment, inflation and interest rates rising.

Above all, not only was she bad for the country during her premiership, she continues to be bad for the country today. The causes of the present slump - unrestricted credit, deregulation and too much financial speculation - all date back to the 1980s. No successive government dared reverse these decisions: a blessing to her legacy, but a curse we must now all share.


If you have left the country, adapted and have a very good lifestyle why do you feel the need to spend so much time convincing everyone else when you should be "living your lifestyle"

Loser

AtW
5th January 2012, 21:14
If you have left the country, adapted and have a very good lifestyle why do you feel the need to spend so much time convincing everyone else when you should be "living your lifestyle"

Loser

I thought you had a successful pimping business with as high margins as current level of humanity allows for human trade, why sign your post as a Loser? :confused:

darmstadt
5th January 2012, 21:28
If you have left the country, adapted and have a very good lifestyle why do you feel the need to spend so much time convincing everyone else when you should be "living your lifestyle"

Loser

Starting to sound like sasguru there :laugh

To the sober person adventurous conduct often seems insanity.

KimberleyChris
5th January 2012, 21:35
"So you are an IRA appeaser too?"

Nope, I've been through my posts and never once do I mention supporting the IRA. You do type some cack, don't you? It's called the 'straw man' argument. You will mention the Nazis very soon :-)

The only thing that Mrs Thatcher could possibly be admired for was her foreign policy. Every action at home seemed to be motivated by unhuman spite, vindictiveness, and the encouragement of a twisted type of 'constructive greed'.

I am aware of at least two suicides as the result of her evil, and in the spirit of 'an eye for an eye' I would not have been too heartbroken if she had ended her days when she was supposed to, regardless of who planted the weapon.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 22:16
"So you are an IRA appeaser too?"

Nope, I've been through my posts and never once do I mention supporting the IRA. You do type some cack, don't you? It's called the 'straw man' argument. You will mention the Nazis very soon :-)

The only thing that Mrs Thatcher could possibly be admired for was her foreign policy. Every action at home seemed to be motivated by unhuman spite, vindictiveness, and the encouragement of a twisted type of 'constructive greed'.

I am aware of at least two suicides as the result of her evil, and in the spirit of 'an eye for an eye' I would not have been too heartbroken if she had ended her days when she was supposed to, regardless of who planted the weapon.

Instead of not constructing an argument and then hiding behind the "straw man" touch you might like to argue why the IRA should have killed Thatcher and what that would mean in terms of your attitude to the IRA. You can then bring this into the context of justifying the position of the trade unions, and explain how the Uk would have been better without Thatcher. You dont and you wont. The anti Thatcherites never use logic. The best they can do is to drum up a few anecdotal stories of suicides which incidentally have been happening on a daily basis since the economy crashed at the hands of New Labour.
It is also interesting that for someone who has been so enriched by Thatchers policies that you should accuse her of encouraging greed. The inhumanity of Thatcher is what preceded her. What followed was that people like you became free to trade your skills in enterprise markets, selling your privileged skills to the highest bidder and becoming part of the richest sector of people on the entire planet.
If you want to argue that a controlled economy under a labour government with Nationalised Industries controlled by Trade Unions would have been a better alternative then argue it. You people seem to ignore the fact that had Thatcher been killed by the IRA there would have been an alternative, yet you neither explain what this should or would have been. Maybe we could have lived under the control of the Trade Unions and the IRA? If you think this would have been a better alternative then say so.
Alternatives are never discussed by you people because Thatcher stirs up your own failings. Is it misogyny or a refusal to accept that left wing ideology is evil?
You make no arguments, because you cannot. The best you can do is squeal "vindictive, cruel, greed and throw in a few anecdotal suicides to strengthen emotions in true left wing fashion, desperately hoping to illicit credibility to what is no more a tirade of bigotry, and a point blank refusal to apportion blame on the trade unions and the labour government.

It is very easy to denigrate Thatcher but not so easy to discuss the alternatives or justify the totalitarianism of what she inherited. The joy of Thatcher is that she forces the hypocrites, the misogynysts the "entitled", the lazy and the feckless out into the open, just as the failure of the Euro is currently doing.

DodgyAgent
5th January 2012, 22:18
Starting to sound like sasguru there :laugh

To the sober person adventurous conduct often seems insanity.

I have been trained by the very best

AtW
5th January 2012, 22:27
I have been trained by the very best

:laugh

Doggy Styles
5th January 2012, 23:14
Softies and lefties understandably didn't like her, but she was a rare conviction politician who kicked the UK from the 'sick man of Europe' back into competitiveness.

I suffered redundancy from a 'job for life' under her policies but I could see further than my own nose and understood the bigger picture, stopped whingeing, and got off my arse.

In different ways Thatcher and Atlee were the best two prime ministers the UK had last century, even above Churchill.

AtW
5th January 2012, 23:40
In different ways Thatcher and Atlee were the best two prime ministers the UK had last century, even above Churchill.

I don't think many PMs other than Churchill would have told the nazies to fook off and keep fighting after Dunkirk.

Churchill was ready to fight on the beaches, Thatcher took the milk away from schools.

ZARDOZ
5th January 2012, 23:45
The country was f**ked up by your socialist friends. What she did was to administer the medicine. She also introduced the notion of self reliance and personal responsibility by breaking up the Unions, freeing up the banking and energy and airline and every other "protected industry" sector.

No one ever thinks of the misery and totalitarianism of what went before her, the bankrupting of the economy, the three day week.

there are many things that she did (in hindsight) that could have been done better, but most of these would have involved borrowing money (there was none) , for for example infrastructure investment.

I know its fashionable to resent her - "oh I am so caring, so liberal" but most of us especially contractors have been freed from the grasp of the state and its institutions to live our own lives and take our own responsibilities - which the liberals choose to call greed.

The Three-Day Week was one of several measures introduced by the Conservative Government 1970–1974

Alf W
5th January 2012, 23:58
I can't be arsed arguing with Tory Boy at this time of night. I'll just let him froth over his Daily Express.

I'll settle for any Thatcher funeral. I'll chip in myself if need be.

Paddy
6th January 2012, 00:29
I don't think many PMs other than Churchill would have told the nazies to fook off and keep fighting after Dunkirk.

Churchill was ready to fight on the beaches, Thatcher took the milk away from schools.

Some trivia

There were no radio broadcasts from the Parliament during the war. An actor
Norman Shelley actually spoke the words of Churchill’s speech originally for American Newsreel but the recording was played on British Radio sometime after.

People's memories fade an there are some people who say that they actually heard Churchill on the radio broadcasting from Parliament.

AtW
6th January 2012, 00:37
An actor
Norman Shelley actually spoke the words of Churchill’s speech originally for American Newsreel but the recording was played on British Radio sometime after.

The actor wasn't making the decision. It's beyond doubt as far as I am concerned that it was Churchill's personality who was not just against Nazi Germany but also against Soviet Nazies.

Paddy
6th January 2012, 00:42
The actor wasn't making the decision. It's beyond doubt as far as I am concerned that it was Churchill's personality who was not just against Nazi Germany but also against Soviet Nazies.

Yes, he wanted to nuke Russia into the stone age after WWII, you would have liked that no doubt.

vetran
6th January 2012, 02:03
Its funny in 18th century to Victorian times increasing population and industrialisation drove down employment, poverty & dependency (on charitable handouts) was on the rise.

Union power was smashed then remember the Luddites.

During the wars we killed half our workforce which made workers valuable again.

Early to mid 20th century after some of the fastest technical developments in human history (we invented Computers, achieved space travel and high levels of mechanisation). Driven by a shortage of workers and necessity to win world wars. Need for labour fell but still we encouraged immigration and post war baby boom. When all these collided in the 80's with more workers than jobs it was all one politicians fault? Admittedly Maggie was powerful force but she was hardly the first to take on the unions.

This account agrees with my memories of the 70's & 80s and its hardly a right wing view:

The Roots of the Thatcher Onslaught on the Unions and a Radicalising Shop Stewards’ Movement (http://www.isg-fi.org.uk/spip.php?article60)


Car workers, along with other militant sectors such as engineering workers, dockers, printers and miners, were the pace-setters in trade union struggle, and in wages and working conditions, in the 1960s and 1970s. Piecework bargaining had made the car workers the highest paid industrial workers by the 1960s, and they remained so into the 1970s. These militant sectors, however, were not all in the same position. The miners were a key target, of course. They were displaying a new militancy after the doldrums of the 1950s and 1960s when they had suffered extensive pit closures accepted by their union. They were now an increasing challenge to government after their two spectacular victories in 1972 and 1974. They remained, however, too strong to take on. The dockers had defeated the Industrial Relations Act in the struggle over the jailing of the Pentonville Five but were fighting a defensive battle against containerisation and inland ports. Strike levels in print and engineering were not as high as in the car plants. [1]


....

Since it is far easier to destroy than to create, the damage done by the attacks on the unofficial movement was bound to have long-term effects. In Cowley my own victimisation in April 1974 was used by the TGWU to break up long established shopfloor structures. It became a stepping stone to the victimisation of Derek Robinson, in Longbridge, in 1979, in what was a watershed battle for the unions in British Leyland. This in turn had far-reaching implications beyond the car industry. Thus by the end of the 1970s serious damage had been inflicted on some of the most militant sectors of the movement. This, along with Labour’s drift to the right under Wilson and Callaghan and its disastrous incomes policy, not only helped to create conditions for the new realism of the 1980s but provided a basis from which the Tory crusade against trade union strength could be launched. All this is covered in subsequent chapters.



Do you remember 'Red Robbo' and Scargill?

So Maggie wasn't the only one to smash industry. In fact industry shrank faster under New Lie.

I remember Maggie trying to close 20 pits and concentrate on making the rest profitable:

BBC - Wales - History - Themes - The miners' strike (http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/society/industry_coal06.shtml)

But as a result of production falling we lost market share to subsidised German coal. Maybe if we mothballed a few pits then we could have handled the falling demand? (it had already halved since the war).

Maybe Maggie should have started subsidising coal unlike the Labour government before her? How would she have paid for that?

It seems a awful lot of pits were closed before Thatcher ever came to power, with the permission of the unions.

Coal is being used less:


Coal Production and Trade
2.4 UK coal production has seen a general decline since 1952, where levels peaked at 228 million
tonnes. Production levels also plummeted in 1984 as a result of the miners’ strike before recovering
fairly quickly to levels recorded pre-1984, and fell again in the early 1990’s. Figures for 2010 show
that coal production (including an estimate for slurry) increased by a small amount on 2009 (3.0 per
cent) to 18 million tonnes (Chart 2.1)



Production
In the 1950’s and 1960’s virtually all the energy produced in the UK was coal. There
was a small amount of primary electricity, via hydro schemes but all other fuels such
as oil were imported or made from coal such as town gas and electricity. The 5
situation changed dramatically during the 1970’s as the UK started to produce oil and
gas. So by 1980 coal represented 39 per cent of production, crude oil 41 per cent,
gas 16 per cent and primary electricity (nuclear and hydro) 4 per cent

http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/statistics/publications/dukes/1_20090729135638_e_@@_dukes60.pdf


Of course If Thatcher had rolled over and given in unlike the labour and previous tory governments hadn't would we have had the influx of the American & Japanese companies we saw in the eighties?

Germany kept manufacturing by investing heavily in new plant after the war, we didn't we spent the money on unions and making sure unskilled car workers earned more than policemen or teachers.

How often do you see a British company scrimp on plant or having difficult conversations with the staff. Yet see an American or Japanese company invest?

She Also brought the troubles to an end by stripping them of their money / support and then agreeing to meet them.

Special Reports - America And The Conflict | The Ira & Sinn Fein | FRONTLINE | PBS (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ira/reports/america.html)

I know it says they didn't need American money but you can see how when the funding & support dried up both from their illegal activities in Ireland and from US donations they came to the table.

The only real reason you have to hate Maggie is because she stopped heavily subsidised school milk that was always off when we drank it.

Gonzo
6th January 2012, 03:39
The country was f**ked up by your socialist friends.Not really.

All governments in the period after WWII followed broadly the same economic approach, the Conservatives were just as guilty as Labour for the mess that the country became.

The approach to the economy that still leaves people bitter today (as evidenced by this thread :laugh) was really the work of Sir Keith Joseph, Maggie just went along with it.

Anyway, I am sure that her kids can pay for the funeral - why should the State?

TiroFijo
6th January 2012, 07:12
So what exactly should she have done? Our manufacturing was inefficient and the rest of the country went to work to pay taxes to subsidise the likes of British leyland, The miners, the airlines, the power companies and every other trade union run organisation. By the time the game was up and we could no longer afford to subsidise your northern "entitlement" the country had gone bust and someone needed to come in and administer the medicine.
How hard is it to understand? It is the Trade Unions, The labour governments and Edward heath's placatory wettishness that you need to blame not Thatcher. The Soviet Union collapsed for exactly the same reasons

She did the right thing in crushing the miners, every f ucking winter they would be out on strike holding the country to ranson with that prick Arthur Scargill being shofer driven in his big new jag to the picket line just in time for the TV crew to arrive then fooking off as soon as they had left. The miners got what was coming to them

Jiust hope that Cameron has the balls to break that other prick Bob Crow.

vetran
6th January 2012, 09:43
She did the right thing in crushing the miners, every f ucking winter they would be out on strike holding the country to ranson with that prick Arthur Scargill being shofer driven in his big new jag to the picket line just in time for the TV crew to arrive then fooking off as soon as they had left. The miners got what was coming to them

Jiust hope that Cameron has the balls to break that other prick Bob Crow.

Have a certain amount of sympathy with the miners, there wasn't a lot else for them to do work wise. We would have been better off starting new industry for them to move to then closing the pits as we started being short of workers. The people I hated were Scargill & co who got rich off other people's misery.

Agree Bob Crow needs sorting, maybe we should start by throwing him out of his tax payer subsidised house. I suspect we will soon see automated trains.

:tantrum:

Earn £145,000 like Bob Crow? Then forget a council house | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/property/article-1390037/Earn-145-000-like-Bob-Crow-Then-forget-council-house.html)

Its not like he needs the poor to pay his rent.

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 13:57
Response to DodgyAgent's 22:16

Again, I cannot understand why you accuse me of hiding behind 'straw man', and then continuing with another half a page of it!!!.

I especially resent the implication of tacit IRA support based on the straw man:

a) KimberleyChris would have shed no tears if the Brighton Bomb had found its target.
b) The IRA wanted to kill Margaret Thatcher
c) Therefore KC must be an IRA supporter.

If Margaret Thatcher had somehow been sent to the next world, there would be no shortage of people with a motive, and there would have been street parties held in the north and in south wales etc.

I wouldn't have cared whether the bomb had been planted by the Irish Republican Army or the Salvation Army. It would not have made me a salvationist, and it doesn't make me an IRA supporter either.

Also, why do you assume that anybody who does not venerate Thatcher must be either a loony-leftie or a bleeding-heart liberal? If pushed, I would class myself as a one-nation conservative, but I loathed Margaret Thatcher and her nasty socially-divisive regime. I hated her so much that it could keep me awake at night :-)

As I said before, the only thing I admire her for was her tough foreign policy. Thankfully David Cameron shows some of the same mettle in that respect.

Don't forget that she was not 'de-elected' from office - she was thrown out of number 10 by her own party...all credit to them.

Anyway...nothing I say is going to change one detail of your perfectly-assimilated 'Thatcher good - all else is evil' indoctrination, so I will wish you all the best.

Thanks...Debate is good - argument is bad :-)

Doggy Styles
6th January 2012, 14:05
I don't think many PMs other than Churchill would have told the nazies to fook off and keep fighting after Dunkirk.

Churchill was ready to fight on the beaches, Thatcher took the milk away from schools.You daft tw@t! :laugh

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 14:07
Response to DodgyAgent's 22:16

Again, I cannot understand why you accuse me of hiding behind 'straw man', and then continuing with another half a page of it!!!.

I especially resent the implication of tacit IRA support based on the straw man:

a) KimberleyChris would have shed no tears if the Brighton Bomb had found its target.
b) The IRA wanted to kill Margaret Thatcher
c) Therefore KC must be an IRA supporter.

If Margaret Thatcher had somehow been sent to the next world, there would be no shortage of people with a motive, and there would have been street parties held in the north and in south wales etc.

I wouldn't have cared whether the bomb had been planted by the Irish Republican Army or the Salvation Army. It would not have made me a salvationist, and it doesn't make me an IRA supporter either.

Also, why do you assume that anybody who does not venerate Thatcher must be either a loony-leftie or a bleeding-heart liberal? If pushed, I would class myself as a one-nation conservative, but I loathed Margaret Thatcher and her nasty socially-divisive regime. I hated her so much that it could keep me awake at night :-)

As I said before, the only thing I admire her for was her tough foreign policy. Thankfully David Cameron shows some of the same mettle in that respect.

Don't forget that she was not 'de-elected' from office - she was thrown out of number 10 by her own party...all credit to them.

Anyway...nothing I say is going to change one detail of your perfectly-assimilated 'Thatcher good - all else is evil' indoctrination, so I will wish you all the best.

Thanks...Debate is good - argument is bad :-)

You still have not presented one single argument to support your villification of Thatcher.
All you present is a diatribe of hate and bile, supported by simplistic, dubiously connected anecdotes of suicides (is this really the best you can do? emotional manipulation to illicit negativity?) as opposed to a single logically explained argument as to how events should have unfolded.
I am a great admirer of hers but I am not a tribal fool -like you clearly are-to think for a minute that everything that she did was brilliant. She left at the right time, her job was done and she was the solution that this country had asked for. She should in my view have never come to power in the first place. It does however look increasingly like we need someone like her again.

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 14:18
"She should in my view have never come to power in the first place".

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely interested to know why such a 'true blue' would say that. Is it a mis-type?

As I said, I didn't hate her because she was a conservative, but because she was extremely, unashamedly and aggressively 'two-nation'. In other words a political civil war, which I believe damaged the country badly.

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 14:31
"She should in my view have never come to power in the first place".

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely interested to know why such a 'true blue' would say that. Is it a mis-type?

As I said, I didn't hate her because she was a conservative, but because she was extremely, unashamedly and aggressively 'two-nation'. In other words a political civil war, which I believe damaged the country badly.

The economy should never have been allowed to get into the state it was in. the Unions should never have accumulated so much power. Because we had indulged in socialism with our leading industries shackled by antiquated working practices and a lack of competition the economy went down the pan.
There was no money for investment, and no will to change (conservatives or labour).
Either the UK could bow to a communist style closed regime or it could revolutionise itself and become a market led economy. Change could have happened earlier, but as it was the IMF had to be called in and severe hardship and cuts had to be imposed. Thatcher was the only person prepared to take this responsibility. She did so in the face of hostility from within the Tory party, the liberal left, misogynysts and the trade Unions. her support came from the silent majority who had the intelligence to realise that money did not grow on trees.
Had she not taken the responsibility then we could quite easily have succumbed to a truly nasty form of dictatorship, which is what looks like happening to Hungary, which is what happened to Germany and which is what may still happen to Greece.
Crude and cruel she may have been but the blame for the hardship people suffered laid elsewhere.
She left at the right time and had if anything become addicted to power which is why she needed to be pushed.

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 14:38
"The economy should never have been allowed to get into the state it was in. the Unions should never have accumulated so much power. Because we had indulged in socialism with our leading industries shackled by antiquated working practices and a lack of competition the economy went down the pan.
There was no money for investment, and no will to change (conservatives or labour)."

Agree totally...I was there and I remember it.

But do you not think that there was a 'third way'? Did it have to be achieved by splitting the nation in half?

Doggy Styles
6th January 2012, 14:40
"She should in my view have never come to power in the first place".

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely interested to know why such a 'true blue' would say that. Is it a mis-type?

As I said, I didn't hate her because she was a conservative, but because she was extremely, unashamedly and aggressively 'two-nation'. In other words a political civil war, which I believe damaged the country badly.Dodgy means that it would have been preferable if the UK hadn't got into that state in the first place.

Someone with Thatcher's single-mindedness was required to sort out the dire state of the UK at the time. We were the sick man of Europe and sinking, and there was no way out other than some hard choices.

BTW the country is always in a political civil war. So are most other countries.

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 14:44
"The economy should never have been allowed to get into the state it was in. the Unions should never have accumulated so much power. Because we had indulged in socialism with our leading industries shackled by antiquated working practices and a lack of competition the economy went down the pan.
There was no money for investment, and no will to change (conservatives or labour)."

Agree totally...I was there and I remember it.

But do you not think that there was a 'third way'? Did it have to be achieved by splitting the nation in half?

In my view treat it like you treat cancer. Throw everything at it and rehabilitate from there. So whilst I think that there was no third way my criticism is of the ensuing Tory party who failed to take up the reforms and create the environment to retrain workers and rebuild manufacturing.

Thatcher should have gone earlier. Instead the Tories presided over a system of rich and poor - compounded I will add with the vice like grip over the public services that remains to this day the scandal of our society.

Then Blair got in :mad

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 14:53
"my criticism is of the ensuing Tory party who failed to take up the reforms and create the environment to retrain workers and rebuild manufacturing".

If Thatcher had done this herself at the same time as slashing and burning, we would probably be living in a golden age now. She certainly had the drive, but she only did half the job. Given that she was a scientist by profession, I will never understand why.

If people had seen two new trees planted for every one felled, they would all have followed her.

d000hg
6th January 2012, 14:56
If you were not living oop north during the Thatcher era then I'm sorry, but you have nothing to say.


So what exactly should she have done? Our manufacturing was inefficient and the rest of the country went to work to pay taxes to subsidise the likes of British leyland, The miners, the airlines, the power companies and every other trade union run organisation. By the time the game was up and we could no longer afford to subsidise your northern "entitlement" the country had gone bust and someone needed to come in and administer the medicine.
How hard is it to understand? It is the Trade Unions, The labour governments and Edward heath's placatory wettishness that you need to blame not Thatcher. The Soviet Union collapsed for exactly the same reasons
Regardless, the North STILL lacks jobs or industry (barring a minor tech outgrowth recently), which means thousands are living on government handouts paid for by the south. That hardly seems a good outcome because it means the government has to find a huge amount of money to keep all those people alive.

The government could've subsidised industry and still lost money, but people in the North would have not forgotten how to work. Maybe :)

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 15:00
Regardless, the North STILL lacks jobs or industry (barring a minor tech outgrowth recently), which means thousands are living on government handouts paid for by the south. That hardly seems a good outcome because it means the government has to find a huge amount of money to keep all those people alive.

The government could've subsidised industry and still lost money, but people in the North would have not forgotten how to work. Maybe :)

They should create low/nil tax enterprise zones, build more and better transport links and introduce work for welfare schemes.

DA for PM you read it here first folks :happy

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 15:01
"my criticism is of the ensuing Tory party who failed to take up the reforms and create the environment to retrain workers and rebuild manufacturing".

If Thatcher had done this herself at the same time as slashing and burning, we would probably be living in a golden age now. She certainly had the drive, but she only did half the job. Given that she was a scientist by profession, I will never understand why.

If people had seen two new trees planted for every one felled, they would all have followed her.

We are now getting somewhere

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 15:14
We are now getting somewhere

Not really. I can forgive her failure, and we have had plenty both before and after her.

I cannot forgive the malice. You do not create 'new life' by killing off the old and just leaving it to chance.

Sorry, but I saw too many good men just thrown on the scrap-heap without any hope. People come first. If people work in a mine and you want to shut it, then fine, but you have to use your power to give them somewhere else to work. It's not politics, it's just humanity.

As for the other comment about the north forgetting how to work..we have not forgotten, but with so many people applying for the same job, it's a race to the bottom.

Of course we are trapped here now, because you can no longer 'get on your bike', get a job down south and get your new employer to sponsor you for an early council house...but that's another story :-)

d000hg
6th January 2012, 15:20
They should create low/nil tax enterprise zones, build more and better transport links and introduce work for welfare schemes.So do you think Thatcher (and later Tory PMs) made a mistake not doing that?

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 15:29
Not really. I can forgive her failure, and we have had plenty both before and after her.

I cannot forgive the malice. You do not create 'new life' by killing off the old and just leaving it to chance.

Sorry, but I saw too many good men just thrown on the scrap-heap without any hope. People come first. If people work in a mine and you want to shut it, then fine, but you have to use your power to give them somewhere else to work. It's not politics, it's just humanity.

As for the other comment about the north forgetting how to work..we have not forgotten, but with so many people applying for the same job, it's a race to the bottom.

Of course we are trapped here now, because you can no longer 'get on your bike', get a job down south and get your new employer to sponsor you for an early council house...but that's another story :-)

You make yourselves sound like victims. its pathetic. You have also completely failed to acknowledge the fact that these people made their own beds with the help of the Unions. these businesses did not close down because some madman stole them. They closed down because they were inefficient and being supported by everyone else. Why should everyone else subsidise these people? They've got two legs and a brain so why didnt they do what you do and get a job wherever.

I've got a Romanian woman working for me with two kids she hardly sees. She works hard and is earning good money. She is now marketable on EU markets thanks to the sacrifices she has made. she knows that no one owes her a living and it takes her considerably longer to get her caravan here from bucharest than it does for some whining Northerner to cycle to london from Doncaster

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 15:47
"You make yourselves sound like victims. its pathetic. You have also completely failed to acknowledge the fact that these people made their own beds with the help of the Unions. these businesses did not close down because some madman stole them. They closed down because they were inefficient and being supported by everyone else. Why should everyone else subsidise these people? They've got two legs and a brain so why didnt they do what you do and get a job wherever".

That's what I'm saying...most Northerners would leg it down south tomorrow if there was a reasonable job at the other end, but it's just logistics.

I grew up on a council estate. When I was a kid, these estates were 90% working people with good jobs. If you wanted to follow the work, then you could, by moving to a 'new town'. You could move to the other end of the country and your employer would sign the housing application form. There was mobility. The council houses were for workers, not layabouts. Now there are so few that you have to be a socio-economic basket case before you are even allowed on the waiting list.

We were sold the idea that council houses would be sold to long-term tenants on the logical assumption that the money would be used to build new ones for workers where they were needed. Again, a job half-done.

I would WALK down south to a new job if there was a reasonably-paid job and a realistic rent at the other end for me and my family. Governments mouth words about getting on your bike, but there is not a penny available to help you to re-locate where the work is. It's almost as though they would rather pay dole in one place than collect tax in the other.

A waste of a nation.

vetran
6th January 2012, 16:12
There was a third way, the unions could have compromised as they did on the earlier pit closures. The car workers could have abandoned their spanish practices etc.

Private enterprise could have lobbied for tax incentives and invested in the future as Germany & Japan did, and as India & China are doing now.

Apparently Thatcher is responsible for closing all the profitable and well run private industry, the exceptionally cheap coal mines and ultra reliable car works that we used to have. Personally I remember them all being heavily subsidised, rubbish quality and on strike all the time.

Yet at the same time equivalent German plants with established workers councils built cars for a profit & to a quality we couldn't achieve.

I remember BT taking a month to come out & fix your phone. The water & gas board being even more arrogant with their customers than they are today. Do you?

Mechanisation & computers have removed hundreds of times more jobs than any government. Miners used to use pickaxes, now there are 3 miners and a million pounds worth of mining equipment in a colliery. Factories have 5 workers and the rest are machines. Admin staff have gone from a thousand secretaries to one computer. This is the back drop to the 'Tory job cuts'.

If you want to go back to full employment like in the 1800s then you have 3 choices
1. Have some serious wars or a plague. (did for 1914 - 1918)
2. Smash all the machines.
3. Create innovative new jobs that can only be done in the UK by humans.

Again apart from stopping the Milk what else can you lay at Thatchers door?

vetran
6th January 2012, 16:27
I would WALK down south to a new job if there was a reasonably-paid job and a realistic rent at the other end for me and my family. Governments mouth words about getting on your bike, but there is not a penny available to help you to re-locate where the work is. It's almost as though they would rather pay dole in one place than collect tax in the other.
A waste of a nation.

Well most of Eastern Europe seem to have made it here without a council house to go to.

I relocated to where the jobs were and the houses were cheaper 15 years ago. I lost money on my old flat yet we still managed it. You are allegedly a skilled worker you should be able to command the average wage, live in a poor house on a rough estate for a bit like everyone else does until they can afford a Swindon style mansion, or commute. You can rent a place just outside London from £55 a week.

Property to rent in Southall, Middlesex (http://www.findaproperty.com/to-rent/southall.middlesex/properties)

so that is £250 a month what are you going to spend the other £1250 on?

doodab
6th January 2012, 16:30
smash the machines!

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 16:41
smash the machines!

er what about IT?

doodab
6th January 2012, 16:49
er what about IT?

What about what?

vetran
6th January 2012, 16:51
would count that as machines.

But bottom end labour was removed by mechanisation. Administration & sales by IT.

We could all retrain as outreach consultants.

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 16:56
would count that as machines.

But bottom end labour was removed by mechanisation. Administration & sales by IT.

We could all retrain as outreach consultants.

The worst of the bunch are the likes of Churchill who put IT on machines :mad

doodab
6th January 2012, 17:06
The worst of the bunch are the likes of Churchill who put IT on machines :mad

I wouldn't put it on machines. It might get mangled in the gears or something.

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 17:39
Well most of Eastern Europe seem to have made it here without a council house to go to.

I relocated to where the jobs were and the houses were cheaper 15 years ago. I lost money on my old flat yet we still managed it. You are allegedly a skilled worker you should be able to command the average wage, live in a poor house on a rough estate for a bit like everyone else does until they can afford a Swindon style mansion, or commute. You can rent a place just outside London from £55 a week.


so that is £250 a month what are you going to spend the other £1250 on?

Fairy nuff.
I've lived down south before, you know. As soon as I get a job up here, my first aim is to save up a few grand for the deposit, rent up-front and van hire etc, and as soon as a job comes up I will be out of god-forsaken Cumbria forever, and never set foot here again.....

It's just a pity that the government don't have some kind of scheme for the longer-term unemployed who have exhausted their resources and don't have the necessary reserves to 'jump' towards the work. It seems illogical to me to carry on paying dole to people who would much rather be working, when if they were to cough up a few month's worth, they could then get it all back in income tax.

If they can't bring work to the people, why not help people to move to the work?

Just to repeat my friendly warning to all. STAY AWAY FROM WEST CUMBRIA. It is OK to 'work away' here, but do not consider re-locating. That is the biggest mistake I ever made. There is only one major employer. So all it takes is one self-preserving contract manager, then if you get sacked you stay sacked.

AtW
6th January 2012, 17:40
I don't think its ethical to discuss how someone still alive should be buried.

I'd like to propose for mods to close this thread and I'll start new one which would be a poll of those who wishes Mrs Thatcher good health and long life and those like AlfW.

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 17:52
Fairy nuff.
I've lived down south before, you know. As soon as I get a job up here, my first aim is to save up a few grand for the deposit, rent up-front and van hire etc, and as soon as a job comes up I will be out of god-forsaken Cumbria forever, and never set foot here again.....

It's just a pity that the government don't have some kind of scheme for the longer-term unemployed who have exhausted their resources and don't have the necessary reserves to 'jump' towards the work. It seems illogical to me to carry on paying dole to people who would much rather be working, when if they were to cough up a few month's worth, they could then get it all back in income tax.

If they can't bring work to the people, why not help people to move to the work?



Just to repeat my friendly warning to all. STAY AWAY FROM WEST CUMBRIA. It is OK to 'work away' here, but do not consider re-locating. That is the biggest mistake I ever made. There is only one major employer. So all it takes is one self-preserving contract manager, then if you get sacked you stay sacked.

Take the dole away - they will soon find work

AtW
6th January 2012, 17:54
Take the dole away - they will soon find work

And you'll help them? :wink

doodab
6th January 2012, 17:59
Take the dole away - they will soon find work

You really are a spiritual descendent of the sheriff of Nottingham aren't you.

From a practical perspective, they'll just as likely end up destitute or criminal and the cost to your calculating but uncaring society will likely be just as high or higher as if you had helped them.

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 18:07
You really are a spiritual descendent of the sheriff of Nottingham aren't you.

From a practical perspective, they'll just as likely end up destitute or criminal and the cost to your calculating but uncaring society will likely be just as high or higher as if you had helped them.

I am helping them by incentivising them. You want to help them by making them sit at home and do nothing. Which is better?

They get on a bike and pick fruit in Norfolk, gain confidence and have something on their CV from which to step up from
or they are paid to sit at home and do nothing where they build dependence, get fat, lose self esteem, fall into crime and have no hope of ever being taken seriously in the work market.
Your solution smacks of kindness when it is nothing of the sort - it is cruelty dished out to make you feel better about yourself.

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 18:08
And you'll help them? :wink

I have an office full of eastern europeans to prove it :tongue

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 18:15
Take the dole away - they will soon find work

You seem to live in a simplistic right-wing dream world.

Unemployment has risen dramatically recently. These people (the increase) are not layabouts - they were working before and want to work again. None of them resigned to live a cushy life on the dole - they were sacked and they hate it.

Your system only works if there are more vacancies than people. Then, and only then can you spot the layabouts.

There is no such thing as a cushy life on the dole. A couple gets just over £100/week and some of the rent paid, but not all (it depends if you have any unused bedrooms). All other bills (gas, electric, phone/internet for keeping in touch with agents etc.) come out of the £100. That's £14 per day. If you now anybody who fits the caricature of a dole layabout who has a flash car, smokes and spends all his nights with his mates down the pub, then he is also working on the side.

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 18:38
"I have an office full of eastern europeans to prove it"

Yeah...right.

OK DodgyAgent

We have been chatting for 24 hours now. You have answered every one of my posts within minutes, often with several paragraphs of rant.

Today is Friday, a work day.

I think that you are actually nothing in real life. Just basically a full-time troll. Nobody works for you. You do not work.

doodab
6th January 2012, 18:43
I am helping them by incentivising them. You want to help them by making them sit at home and do nothing. Which is better?

They get on a bike and pick fruit in Norfolk, gain confidence and have something on their CV from which to step up from
or they are paid to sit at home and do nothing where they build dependence, get fat, lose self esteem, fall into crime and have no hope of ever being taken seriously in the work market.
Your solution smacks of kindness when it is nothing of the sort - it is cruelty dished out to make you feel better about yourself.

This is where you jump to conclusions and, like Mrs T you equate "help" with "give a handout". It's the classic perspective of people who don't actually know what hard work is and don't understand how much of a working man's self esteem comes from his work, his pride in his job and his pride in supporting himself and his family. You don't replace that with cash, because you can't. What you need to do is help him find work, not crush him under foot and tell him he's lazy because he doesn't want to move 300 miles to work for a pittance while lining the pockets of some brylcreemed spiv.

Pondlife
6th January 2012, 18:46
"I have an office full of eastern europeans to prove it"

Yeah...right.

OK DodgyAgent

We have been chatting for 24 hours now. You have answered every one of my posts within minutes, often with several paragraphs of rant.

Today is Friday, a work day.

I think that you are actually nothing in real life. Just basically a full-time troll. Nobody works for you. You do not work.


What do you think his Europeans are doing. Their job is to read out your posts whilst he paces his office shouting replies and doing deals on the phone.

It's a bit like this... Picture DA on the phone...

Now, listen, Jerry, I'm looking for negative control. Okay? No more than 30, 35 percent. Just enough to block anybody else's merger plans and find out from the inside if the books are cooked. If it looks as good as on paper, we're in the kill zone, pal. Lock and load. THAT KIMBERLY FECKER SAID WHAT! RIGHT START TYPING SERGEI!

Regent
6th January 2012, 18:46
"I have an office full of eastern europeans to prove it"

Yeah...right.

OK DodgyAgent

We have been chatting for 24 hours now. You have answered every one of my posts within minutes, often with several paragraphs of rant.

Today is Friday, a work day.

I think that you are actually nothing in real life. Just basically a full-time troll. Nobody works for you. You do not work.

Are there any internet forums for agents?

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 18:56
You've got it :-)

DA does not exist in real life. He is the on-line alter-ego of a Walter Mitty character!

No agent could possibly exist like that. They are all far too busy chasing leads, rounding-up contractors, sorting out people's contracts/tax gripes/ maternity/NI, chasing invoices etc to spend an entire working day on CUK!!!

I know...I've worked in a pimp's office, and it's actually bloody hard nail-biting stuff :-)

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 19:13
This is where you jump to conclusions and, like Mrs T you equate "help" with "give a handout". It's the classic perspective of people who don't actually know what hard work is and don't understand how much of a working man's self esteem comes from his work, his pride in his job and his pride in supporting himself and his family. You don't replace that with cash, because you can't. What you need to do is help him find work, not crush him under foot and tell him he's lazy because he doesn't want to move 300 miles to work for a pittance while lining the pockets of some brylcreemed spiv.


Well...I'd vote for you !!!!!!

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 19:19
"I have an office full of eastern europeans to prove it"

Yeah...right.

OK DodgyAgent

We have been chatting for 24 hours now. You have answered every one of my posts within minutes, often with several paragraphs of rant.

Today is Friday, a work day.

I think that you are actually nothing in real life. Just basically a full-time troll. Nobody works for you. You do not work.

For someone with only 64 posts you've got me sussed :rollin:

KimberleyChris
6th January 2012, 19:25
Maybe, but I'm not the only one...you should see my PM's Mr Mitty :-)

pjclarke
6th January 2012, 19:31
Should Thatcher get a state funeral?

She'd only privatise it.

Alf W
6th January 2012, 20:39
She needs to be cremated. If they bury her, the evil witch will dig herself out.

vetran
6th January 2012, 21:05
Nope they need to be made to work for benefits

Half unemployed give up benefits rather than work unpaid with many falling back on 'black economy' jobs (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/article-2082513/Half-unemployed-benefits-work-unpaid-falling-black-economy-jobs.html)



Half of those claiming unemployment benefits would prefer to lose their handouts than do a stint of unpaid work.

Figures show that 20 per cent of those ordered to take part in four-week community projects stop claiming immediately and another 30 per cent are stripped of their benefits when they fail to turn up.

Officials suspect many of those who stop claiming benefits are working in the black economy and would rather lose their welfare than give up their undeclared earnings.


Would sort the wheat from the chaff.


Sorry to seem uncharitable but its what I and many of my friends have suspected for years. The benefit system is being abused. Plenty of people willing to take easy money from the government.

Roll it out for the long term unemployed, Then at least the ones that want to work will have a good attendance record they can show to prospective employers. You can combine it with free training and support so they can transition into work smoothly.

Alf I say again - what have you actually got against Thatcher apart from the Milk?

DodgyAgent
6th January 2012, 21:10
She needs to be cremated. If they bury her, the evil witch will dig herself out.

I see the misogynist bigot is back from under his stone :happy

AtW
6th January 2012, 21:11
I see the misogynist bigot is back from under his stone :happy

:spel

coal mine

Waldorf
6th January 2012, 22:07
So what exactly should she have done? Our manufacturing was inefficient and the rest of the country went to work to pay taxes to subsidise the likes of British leyland, The miners, the airlines, the power companies and every other trade union run organisation. By the time the game was up and we could no longer afford to subsidise your northern "entitlement" the country had gone bust and someone needed to come in and administer the medicine.
How hard is it to understand? It is the Trade Unions, The labour governments and Edward heath's placatory wettishness that you need to blame not Thatcher. The Soviet Union collapsed for exactly the same reasons

Well put - I think that overall she did Britain proud, yes she made some mistakes, but overall I wish we had in No.10 now.

TiroFijo
7th January 2012, 08:57
If you have left the country, adapted and have a very good lifestyle why do you feel the need to spend so much time convincing everyone else when you should be "living your lifestyle"

Loser

You're starting to lose(r) it now...

sbakoola
8th January 2012, 15:02
Having been raised in England in single parent family on a council estate I was given an opportunity to be relatively rich and have all the material things I could possibly want having worked hard to proceed through University and into investment banking.

Had a Labour government been in power during the 1980s and the early 1990s that would not have been possible, under them the scenario would have lead to my disposable income ravaged by high taxes and me taking an average pay in reduced free market economy labour markets.

Thatcher created the "conditions" to succeed in attaining what people wanted in life, the pity of it is that not everyone could achieve this. I am not saying that she created anything approaching a Eutopia but the alternative would have been a sinking from which Britain would never have been able to pull itself out of evidenced by the Labour governments efforts 1997 - 2010 (yes it was that long). Tony Blair was the slipperiest devil to ever grace the position of Prime Minister in this country and I and so many others feel hoodwinked by this man who let down the country in so many ways and got away with it scott free.

I think that she should be given a State funeral, I for one would buy flowers for her funeral if its local.

In fact just looking it up in the internet it looks like she will be having a state funeral....

Lady Thatcher to be honoured with State funeral | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1034634/Lady-Thatcher-honoured-State-funeral.html)

DodgyAgent
8th January 2012, 15:19
Having been raised in England in single parent family on a council estate I was given an opportunity to be relatively rich and have all the material things I could possibly want having worked hard to proceed through University and into investment banking.

Had a Labour government been in power during the 1980s and the early 1990s that would not have been possible, under them the scenario would have lead to my disposable income ravaged by high taxes and me taking an average pay in reduced free market economy labour markets.

Thatcher created the "conditions" to succeed in attaining what people wanted in life, the pity of it is that not everyone could achieve this. I am not saying that she created anything approaching a Eutopia but the alternative would have been a sinking from which Britain would never have been able to pull itself out of evidenced by the Labour governments efforts 1997 - 2010 (yes it was that long). Tony Blair was the slipperiest devil to ever grace the position of Prime Minister in this country and I and so many others feel hoodwinked by this man who let down the country in so many ways and got away with it scott free.

I think that she should be given a State funeral, I for one would buy flowers for her funeral if its local.

In fact just looking it up in the internet it looks like she will be having a state funeral....

Lady Thatcher to be honoured with State funeral | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1034634/Lady-Thatcher-honoured-State-funeral.html)

People who "make it" from your type of background are loathed by the leftie liberals in our society. They like to see that their "look at me I am virtuous" by "hating" Thatcher is vindicated by a perpetual existence of a working class who will always be there to be "grateful" to their liberal protectors. Thanks to Thatcher we no longer have a working class because people like you are now firmly planted as property owning middle classes. Her greatest achievement was probably to show the working classes that they did'nt have to live in a council flat owned by someone else all of their lives.

The liberals have countered this with howls of "greed and selfishness" instead of reflecting the truth which is that Thatcher enabled a whole generation of the less well off to become individuals and take responsibility for themselves and to aspire to whatever they wish. She also freed up the nationalised Industries to free workers to create their own businesses and to take their skills to the markets.. The emergence of the so called Essex boy traders and IT contractors were two such shining examples of her achievements.

The working class has been replaced by the underclass and by immigrants (who the liberals then go and "dump" in the working class areas of the country). Having lost their precious working classes they can now purge their guilt by pretending to "care" about their latest creation - the underclass.

The reason why labour have no policy is because it suits them to have a dependency class. if however they could shake off their self serving bigotry they could step up to the challenge and get the poor off welfare by giving them proper education and training, and persuade them to aspire to success that is largely held by those educated and brought up outside the state system.

AtW
8th January 2012, 15:36
Thanks to Thatcher we no longer have a working class because people like you are now firmly planted as property owning middle classes.

I think the destruction of industry has got more to do with it than making people into middle classes.

DodgyAgent
8th January 2012, 15:46
I think the destruction of industry has got more to do with it than making people into middle classes.

You are probably right in that there are not so many "production line" jobs any more. It is never going to get any better whilst we have such high taxes and expensive employment laws. They may as well teach Polish in the schools and they can go and work there!

AtW
8th January 2012, 15:53
It is never going to get any better whilst we have such high taxes and expensive employment laws.

That I agree - taxation levels make anything but high margin enterprise in this country very hard to do especially if real stuff is involved, ie shifting materials etc.

The Tories wrongly think they can change that by makin g it easier to fire people, so far I don't think their policies much different from that of Labour if they remained in power. Next year it will be too late to change anything, so I reckon Labour will be back in - in which case Thatcher probably won't get state funeral!

Bagpuss
8th January 2012, 17:37
Even her children can't stand her. Dodgy, why didn't you pop around?


The Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, ignored by her children again this Christmas | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080536/The-Iron-Lady-Margaret-Thatcher-ignored-children-Christmas.html)

DodgyAgent
8th January 2012, 17:40
Even her children can't stand her. Dodgy, why didn't you pop around?


The Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, ignored by her children again this Christmas | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080536/The-Iron-Lady-Margaret-Thatcher-ignored-children-Christmas.html)

I did :tongue

BrilloPad
8th January 2012, 19:42
I did :tongue

Are you on the same intelligent level as her then? I knew you were senile - but not that bad...

Incognito
8th January 2012, 21:29
This is the state of the UK when Thatcher came into power.


By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor7:30AM GMT 10 Feb 2010Comments
JP Morgan, said that in “many” ways “the UK’s fiscal position is currently worse than observed around the IMF loan in 1976”.
The bank warns that Government debts, when compared to the total size of the economy, are higher than during the 1970s crisis.
It adds that there could be a “marked fall” in the value of the pound as international investors re-assess the health of the British economy.
The intervention from JP Morgan is likely to add to the pressure on Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling to set out how they intend to cut Britain’s deficit. JP Morgan is one of the biggest banks in the world with assets of more than $2 trillion – almost as big as the entire British economy. Tony Blair is a consultant to the firm.
The Conservatives have warned that Britain faces bankruptcy if public spending is not cut.
In 1976, Britain was forced to turn to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for a £2.3 billion bailout. In return for the funds, the IMF insisted on reforms to the British economy including public spending cuts. The period was regarded as one of the most humiliating in the history of the British economy.
In a research note entitled “UK Fiscal Policy: some lessons from the 1976 crisis”, JP Morgan said: “On many metrics, the UK’s fiscal position is currently worse than observed around the IMF loan in 1976…The size of the current budget deficit suggests that the UK is leaning heavily on the credibility it has built up since the mid-1970s.”
The bank’s “central forecast” is that Britain will “muddle through” the crisis. However, JP Morgan added: “The possibility that markets could take a more severe view of the fiscal position is clear, and the 1976 experience demonstrated that the situation can change quickly and unpredictably.
“Officials fretted over the possibility of a marked fall in the currency well before the crisis. Looking back at 1976, one can argue that as the crisis broke, the underlying situation had actually begun to improve (growth had begun to recover and current account deficits had begun to fall).”
There are growing fears about the high level of Government borrowing which is causing turmoil on financial markets in this country and throughout Europe. The value of the pound has recently fallen sharply against the dollar.
European leaders will meet later this week to discuss the financial crisis in Greece. Greek public debts are crippling the economy and have prompted concerns over the euro as wealthier European countries may be forced to bail-out the beleaguered nation.
Britain has now been branded one of the “STUPID” countries – Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, Portugal, Italy and Denmark – whose “excessive” Government borrowing is now threatening the economy. Total Government borrowing in this country is due to top £1 trillion in the next few years.
Mr Brown insists that increased borrowing has allowed the Government to invest during the recession and stop unemployment rising as fast as feared. Ministers have pledged to cut the deficit in half over the next four years but have yet to spell out exactly how this will be achieved.

Britain's economy now as bad as 1970s, JP Morgan warns - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/7198359/Britains-economy-now-as-bad-as-1970s-JP-Morgan-warns.html)



We were no better off than the likes of Greece are now. Due to Thatchers policies though (which Blair embraced) look at where we are now (we were the 6th largest global economy up to last year).

Anyone who thinks that isn't down to Thatcher embracing the free market can **** off back to North Korea.

SimonMac
8th January 2012, 21:30
Even her children can't stand her. Dodgy, why didn't you pop around?


The Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, ignored by her children again this Christmas | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080536/The-Iron-Lady-Margaret-Thatcher-ignored-children-Christmas.html)

I think that say's more about her ****ed up children then her

AtW
8th January 2012, 23:56
I think that say's more about her ****ed up children then her

Aye.

Paddy
9th January 2012, 00:48
I think that say's more about her ****ed up children then her
Or Mark got lost (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/12/newsid_2523000/2523841.stm)