• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Should Thatcher get a state funeral?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #71
    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

    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

    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/s...@@_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

    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.

    Comment


      #72
      Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
      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 ) 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?

      Comment


        #73
        Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
        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.

        Comment


          #74
          Originally posted by TiroFijo View Post
          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.



          Earn £145,000 like Bob Crow? Then forget a council house | Mail Online

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

          Comment


            #75
            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 :-)

            Comment


              #76
              Originally posted by AtW View Post
              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!

              Comment


                #77
                Originally posted by KimberleyChris View Post
                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.
                Last edited by DodgyAgent; 6 January 2012, 14:12.
                Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

                Comment


                  #78
                  "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.

                  Comment


                    #79
                    Originally posted by KimberleyChris View Post
                    "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.
                    Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

                    Comment


                      #80
                      "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?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X