Industrial investment in 1979 wouldn't have worked.

[DodgyAgent]

Was having this discussion with the missus this weekend: at the moment I work from home and could be based anywhere in the world with a reliable internet connection OR I could easily get a job in Germany, Switzerland, Singapore, probably the US, maybe Japan.

We are going to do the emigration thing within the next 5 years, there's no point in living in a country in fast decline - and with the possibility of major economic chaos*

*People forget that this is the most indebted country in Europe.

Off you go we are not stopping you. BTW can I have your bus pass please?

[Gibbon]

And why UK workers are building good cars, albeit for foreign companies like Honda, Nissan, BMW etc?

Janan, France, Germany (especially) and even USA kept industry and out of those countries only UK totally pissed away the inheritance from the industrial revolution. Can't even build a fooking railway now quickly and cheaply.

Wrong it's because of, basically the foreign firms have the power that goverment didn't have back then. Agree to these working practices or we'll invest elsewhere.

[sasguru]

Or reaping that which we sowed.

Quite!

[AtW]

Wrong it's because of, basically the foreign firms have the power that goverment didn't have back then.

So which foreign firm is mining coal in UK now?

Aerial photoes of run down former industrial estates in Birmingham would probably be consistent with Luftwaffe damage caused in WW2. Much worse in all probability.

I am not saying it was only Thatcher who did it - if anything New Labour dealt the final blow to manufacturing in UK, but if there was one recent PM that started campaign of deindustrialization in Britain then it would be her.

[DodgyAgent]

So which foreign firm is mining coal in UK now?

Aerial photoes of run down former industrial estates in Birmingham would probably be consistent with Luftwaffe damage caused in WW2. Much worse in all probability.

I am not saying it was only Thatcher who did it - if anything New Labour dealt the final blow to manufacturing in UK, but if there was one recent PM that started campaign of deindustrialization in Britain then it would be her.

As some one who was not even here during Thatchers time and has probably not even studied any objectively written history of the country that he has moved to, you are jumping to the wrong conclusions:

What of the other, bigger, claim against the Thatcher governments: that as matter of deliberate policy, manufacturing industry as a whole was “decimated”? Roger Backhouse, professor of economics at Birmingham University and no Thatcherite, produced an assessment some years ago that concluded: “The main feature of the UK’s growth performance from 1979 to 1989 was an unusually high growth rate of manufacturing productivity.”

Even Thatcher’s critics would have to admit we became more productive in the 1980s — compare Nissan’s Sunderland plant with custom and practice at British Leyland. But what about overall manufacturing output? According to the Office for National Statistics, between the second quarter of 1979 and the third quarter of 1990 (the period of her leadership) it increased — yes, increased — by 7.5%.

It is certainly true that manufacturing declined as a proportion of GDP — and went on to do so at a faster rate during the years of new Labour. Yet this has been a feature of the West as a whole, and certainly not a peculiarly British phenomenon; about 12% of our GDP is attributable to manufacturing, similar to the proportion in France and America.

Even at their overblown peak, financial services never contributed anything like as big a proportion of our GDP. Again, you would never know that from almost every account of the post-Thatcher British economy.

Where British industry would have been without the Thatcher government’s brusque injection of competitiveness — not least through privatisation — is best assessed by reading the memoirs of Bernard Donoughue, head of the Downing Street policy unit under Harold Wilson and Jim Callaghan.

[doodab]

As some one who was not even here during Thatchers time and has probably not even studied any objectively written history of the country that he has moved to, you are jumping to the wrong conclusions:

What of the other, bigger, claim against the Thatcher governments: that as matter of deliberate policy, manufacturing industry as a whole was “decimated”? Roger Backhouse, professor of economics at Birmingham University and no Thatcherite, produced an assessment some years ago that concluded: “The main feature of the UK’s growth performance from 1979 to 1989 was an unusually high growth rate of manufacturing productivity.”

Even Thatcher’s critics would have to admit we became more productive in the 1980s — compare Nissan’s Sunderland plant with custom and practice at British Leyland. But what about overall manufacturing output? According to the Office for National Statistics, between the second quarter of 1979 and the third quarter of 1990 (the period of her leadership) it increased — yes, increased — by 7.5%.

It is certainly true that manufacturing declined as a proportion of GDP — and went on to do so at a faster rate during the years of new Labour. Yet this has been a feature of the West as a whole, and certainly not a peculiarly British phenomenon; about 12% of our GDP is attributable to manufacturing, similar to the proportion in France and America.

Even at their overblown peak, financial services never contributed anything like as big a proportion of our GDP. Again, you would never know that from almost every account of the post-Thatcher British economy.

Where British industry would have been without the Thatcher government’s brusque injection of competitiveness — not least through privatisation — is best assessed by reading the memoirs of Bernard Donoughue, head of the Downing Street policy unit under Harold Wilson and Jim Callaghan.

So now you aren't even attributing your quotes?

[DodgyAgent]

So now you aren't even attributing your quotes?

My new name is "Dodgy Lawson"

[AtW]

Where British industry would have been without the Thatcher government’s brusque injection of competitiveness

Competitiveness. Nice word. It's good to increase competitiveness innit?

Well, there are two ways you can do it -
1) invest into R&D long term and continue to create products in demand, CREATE demand even in new areas - that's top achivement. This gives good margin products.
2) cut your costs - no minimum wage (!), fook all job security etc

Japan, Germany, France went for option 1.
UK and I dare say USA went for option 2.

USA managed to keep some good industries though, not least thanks to large military budget.

Ultimately, it's about who make money and who spends it - Germany got very high exports, they EARN their keep in the world, and UK (as well as USA) imports far more than exports.

The main thing that UK exported and continues to export is jobs.

[Mich the Tester]

I've worked in several client cos with much the same division of tasks between DBA, OS support and so on. You have the same petty empire building, obstruction and inefficiency. It's management squabbling rather than union politics but the effect is much the same.

Indeed. IBM and KPN come to mind.

[stek]

Industrial investment in 1979 wouldn't have worked.

De Lorean anyone?