Thatcher to be given a state funeral

[steward 433]

The problem with the manufacturing industries and their decline was not Thatcher, but the unions. Their leaders greed and political (mainly Communist) motives led to the downfall of Britain's manufacturing industry.

Spot on

The unions and their incessant greed for more wages (so union fees could increase) made our manufacturing industry overpriced and quite often unreliable and late.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

The tragedy of new labour is not that they have ruined the country, but they have done so little to improve the mess they inherited from Major.

I was thinking the same thing!

 

[Simster]

Any manufacturing industries that we had eventually became crippled by the all powerful unions. How could any of our products be viable to a potential international buyer on a global stage when all the time the workers in that industry where going on strike.

Take cars for instance the workers at British Leyland were striking all the time in the 70's. If you are say Dutch and have a choice between a British Leyland manufactured car that is 6 months late due to strikes or a Volkswagen what are you going to buy?

The problem with the manufacturing industries and their decline was not Thatcher, but the unions. Their leaders greed and political (mainly Communist) motives led to the downfall of Britain's manufacturing industry.

A decent PM would have crushed the unions AND propped up our manufacturing base as best possible. The French managed it, and they're *always* on strike.

Thatcher just took one look at it, decided we couldn't compete with Japan and did NOTHING as our entire car manufacturing base just died on its arse.

 

[simmo]

A decent PM would have crushed the unions AND propped up our manufacturing base as best possible. The French managed it, and they're *always* on strike.

Thatcher just took one look at it, decided we couldn't compete with Japan and did NOTHING as our entire car manufacturing base just died on its arse.

So now you agree she was a half good prime minister by crushing the unions!

I said in an earlier update that the French have their problems and are not disimilar to ours in the 70's but are not so severe.

The French have not crushed their Unions. International businesses will not locate in France because the labour laws lean over too far towards the workers/unions and leaves the French business environment uncompetetive. In France if you are in higher education you are told to do a masters because there are no jobs for you. My aunt whom can speak 5 languages took over a year to get a job in and around Paris. This doesn't happen in England because we have much more flexible labour laws because we are not suffocated by the unions.

I believe no-one can by law, in France, work over a 35 (maybe a bit higher) hour week even if you want to and the Unions will not allow the governement to change this. Sakorzy run on a ticket to change this and his opponent Royale?? didn't. He won the election will he have the guts like Thatcher did to take on the Unions with their inevitable strikes to change it.

 

[London Pompous]

I'm in a union and earn loads, what am I doing wrong? AND I think that Thatch was an evil witch who looked after her cronies and son through privatisation and arms deals.

 

[simmo]

I'm in a union and earn loads, what am I doing wrong? AND I think that Thatch was an evil witch who looked after her cronies and son through privatisation and arms deals.

Are you Gary Neville?

 

[User removed 4]

I'm in a union and earn loads, what am I doing wrong? AND I think that Thatch was an evil witch who looked after her cronies and son through privatisation and arms deals.

what is your obsession with letting everyone know your on good money ?? are you a bit insecure or something ?

 

[El Presidente]

what is your obsession with letting everyone know your on good money ?? are you a bit insecure or something ?

Probably has a small penis

 

[steward 433]

Probably has a small penis

Most 12 year old keyboard warriors do though

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Any manufacturing industries that we had eventually became crippled by the all powerful unions. How could any of our products be viable to a potential international buyer on a global stage when all the time the workers in that industry where going on strike.

Take cars for instance the workers at British Leyland were striking all the time in the 70's. If you are say Dutch and have a choice between a British Leyland manufactured car that is 6 months late due to strikes or a Volkswagen what are you going to buy?

The problem with the manufacturing industries and their decline was not Thatcher, but the unions. Their leaders greed and political (mainly Communist) motives led to the downfall of Britain's manufacturing industry.

The reason no one would buy a Leyland car was because like most British things they were shite. This has nothing to do with the unions.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

A decent PM would have crushed the unions AND propped up our manufacturing base as best possible. The French managed it, and they're *always* on strike.

Thatcher just took one look at it, decided we couldn't compete with Japan and did NOTHING as our entire car manufacturing base just died on its arse.

VW is heavily unionised. But they pay their workforce a decent salary and put a lot back into Wolfsburg (the main factory). In return the workforce are reasonably loyal and hard working. I read a piece about their union leader having the easiest job in the world as the bosses and workers are in harmony most of the time.

Make and sell a decent product for a decent price....and pay your staff a decent wage. Not rocket science is it. Britain is full of people at every level trying to squeeze the last penny out of everything. It's pathetic really.

 

[El Presidente]

The reason no one would buy a Leyland car was because like most British things they were shite. This has nothing to do with the unions.

OI! I used to have a BEIGE Leyland Metro 1.0 HLE. It was the original FANNY MAGNET, you would not believe the number of women who SPREAD themselves on the unique (at the time) split rear seat setup in the GLORY DAYS.

 

[1066familyman]

Could we afford them? It seems that we struggle to subsidise the NHS etc. without having the onus of propping up council houses and the coal industry etc. etc. despite the fact we are paying record levels of taxation.

Can we afford to continue to prop up private landlords/ladies ?

What about the Housing Benefit that millions receive so they can afford to rent in the private sector seeing as there isn't enough council housing ?

State subsides for the buy to let brigade, surely ?

Oh, but that's ok I suppose, because people who buy to let are 'entrepreneurs', and entrepreneurs are good people aren't they ?


Whereas council house tenants............

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Can we afford to continue to prop up private landlords/ladies ?

What about the Housing Benefit that millions receive so they can afford to rent in the private sector seeing as there isn't enough council housing ?

State subsides for the buy to let brigade, surely ?

Oh, but that's ok I suppose, because people who buy to let are 'entrepreneurs', and entrepreneurs are good people aren't they ?


Whereas council house tenants............

I am not saying that but-to-letters are a godsave. They have been part of the problem in driving up prices to unsustainable levels and ensuring that a whole generation of Britons struggle or are unable to purchase a house without risking financial destruction. The government have not done enough to safeguard against people buying numerous properties.

The point I was getting as was could we have afforded to prop up the coal industry, bring council housing up to an acceptable standard, invest in our manufacturing industry, invest in the rail network etc. etc. All those are used as a stick to beat Thatcher, but I am pretty sure the country was dying on it's arse after a torrid period in the 70s and the unions were strangling the life out of the country. Did we have the money to turn things round? Why have Labour not re-nationalised industries or increased their housing stock? Governmental income has risen greatly since they took over.

I think our continental cousins have got the right idea. A large proportion of families live together in a family house without having to rely on the state to house them.

We are a handout nation. Perhaps Poll Tax was a bright idea and may go someway to discouraging people to overproduce children that they can't afford and the knock on effect.

Considering we supposedly have record high levels of employment and low levels of unemployment, we seem to dish out a hell of a lot of welfare benefits/housing benefits.

Bah. It is late/early and I am not making much sense.

 

[1066familyman]

I am not saying that but-to-letters are a godsave. They have been part of the problem in driving up prices to unsustainable levels and ensuring that a whole generation of Britons struggle or are unable to purchase a house without risking financial destruction.

The point I was getting as was could we have afforded to prop up the coal industry, bring council housing up to an acceptable standard, invest in our manufacturing industry, invest in the rail network etc. etc. All those are used as a stick to beat Thatcher, but I am pretty sure the country was dying on it's arse after a torrid period in the 70s and the unions were strangling the life out of the country. Did we have the money to turn things round? Why have Labour not re-nationalised industries or increased their housing stock? Governmental income has risen greatly since they took over.

I think our continental cousins have got the right idea. A large proportion of families live together in a family house without having to rely on the state to house them.

We are a handout nation. Perhaps Poll Tax was a bright idea and may go someway to discouraging people to overproduce children that they can't afford and the knock on effect.

Considering we supposedly have record high levels of employment and low levels of unemployment, we seem to dish out a hell of a lot of welfare benefits/housing benefits.

Not sat down with the figures then I take it ? i.e. Private rent costs v wages.

As for the children bit, I can see your Thatcherite sympathies there. After all, if there's no such thing as society, who needs future generations ?

And Labour have not re-nationalised industries or increased [public] housing stock because since Thatcher we're yet to have a labour government, or haven't you noticed ?

 

[GNF on Tour]

A state funeral is the correct course and befitting arguably the greatest prime minister in Britsh history as children in 40/50 years time will be taught.

Oh thanks, that one had me in stitches, needed a laugh today.

 

[GNF on Tour]

You asked the question. You're missing my point. There's been alot wrong with New labour and John Major, but neither of them set out with the sole purpose of closing down entire industries and cosigning entire communities to misery and unemployment. All Gov'ts f*** things up, but Thatcher declared war and armed with the monetarist theories of her mentor Keith Joseph, did not give a flying f*** about what happened to the people left in those communities particularly in the North. That's why she is despised by so many. Brown maybe a crap PM as was Major but you can't say they intentionally want/wanted people working in your industries to have a hard time.

f*** her.

Post of the Decade

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Not sat down with the figures then I take it ? i.e. Private rent costs v wages.

As for the children bit, I can see your Thatcherite sympathies there. After all, if there's no such thing as society, who needs future generations ?

And Labour have not re-nationalised industries or increased [public] housing stock because since Thatcher we're yet to have a labour government, or haven't you noticed ?

Jesus. I am talking about families that mass produce children when they can ill afford to and the eventual burden on society. I am not suggesting that we have a one child policy. Let's not get confused here. Do you think it is acceptable that a family have 4, 5 or 6 children, reap in benefits for said children and rely on the state to provide housing benefits for their small army?

I am not saying that the current housing make-up is perfect, far from it, I was merely commenting one of possible reasons of selling off a large proportion of the housing stock. Look at Brighton & Hove Council, they have a huge shortfall in finance to bring their council houses up to an acceptable standard. They were keen to transfer ownership to a Housing Association, but the residents voted against it. What can they do?

Quite right not to call them a Labour party. They are the love child of many parties and have had a crack at it during a period of ascendency with foundations laid before the smary Blair and Brown set foot in Downing Street. The sooner they are out the better and perhaps we as a nation can take a bit more personal responsibility for our futures as opposed to relying so heavily on the state.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

This thread will still be on the front page the days she dies at this rate

 

[1066familyman]

Jesus. I am talking about families that mass produce children when they can ill afford to and the eventual burden on society. I am not suggesting that we have a one child policy. Let's not get confused here. Do you think it is acceptable that a family have 4, 5 or 6 children, reap in benefits for said children and rely on the state to provide housing benefits for their small army?

I am not saying that the current housing make-up is perfect, far from it, I was merely commenting one of possible reasons of selling off a large proportion of the housing stock. Look at Brighton & Hove Council, they have a huge shortfall in finance to bring their council houses up to an acceptable standard. They were keen to transfer ownership to a Housing Association, but the residents voted against it. What can they do?

Quite right not to call them a Labour party. They are the love child of many parties and have had a crack at it during a period of ascendency with foundations laid before the smary Blair and Brown set foot in Downing Street. The sooner they are out the better and perhaps we as a nation can take a bit more personal responsibility for our futures as opposed to relying so heavily on the state.

We obviously have a fundamental difference of opinion regarding children. You regard children born to parents who have to claim some form of 'benefit' (a very high percentage of parents today btw) as a "burden on society". Personally I consider all children, regardless of what social class they happen to be born into, as a future asset to society. I think you'll also find that despite the media hysteria around immigration the population of Western Europe is in decline due to the decline in the birth rate. I'm doing my bit though ; GOD willing, number four on the way next month :yahoo:

The shortfall local authorities have regarding council housing is surely ultimately due to lack of funding and support from central government ? Back to our point on 'New' Labour again, and we don't disagree there, so no need to labour the point.

In conclusion though.....Thatcher was/is an evil bitch IMHO. I won't dance on her grave though because two wrongs will never ever make a right.