Media's Handling of Thatchers Death - Small comparison within.

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 


Scargill is a complete scumbag and i can't believe people still buy his baloney. Even most ex miners round where i grew up now view Scargill as a scumbag out to line his own pocket. His ex wife on the news talking about the death of Thatcher was actually one of those cringing tv highlights for me - made absolutely no sense whatsoever and came across as completely thick (so a good match for Scargill).

However, that is an aside. The mining situation is very simple. Extraction costs had risen to the point where most mines were completely unprofitable and the industry as a whole was costing the taxpayer hundreds of millions a year. The result of Scargills' intractability was that instead of just shutting unprofitable mines (the majority), just about all mines were shut instead.

Miners weren't badly paid either. Some pits in the Selby Coalfield were still open into the 1990's and i personally know some guys that were taking home over £1000 a week back then (after tax). Sadly for them though, even those coal seams became unprofitable, hence the subsequent closures.




posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
An example of what Thatcher did for us.........

Pre Thatcher, the tax on unearned income (savings, dividends, etc) was 98%. This prevented people from investing in industry. The result? Industry starved of investment, opportunities to grow, etc.

The top bracket of income tax was 83%.

How is history already judging her economic policies? Quite simple - she is viewed as making Britain have a sound economy again and ensuring that Sterling remained a valued currency. This shouldn't be underestimated as, quite simply, by the late 1970's Britain was almost completely bankrupt.


I dunno my recolection of the late 70's was being able to walk out of one job and straight into another, as opposed to now where there are no jobs.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 


Speak for yourself. There are plenty of jobs around these days. I see job adverts everywhere i go around here. And i have to travel a lot around the country with my current work and see similar in most areas, although admittedly not all areas.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 





Scargill is a complete scumbag and i can't believe people still buy his baloney. Even most ex miners round where i grew up now view Scargill as a scumbag out to line his own pocket


I don't know the answer but I will ask, Did Scargill demand his pay grade or was it set and came with the job ?

I'm only going by most posts that come with a set wage.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
The bbc has been running 24/7 coverage of thatcher's death - As if they were expecting her to rise from the dead and give a speech. During this time, they've been gageing reactions from past and current politicians who all seem to agree that her policies were fantastic and wonderful - changed the country for the better (Pretty sickening considering there all suppose to be on different ends of the scale cons/lib/labour are obviously all under the same umbrella now.)


Nope, I don't know what news you've been watching, but I've been watching Sky and the BBC and there are plenty of detractors speaking about her obvious mistakes and flaws.

The difference is perhaps that they are adults, actually lived through her government, and they have some class too. The "parties" seem to be 80% under 30, basing their opinions on an extreme leftist ideology verging on socialism. They know nothing about her time in power other than she was a Tory, and that bad things happened under her leadership.

There are certain things that people cannot criticize her for...
1. The unions had been holding the country to ransom, and she stopped that.
2. The Falkland islands were invaded, and she didn't hesitate in defending those free people by sending in our troops.
3. She worked harder than any politician in her government or the opposition throughout, and she probably worked harder than any politician since.
4. She didn't pander to bankers, capitalists or Europe. She made her decisions for the betterment of the country.
5. She fought against the federalization of Europe.
6. She didn't pander the minorities of Britain, she did what her elected wanted her to do, which was run the country and make it better than it was before she arrived.

Like her or not, agree with all of her policies or not, there are certain things that no sane person with some knowledge of history can deny.


Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
Why cant 200 people gather to celebrate her death? I thought this was a free society?


I don't see anyone stopping these people from celebrating if they wish.
I do see the police preventing violence and rioting. If you were paying any attention to what was happening in Brixton last night, you'll know that there was a skirmish, not a party. Shops were once again vandalized and looted. That is not a party, and just as I expected the police to act the last time the scum of this country went on a rampage, I expect them to act against that again.

People can have a party in the streets over the death of a frail old woman if they want. But the moment they step out of line and become a threat to the people living there then they damn well should be put down with appropriate force. We saw what happened in the UK when the police failed to act last time, so they better make sure they do their job this time and do it right from the start.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by dodgygeeza
I cannot express how disgusting it is to see people celebrating the death of an old lady, many of those celebrants being just out of school and having not even been even a twinkle in their parent's eyes when she left power.

Regardless of her politics (of which I was against for the record), she was still loved as a mother, sister and aunt and to celebrate and wish her hell is foul beyond words. I truly hope that I do not hate anyone as much as some people seem to be capable of.


Regardless of her politics. Remember the poll tax? If it was not for the Falklands war she would of only survived one term. Yes people have a right to celebrate her death. She was politically a c@w. She sucked up to the banks and started the de-regulation which is a major reason for the economic turmoil we have today.

No its not nice to celebrate the death of an old lady but she was a lot more than that to most people.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Yes, it makes perfect sense to shut down industry and put those all those people and families on the dole, then moan incessantly at them for not having a job and having to claim benefits. Of course, I see it now.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
The bbc has been running 24/7 coverage of thatcher's death - As if they were expecting her to rise from the dead and give a speech. During this time, they've been gageing reactions from past and current politicians who all seem to agree that her policies were fantastic and wonderful - changed the country for the better (Pretty sickening considering there all suppose to be on different ends of the scale cons/lib/labour are obviously all under the same umbrella now.)


Nope, I don't know what news you've been watching, but I've been watching Sky and the BBC and there are plenty of detractors speaking about her obvious mistakes and flaws.

The difference is perhaps that they are adults, actually lived through her government, and they have some class too. The "parties" seem to be 80% under 30, basing their opinions on an extreme leftist ideology verging on socialism. They know nothing about her time in power other than she was a Tory, and that bad things happened under her leadership.

There are certain things that people cannot criticize her for...
1. The unions had been holding the country to ransom, and she stopped that.
2. The Falkland islands were invaded, and she didn't hesitate in defending those free people by sending in our troops.
3. She worked harder than any politician in her government or the opposition throughout, and she probably worked harder than any politician since.
4. She didn't pander to bankers, capitalists or Europe. She made her decisions for the betterment of the country.
5. She fought against the federalization of Europe.
6. She didn't pander the minorities of Britain, she did what her elected wanted her to do, which was run the country and make it better than it was before she arrived.

Like her or not, agree with all of her policies or not, there are certain things that no sane person with some knowledge of history can deny.


Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
Why cant 200 people gather to celebrate her death? I thought this was a free society?


I don't see anyone stopping these people from celebrating if they wish.
I do see the police preventing violence and rioting. If you were paying any attention to what was happening in Brixton last night, you'll know that there was a skirmish, not a party. Shops were once again vandalized and looted. That is not a party, and just as I expected the police to act the last time the scum of this country went on a rampage, I expect them to act against that again.

People can have a party in the streets over the death of a frail old woman if they want. But the moment they step out of line and become a threat to the people living there then they damn well should be put down with appropriate force. We saw what happened in the UK when the police failed to act last time, so they better make sure they do their job this time and do it right from the start.





Income inequality among working-age people has risen faster in Britain than in any other rich nation since the mid-1970s, according to a report by the OECD.


Source



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
Oh come on, do you think miners were rich ?.....Look at the conditions they had to work in, they deserved more.


They were very well paid in comparison to their peers around the world and even in the UK. It is the very reason that foreign coal was cheaper, we had been pandering to the Unions for 40 years and laying pay rise upon pay rise, year on year...

It is quite hard to find historic figures, but today a newly qualified miner can easily earn £30k+ before any Overtime or bonuses, which is a decent salary. Bear in mind though that miners wages are relatively lower today than they were back in the heyday, when they regularly demanded and won annual increases of 6-7%.


Originally posted by ken10
What was at fault was cheap imports, British manufacturing should have been protected. Imports of cheap materials and labour has been detrimental to the British workforce, and Thatchers policies helped in this.


Oh right, then other countries protect their industries and we get restricted access to stuff we can't/don't make, costs go up etc etc... Then the already moribund economy we had in the 1980's goes into the crapper.


Originally posted by ken10
imo of course


Of course, I recognise there are many facets to this debate and I can see why Thatcher was a hate figure.


Originally posted by ken10
Oh and btw Scargill may have been paid too much, but he did his job, he went to war against Thatcher to try and protect and improve the miners standards of living.


To a point - he feathered his nest very nicely and continued to live the life of a King until last year, when the NMU finally forced him out his luxury pad in London after a costly legal fight. Had he been less confrontational, the chances are the pit closures would have been less severe.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
The youth have been sold into slavery thanks to this woman.


How exactly?

I'm 35, I remember the poll tax riots and the latter years of her last term in office, and I don't feel any sense of being "sold into slavery" at all. What makes people come up with statements like this?

We currently live in one of the most prosperous and free nations on Earth, and much of that is actually thanks to the misguided boom and bust attitude we are all dealing with now. But what would this country be like if we hadn't done that?

People criticize her, but they ignore what this country was before her. Unions were blackmailing the entire nation, and the people were sick of it! We were still in collapse after the war, and the unions were making things a hell of a lot worse for the average Brit.

I'm just trying to get my head around this idea that she somehow "destroyed" this country, when in fact we saw a revival of our economy, and her divisive policies actually DID work to get the country out of the mess it was in before her.

I have been a lefty all my life. I know there are things that she said and did that really were not very good for the people of this country (the Poll tax being the major one we all remember). But I'm astounded by this blanket opinion that she was "evil" and "nasty" and did things simply to destroy the working classes.

Once again, consider what this country was like before she came into power, and consider what it was like when she left. That is how people should be judging her, and if they did that they would see that she did a hell of a lot for this nation and we would certainly not be where we are now without her.

People seem to think we're living in some kind of Hell right now. But in comparison to many other countries, with the opportunities and freedoms people have here to create their own future, we're living in luxury!



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10


Income inequality among working-age people has risen faster in Britain than in any other rich nation since the mid-1970s, according to a report by the OECD.


Source


Right, and that's the fault of a woman who left power 20 years ago? I don't see Labour or the current ConDem government fixing that.

Also, it might have risen faster, but it isn't the highest. And we're not alone either. Is Thatcher also to blame for the income inequality across Europe, Asia, Africa?

You need to consider what is the fault of her policies, and what is the fault of a global economic corruption where politicians allow themselves to be paid off by corporations and bankers. She cannot be blamed for Blair, Brown and Cameron (and all their fellow politicians) taking money and making decisions for their banker, corporate, media and union friends. They are just as responsible for allowing this inequality to deepen and grow.

And it still doesn't change the question of where this country would be if she HADN'T made those choices too. Once again, look at what the UK was like before she came in, and look at what it was like after those 11 years. There is absolutely no denying that the entire country as a whole was indeed better off.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocker2013
Nope, I don't know what news you've been watching, but I've been watching Sky and the BBC and there are plenty of detractors speaking about her obvious mistakes and flaws.


She's getting far more praise than she deserves.


The difference is perhaps that they are adults, actually lived through her government, and they have some class too.


Did you really just insinuate that current political figureheads have class? Taking your post less seriously now.


The "parties" seem to be 80% under 30, basing their opinions on an extreme leftist ideology verging on socialism. They know nothing about her time in power other than she was a Tory, and that bad things happened under her leadership.


Why cant the youth celebrate her passing? She sold their future's to big companies in the name of greed. The current generation is one with everything and nothing - And it all started with her government.


There are certain things that people cannot criticize her for...
1. The unions had been holding the country to ransom, and she stopped that.
2. The Falkland islands were invaded, and she didn't hesitate in defending those free people by sending in our troops.
3. She worked harder than any politician in her government or the opposition throughout, and she probably worked harder than any politician since.
4. She didn't pander to bankers, capitalists or Europe. She made her decisions for the betterment of the country.
5. She fought against the federalization of Europe.
6. She didn't pander the minorities of Britain, she did what her elected wanted her to do, which was run the country and make it better than it was before she arrived.


She went about her business as if her decisions had no effect on anybody. Do you still think de-regulating the banks was a fantastic idea? No? Well stop singing her praises then.


Like her or not, agree with all of her policies or not, there are certain things that no sane person with some knowledge of history can deny.


Like it or not, even after her death the facts remain - She made people destitute and obviously isnt going to be loved and cherished for it.



Originally posted by Rocker2013
I don't see anyone stopping these people from celebrating if they wish.
I do see the police preventing violence and rioting. If you were paying any attention to what was happening in Brixton last night, you'll know that there was a skirmish, not a party. Shops were once again vandalized and looted. That is not a party, and just as I expected the police to act the last time the scum of this country went on a rampage, I expect them to act against that again.


And what about the one in bristol? Yano, the one i linked in the OP? Anytime the police turn up anywhere with a crowed they seem to cause trouble.


People can have a party in the streets over the death of a frail old woman if they want. But the moment they step out of line and become a threat to the people living there then they damn well should be put down with appropriate force. We saw what happened in the UK when the police failed to act last time, so they better make sure they do their job this time and do it right from the start.


Those riots were a conspiracy in themselves, 3 days to quell a small scale riot!? I smell a rat.

Let people celebrate, let them grieve her death how they feel appropriate. If people are celebrating the fact that you are dead then maybe, just maybe, there's a good reason for it.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by doobydoll
reply to post by stumason
 


Yes, it makes perfect sense to shut down industry and put those all those people and families on the dole, then moan incessantly at them for not having a job and having to claim benefits. Of course, I see it now.


If having them on the dole and looking for other work costs £1 billion a year, but subsidizing the failed mines costs £1.5 billion a year, then yes it does make absolute economic sense to do exactly that!

It might not be popular, but it's the right decision for a real leader to make to save the country.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
I dunno my recolection of the late 70's was being able to walk out of one job and straight into another, as opposed to now where there are no jobs.



Oh jebus, like I have said, that is because there were swathes of State run industries where people would work for life. These industries, however, were inefficient and unprofitable.

That said, there are plenty of jobs around now. As I've said in other threads about work, just because there might not be one 15 mins from your house, doesn't mean there aren't any. I myself have been in pretty much continuous employment since I left school, barring a few months were I was out of work in the early 00's and I was sleeping on friends sofa's, but even then, I "got on my bike" and found work.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by ken10


Income inequality among working-age people has risen faster in Britain than in any other rich nation since the mid-1970s, according to a report by the OECD.


Source


Right, and that's the fault of a woman who left power 20 years ago? I don't see Labour or the current ConDem government fixing that.



Actually it is, She sold off most of the council house's and didnt build any replacements, now we have a generation of people unable to move out because landlords are expensive and getting a mortgage on your first house is impossible.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Rocker2013
 


Exactly - the figures from her time in office back up the economic argument that what she did helped the vast majority of us better ourselves...

Unemployment fell from a high of 18% when she took power to less than 8% by the time she left. Health, education and welfare spending all increased by 30% and the GDP grew by 23.3% between 1979 and 1989.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by doobydoll
reply to post by stumason
 


Yes, it makes perfect sense to shut down industry and put those all those people and families on the dole, then moan incessantly at them for not having a job and having to claim benefits. Of course, I see it now.


If having them on the dole and looking for other work costs £1 billion a year, but subsidizing the failed mines costs £1.5 billion a year, then yes it does make absolute economic sense to do exactly that!

It might not be popular, but it's the right decision for a real leader to make to save the country.

Then folk should stop bloody whinging and whining about the cost of unemployed people who need benefits to survive if it's cheaper than employing them.

You can't just throw people out of their jobs and offer them no alternative means to earn a living except benefits, then expect them to sing your praises.

As someone posted earlier, 'ya can't have it both ways'.
edit on 9-4-2013 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
Actually it is, She sold off most of the council house's and didnt build any replacements, now we have a generation of people unable to move out because landlords are expensive and getting a mortgage on your first house is impossible.



Actually, getting a mortgage was really quite easy up until 2008 when the banks fell over. I wish I had done so now, but I was waiting for other matters to be settled first in my own life. But prior to the banking crisis, you could easily get a mortgage to buy pretty much whatever home you wanted, even if you had no deposit.

Some people have really tinted glasses....



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
The youth have been sold into slavery thanks to this woman.


How exactly?


Her privatization of national assets (Gas, Water, Electric, Telephone) Further privatization of Transport after her own party kicked her from office. These assets are now being sold back to the taxpayer at inflated prices that the majority of working class people cannot afford.

Loss of well paid jobs, namely by the destruction of the manufacturing base of this country. Trades have been squashed - Ship building, Steel-working.

Slaughtering the unions that were the only voice for the working classes after many hundreds of years of repression by the elite. Now there's no unions in parliament to CARE about working class people and that's why they're being treated so badly.

Selling off council house's and not building any more. People in their late 20's still living at home because they simply cannot afford to move out. Landlords making an absolute killing on those who are forced to move out and first time buyers currently don't have a chance in hell.

De-regulation of the banking industry - Speaks for itself really.

Ive said it before, this generation has everything and nothing and that started with her government in 1979 and has continued on ever since. The damage she has inflicted upon people of this country will effect many generations until the balance is restored.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:36 AM
link   
[img]
Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/img]

maggie with an admirer. One of her own little lovely darlings.

I still cant get my head arround the fact that she spent 11 christmasses with a rapist. SIR jimmy so VILE savile.
edit on 9-4-2013 by illuminnaughty because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join