Thatchers Funeral - Evidence of the Great Class Divide.

page: 5
33
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


Oh for goodness sake! Need you be so obtuse?




posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by something wicked
 


Okay apart from Black Wednesday being included, what else aren't facts on that long list?

We have discussed a number of things on several threads and you claimed you were not a Tory, yet you defend them at every opportunity.



Go on then, just for a laugh because none of them have any reference against them or any balance but you seem game to have a go, try....

2. She destroyed the country's manufacturing industry

Who destroyed it really? Unions, a declining economy? Industry built on a demand that no longer existed? The fact that like it or not, other countries competed better/cheaper?

Now, to answer that, was this country's manufacturing industry really thriving pre Thatcher, or was it starting to see the effect of being part of a global market? If you think it was Thatcher and Thatcher alone, why isn't it now flourishing 23 years after she left office?

Or (more likely) is the statement a call to emotion?
edit on 17-4-2013 by something wicked because: Last sentence



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by something wicked
 


Oh for goodness sake! Need you be so obtuse?


Yes, it's called facts, don't you think they are important rather than emotion based rhetoric that isn't based on fact? That's kind of what deny ignorance means, but people often forget that when it suits them.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


Thatcher destroyed unionism in the UK and as a result the average union rep today is little more than a go between for the 'bosses'. That has resulted in thousands of people being employed by corporations declaring billions in profits yet paying their employees a wage so low that it has to be topped up by the government in the form of tax credits. Free enterprise? Nigh on free labour more like.

The masses of long term unemployed were switched onto sickness benefits, and remained there, to disguise the real impact of those positive reforms. .And when people were denied the opportunity to train in useful and skilled employment they were instead supplied with readily available credit to keep the high street busy and the economy rolling. Boom bang a bust....that's how it goes.

It was entirely unnecessary to completely destroy the manufacturing base in this country - and as we now know - unwise to believe that our economy could survive on services alone. The over dependence on capital led to banking deregulation and an over reliance on the City to provide high tax revenues. Look where that got us - anything the City ever put into the economy has been sucked back out by the massive subsidies the ordinary tax payer had to provide it. In any event - almost all tax revenue in the UK pays for the massive social security bill we have had for decades now. Not exactly healthy.

How are we going to get out of recession with nothing to sell?

A true visionary would have upped our game, moved with times in manufacturing and assisted with modernisation of the many outdated factories extant in 1970's Britain.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by something wicked
 


Thatcher destroyed unionism in the UK and as a result the average union rep today is little more than a go between for the 'bosses'. That has resulted in thousands of people being employed by corporations declaring billions in profits yet paying their employees a wage so low that it has to be topped up by the government in the form of tax credits. Free enterprise? Nigh on free labour more like.

The masses of long term unemployed were switched onto sickness benefits, and remained there, to disguise the real impact of those positive reforms. .And when people were denied the opportunity to train in useful and skilled employment they were instead supplied with readily available credit to keep the high street busy and the economy rolling. Boom bang a bust....that's how it goes.

It was entirely unnecessary to completely destroy the manufacturing base in this country - and as we now know - unwise to believe that our economy could survive on services alone. The over dependence on capital led to banking deregulation and an over reliance on the City to provide high tax revenues. Look where that got us - anything the City ever put into the economy has been sucked back out by the massive subsidies the ordinary tax payer had to provide it. In any event - almost all tax revenue in the UK pays for the massive social security bill we have had for decades now. Not exactly healthy.

How are we going to get out of recession with nothing to sell?

A true visionary would have upped our game, moved with times in manufacturing and assisted with modernisation of the many outdated factories extant in 1970's Britain.



With respect, your post is a pile of nonsense, absolute steaming pile of it. Thatcher destroyed unionism in the UK? So, Post Office Counters have just been on strike, the Tube and railways in London threatened to strike during the Olympics... do you mean she blunted their claws a little? Personally I think Scargil made the unions in the UK look more like a mafia.

Oh, ETA, the opposition at the time was initially Michael Foot - you think we would now be better off if he had been PM?
edit on 17-4-2013 by something wicked because: ETA



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   
state assets were draining money away from tax payers, Arthur Scargil forced the miners to strike, coal imported from Poland was cheaper than from UK mines, The people of the Falklands 'love' the Baroness, so they should.
The baroness secured a rebate from the EU as it then was, worth seventy five BILLION pounds (£).
Just what was the point of keeping state industries going that never made a profit, and sucked money out of the national economy that could go to the national health service, education, the police service, the fire service, old age pensions?



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


Well what a concise response. I admire your eloquence but wonder where you found the reference to Scargill in my post? It would be great if you could actually deal with some of the points I raise rather than a generalised put down.

Are you trying to tell me that Thatcherism has proved to be ultimately good for this country? If so, please explain (precisely) how.

ETA re Michael Foot - no I don't think he would have been better, nor would Neil Kinnock. Britain's politicians stopped working for the benefit of the people of this country before I was born. We need a radical overhaul - I support none of the parties.
edit on 17-4-2013 by christina-66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Well enough people are upset at the fact that the tax payer (you and me) will foot the £10 million funeral.

However This story is really going to put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Titled 'Margaret Thatcher the tax snatcher? Mystery of her £6m house with links to THREE tax havens'

Excerpt :-

Margaret Thacther's £6m London townhouse is owned by a mysterious company with links to THREE notorious tax havens.

Financial experts said it could have been a scheme which would help her estate avoid millions of pounds in inheritance tax.

But because her affairs are shrouded in such extraordinary secrecy it may be impossible to find out.



No wonder why people are so fed up at the class divide.
edit on 17/4/2013 by diddy1234 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


Scargill, Thatcher and union membership.

In those days you were a town member or a country member.

I would say that neither Scargill or Thatcher were town members.

Which means Arthur was a country member and Margaret was a country member.

At least that's what I remember






posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


If that was truly the case, then why did Germany and France (who have a very strong trade union influence) continue to flourish?Maybe it was because their governments invested in their industries instead of focusing their attentions and resources into the banking industry. The same industry that finances the Conservative Party.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


Evidence of a class divide - hey.

I do not think so,.

I think the death dancers and grave celebrations show a gap between normal people who show respect at someones passing and a nasty, mean, callous element of British society.

The death dancers are just full of hate and need to grow up and work on themselves. they cause the problems in todays Britain, with their violence and small hearts.

The rest of us are just not vicious like this. We show good old fashioned respect at someone's passing and funeral.

NOTHING to do with class in one sense, everything to do with class in another sense.

IE: The death dancers ''sure got NO class.''..


edit on 17-4-2013 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


Our people are not sad and vindictive, as you continually choose to colour them. Our political class and establishments are, on the other hand, elitist, aloof and out of touch.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by HelenConway
 


Our people are not sad and vindictive, as you continually choose to colour them. Our political class and establishments are, on the other hand, elitist, aloof and out of touch.


Are you a death dancer - lets dance on her grave person ?

Are the people who cheer and celebrate the death of an old lady, a world leader, a mother, your people ?

If so, I have said my piece above... and I stand by what I said .. if they are ''your'' people they ARE the problem, they are NOT in any sense a solution ...

May Baroness Thatcher 'Rest in Peace' - free from vindictive vitriol.

edit on 17-4-2013 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
I put it on TV for my old dears (Old folks home) and after a while when they understood who it was for a few of them got annoyed and one who is 97 went a bit crazy saying "ruined us all!!!" the only way to calm him down was a nice cup of tea and a video of (carry on nursing).
This guy was a hero in ww2 and to see him go mad like that even though he had dementia told me how the older people feel about her.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Im not old enough to really remember her so im not going to comment on what she did right or wrong but using tax payers money to pay for funeral is unacceptable. Her family had millions but instead it comes out of public wages. Should try fixing the nhs or something that really matters to the whole country not a funeral for an ex prime minister.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by something wicked
 


If that was truly the case, then why did Germany and France (who have a very strong trade union influence) continue to flourish?Maybe it was because their governments invested in their industries instead of focusing their attentions and resources into the banking industry. The same industry that finances the Conservative Party.


I don't know, you tell me? Maybe there was a better accord between workers/union and government that wouldn't have worked here at the time but please note that France is actually closer to bankruptcy than it appears due to their left wing agreements - sorry, just pointing it out and unless Germany bails them you will see France become even more messy sooner rather than later.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by dan151
 


Yea and when the Queen dies lets give her a paupers funeral, an austerity funeral.
Great idea



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


Queens a bit more important than a prime minister and actually brings millions into the economy through tourism. Just so you know



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


I am no 'death dancer' as you care to put it - and 'our people' are the people of this country. Have you read the BBC comments page recently? You'll find, that most people on there, like me, are sick to the back teeth of the one sided commentary the channel has given her (with a little lip service to contrary opinions).

They paid for her funeral from the public purse and in so doing turned what ought to have been a private and dignified affair into a public spectacle (all pre approved by the lady herself) which we are therefore perfectly entitled to discuss. For someone who was so against using the public purse to pay for anything when she was in office the irony of tax payers money paying for her funeral cannot be ignored and, as such, the pros and the cons of the woman's legacy are indeed open to debate.

You would have us all 'respect the dead' and close our mouths, eyes and ears at the expense of freedom of expression. As I have previously stated to you, your views belong in a totalitarian state, not an open democracy where all views should be heard and valued.

As I have also previously stated to you, you repeatedly ask the wrong question. You should not ask, 'how could these people behave so appallingly,' but 'what appalling things happened to these people to have them react in this way?'



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by something wicked
As for your previous post around Tony Benn - you assume the UK was ruined, that is your opinion. At the end of the 70's we were literally close to real economic ruin - we were well known as the 'sick man of Europe' - don't you know any of this at all? Where do you get your facts? I'm being polite about this as all you do is spout the standard socialist worker responses with little actual fact.



One little acknowledged fact is that the grocer's daughter reduced UKplc balance sheets from a (GDP) 0.6% surplus to a 3.9 percent defecit.

It was Thatcher's little experiment with monetarism that nearly bankrupted this country, not the working man that demanded a fair shake.





top topics
 
33
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join