I agree don't vote tory, vote Labour but none of them will be great... bluntly if your rich you will vote Tory if your Working class vote labour... its not hard.. all party's are greedy but tory's are just maggots
@Quad2healey First of all I am not a faggot if your going to reply at least do it without insults. Second of all I am not posh I live in Barking and work two jobs so I cant be that posh or well off. This is Britain if you do not want to work for free you find work and keep trying I support anyone looking for work and someone that been made redundant after being in a job. But your opinion should benefits be life if your able to work but choose not to work?
I'm sorry, but compared to what the Labour lot is responsible for, this film is more like a positive ad then a negative one. So what if Mellor had sex, so what if Hamilton accepted cash for questions? That chap had billions in the bank and what hurt does it cause me that a question is asked in the HoCommons? There were 5 Labour MP's caught in the cash for lobbying scandal, and in this case, it WAS our tax which was spent. I'd rather have some tory than a incompetent brownite!
thatcherism ideal , end all manufacturing in this country from nationalised companies and rely on the city investers banks etc to bring in the dosh privatise and privatise, george osbourne said of irelands economic policies that they showed the way and we should follow.oh yeah right!
Load of pish. Labour left our economy in a disgraceful state. £120m of debt interest PER DAY, that's more than is spent on schools, defence and police!
Some of this is due to the banks, but a lot is due to Labour's mismanagement BEFORE the crisis such as failure to put the brakes on the property boom and the expansion of personal debt. The banks didn't make people take out loans or the government to borrow so they can't cop call the flak. Labour deserve to be out of power for a generation.
@DuncanMcA Labour should never be allowed to govern again! everytime they have been in power they have left a legacy of shit, 2010, 1979, 1970,1951 building a NHS on nothing but borowed money from america. money which was't paid back until the mid 2000s. its an absolute joke how these incapable clowns get elected. brown an blair are more like laurel and hardy, couldn't run a bath between them never mind a country.
1bn immigrants in ten year, same population as birmingham, britains second largest city! Did they build houses, create jobs and help our services cope with this influx, NO NO NO! Low pai0d british workers now struggle to get jobs in factories because its full of Polish people, Yea vote labour the great defender of the British working people! At least the Tories stick to their priniciple voters! labour= he who has fuck all demands that no one else has fuck all too, you will never create wealth
@johnfox3 I did mean a million, but still too many here, no infrastructure was built to accomodate all these foreigners coming in. drain on the economy, and devalued the British way of life.Labour have swamped us
HAHAHA VOTE LABOUR! euro lovin, swamped this country with foreigners and brought us to the verge of bankruptcy. Gave us the largest debt in history and the largest in the G20. Criminal justice system has become a joke with the european court of human rights over ruling and giving criminals better rights than victims. alcholics and druggies get money for their habbits and Tony blair was the biggest war mongerer since hitler. yeah vote Labour and lets really send this country down the shitter
ahaha thanks, its all supposed to be a democracy and yet people vote for these fuckers who dont actually believe in it, they are hands down dictators :(xx and glad someone has sensex
no problem dan, but the fact remains , with the north sea oil revenue, and the income from the sale of our national industries and assets, a child could have paid of our debt, it wasnt something special that was achieved, reform of trade uniouns yes, it was needed, however there was no ecomomical miracle , to quote a previous tory pm , she sold the family silver, and emptied the savings account , nothing special, and thats before we get to what they did wrong,
- dismantling of the manufacturing industry, and manufacturing output consequently plummetted by 30%. However, like Lawson said, we can run a service surplus and have a manufacturing deficit. And this system has served us well ever since 1984 right through the Major, Blair and Brown years, making us one of the strongest economies in the world. As for the ERM, I say again, it was a mistake on the part of all parties, not just the Tories.
- enabling the British economy to catch up with the other advanced capitalist nations who were already far ahead of us due to 30 years of stagnated output. So, in a way, unemployment was indeed a price worth paying, since the unemployment at the time allowed us to cut away waste and zombie businesses and fuel a private sector lead recovery, leading to consistently high employment by 1997. O yes, and something I forgot to mention last time; you were right to point out that this meant the tragic -
@DanRivers22 well dam i can see some of your points, but on others we will have to agree to disagree, nice to have some sensible, reasoned adult debate, cheers
@spaceman979 Maybe you're right. I am running out of time anyway. For now, we can just agree to disagree. But I'm glad you're enjoying the intellectual debate. But I'll finish the rest of my argument after work if you care to read it or respond to it.
- keep afloat. Since we already had a deficit of 6% and debt of at least 60%, we had to make cuts to reduce them. Sadly, few of these workers had any other prospects, and therefore unemployment remained over 1.5 million even during Thatcher's best years. Fortunately, this inflexibility no longer exists in our country, and in no small part due to Thatcher. Also fortunately, the end of the governmental policy of "over-manning" just to ensure employment caused businesses to be more productive, -
- inflexibility of the job markets. At the time, entire towns at a time in England existed for the mines, and the main sources of employment in Scotland at the time was the shipyards. Basically, people went straight from school to the mines/shipyards etc. Now since these industries were nationalised, and were in fact dead industries that were not returning a profit (the overall aim of any industry), these zombie businesses were a burden to the taxpayer which cost over £1 billion each year to -
you make good points, put across sensibly, however, i dont agree with the 8 years of wonderfull growth, the fact is the tories averaged an 9 % interest rate for 18 years, averaged nearly ten % interest rate for 18 years, and 11 % unemployment, whilst neglecting investment in the infrastructure, whislt courting dictators and shady individuals, as for mandella, please dont quote evidence that has long since been discredited, and a leading tory at the time said he should be shot not relased,
@spaceman979 Yes those figures are true, unemployment and interest rates were consistently high. But the interest rates, like I said, existed to short out the money supply and therefore reduce inflation, which by 1983 was still 9%, though having fallen from 18% in 1979. Even during the Lawson boom of '87, there was still 4.5% inflation, the second highest in the G7. The unemployment was consistently high, but there were factors that exasperated the situation. One of the biggest was the -
- cause. So calling the man a terrorist was an easy mistake to make at the time. I do not approve of Thatcher's friendship with General Pinochet, if that's what you're referring to, even though he was a free marketeer he was a fascist military dictator. But even Thatcher made her mistakes. I do not pretend to say she was flawless, but her monetary policy was utterly correct. See the glorious 8 years of economic boom and ease this country had after 1984 as a result of her policies
@DanRivers22 as for europe i am right in saying the tories signed us up to the common market, the marstrict treaty. took us into the erm ? yet there anti europe ? huge faux pas, also a leading tory said in 1998 you cant have a full house of low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates , and growth, its just not possible. well labour managed it for 11 years, and please dontr say that because they inherited it, it still had to be done, you can blame others for your performance,
@DanRivers22 also dan , lets not forget thatcher had an advantge no other pm had beofre or will have again, liquid gold pouring out of the north sea, yes she benefitted from the most productive goilden years of north sea oil, from 1980 to 1988, and it was totaly wasted, on a social security bill due to her policy and tax breaks for the rich, wasted !!!!!! and then there is no such thing as society, yet cameron wants to big society to run schools and look after the vunerable, what hypocrits, !!!!
@DanRivers22 i do agree however about a benfit dependat society, its wrong, however , its all well and good telling people to get on their bikes and find work and be responsible, i agree, however where are the jobs ??????? cant have it both ways, Cameron has already apolgised and said they were wrong on so many things, mandela, society, the vunerable, unemployment, and i feel he will be doing a lot more , for his and the last tory government mistakes,
@DanRivers22 calling mandella a terrorist was not an easy mistake , it was a disgrace, an absolute disgrace, same as pinochet, look up his record, only a fool would call him a friend, then there was the south african premier, and the restoration of pol pott to cambodia, no human being can defend that wether tory , labour or monster raving loony, only thatcher justified it,
@DanRivers22 As for 8 years of wonderfull growth, sorry dan i checked, there wasnt wonderfull growth, yes there was some, but from such a low starting point this wasnt dificult, from early 89 we were back in reccesion, also as well as norht sea oil she had the money from all the sell offs, 22 in total, and this money went the same was as the oil revenue, wasted, ! and this reccession is a world one caused by world banks, which thatcher removed the restrictions for her free market,
@DanRivers22 and this world banking crisis, World, not just uk, is down to the deregualtion of the banks, started by raegan and thatcher in the 80s and carried on by gordon brown. the extreme of right wing policies , of non intervention and regulation,
- into the ERM was a cross-party consensus, supported on ALL sides of the House of Commons. So in essense, it didn't matter who was in charge, if the decision was supported by all parties, it would have happened anyway wouldn't it? The Tories just happened to be the party in government at the time. As for Nelson Mandela, I have the utmost respect for the man, but some of his activities against the government, such as armed sabotage and guerrila warfare, resembled terrorism, even with it's noble-
- on IMF loans. The need to cut was dire. Of course we could have taken Labour's advice and delayed the cuts, but if that had happened and the Trade Unions been given their way, we'd have upwards of 5 million unemployed by now. Ultimately, there was no way around the unemployment. And as for Europe, Thatcher didn't want to enter the ERM, and was ejected by her party for this very reason. The stupid decision to enter the ERM was made by John Major. Yes he was a Tory, but get this - the entry -
- in the days of Callaghan to 8% by 1984. The interest rates were deliberately and calculatedly raised by Thatcher to serve the purpose of rooting out inflation. Yes, this lead to a severe dip in our manufacturing output and record unemployment. But when most jobs in the country depend on the public sector, what do you expect will happen when the need to cut arises? When Thatcher inherited this country, we had a deficit of 6%, and a debt (officially) of 60% of annual GDP, and we were dependant -
Now, whether or not you read this is up to you. But let me just say, if you believe me, that I understand your views, and I respect your intelligence. I apologise if I insulted you, though at times I felt insulted myself, but nonetheless I apologise. And I do feel, even though you may not, that for the most part this was an intelligent debate. So I guess we go our seperate ways here. Best wishes to you as well sir. Goodbye.
@DanRivers22 Thanks, i have read and enjoyed all of your last comments.I want to clarify that,in context i was not calling you a Zealot, as in an insult for a fanatic, rather than saying 'zealousness' in the way that you were enthusiastically putting over your points of view so i could and maybe should just as easily have said 'enthusiasm' as i meant the same thing
- that was precisely what we were doing. And it had to change. O, and before I forget to mention, Thatcher never had less than 42% victories in the polls when she was in office. -
- friend, was because of the economic success that her policies were beginning to have. Now, as I have already conceded, people did suffer horrifically under Thatcher. Unfortunately, given the great need to economise, and the fact that so many people's jobs relied on state funding, meant that those people had to lose their jobs - that, or we waited until the IMF forced even worse cuts indiscriminately across the entire board. You CANNOT keep financing a country on debt money, you CAN'T. And -
- , so too does Monetarism and Capitalism. And I see you mentioned the Falkland war. Now, forgive my arrogance, but I adore turning that one around on the people who bring it up. There was a study done about the time after the 1983 election, which Thatcher won by a decisive 44% about the effect of the Falklands war on the polls. It shows that Thatcher only gained a 3% boost in the polls, and bear in mind that she was only 27% in the polls to Labour's 34%; for all of three months! And that, my -
- that at first glance I thought was pure genius. But Adam Smith counters the theory with vast amounts of economic wisdom on his website. Milton Friedman dissects the theory in two very informative books, Freedom and Capitalism, and A Monetary History Of The United States, both of which I recommend to you. Friedrich Von Hayek does the same in his book, the Road To Serfdom. Ludwig Von Mises then decimates the theory in a single essay. So while I confess that socialism has intelligent advocates -
- after I'd finished listing her numerous accomplishments, which is not only completely unjustified, seeing as her policies weren't popular at all, and that her actions were needed by the economy, not wanted by the people, it made me think that you ignored me because there seemed to be next to no acknowledgment of anything I said. Now, I do accept that there are very clever people who advocate socialism and Keynesianism. I have read Keynes' book; it is a complex theory of the multiplier effect -
- who caused the astronomical levels of debt and deficit in this country with reckless overspending, you appear completely oblivious to the dangers of the situation Labour caused when socialist countries such as Greece and even Communist Cuba are hastening to make cuts to avert catastrophe, and you insist that we, the Tories are simply out to serve an ideological desire to shrink the state and "punish the poor", which aggravates me to no end. Secondly you just said "Thatcher was a demagogue" -
- that Labour goes to to exercise "fairness" by interfering with business development, often causing the disruption of those businesses, and giving out benefits indiscriminately and at absurd levels. Now, you say you patronised by me. Well, again let me explain. You claimed to have listened to every word I said, well believe me that's not how it came across in your comments. You sounded like ( I repeat, SOUNDED LIKE, not identify with) the Labour opposition, who in spite of being the very party-
- Labour supporter myself. I was brought up by a Scottish mother to loathe Thatcher and spoon-fed the tales of the misery caused by her cuts in the early 80s. But I converted to Thatcherite conservatism, and not because of peer pressure or anything like that; it was the honest study of history and economics, and an intellectual conversion. So while I admit sometimes I do go over the top, I am no zealot. I agree with helping the poor, and the public sector, but I do not agree with the lengths -
With due respect to you, i do understand that we dont see eye to eye on some Political issues, but maybe we would agree on some other ones of which neither of us at the moment are aware.However,forgive me for not being able to continue the discussion to the extent to which we have both attempted to put over our respective points recently,as although no doubt like yourself i have the inclination to discuss, i dont have sufficient time to do it regularly at length in writing ; best wishes to you
and shockingly unfair,dangerous and exploitative slave labour working conditions,thats those who had work at all.I do not consider myself any kind of extremist,Marxist,Communist or a particular lefty and see some good in what Thatcher did and also in some of what who she considered 'wets' in her own party did before her,although much of that was not so different from moderate Labour Govts ; to my mind we have never seen an extreme Left wing Labour Govt in MY lifetime,certainly not the LAST one !
painlessly for results for which they are congratulated. I conclude by saying that i personally, have never voted Tory on principle, being from a working class area and family who have only benefited from some degree of socialism implemented by post war Govts who have adhered to a non radical Keynesian economic model. My family and many like ours would have perished in the 19th century before the advent of socialist Govt reforms and a diet of bread and margarine, filthy and dangerous living..
too quickly, rigidly and without any room for compassion. This brings me to the fact that it is all very well to ignore the the social consequences of a quick shift to radical monetarism not seen on such a scale for at least two generations,but it does depend,like many things upon which side of your bread is buttered. It is easy to apply such economic policies to fix an unhealthy economy with such rigor when one hasnt or wont endure excessive pain and suffering of poverty while a few wait....
Well before the end of her tenure, she was considered an electoral liability by many of her party and in fact was behind in the opinion poles for the last year and a half of her leadership.It is not entirely,as you say, my failure to acknowledge the longer term economic benefits of some of her policies but more my realism in also pointing to the failings of her time in office and some of the appallingly dire social consequences of her radical approach ; attempting to apply many of her polices..
as you,a fan celebrate : we all know of the 3 million unemployed by the end of 1981 after a summer of inner city riots and uprisings ; how in spite of arrogantly ignoring warnings from her own ministers that not adequately protecting the Faulklands would result in the inevitable invasion,she still capitalised fully on the propaganda resulting from the British troops superiority and used it to bolster her career low public and party ratings and win a second term from it....
of them from within not only her 'own' party,but from within her own CABINET. It was one such high profile instance you need not be reminded which served as the eventual catalyst precipitating her own downfall. You see,as to which you quickly and readily alluded, that as someone deemed one of our most successful and intellectual P.M.s, Wilson brought about his own 'downfall' after winning three elections and presiding over many great social reforms, things werent all as successful for Thatcher..
about the failings of our education system since the 1960s, i dont know whether i sufficiently conform to many people's criteria of what constitutes a 'lefty'. In spite of that, a lot of very successful people have profited from the post war U.K. education system which even many of todays top Politicians enjoyed entirely free until it's completion. As for Thatcher, many of those millions of backgrounds i mentioned a bit earlier, have opposed the intensity of the implementation of her ideas, many
backgrounds, including many academics, many of them Economists ; some well know,some not so, who have not only totally different views from yourself, but many who have SOME views that are different.For me personally, it depends what a 'conclusive' or definitive definition of 'lefty' is ; i dont know but i suppose that in reality it's relative, that's once it has been accurately defined in the first place ! For somebody like myself,who totally agrees with much of what Norman Tebbit has written..
..that in spite of it having 'noble ideas' is doomed to failure. I also feel personally patronised by you addressing me as some sort of unresponsive audience or a pupil not paying sufficient attention to an important lecture.I did read all of your comments, and i effortlessly deduced what you proudly & freely admitted, that youre a 'Thatcherite Tory' anyway, although you dont acknowledge that there are millions of highly intelligent, well educated and well informed people from many different..
- people are immediately in uproar about it because they're scared of losing their jobs, most of which are government funded, like the Miners in 84, or they're scared of losing their benefits. In other words, socialism results in the need for people like Thatcher, and now Cameron, to come in and cut spending. That is the folly of socialism. It causes long term damage, and makes it necessary to economise, which unfortunately means hurting the public.
- exoansion with red tape and bureaucratic nonsense, more businesses eventually find themselves on life support, which leaves the state with no choice but to either raise taxes now, or to borrow money from abroad, and increase taxes later when the need arises to pay that money back. Eventually, because of overspending, you normally end up with a huge budget deficit, like Britain in 79 and also recently under New Labour, and Greece. Then when the red light flashes and the pressure to cut arises -
- government is obsessed with maintaining short-term employment rather than encouraging the employees to find other jobs, they finance the business on taxpayer money. This not only crowds out private sector investment by removing consumer money, it normally results in a business becoming sloppy and mismanaged. Do you think that the state is actually better at running businesses than the business-trained people who founded them? Eventually, given the interference of the government in business -
- event known as the Spanish Miracle, and see for yourself the power of the private sector at making everyone's lives better. Now, as for Tory opposition to socialism and keynesianism, we are not opposed to either because of ideological hatred. Socialism is a noble idea, but it is always bound to fail economically and socially. Economically it will fail because it refuses to allow businesses to economise when necessary, which would normally cause that business to go under. But because the -
- by Labour, does NOT create wealth. It only consumes it. It exist to provide us with the NHS, education and welfare, which do not exist to create profit. The true money making section is the private sector, which is run by entrepeneurs and business minds working towards a profit. Because of this, whilst the rich do in fact grow even richer, so do the poor as well. In high periods of growth, average incomes rise, and the private sector is the ultimate tool in providing growth. Just research an -
- in order to finance both the lagging economy, which judging by the mere presence of a deficit is probably already burdened with a oversized public sector, and also to make the debt repayments. After the misery of the fist five years of her tenure, Thatcher maintained a surplus in the budget, and because of this, was able to cut the top and bottom rates of taxes in half, having billions of pounds in reserve already. Thirdly, as I grow tired of mentioning, the public sector, swelled repeatedly -
- meaning that we would be paying higher and higher interest rates, which I understand is roughly £70 billion, and that doesn't even include paying off the actual debt this country owes, which is already a staggering 466% of annual economic output. Also, our debtors have warned us that our debt maybe downgraded, so we'd be paying yet more money on repayment. Secondly, whilst we maintain a deficit, for the reasons I have given above, taxes must be consistently higher than they would otherwise be-
- spending of the government and favour the private sector over the public sector. You spout the message that our cuts are borne out of blind adherence to ideology and methodically calculated to hit the poorest, just like the Labour opposition. Let me explain something, and actually listen this time. Right now, the Tory-libdem government is cutting spending to reduce the largest deficit in the G20, caused by Labour. If we maintain that deficit, our debt will grow substantially each year, -
- out of a simple rigid devotion to capitalist idealism; she took an economy laden with debt, a growing deficit and halted growth, and made the decisions she made to stop the pending devastation of the entire country, and made it the fourth strongest in world. THAT is why she did it. But you sound like the typical narrow minded socialist who adheres to the idea that the Tories are just plutocratic lunatics who believe in rewarding the rich and punishing the poor because we cut away excess -
@DanRivers22 Nah, again i justify saying that you generalise because firstly, in your zealousness to portray your views of Thatcherism and Monetarism as the only,correct and definitive doctrines, you dont see that you jump to glib conclusions about people you dont know, implying theyre 'lefties', which you no doubt consider (although i dont) a kind of insult, & patronise the complex and varied concept of 'socialism' which has enjoyed much success as well as difficulties in maintaining by saying
@kenfig Well, before you walk out on me, let me explain what I said last time. I assumed from what you said, that despite all the reasoning I did in Thatcher's defense that you ignored me, which pissed me off a little bit. Most lefties, as I am now addicted to calling them by now I'm afraid, adamantly refuse to listen to the good that Thatcher did. That is why I called you a lefty. Now you also call me zealoted. But here's something you might be interested to know; I actually used to be a -
extreme pain due to millions of job losses to come, we will see the destruction of many many livelihoods as a cost of Macroeconomic experiments administered by those indifferent few who are way out of reach of the pain they cause so that they can satisfy an ideological hunger to punish the 'undeserving poor' and make them accountable for the mistakes made by the reckless and wasteful spending of successive Govts and their failures of Govts to fetter irresponsible bank lending ; we are guineapigs
by the Post war Labour Govt of Atlee. Any problems have arisen out of inconsistencies of measures i have highlighted ; fluctuations between wasteful & unrestrained spending by all colour Govts and then complete withdrawal and of all Keynsian Economic ideas, disregarding many of their positive values and principles due to an arbitrary ideological hatred of them without a sensible,moderate or gradual application of alternatives.This is what we are seeing right now : regardless of many years of..
- the general election, and largely because of the scare tactics and endless smearing of the Labour Party. Do you deny that?
For now I must retire to my bed. It is now very late and I must get up for work tomorrow. But I know I've missed out on a few of your points, namely MacMillian and consensus politics, and will address them tomorrow.
- extremism and selfishness. Furthermore, you mentioned Tory controlled press. I admit that exists, but don't pretend for a second that Labour don't do that as well. In fact, the last Labour government was the most slimy, underhanded, wretched administration we'd ever had, smearing it's political opponents in the most vile of fashions, like with the McBride incident, and even it's own people, like Blair, Milburn, Byers and even Mandelson. People were so prejudiced against the Tories before -
- anyone who crossed the picket lines, and demanding money he knew the state didn't have to spare. He is a nationalising, redistributionist multi-millionaire who lives in a massive mansion in Holland Park and has a county estate in Sussex, yet he has not nationalised a single penny of his own fortune so that the poor can live off of it. He lived by the principle "Do what I say, not what I do". Men like Attlee, Callaghan and Foot were genuinely principled men, but Benn was the personification of-
- in Europe. So I believe this adequately absolves Thatcher of the misery of her early rule. Now on another point, I admit I have an obscene tendancy to exaggerate, so I will correct myself here. Labour isn't a stalinist party; it's a typical socialist party. Plus, I admit that Foot was certainly not a bad character, but Tony Benn was absolute scum. He was not only a radical lefty, but a liar and a hypocrite as well. He supported the militant rallies of the Unions, even whilst they were killing-
- that would have been much worse than the suicides in the early 80s. But it did pick up from there, which you don't often hear about as people are overly keen to recount the misery of '79-84. But after that, Thatcher gave this country a glorious economic boom of 23.5%, something unseen for 30 years. She cut the top and bottom rates of tax in half, and the average income was almost double in '90 what it was in '79. And unemployment had by then halved to 1.5 million, and was falling the fastest -
- breaking point as the public sector struggled to find fuel to consume. The IMF would have either come in and FORCED the cuts, which would have been even deeper and much less considerate and methodical like Thatcher, which may have meant as high as 5 million unemployed, or the end of the NHS or God knows what else, or worse, have simply stopped it's loans and left us to rot. To summarise, either it was the misery of painful cuts under Thatcher, or the whole country would have gone down. And -
- suffered in that period were tragic, particularly the loss of life. But if the situation had continued; if our country had become completely dependant on loans (as it nearly was), and the Trade Unions had been allowed to suck the rest of the money from the state, then eventually we'd have had a gilts strike, sterling would have collapsed, and a new recession would have ensued. Economic growth would have halted completely. As inflation skyrocketed, the taxpayers would been stretched to their -
- Also, the labour market was extremely inflexible at that time. As you said, a lot of people weren't willing to look for other jobs, largely because some towns existed solely because of a particular trade such as mining, and because it was the same jobs their fathers and grandfathers had done, a pretty stupid reason I think. Nowadays, Britain doesn't have this problem. People are more willing to look for prospects elsewhere, because of what Thatcher did in '84. And yes, I agree that the losses-
- deathbed. This was a time when we NEEDED a determined leader like Thatcher, someone who could stand against the Trade Unions and bring them into line, and have the courage to get rid of dead weight like the pits and cut the overall size of the public sector, allowing the private sector to emerge. Yes, this resulted in 3 million umemployed, but this wasn't entirely Thatcher's fault. There was a world recession in '82/3 that affected us particularly badly because of our structural problems. -
- into giving them more and more money at a time when the British economy was literally haemorrhaging growth and inflation was spiralling out of control. Both Wilson and Callaghan bowed to these unreasonable tyrants, hence their downfall. Thus, Thatcher inherited a country literally on state life support, with taxpayer money being burned to fuel an unsustainable public sector, with debt at 60% of our annual GDP, inflation at 23%, the deficit at 6%, growth at a standstill, and a country on it's -
- rise of Thatcher. Now, Thatcher was indeed the most dogmatic and powerful Prime Ministers Britain has ever seen. Many people call her a dictator, which is sadly true at times, like the treatment of the Scots with the poll tax, but absolutely unjustified when she refused to perform the old U-turn that the two previous Labour Prime Ministers, Wilson and Callaghan (who I respect by the way) performed because of pressure by the militant, borderline terrorist Trade Unions, who bullied the state -
- cutting the excessive government waste and the highest budget deficit of any advanced worldwide economy, and to fuelling a private sector led return to growth. On the other hand, we have a typical lefty opposition who are in uproar over the prospective reduction of the public sector, and insist that they could have maintained economic recovery with a wasteful public sector running on increasing levels of debt money, which is absolutely preposterous. And so it was during the prelude to the -
economy I believe in; a private sector majority. This is what' best for social and economic health. Secondly, I acknowledge that the Prime Minister is not always representative of a whole party's belief, such as Blair and Thatcher. What I should have said was this: I am a Thatcherite Tory, which I realise is a unique political identity. But seriously, how similar do you really think Labour and the Tories are? Look at the situation in Parliament now. We have a Tory-libdem government committed to-
- on taxpayer money, which would otherwise be consumer money used to fuel the advancement of businesses. That money is then gone; it produces no additional wealth. That is why I believe the public sector should be limited to things like the NHS, education and welfare, but the businesses should regulate themselves. This allows humanitarianism through state provision to those who would otherwise not get by whilst enabling business productivity causing the economy to flourish. This is the mixed -
beliefs of humanitarianism,compassion,tolerance and understanding have been shockingly and unjustly maligned by awful people like The Sun newspaper,who have attempted to strip them of their dignity by personal attacks of 'Worzel Gummidge' for Michael Foot,a decent and honourable man of high integrity, and 'Loony Left' for Benn & many others
The thing is we have NEVER had anywhere near truly left wing, Marxist, Communist or any other right wing Tory Propaganda press label for Labour Govts. policies IN Govts. The MOST radically Left wing OF British Labour parties have had little influence on things because the controlling Tory press of this country has ensured that people are unreasonably scared of their portrayal of them as Stalinites.So decent intellectual and compassionate people like Foot & Benn who devoted their lives to their
The thing about the Miners is that after the closure of so many mines, like 90 odd %,so many other industries linked to the coal industry were badly affected, like Rail,Steel & Electricity.Furthermore so many towns and villages which had depended on these jobs were completely decimated by the EXTENT of the closures, and hundreds of suicides and home losses were reported as a direct consequence of so many losing their livelihoods,without hope of alternatives.Thatcher still has a lot to answer for
The next P.M. of particular significance, Wilson brought in many brilliant Social reforms needed in a modern society and built upon the opportunities and social mobility available to all,as well as bridging the class divide. The thing is,there is much more to Politics and Govt than PURELY Economics and the rigid application of radical Economic polices ; there has to be a balance between prudency with compassionate and considerate social policy.This is why Thatcher was so unpopular with so many
History tells us that Thatcher's sense of her own invincibility as a leader was distorted and unreasonable.Back to my original points : we had,as you surely must concede, consensus politics in the U.K. for a long time after the 2nd World War, when many great things were achieved.This was acknowledged by Tory P.M.s,most notably MacMillan,who presiding over a period of high economic growth and near full employment,rejected some calls for Monetarist economic policies from within his own Govt....
of not only a variety of opposing views on issues, when some they agree on,but then the members who have the most influence change with time,putting sometimes a totally different complexion on the party.You see,not only is ONE Prime Minister not representative of all the party,as with Thatcher or Blair,but the more they attempt to be authoritarian to their own Govt members,as Thatcher increasingly became, the more unhealthy it becomes for the Govt and the sustainability of their own leadership..
- the government to graze them like sheep through benefits and support their jobs through state means. Do you remember the Miner's Strike in '84? Those pits were costing the taxpayer billions each year to keep open, and were not returning any profits. They were a liability and had to be dispensed with because of rising debt and inflation, but the Trade Unions wouldn't allow it, and kept demanding more money. They were shut down for the sake of economic health.
Left respectively. Finally, I do not object to a mixed economy. I approve wholly of the NHS, state education and welfare support (though strictly for those who need it only), but socialism's inherent detestation of free enterprise and belief that the state needs to own and control everything leads to a deteriorating economy, an unsustainable public sector which causes strain on the taxpayer and eventually causes debt and deficit to spiral out of control, and an infantised society which expects -
- taxpayer money, and then debt. Secondly, you claim party differences are "fluid and inconsistent"; wrong. Labour have been a left wing party ever since they came into being, with the brief defection of the Blairite government to the centre-right. The Tories, though traditionally they have always been right wing, stupidly got in on the act when the country decided it wanted a change to socialist government after the war. Now, both the Tories and Labour have both moved back to the Right and -
It has also been rightly acknowledged that the late 1970s were not only a time when more than any time previously,an entire generation of young people had more and had been significantly more successful than their parents ; this would never be the case again.
@kenfig But I expect this argument will continue for some time. So I cordially invite you to move this debate over to the Youtube messaging system. My arguments are far more compelling and effective when I don't have to limit them to 500 words, which I really hate by the way. It could be very interesting, but of course it's your call.
attribute any Socialism to many of the Tory Govts. over that timespan,their tenure still accounted for over half of the '30 years' you call a 'Socialist experiment'.You see,in a proper discussion you HAVE to be clear about these things.Thirdly,to dismiss a mixed Economy model of Socialism as a 'failed experiment' is to disregard & condemn all the achievements & established benefits that we have longsince enjoyed & taken for granted, that have their roots in the policies of post war Labour Govts.
@kenfig It's not "glib and generalised", it's fact. First of all, it is true that the Tories accounted for a large part of the 30 years of marxism after the war, but those Tories bragged of spending more money on welfare and other public services than Labour, the complete opposite of the Thatcherite government. Because of this, the debt spiralled out of control, and the economic growth stagnated as the private sector died and the majority of economic and social activity become reliant on -
@DanRivers22 Look,why i said glib & generalised is because one cant make a statement like 'theyre superior to Labour in every way' or vice versa about Labour ; its a misnomer that cant be used if using common sense.Furthermore you contradict that by saying you dont mind a mixed Economy.The problem many people have in the population is theyre too hung up on generalised Political labels and assume everyone associated with political parties conform to them rigidly when those parties are composed...
@kenfig Well, maybe I concede to your first point, but actually I do not contradict myself in the slightest by praising a mixed economy, because as I have said I believe wholly in state healthcare and education. But I cannot abide by the idea of the state interfering with and hindering the wealth-creating private sector, which was nearly eradicated by the 30 years socialism, and by Brown during his government. The private sector creates wealth, but the public sector does no such thing. It runs -
@DanRivers22 Nah, Thatcher is a Demagogue.What i believe is that a true enemy of any country is extremist policies like with Monetarism, and inconsistency, like we have in this country. I dont mind money being spent effectively, but i dont think it should be unduly wasted,like what the recent Labour Govt did for years.However,my main points have concerned the fact that successive Conservative Govts since the war have adhered to many of the good strong principles of Govt policies first initiated
@kenfig It sounds like you've just completely ignored what I had to say about Thatcher. Despite all the logic and statistics that I offered in her defense, you turn around and say "Nah, Thatcher is a Demagogue." You sound just like a typical lefty. You'll delight in criticising her for the awful record of '79-'84, yet you refuse to listen to anyone who points out the good she did the country. And you accuse me of being "glib and generalised"? Listen, Thatcher didn't do what she did out of -
- the stupid decision to join the ERM. So it was no boom and bust really. I'm not saying that the Tories are perfect; I'm just saying they're vastly superior to Labour in every way.
@jinkedful Not much chance of that ; she's in hospital now ; i'm keeping my fingers crossed that the old rancid scumbag will be in Hell by the end of the week
@jinkedful I'm sorry but i really don't have a clue what you're on about ; are you sending comments to the right person ?? . One thing i have to say is you dont have to put capital letters after every comma ; they're not new sentences
@kenfig While you are letting your guard down, I will be letting myself go, While you keep running your ship aground, I will be setting myself alight,
Too late, you dropped the drawbridge, You let the vampires in, You caused this shit to happen, and now you want out?
@jinkedful Well, i recommend something like Chlorpromazine, or Zuclopenthixol but there may be newer,more effective ones ; check with your doctor eh ? Oh, and close the drawbridge on your way out
Vote Labour and protect what we have? Protect what? A national debt of 466%, the largest ever budget deficit, record youth unemployment, and an infantised public dependant on state benefit? The double-dealing, underhanded and smearing antics of the last wretched government this country had? Or is the overwhelming power of terrorist Trade Unions or the repeated dips in Sterling that you miss about Labour? Maybe it's the strangled economic growth that made us the sick man of Europe for 30 years?
@DanRivers22 You dumb fucks are so glib,generalised and superficial in your thinking ; Labour wasted lots of money which went far beyond spending constructively but you talk as if we had a clean slate and were in the black when Labour last came to power ; it's always been the same with SUCCESSIVE Govts in this country ; Boom & Bust a go-go during the Thatcher AND Major years but just like folk that say Labour did NOTHING wrong, youre JUST as bad with your predictable Tory propaganda
@kenfig It isn't propaganda that Thatcher lowered our debt from 60% to about 30%, cut taxes in half, gave us a surplus every year and caused our economy to grow by 23.5% in 8 years. It's also not propaganda that a 30 year socialist experiment nearly obliterated this country before she came to power. When she first came to power, she did what she had to do to lower the country's debt and inflation by cutting the enormous size of the public sector, and the boom that followed only ended because of-
@DanRivers22 Again your comment is glib & generalised : "they're vastly superior to Labour in every way".Firstly,you make unreasonably distinction between parties,which are actually fluid and inconsistent ; you say "30 year socialist experiment" ; what FOR ? That is merely a sensationalist comment ; we have had some sort of consistent Socialism in this country for almost 70 years,thank goodness.Its that you dont properly define the doctrine with your implications.Secondly,if you dont....
Hey that's pretty funny. No I obtain my facts from a vast array of historical and economic texts. There is nothing untrue about anything I've said. The only problem is that people like you refuse to hear it.
@DanRivers22 wrong on the record national debt,!! wrong on record youth unemployment, !!
or would you rather have record total unemployment, interest rates averaging 8 % for the tories entire time in office, , inflation at 10 % the total destruction of our manufactoring indutries, the E R M when interest rates doubled, in one day !!!! the tories who took us into europe, signed the marstrict reaty, and the single market agreement, then said we shouldnt bow to europe ????
@spaceman979 The debt figure I gave, though I do understand your utter disbelief of it, is 100% true. That is the figure when the true cost of the stupid bank bailouts, the botched PFI projects, railtrack nationalisations etc are accounted for. The official figures hilariously understate the debt to be only 56% of GDP! We wish!
And are you telling me that the International Labour Organisation (ILO) was wrong? They recorded the UK's youth unemployment to be over 20%. Go look it up.
@spaceman979 As for what you've said about the Tories, first inflation was the fault of the pre-1979 Labour government, not the Tories. Callaghan tried to freeze pay in this country in order to kill inflation, but didn't have the spine to stand up to the Trade Unions, who ordered nationwide strikes in response to this plan. Thatcher did what neither Callaghan nor Wilson had the guts to do; she made cuts to spending and contracted the enlarged money supply, which lowered inflation from over 20% -
@DanRivers22 or a government that condems nelson madela as a terorist, whisl having t on the lawn of chequers with a war criminal , and supported the return of pol pott to power in cambodia ?
INCAPACITY BENEFIT, over which loads of fuss is made, is being TOTALLY phased out and Tory Propaganda use 'one in a million' extreme cases of cheats who DO 'swing the lead', to justify that thousands of people are already no longer eligible to claim, NOT beacuse as the Daily Express claim, that theyve been 'declared FIT for work' and were 'all along',but because the criteria has been changed to NOW preclude ALL legitimate mental health claimants from claiming their legitimate entitlements
@BRITLEGEND77 One more thing, The 'SCUM' (Sun for readers who didnt know) so called 'news' paper and Daily Express are perpetuating some great myths,namely :1, that MOST people are BETTER OFF on BENEFITS than in work (so it gives the Tories a wider birth to get rid of ALL Benefits which they hate anyway), 2, That most people are getting £40,000 a year who dont work (Yeah,RIGHT ! ; really £8 per day and live off toast) They also are turning low paid workers aginst people who have no jobs !! SICK
@BRITLEGEND77 No worries ; its something i feel strongly about.Those spoiled assholes on here speak to intelligent folk like dirt ; sucked in by the propaganda that they are brainwashed by.They dont even realise it you see.They glibly assume we are all benefit 'scroungers' who dont work because of the media which OWN their minds.I am well educated but working class and i hated what 'New Labour' did.But the Tories that i have NEVER voted for just LIE about everything to brainwash folk !
@BRITLEGEND77 That scum 'gopconservative' lives in the U.S. anyway.The fuckers who are brainwashed by Tory propaganda are usually kept,leeching off of their parents and living rent free until up to 40 years old and beyond these days,finally being given the house ! They will NEVER experience standing on their own two feet and having jobs and lives destroyed by rich cunts playing politics with good people's lives and stay brainwashed by the Tory witch hunting media like The SCUM 'news' paper !
@usernameofnobody Thatcher isnt a human being ; it's an emotionless robot like Terminator.Now its machine is failing, it has no memory and shits its pants day and night in bed
And I'm sorry but who on earth uses coal nowadays?!
Take your anger out on people who lost jobs building houses out of wood and thatch when bricks became available if that is your logic. Technology moves on. Society has to move with it.
This came up in my reccommended videos and I say if the choice is between Labour, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, it will be the tories every single time for me.
Thatcher saved this country from the unions who were running riot. Dead bodies lying on the streets because the grave diggers were on strikeand we had to be bailed out by the IMF due to excessive government spending. Thatcher saved this country from financial ruin and returend it to a place of aspiration and prosperity.
@jprbritishcritic Ah, but I find most people expect jobs to come to them. I don't know many people that would have a job working away all week or would move to get a good job. Many people look at job adverts then send off a CV, its far better to get a job through word of mouth and avoid the normal systems.
@jprbritishcritic I've been made redundant, December 31st along with 370 others. I don't feel bitter I can see the company had to close our site down and reloacate to be competitive. I stuggled for the 3 months this year and still don't hold a permanant job (through choice) but I got by so anyone else can.Now temp work has picked up I'm working all the time and been offered 4 jobs in the last month.If someone wants to work they always will.
@jprbritishcritic well it is, if you cut civil service jobs. You could cut 25% without much harm. A lot of part time and many are not needed anyway. The pensions are far too high. It would be interesting to know what percentage of workers work for the state. I bet its higher than 25%. Paying them job seekers is gonna be far less than the wage they are on.
@jprbritishcritic But then there will be even more interest to pay. I'm not saying youre wrong, I think whatever is done is going to be bad for all of us except bailiffs, I just think the risk of unemployment rising is worth taking if it means the UK can get on track sooner, just lets not forgot which party wouldnt cut back spending way after it was apparent the sums didnt add up in 2007.
@jprbritishcritic Everyones money is protected up to a certain figure, 100k??? I can't remember!
What do you suggest then? We can't contiune to borrow 25% of what we spend. 10p of every £1 we pay in tax in paying just for the interest on the debt.
@jprbritishcritic Yeah that is a risk, thats the Lib Dems for you. I'm glad I only have 1 house! I don't agree with the VAT increase mainly becuase I bet it never goes back down again. I woud say get rid of the vast numbers of civil servants in local and national government, however the danger is that they then become unemployed and until the private sector grows then we will be paying benefits for them! We can't continue borrowing £1 in every £4 spend any more though, something has to give.
@jprbritishcritic There is that risk but I think they said they will cut business rates which should help the economy grow faster. As long as business is doing well we wont go back into recession. Thats the reason behind a VAT increase; it won't hammer exports, which is what we need more of. Taxing the rich is the worst way of getting extra money as they all move away, taking their wealth with them.
some great inforamtion here thanks
distractionxx 1 month ago
good work here
MrBrucebracey 1 month ago
interesting video and very informative
jayejayeee 1 month ago
interesting video and very informative
xtremetom180 1 month ago
some great inforamtion here thanks
SuperDogbrown 1 month ago
I agree don't vote tory, vote Labour but none of them will be great... bluntly if your rich you will vote Tory if your Working class vote labour... its not hard.. all party's are greedy but tory's are just maggots
TheLordsOfGamecraft 1 month ago
the labour party = work does not pay we give you more benefits rather than take the minimum wage
199019852007 4 months ago
@199019852007 The conservative party = we'll keep you on benefits and force you to work for free whilst claiming.
you posh rent boy using faggot
Quad2healey 1 month ago
@Quad2healey First of all I am not a faggot if your going to reply at least do it without insults. Second of all I am not posh I live in Barking and work two jobs so I cant be that posh or well off. This is Britain if you do not want to work for free you find work and keep trying I support anyone looking for work and someone that been made redundant after being in a job. But your opinion should benefits be life if your able to work but choose not to work?
199019852007 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
maggie thatcher and the pit strikes! the bitch!
missdarkangelxxx 5 months ago
maggie thatcher and the pit strikes! the bitch!
missdarkangelxxx 5 months ago 6
Amarica needs to have a Toryism govnerment
Robert46514 5 months ago
I'm sorry, but compared to what the Labour lot is responsible for, this film is more like a positive ad then a negative one. So what if Mellor had sex, so what if Hamilton accepted cash for questions? That chap had billions in the bank and what hurt does it cause me that a question is asked in the HoCommons? There were 5 Labour MP's caught in the cash for lobbying scandal, and in this case, it WAS our tax which was spent. I'd rather have some tory than a incompetent brownite!
autofreak7 8 months ago
Labour supported the ERM and urged the Tories to go in earlier than they did. So Labour don't come out of this well neither.
bismuthcadmium 9 months ago
thatcherism ideal , end all manufacturing in this country from nationalised companies and rely on the city investers banks etc to bring in the dosh privatise and privatise, george osbourne said of irelands economic policies that they showed the way and we should follow.oh yeah right!
starstruckone 9 months ago
Load of pish. Labour left our economy in a disgraceful state. £120m of debt interest PER DAY, that's more than is spent on schools, defence and police!
Some of this is due to the banks, but a lot is due to Labour's mismanagement BEFORE the crisis such as failure to put the brakes on the property boom and the expansion of personal debt. The banks didn't make people take out loans or the government to borrow so they can't cop call the flak. Labour deserve to be out of power for a generation.
DuncanMcA 11 months ago
@DuncanMcA Labour should never be allowed to govern again! everytime they have been in power they have left a legacy of shit, 2010, 1979, 1970,1951 building a NHS on nothing but borowed money from america. money which was't paid back until the mid 2000s. its an absolute joke how these incapable clowns get elected. brown an blair are more like laurel and hardy, couldn't run a bath between them never mind a country.
alexandertory 11 months ago
1bn immigrants in ten year, same population as birmingham, britains second largest city! Did they build houses, create jobs and help our services cope with this influx, NO NO NO! Low pai0d british workers now struggle to get jobs in factories because its full of Polish people, Yea vote labour the great defender of the British working people! At least the Tories stick to their priniciple voters! labour= he who has fuck all demands that no one else has fuck all too, you will never create wealth
alexandertory 1 year ago
@alexandertory sorry did you just say 1 Billion?
johnfox3 11 months ago
@johnfox3 I did mean a million, but still too many here, no infrastructure was built to accomodate all these foreigners coming in. drain on the economy, and devalued the British way of life.Labour have swamped us
alexandertory 11 months ago
HAHAHA VOTE LABOUR! euro lovin, swamped this country with foreigners and brought us to the verge of bankruptcy. Gave us the largest debt in history and the largest in the G20. Criminal justice system has become a joke with the european court of human rights over ruling and giving criminals better rights than victims. alcholics and druggies get money for their habbits and Tony blair was the biggest war mongerer since hitler. yeah vote Labour and lets really send this country down the shitter
alexandertory 1 year ago
Tories......... Feed the rich and fuck the poor !!!
RatedRMatt 1 year ago
I didn't know it was possible to have so many bigoted comments in one place
nice7744 1 year ago
TUC national demonstration against the cuts will be in Hyde Park in the Spring, on Saturday 26 March 2011.
AnnyRoadAggro 1 year ago
doesnt matter who you vote for. as long as the BNP, Libdem and TORY have no votes. were sorted
eviltaithe2nd 1 year ago
@eviltaithe2nd i love your stance on politics i agree wholeheartedly fuck BNP tory scum and fibdems
dANNNimal 1 year ago
@dANNNimal
ahaha thanks, its all supposed to be a democracy and yet people vote for these fuckers who dont actually believe in it, they are hands down dictators :(xx and glad someone has sensex
eviltaithe2nd 1 year ago
no problem dan, but the fact remains , with the north sea oil revenue, and the income from the sale of our national industries and assets, a child could have paid of our debt, it wasnt something special that was achieved, reform of trade uniouns yes, it was needed, however there was no ecomomical miracle , to quote a previous tory pm , she sold the family silver, and emptied the savings account , nothing special, and thats before we get to what they did wrong,
spaceman979 1 year ago
- dismantling of the manufacturing industry, and manufacturing output consequently plummetted by 30%. However, like Lawson said, we can run a service surplus and have a manufacturing deficit. And this system has served us well ever since 1984 right through the Major, Blair and Brown years, making us one of the strongest economies in the world. As for the ERM, I say again, it was a mistake on the part of all parties, not just the Tories.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- enabling the British economy to catch up with the other advanced capitalist nations who were already far ahead of us due to 30 years of stagnated output. So, in a way, unemployment was indeed a price worth paying, since the unemployment at the time allowed us to cut away waste and zombie businesses and fuel a private sector lead recovery, leading to consistently high employment by 1997. O yes, and something I forgot to mention last time; you were right to point out that this meant the tragic -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 well dam i can see some of your points, but on others we will have to agree to disagree, nice to have some sensible, reasoned adult debate, cheers
spaceman979 1 year ago
@spaceman979 Maybe you're right. I am running out of time anyway. For now, we can just agree to disagree. But I'm glad you're enjoying the intellectual debate. But I'll finish the rest of my argument after work if you care to read it or respond to it.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- keep afloat. Since we already had a deficit of 6% and debt of at least 60%, we had to make cuts to reduce them. Sadly, few of these workers had any other prospects, and therefore unemployment remained over 1.5 million even during Thatcher's best years. Fortunately, this inflexibility no longer exists in our country, and in no small part due to Thatcher. Also fortunately, the end of the governmental policy of "over-manning" just to ensure employment caused businesses to be more productive, -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- inflexibility of the job markets. At the time, entire towns at a time in England existed for the mines, and the main sources of employment in Scotland at the time was the shipyards. Basically, people went straight from school to the mines/shipyards etc. Now since these industries were nationalised, and were in fact dead industries that were not returning a profit (the overall aim of any industry), these zombie businesses were a burden to the taxpayer which cost over £1 billion each year to -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
you make good points, put across sensibly, however, i dont agree with the 8 years of wonderfull growth, the fact is the tories averaged an 9 % interest rate for 18 years, averaged nearly ten % interest rate for 18 years, and 11 % unemployment, whilst neglecting investment in the infrastructure, whislt courting dictators and shady individuals, as for mandella, please dont quote evidence that has long since been discredited, and a leading tory at the time said he should be shot not relased,
spaceman979 1 year ago
@spaceman979 Yes those figures are true, unemployment and interest rates were consistently high. But the interest rates, like I said, existed to short out the money supply and therefore reduce inflation, which by 1983 was still 9%, though having fallen from 18% in 1979. Even during the Lawson boom of '87, there was still 4.5% inflation, the second highest in the G7. The unemployment was consistently high, but there were factors that exasperated the situation. One of the biggest was the -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- cause. So calling the man a terrorist was an easy mistake to make at the time. I do not approve of Thatcher's friendship with General Pinochet, if that's what you're referring to, even though he was a free marketeer he was a fascist military dictator. But even Thatcher made her mistakes. I do not pretend to say she was flawless, but her monetary policy was utterly correct. See the glorious 8 years of economic boom and ease this country had after 1984 as a result of her policies
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 as for europe i am right in saying the tories signed us up to the common market, the marstrict treaty. took us into the erm ? yet there anti europe ? huge faux pas, also a leading tory said in 1998 you cant have a full house of low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates , and growth, its just not possible. well labour managed it for 11 years, and please dontr say that because they inherited it, it still had to be done, you can blame others for your performance,
spaceman979 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 also dan , lets not forget thatcher had an advantge no other pm had beofre or will have again, liquid gold pouring out of the north sea, yes she benefitted from the most productive goilden years of north sea oil, from 1980 to 1988, and it was totaly wasted, on a social security bill due to her policy and tax breaks for the rich, wasted !!!!!! and then there is no such thing as society, yet cameron wants to big society to run schools and look after the vunerable, what hypocrits, !!!!
spaceman979 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 i do agree however about a benfit dependat society, its wrong, however , its all well and good telling people to get on their bikes and find work and be responsible, i agree, however where are the jobs ??????? cant have it both ways, Cameron has already apolgised and said they were wrong on so many things, mandela, society, the vunerable, unemployment, and i feel he will be doing a lot more , for his and the last tory government mistakes,
spaceman979 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 calling mandella a terrorist was not an easy mistake , it was a disgrace, an absolute disgrace, same as pinochet, look up his record, only a fool would call him a friend, then there was the south african premier, and the restoration of pol pott to cambodia, no human being can defend that wether tory , labour or monster raving loony, only thatcher justified it,
spaceman979 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 As for 8 years of wonderfull growth, sorry dan i checked, there wasnt wonderfull growth, yes there was some, but from such a low starting point this wasnt dificult, from early 89 we were back in reccesion, also as well as norht sea oil she had the money from all the sell offs, 22 in total, and this money went the same was as the oil revenue, wasted, ! and this reccession is a world one caused by world banks, which thatcher removed the restrictions for her free market,
spaceman979 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 and this world banking crisis, World, not just uk, is down to the deregualtion of the banks, started by raegan and thatcher in the 80s and carried on by gordon brown. the extreme of right wing policies , of non intervention and regulation,
spaceman979 1 year ago
- into the ERM was a cross-party consensus, supported on ALL sides of the House of Commons. So in essense, it didn't matter who was in charge, if the decision was supported by all parties, it would have happened anyway wouldn't it? The Tories just happened to be the party in government at the time. As for Nelson Mandela, I have the utmost respect for the man, but some of his activities against the government, such as armed sabotage and guerrila warfare, resembled terrorism, even with it's noble-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- on IMF loans. The need to cut was dire. Of course we could have taken Labour's advice and delayed the cuts, but if that had happened and the Trade Unions been given their way, we'd have upwards of 5 million unemployed by now. Ultimately, there was no way around the unemployment. And as for Europe, Thatcher didn't want to enter the ERM, and was ejected by her party for this very reason. The stupid decision to enter the ERM was made by John Major. Yes he was a Tory, but get this - the entry -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- in the days of Callaghan to 8% by 1984. The interest rates were deliberately and calculatedly raised by Thatcher to serve the purpose of rooting out inflation. Yes, this lead to a severe dip in our manufacturing output and record unemployment. But when most jobs in the country depend on the public sector, what do you expect will happen when the need to cut arises? When Thatcher inherited this country, we had a deficit of 6%, and a debt (officially) of 60% of annual GDP, and we were dependant -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
i do
supermorshu 1 year ago
Now, whether or not you read this is up to you. But let me just say, if you believe me, that I understand your views, and I respect your intelligence. I apologise if I insulted you, though at times I felt insulted myself, but nonetheless I apologise. And I do feel, even though you may not, that for the most part this was an intelligent debate. So I guess we go our seperate ways here. Best wishes to you as well sir. Goodbye.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 Thanks, i have read and enjoyed all of your last comments.I want to clarify that,in context i was not calling you a Zealot, as in an insult for a fanatic, rather than saying 'zealousness' in the way that you were enthusiastically putting over your points of view so i could and maybe should just as easily have said 'enthusiasm' as i meant the same thing
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig Yeah it got heated, but that's to be expected. But it was worth it. No hard feelings.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- that was precisely what we were doing. And it had to change. O, and before I forget to mention, Thatcher never had less than 42% victories in the polls when she was in office. -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- friend, was because of the economic success that her policies were beginning to have. Now, as I have already conceded, people did suffer horrifically under Thatcher. Unfortunately, given the great need to economise, and the fact that so many people's jobs relied on state funding, meant that those people had to lose their jobs - that, or we waited until the IMF forced even worse cuts indiscriminately across the entire board. You CANNOT keep financing a country on debt money, you CAN'T. And -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- , so too does Monetarism and Capitalism. And I see you mentioned the Falkland war. Now, forgive my arrogance, but I adore turning that one around on the people who bring it up. There was a study done about the time after the 1983 election, which Thatcher won by a decisive 44% about the effect of the Falklands war on the polls. It shows that Thatcher only gained a 3% boost in the polls, and bear in mind that she was only 27% in the polls to Labour's 34%; for all of three months! And that, my -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- that at first glance I thought was pure genius. But Adam Smith counters the theory with vast amounts of economic wisdom on his website. Milton Friedman dissects the theory in two very informative books, Freedom and Capitalism, and A Monetary History Of The United States, both of which I recommend to you. Friedrich Von Hayek does the same in his book, the Road To Serfdom. Ludwig Von Mises then decimates the theory in a single essay. So while I confess that socialism has intelligent advocates -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- after I'd finished listing her numerous accomplishments, which is not only completely unjustified, seeing as her policies weren't popular at all, and that her actions were needed by the economy, not wanted by the people, it made me think that you ignored me because there seemed to be next to no acknowledgment of anything I said. Now, I do accept that there are very clever people who advocate socialism and Keynesianism. I have read Keynes' book; it is a complex theory of the multiplier effect -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- who caused the astronomical levels of debt and deficit in this country with reckless overspending, you appear completely oblivious to the dangers of the situation Labour caused when socialist countries such as Greece and even Communist Cuba are hastening to make cuts to avert catastrophe, and you insist that we, the Tories are simply out to serve an ideological desire to shrink the state and "punish the poor", which aggravates me to no end. Secondly you just said "Thatcher was a demagogue" -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- that Labour goes to to exercise "fairness" by interfering with business development, often causing the disruption of those businesses, and giving out benefits indiscriminately and at absurd levels. Now, you say you patronised by me. Well, again let me explain. You claimed to have listened to every word I said, well believe me that's not how it came across in your comments. You sounded like ( I repeat, SOUNDED LIKE, not identify with) the Labour opposition, who in spite of being the very party-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- Labour supporter myself. I was brought up by a Scottish mother to loathe Thatcher and spoon-fed the tales of the misery caused by her cuts in the early 80s. But I converted to Thatcherite conservatism, and not because of peer pressure or anything like that; it was the honest study of history and economics, and an intellectual conversion. So while I admit sometimes I do go over the top, I am no zealot. I agree with helping the poor, and the public sector, but I do not agree with the lengths -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
With due respect to you, i do understand that we dont see eye to eye on some Political issues, but maybe we would agree on some other ones of which neither of us at the moment are aware.However,forgive me for not being able to continue the discussion to the extent to which we have both attempted to put over our respective points recently,as although no doubt like yourself i have the inclination to discuss, i dont have sufficient time to do it regularly at length in writing ; best wishes to you
kenfig 1 year ago
and shockingly unfair,dangerous and exploitative slave labour working conditions,thats those who had work at all.I do not consider myself any kind of extremist,Marxist,Communist or a particular lefty and see some good in what Thatcher did and also in some of what who she considered 'wets' in her own party did before her,although much of that was not so different from moderate Labour Govts ; to my mind we have never seen an extreme Left wing Labour Govt in MY lifetime,certainly not the LAST one !
kenfig 1 year ago
painlessly for results for which they are congratulated. I conclude by saying that i personally, have never voted Tory on principle, being from a working class area and family who have only benefited from some degree of socialism implemented by post war Govts who have adhered to a non radical Keynesian economic model. My family and many like ours would have perished in the 19th century before the advent of socialist Govt reforms and a diet of bread and margarine, filthy and dangerous living..
kenfig 1 year ago
too quickly, rigidly and without any room for compassion. This brings me to the fact that it is all very well to ignore the the social consequences of a quick shift to radical monetarism not seen on such a scale for at least two generations,but it does depend,like many things upon which side of your bread is buttered. It is easy to apply such economic policies to fix an unhealthy economy with such rigor when one hasnt or wont endure excessive pain and suffering of poverty while a few wait....
kenfig 1 year ago
Well before the end of her tenure, she was considered an electoral liability by many of her party and in fact was behind in the opinion poles for the last year and a half of her leadership.It is not entirely,as you say, my failure to acknowledge the longer term economic benefits of some of her policies but more my realism in also pointing to the failings of her time in office and some of the appallingly dire social consequences of her radical approach ; attempting to apply many of her polices..
kenfig 1 year ago
as you,a fan celebrate : we all know of the 3 million unemployed by the end of 1981 after a summer of inner city riots and uprisings ; how in spite of arrogantly ignoring warnings from her own ministers that not adequately protecting the Faulklands would result in the inevitable invasion,she still capitalised fully on the propaganda resulting from the British troops superiority and used it to bolster her career low public and party ratings and win a second term from it....
kenfig 1 year ago
of them from within not only her 'own' party,but from within her own CABINET. It was one such high profile instance you need not be reminded which served as the eventual catalyst precipitating her own downfall. You see,as to which you quickly and readily alluded, that as someone deemed one of our most successful and intellectual P.M.s, Wilson brought about his own 'downfall' after winning three elections and presiding over many great social reforms, things werent all as successful for Thatcher..
kenfig 1 year ago
about the failings of our education system since the 1960s, i dont know whether i sufficiently conform to many people's criteria of what constitutes a 'lefty'. In spite of that, a lot of very successful people have profited from the post war U.K. education system which even many of todays top Politicians enjoyed entirely free until it's completion. As for Thatcher, many of those millions of backgrounds i mentioned a bit earlier, have opposed the intensity of the implementation of her ideas, many
kenfig 1 year ago
backgrounds, including many academics, many of them Economists ; some well know,some not so, who have not only totally different views from yourself, but many who have SOME views that are different.For me personally, it depends what a 'conclusive' or definitive definition of 'lefty' is ; i dont know but i suppose that in reality it's relative, that's once it has been accurately defined in the first place ! For somebody like myself,who totally agrees with much of what Norman Tebbit has written..
kenfig 1 year ago
..that in spite of it having 'noble ideas' is doomed to failure. I also feel personally patronised by you addressing me as some sort of unresponsive audience or a pupil not paying sufficient attention to an important lecture.I did read all of your comments, and i effortlessly deduced what you proudly & freely admitted, that youre a 'Thatcherite Tory' anyway, although you dont acknowledge that there are millions of highly intelligent, well educated and well informed people from many different..
kenfig 1 year ago
- people are immediately in uproar about it because they're scared of losing their jobs, most of which are government funded, like the Miners in 84, or they're scared of losing their benefits. In other words, socialism results in the need for people like Thatcher, and now Cameron, to come in and cut spending. That is the folly of socialism. It causes long term damage, and makes it necessary to economise, which unfortunately means hurting the public.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- exoansion with red tape and bureaucratic nonsense, more businesses eventually find themselves on life support, which leaves the state with no choice but to either raise taxes now, or to borrow money from abroad, and increase taxes later when the need arises to pay that money back. Eventually, because of overspending, you normally end up with a huge budget deficit, like Britain in 79 and also recently under New Labour, and Greece. Then when the red light flashes and the pressure to cut arises -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- government is obsessed with maintaining short-term employment rather than encouraging the employees to find other jobs, they finance the business on taxpayer money. This not only crowds out private sector investment by removing consumer money, it normally results in a business becoming sloppy and mismanaged. Do you think that the state is actually better at running businesses than the business-trained people who founded them? Eventually, given the interference of the government in business -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- event known as the Spanish Miracle, and see for yourself the power of the private sector at making everyone's lives better. Now, as for Tory opposition to socialism and keynesianism, we are not opposed to either because of ideological hatred. Socialism is a noble idea, but it is always bound to fail economically and socially. Economically it will fail because it refuses to allow businesses to economise when necessary, which would normally cause that business to go under. But because the -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- by Labour, does NOT create wealth. It only consumes it. It exist to provide us with the NHS, education and welfare, which do not exist to create profit. The true money making section is the private sector, which is run by entrepeneurs and business minds working towards a profit. Because of this, whilst the rich do in fact grow even richer, so do the poor as well. In high periods of growth, average incomes rise, and the private sector is the ultimate tool in providing growth. Just research an -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- in order to finance both the lagging economy, which judging by the mere presence of a deficit is probably already burdened with a oversized public sector, and also to make the debt repayments. After the misery of the fist five years of her tenure, Thatcher maintained a surplus in the budget, and because of this, was able to cut the top and bottom rates of taxes in half, having billions of pounds in reserve already. Thirdly, as I grow tired of mentioning, the public sector, swelled repeatedly -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- meaning that we would be paying higher and higher interest rates, which I understand is roughly £70 billion, and that doesn't even include paying off the actual debt this country owes, which is already a staggering 466% of annual economic output. Also, our debtors have warned us that our debt maybe downgraded, so we'd be paying yet more money on repayment. Secondly, whilst we maintain a deficit, for the reasons I have given above, taxes must be consistently higher than they would otherwise be-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- spending of the government and favour the private sector over the public sector. You spout the message that our cuts are borne out of blind adherence to ideology and methodically calculated to hit the poorest, just like the Labour opposition. Let me explain something, and actually listen this time. Right now, the Tory-libdem government is cutting spending to reduce the largest deficit in the G20, caused by Labour. If we maintain that deficit, our debt will grow substantially each year, -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- out of a simple rigid devotion to capitalist idealism; she took an economy laden with debt, a growing deficit and halted growth, and made the decisions she made to stop the pending devastation of the entire country, and made it the fourth strongest in world. THAT is why she did it. But you sound like the typical narrow minded socialist who adheres to the idea that the Tories are just plutocratic lunatics who believe in rewarding the rich and punishing the poor because we cut away excess -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
Comment removed
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 Nah, again i justify saying that you generalise because firstly, in your zealousness to portray your views of Thatcherism and Monetarism as the only,correct and definitive doctrines, you dont see that you jump to glib conclusions about people you dont know, implying theyre 'lefties', which you no doubt consider (although i dont) a kind of insult, & patronise the complex and varied concept of 'socialism' which has enjoyed much success as well as difficulties in maintaining by saying
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig Well, before you walk out on me, let me explain what I said last time. I assumed from what you said, that despite all the reasoning I did in Thatcher's defense that you ignored me, which pissed me off a little bit. Most lefties, as I am now addicted to calling them by now I'm afraid, adamantly refuse to listen to the good that Thatcher did. That is why I called you a lefty. Now you also call me zealoted. But here's something you might be interested to know; I actually used to be a -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
extreme pain due to millions of job losses to come, we will see the destruction of many many livelihoods as a cost of Macroeconomic experiments administered by those indifferent few who are way out of reach of the pain they cause so that they can satisfy an ideological hunger to punish the 'undeserving poor' and make them accountable for the mistakes made by the reckless and wasteful spending of successive Govts and their failures of Govts to fetter irresponsible bank lending ; we are guineapigs
kenfig 1 year ago
by the Post war Labour Govt of Atlee. Any problems have arisen out of inconsistencies of measures i have highlighted ; fluctuations between wasteful & unrestrained spending by all colour Govts and then complete withdrawal and of all Keynsian Economic ideas, disregarding many of their positive values and principles due to an arbitrary ideological hatred of them without a sensible,moderate or gradual application of alternatives.This is what we are seeing right now : regardless of many years of..
kenfig 1 year ago
- the general election, and largely because of the scare tactics and endless smearing of the Labour Party. Do you deny that?
For now I must retire to my bed. It is now very late and I must get up for work tomorrow. But I know I've missed out on a few of your points, namely MacMillian and consensus politics, and will address them tomorrow.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- extremism and selfishness. Furthermore, you mentioned Tory controlled press. I admit that exists, but don't pretend for a second that Labour don't do that as well. In fact, the last Labour government was the most slimy, underhanded, wretched administration we'd ever had, smearing it's political opponents in the most vile of fashions, like with the McBride incident, and even it's own people, like Blair, Milburn, Byers and even Mandelson. People were so prejudiced against the Tories before -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- anyone who crossed the picket lines, and demanding money he knew the state didn't have to spare. He is a nationalising, redistributionist multi-millionaire who lives in a massive mansion in Holland Park and has a county estate in Sussex, yet he has not nationalised a single penny of his own fortune so that the poor can live off of it. He lived by the principle "Do what I say, not what I do". Men like Attlee, Callaghan and Foot were genuinely principled men, but Benn was the personification of-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- in Europe. So I believe this adequately absolves Thatcher of the misery of her early rule. Now on another point, I admit I have an obscene tendancy to exaggerate, so I will correct myself here. Labour isn't a stalinist party; it's a typical socialist party. Plus, I admit that Foot was certainly not a bad character, but Tony Benn was absolute scum. He was not only a radical lefty, but a liar and a hypocrite as well. He supported the militant rallies of the Unions, even whilst they were killing-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- that would have been much worse than the suicides in the early 80s. But it did pick up from there, which you don't often hear about as people are overly keen to recount the misery of '79-84. But after that, Thatcher gave this country a glorious economic boom of 23.5%, something unseen for 30 years. She cut the top and bottom rates of tax in half, and the average income was almost double in '90 what it was in '79. And unemployment had by then halved to 1.5 million, and was falling the fastest -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- breaking point as the public sector struggled to find fuel to consume. The IMF would have either come in and FORCED the cuts, which would have been even deeper and much less considerate and methodical like Thatcher, which may have meant as high as 5 million unemployed, or the end of the NHS or God knows what else, or worse, have simply stopped it's loans and left us to rot. To summarise, either it was the misery of painful cuts under Thatcher, or the whole country would have gone down. And -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- suffered in that period were tragic, particularly the loss of life. But if the situation had continued; if our country had become completely dependant on loans (as it nearly was), and the Trade Unions had been allowed to suck the rest of the money from the state, then eventually we'd have had a gilts strike, sterling would have collapsed, and a new recession would have ensued. Economic growth would have halted completely. As inflation skyrocketed, the taxpayers would been stretched to their -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- Also, the labour market was extremely inflexible at that time. As you said, a lot of people weren't willing to look for other jobs, largely because some towns existed solely because of a particular trade such as mining, and because it was the same jobs their fathers and grandfathers had done, a pretty stupid reason I think. Nowadays, Britain doesn't have this problem. People are more willing to look for prospects elsewhere, because of what Thatcher did in '84. And yes, I agree that the losses-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- deathbed. This was a time when we NEEDED a determined leader like Thatcher, someone who could stand against the Trade Unions and bring them into line, and have the courage to get rid of dead weight like the pits and cut the overall size of the public sector, allowing the private sector to emerge. Yes, this resulted in 3 million umemployed, but this wasn't entirely Thatcher's fault. There was a world recession in '82/3 that affected us particularly badly because of our structural problems. -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- into giving them more and more money at a time when the British economy was literally haemorrhaging growth and inflation was spiralling out of control. Both Wilson and Callaghan bowed to these unreasonable tyrants, hence their downfall. Thus, Thatcher inherited a country literally on state life support, with taxpayer money being burned to fuel an unsustainable public sector, with debt at 60% of our annual GDP, inflation at 23%, the deficit at 6%, growth at a standstill, and a country on it's -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- rise of Thatcher. Now, Thatcher was indeed the most dogmatic and powerful Prime Ministers Britain has ever seen. Many people call her a dictator, which is sadly true at times, like the treatment of the Scots with the poll tax, but absolutely unjustified when she refused to perform the old U-turn that the two previous Labour Prime Ministers, Wilson and Callaghan (who I respect by the way) performed because of pressure by the militant, borderline terrorist Trade Unions, who bullied the state -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- cutting the excessive government waste and the highest budget deficit of any advanced worldwide economy, and to fuelling a private sector led return to growth. On the other hand, we have a typical lefty opposition who are in uproar over the prospective reduction of the public sector, and insist that they could have maintained economic recovery with a wasteful public sector running on increasing levels of debt money, which is absolutely preposterous. And so it was during the prelude to the -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
economy I believe in; a private sector majority. This is what' best for social and economic health. Secondly, I acknowledge that the Prime Minister is not always representative of a whole party's belief, such as Blair and Thatcher. What I should have said was this: I am a Thatcherite Tory, which I realise is a unique political identity. But seriously, how similar do you really think Labour and the Tories are? Look at the situation in Parliament now. We have a Tory-libdem government committed to-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- on taxpayer money, which would otherwise be consumer money used to fuel the advancement of businesses. That money is then gone; it produces no additional wealth. That is why I believe the public sector should be limited to things like the NHS, education and welfare, but the businesses should regulate themselves. This allows humanitarianism through state provision to those who would otherwise not get by whilst enabling business productivity causing the economy to flourish. This is the mixed -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
beliefs of humanitarianism,compassion,tolerance and understanding have been shockingly and unjustly maligned by awful people like The Sun newspaper,who have attempted to strip them of their dignity by personal attacks of 'Worzel Gummidge' for Michael Foot,a decent and honourable man of high integrity, and 'Loony Left' for Benn & many others
kenfig 1 year ago
The thing is we have NEVER had anywhere near truly left wing, Marxist, Communist or any other right wing Tory Propaganda press label for Labour Govts. policies IN Govts. The MOST radically Left wing OF British Labour parties have had little influence on things because the controlling Tory press of this country has ensured that people are unreasonably scared of their portrayal of them as Stalinites.So decent intellectual and compassionate people like Foot & Benn who devoted their lives to their
kenfig 1 year ago
The thing about the Miners is that after the closure of so many mines, like 90 odd %,so many other industries linked to the coal industry were badly affected, like Rail,Steel & Electricity.Furthermore so many towns and villages which had depended on these jobs were completely decimated by the EXTENT of the closures, and hundreds of suicides and home losses were reported as a direct consequence of so many losing their livelihoods,without hope of alternatives.Thatcher still has a lot to answer for
kenfig 1 year ago
The next P.M. of particular significance, Wilson brought in many brilliant Social reforms needed in a modern society and built upon the opportunities and social mobility available to all,as well as bridging the class divide. The thing is,there is much more to Politics and Govt than PURELY Economics and the rigid application of radical Economic polices ; there has to be a balance between prudency with compassionate and considerate social policy.This is why Thatcher was so unpopular with so many
kenfig 1 year ago
History tells us that Thatcher's sense of her own invincibility as a leader was distorted and unreasonable.Back to my original points : we had,as you surely must concede, consensus politics in the U.K. for a long time after the 2nd World War, when many great things were achieved.This was acknowledged by Tory P.M.s,most notably MacMillan,who presiding over a period of high economic growth and near full employment,rejected some calls for Monetarist economic policies from within his own Govt....
kenfig 1 year ago
of not only a variety of opposing views on issues, when some they agree on,but then the members who have the most influence change with time,putting sometimes a totally different complexion on the party.You see,not only is ONE Prime Minister not representative of all the party,as with Thatcher or Blair,but the more they attempt to be authoritarian to their own Govt members,as Thatcher increasingly became, the more unhealthy it becomes for the Govt and the sustainability of their own leadership..
kenfig 1 year ago
- the government to graze them like sheep through benefits and support their jobs through state means. Do you remember the Miner's Strike in '84? Those pits were costing the taxpayer billions each year to keep open, and were not returning any profits. They were a liability and had to be dispensed with because of rising debt and inflation, but the Trade Unions wouldn't allow it, and kept demanding more money. They were shut down for the sake of economic health.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
Left respectively. Finally, I do not object to a mixed economy. I approve wholly of the NHS, state education and welfare support (though strictly for those who need it only), but socialism's inherent detestation of free enterprise and belief that the state needs to own and control everything leads to a deteriorating economy, an unsustainable public sector which causes strain on the taxpayer and eventually causes debt and deficit to spiral out of control, and an infantised society which expects -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- taxpayer money, and then debt. Secondly, you claim party differences are "fluid and inconsistent"; wrong. Labour have been a left wing party ever since they came into being, with the brief defection of the Blairite government to the centre-right. The Tories, though traditionally they have always been right wing, stupidly got in on the act when the country decided it wanted a change to socialist government after the war. Now, both the Tories and Labour have both moved back to the Right and -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
It has also been rightly acknowledged that the late 1970s were not only a time when more than any time previously,an entire generation of young people had more and had been significantly more successful than their parents ; this would never be the case again.
kenfig 1 year ago 6
@kenfig But I expect this argument will continue for some time. So I cordially invite you to move this debate over to the Youtube messaging system. My arguments are far more compelling and effective when I don't have to limit them to 500 words, which I really hate by the way. It could be very interesting, but of course it's your call.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
attribute any Socialism to many of the Tory Govts. over that timespan,their tenure still accounted for over half of the '30 years' you call a 'Socialist experiment'.You see,in a proper discussion you HAVE to be clear about these things.Thirdly,to dismiss a mixed Economy model of Socialism as a 'failed experiment' is to disregard & condemn all the achievements & established benefits that we have longsince enjoyed & taken for granted, that have their roots in the policies of post war Labour Govts.
kenfig 1 year ago 2
@kenfig It's not "glib and generalised", it's fact. First of all, it is true that the Tories accounted for a large part of the 30 years of marxism after the war, but those Tories bragged of spending more money on welfare and other public services than Labour, the complete opposite of the Thatcherite government. Because of this, the debt spiralled out of control, and the economic growth stagnated as the private sector died and the majority of economic and social activity become reliant on -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 Look,why i said glib & generalised is because one cant make a statement like 'theyre superior to Labour in every way' or vice versa about Labour ; its a misnomer that cant be used if using common sense.Furthermore you contradict that by saying you dont mind a mixed Economy.The problem many people have in the population is theyre too hung up on generalised Political labels and assume everyone associated with political parties conform to them rigidly when those parties are composed...
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig Well, maybe I concede to your first point, but actually I do not contradict myself in the slightest by praising a mixed economy, because as I have said I believe wholly in state healthcare and education. But I cannot abide by the idea of the state interfering with and hindering the wealth-creating private sector, which was nearly eradicated by the 30 years socialism, and by Brown during his government. The private sector creates wealth, but the public sector does no such thing. It runs -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 Nah, Thatcher is a Demagogue.What i believe is that a true enemy of any country is extremist policies like with Monetarism, and inconsistency, like we have in this country. I dont mind money being spent effectively, but i dont think it should be unduly wasted,like what the recent Labour Govt did for years.However,my main points have concerned the fact that successive Conservative Govts since the war have adhered to many of the good strong principles of Govt policies first initiated
kenfig 1 year ago
Comment removed
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@kenfig It sounds like you've just completely ignored what I had to say about Thatcher. Despite all the logic and statistics that I offered in her defense, you turn around and say "Nah, Thatcher is a Demagogue." You sound just like a typical lefty. You'll delight in criticising her for the awful record of '79-'84, yet you refuse to listen to anyone who points out the good she did the country. And you accuse me of being "glib and generalised"? Listen, Thatcher didn't do what she did out of -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
- the stupid decision to join the ERM. So it was no boom and bust really. I'm not saying that the Tories are perfect; I'm just saying they're vastly superior to Labour in every way.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
long live margarat thatcher! god bless you and fuck the left
jinkedful 1 year ago
@jinkedful Not much chance of that ; she's in hospital now ; i'm keeping my fingers crossed that the old rancid scumbag will be in Hell by the end of the week
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig I know that I could help you, I just don't fucking want to, and the feelings getting stronger every day.
jinkedful 1 year ago
@jinkedful Help me ? What ARE you thinking ?
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig Say that I'm selfish, But I know you need this, And I'm just so sick of the chase
jinkedful 1 year ago
@jinkedful I'm sorry but i really don't have a clue what you're on about ; are you sending comments to the right person ?? . One thing i have to say is you dont have to put capital letters after every comma ; they're not new sentences
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig While you are letting your guard down, I will be letting myself go, While you keep running your ship aground, I will be setting myself alight,
Too late, you dropped the drawbridge, You let the vampires in, You caused this shit to happen, and now you want out?
jinkedful 1 year ago
@jinkedful Well, i recommend something like Chlorpromazine, or Zuclopenthixol but there may be newer,more effective ones ; check with your doctor eh ? Oh, and close the drawbridge on your way out
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig
Too late, you dropped the drawbridge
You let the vampires in
I hope you know now that
it's nobodie's fault but yours!
jinkedful 1 year ago
@jinkedful Um....yeah
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig While you are letting your guard down
I will be letting myself go
While you keep running your ship aground
I will be setting myself alight
jinkedful 1 year ago
Vote Labour and protect what we have? Protect what? A national debt of 466%, the largest ever budget deficit, record youth unemployment, and an infantised public dependant on state benefit? The double-dealing, underhanded and smearing antics of the last wretched government this country had? Or is the overwhelming power of terrorist Trade Unions or the repeated dips in Sterling that you miss about Labour? Maybe it's the strangled economic growth that made us the sick man of Europe for 30 years?
DanRivers22 1 year ago 5
@DanRivers22 You dumb fucks are so glib,generalised and superficial in your thinking ; Labour wasted lots of money which went far beyond spending constructively but you talk as if we had a clean slate and were in the black when Labour last came to power ; it's always been the same with SUCCESSIVE Govts in this country ; Boom & Bust a go-go during the Thatcher AND Major years but just like folk that say Labour did NOTHING wrong, youre JUST as bad with your predictable Tory propaganda
kenfig 1 year ago
@kenfig It isn't propaganda that Thatcher lowered our debt from 60% to about 30%, cut taxes in half, gave us a surplus every year and caused our economy to grow by 23.5% in 8 years. It's also not propaganda that a 30 year socialist experiment nearly obliterated this country before she came to power. When she first came to power, she did what she had to do to lower the country's debt and inflation by cutting the enormous size of the public sector, and the boom that followed only ended because of-
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 Again your comment is glib & generalised : "they're vastly superior to Labour in every way".Firstly,you make unreasonably distinction between parties,which are actually fluid and inconsistent ; you say "30 year socialist experiment" ; what FOR ? That is merely a sensationalist comment ; we have had some sort of consistent Socialism in this country for almost 70 years,thank goodness.Its that you dont properly define the doctrine with your implications.Secondly,if you dont....
kenfig 1 year ago 2
@DanRivers22
Hmm Get your "facts" from the daily mail do you? Or....Maybe Erics pickles secret stash..
whiskasalpha 1 year ago
@whiskasalpha
Hey that's pretty funny. No I obtain my facts from a vast array of historical and economic texts. There is nothing untrue about anything I've said. The only problem is that people like you refuse to hear it.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 wrong on the record national debt,!! wrong on record youth unemployment, !!
or would you rather have record total unemployment, interest rates averaging 8 % for the tories entire time in office, , inflation at 10 % the total destruction of our manufactoring indutries, the E R M when interest rates doubled, in one day !!!! the tories who took us into europe, signed the marstrict reaty, and the single market agreement, then said we shouldnt bow to europe ????
spaceman979 1 year ago
@spaceman979 The debt figure I gave, though I do understand your utter disbelief of it, is 100% true. That is the figure when the true cost of the stupid bank bailouts, the botched PFI projects, railtrack nationalisations etc are accounted for. The official figures hilariously understate the debt to be only 56% of GDP! We wish!
And are you telling me that the International Labour Organisation (ILO) was wrong? They recorded the UK's youth unemployment to be over 20%. Go look it up.
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@spaceman979 As for what you've said about the Tories, first inflation was the fault of the pre-1979 Labour government, not the Tories. Callaghan tried to freeze pay in this country in order to kill inflation, but didn't have the spine to stand up to the Trade Unions, who ordered nationwide strikes in response to this plan. Thatcher did what neither Callaghan nor Wilson had the guts to do; she made cuts to spending and contracted the enlarged money supply, which lowered inflation from over 20% -
DanRivers22 1 year ago
@DanRivers22 or a government that condems nelson madela as a terorist, whisl having t on the lawn of chequers with a war criminal , and supported the return of pol pott to power in cambodia ?
spaceman979 1 year ago
Neva 4get da Toreeeeeez !
Bellalodicci9 1 year ago
INCAPACITY BENEFIT, over which loads of fuss is made, is being TOTALLY phased out and Tory Propaganda use 'one in a million' extreme cases of cheats who DO 'swing the lead', to justify that thousands of people are already no longer eligible to claim, NOT beacuse as the Daily Express claim, that theyve been 'declared FIT for work' and were 'all along',but because the criteria has been changed to NOW preclude ALL legitimate mental health claimants from claiming their legitimate entitlements
kenfig 1 year ago
@BRITLEGEND77 One more thing, The 'SCUM' (Sun for readers who didnt know) so called 'news' paper and Daily Express are perpetuating some great myths,namely :1, that MOST people are BETTER OFF on BENEFITS than in work (so it gives the Tories a wider birth to get rid of ALL Benefits which they hate anyway), 2, That most people are getting £40,000 a year who dont work (Yeah,RIGHT ! ; really £8 per day and live off toast) They also are turning low paid workers aginst people who have no jobs !! SICK
kenfig 1 year ago
@BRITLEGEND77 No worries ; its something i feel strongly about.Those spoiled assholes on here speak to intelligent folk like dirt ; sucked in by the propaganda that they are brainwashed by.They dont even realise it you see.They glibly assume we are all benefit 'scroungers' who dont work because of the media which OWN their minds.I am well educated but working class and i hated what 'New Labour' did.But the Tories that i have NEVER voted for just LIE about everything to brainwash folk !
kenfig 1 year ago
@BRITLEGEND77 That scum 'gopconservative' lives in the U.S. anyway.The fuckers who are brainwashed by Tory propaganda are usually kept,leeching off of their parents and living rent free until up to 40 years old and beyond these days,finally being given the house ! They will NEVER experience standing on their own two feet and having jobs and lives destroyed by rich cunts playing politics with good people's lives and stay brainwashed by the Tory witch hunting media like The SCUM 'news' paper !
kenfig 1 year ago
@BRITLEGEND77 good...you mining scum were destroyed and rightly so.....
gopconservative78 1 year ago
Labour are such bad losers. Thatcher was fantastic!
usernameofnobody 1 year ago
@usernameofnobody Thatcher was an evil bastard that didn't give a damn about the poor and the old
123LK 1 year ago
@usernameofnobody Thatcher isnt a human being ; it's an emotionless robot like Terminator.Now its machine is failing, it has no memory and shits its pants day and night in bed
kenfig 1 year ago
fucking YouTube! QUIT FUCKING UP OUR VIDS YOUTUB!
Nice video, good to give the tories a kicking.
badnewswade 1 year ago
BASTARDS
GenericEmotions 1 year ago
Headed for a double dip I see, thanks to the budget. LOL, stoopid CONDEM's have screwed us all!
JoedhSingh 1 year ago
And I'm sorry but who on earth uses coal nowadays?!
Take your anger out on people who lost jobs building houses out of wood and thatch when bricks became available if that is your logic. Technology moves on. Society has to move with it.
GoldenbanjoDJ 1 year ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Er, if no-one uses coal anymore, why do we import it from Australia?
There are still coal-fired power stations in UK.
There is more to life than economics.
The human cost of destroying trade unionism is clear for all to see.
Wages have been going backwards for 30 years.
lukesixtynineuk 1 year ago
This came up in my reccommended videos and I say if the choice is between Labour, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, it will be the tories every single time for me.
GoldenbanjoDJ 1 year ago
@BRITLEGEND77
Thatcher saved this country from the unions who were running riot. Dead bodies lying on the streets because the grave diggers were on strikeand we had to be bailed out by the IMF due to excessive government spending. Thatcher saved this country from financial ruin and returend it to a place of aspiration and prosperity.
usainlightning 1 year ago
@BRITLEGEND77
The coal industry was losing money and internationally uncompetitive. It had to close.
usainlightning 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic Ah, but I find most people expect jobs to come to them. I don't know many people that would have a job working away all week or would move to get a good job. Many people look at job adverts then send off a CV, its far better to get a job through word of mouth and avoid the normal systems.
pimpUK1 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic I've been made redundant, December 31st along with 370 others. I don't feel bitter I can see the company had to close our site down and reloacate to be competitive. I stuggled for the 3 months this year and still don't hold a permanant job (through choice) but I got by so anyone else can.Now temp work has picked up I'm working all the time and been offered 4 jobs in the last month.If someone wants to work they always will.
pimpUK1 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic well it is, if you cut civil service jobs. You could cut 25% without much harm. A lot of part time and many are not needed anyway. The pensions are far too high. It would be interesting to know what percentage of workers work for the state. I bet its higher than 25%. Paying them job seekers is gonna be far less than the wage they are on.
pimpUK1 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic If 1 person is made unemployed to save 9 jobs then of course it is.
pimpUK1 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic But then there will be even more interest to pay. I'm not saying youre wrong, I think whatever is done is going to be bad for all of us except bailiffs, I just think the risk of unemployment rising is worth taking if it means the UK can get on track sooner, just lets not forgot which party wouldnt cut back spending way after it was apparent the sums didnt add up in 2007.
pimpUK1 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic Everyones money is protected up to a certain figure, 100k??? I can't remember!
What do you suggest then? We can't contiune to borrow 25% of what we spend. 10p of every £1 we pay in tax in paying just for the interest on the debt.
pimpUK1 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic Yeah that is a risk, thats the Lib Dems for you. I'm glad I only have 1 house! I don't agree with the VAT increase mainly becuase I bet it never goes back down again. I woud say get rid of the vast numbers of civil servants in local and national government, however the danger is that they then become unemployed and until the private sector grows then we will be paying benefits for them! We can't continue borrowing £1 in every £4 spend any more though, something has to give.
pimpUK1 1 year ago
@jprbritishcritic There is that risk but I think they said they will cut business rates which should help the economy grow faster. As long as business is doing well we wont go back into recession. Thats the reason behind a VAT increase; it won't hammer exports, which is what we need more of. Taxing the rich is the worst way of getting extra money as they all move away, taking their wealth with them.
pimpUK1 1 year ago