If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
As you mentioned CT I thought I would post a link to the "Isitfair" forums.
I spotted a pensioner crying a few weeks ago in town and when I asked her what was wrong she told me this sad tale about how she was going to have to sell her home because CT has gone up by so much more than her pension. Poll tax was brought in because Maggie knew that it would force at least some of the labour vote out of the electoral system.
"Many people are now looking back fondly on it, it was a fair tax, based on the principle of "if you vote, you should pay""
I quite agree providing that if I don't vote I don't pay. (and you leave me the fuck alone as well.)
Was it really necessary to tip the balance so drastically towards the wealthy, to the point where tens of millions of people in this country were left considerably worse off?
Was it really necessary to starve off public services?
Would someone else really been as supportive of odious regimes such as the Apartheid or mass murderer Pinochet's as she was?
In fact, what good whatsoever did that woman actually do to this country?
Drastic impact, more than a few dodgy moments.
Just would like to point out that we can subjectively discuss the impact of the Thatcher years on current Britain, but we will never know what a labour government would have done differently. In some respects saying that Thatcher's was a neccessary government is basically indentifying a causal relationship of her government in history...we will never have a solid basis for comparison.
Surely that was down to "necessary restructuring".
As the OECD have shown, Britains prosperity over the last 10 years has almost exactly mirrored that of the leading OECD members - a fact that was shown on Newsnight last night, so it isn't all down to Gordon Brown no matter how hard Labour try to push this view. He's still ld Labour at heart straining at the leash to tax the wealthy more in that old mistaken socialist belief that re-distribution of wealth is good!
I didnt say Brown did it on his own, was merely pointing out how you ran completely over the idea that some labour economic policy has met with some success
And I won't start on education ....
You should, you know.........
Seems a bit kinky for a first date though.
Does Teach Yourself Trolling have a troubleshooting section for this kind of eventualities?
That sounds rather gay to me. In fact I've heard a few gay people use that expression before.
Mmm...
Anyways, back to oral sex...
like someone said, we can look back in hindsight, but that doesn't reflect what was happening at the time... when Thatcher was first elected, the Labour govt had presided over the so called winter of discontent... 3 day working weeks, the devaulation of the pound, electricity shortages etcetc... though they may have admirable ideas, it's hard to sympathise with the unions when you only electricity until 6pm.. Labour's alternative to Thatcher was, in short, bloody awful. The 1983 LAbour Manisfesto was termed the 'longest suicide note in history' by a member of the then Labour shadow cabinet.. it advocated immeadate withdrawl from the EEC without a referendum, abandoning the polaris nuclear missile system (during the cold war), negioations between industry and the government to set wages, re-purchase of council houses, and the renationalistion of industry... Whatever that is, it is not a socially viable or economically sound list of policies.
she did go a bit far, but the unions did need to be broken... why should somelike Scargill - who is unelected - wield so much power? Like her or not, she was the most decisive and ideological leader of her generation.
all symptoms of a health system where people can actually get treatment in the first place, a privatised system on the american model? Sod that, preventable death occuring all over the place.
Oh and by the way, waiting lists and elderly care suffered IMMENSELY under the tories. Still a long way to go but thank goodness for the NHS...at least you know to some degree if something happens people can help you.
Even her admirers seem to be implying that other than curbing union power she did little good for the country.
Personally I think whatever good she did with the unions will forever be overshadowed by the immense damage she did to anyone who wasn't in the upper-middle class or higher, the dehumanised greed culture she championed, the worsening of living conditions for the most vulnerable and her repulsive support for fascists, racists and assorted scumbags from the Apartheid to Reagan to Pinochet.
No, don't start on education. Considering how wrong you are on health, you would only make a hash of it.
Although I frequently try to engage with you on this subject, every time I point out that you arguments are shite, you never respond.
Once again, you have posted a list of lies and half truths here about the NHS.
Can't you substantiate any of them, or are you just repeating propaganda?
Privatisation (of what she privatised, anyway). Nopbody can seriously claim that BA was better in public hands.
Falklands War.
Clamping down on trade unionistr militants, and teaching Scargill (the man truly repsonsible for the collapse of the British mining industry) a lesson he hasn't forgotten. The unions needed to be told who was boss, and Thatcher did it.
The Poll Tax was fair too, IMHO: you paid for what you used.
Developing the culture of property-ownership, instead of being reliant on crappy housing from crappy councils.
What she got wrong:
She went too far with the unions, although the reason why they don't have any power any more is because they refuse to do anything except perform deep analingus on Princess Tony.
Poll Tax. £3billion down the drain.
Valuation of sterling in the ERM.
Creating a selfish country: "trickle-down" didn't work.
Regardless of your opinion of Thatcher's ideology, the simple fact is that it is without doubt that she truly believed in what she was doing, and she was doing it for the "good" of the country instead of the good of her buddies. Some think her ideology was spot-on, some think it was crap, but I believe she did more good than harm.
Not the best PM, but I'd choose her ahead of the two PMs before and after her.
She undoubtedly went too far with the Unions, their power and influence have been reduced to a level at which they are largely ineffective in many industrial disputes. Her use of the police was similarly over the top. Would disagree feverently about the Poll Tax, especially in the context of the time in which it was brought in (and as was previously stated, bought selfish taxation into a selfish country).
In personal terms she didnt come across as deceptive or misleading or placating.
The question of who do you think is the better leader is much different from 'Who's Britain would you rather live in?'
I sincerely hope we never see an era of supply side economics like the 1970's/80's.
But not in context.
All the moaning miners who complain about "police brutality" don't seem to extend the same courtesy to miners who broke the strike. "Scabs" still get violently attacked in many mining communities.
Odd how the unions want to be treated with respect but didn't and don't extend any respect to those who disagree with them.
She never told the police how to operate she only told them what she wanted done. She did the same thing in the Falklands - "I want the island back, see to it" were her words. The only time she got involved was when something dodgy was called for that needed PM approval.
Your point there seems to be comparing police brutality with a section of striking miners who engaged in internal violence, and suggesting that this is the context in which it should be viewed. If this is the case then its a meaningless comparison, a completely separate consideration from the operational parameters of state. The government set the legislative and civil framework in which this took place, it is not an exclusively reactionary body.
My point was more that the police weren't that bad in comparison, and that miners whingeing about being hit are on very thin ice when one considers just how badly people who disagreed with them were and are treated.