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.
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
why should BA be under control of our government
I have said I am 17 many times you twit. The point is most people my age are influenced by the bias against Thatcher, and automatically hate Thatcherism with out knowing anything about it. Other then it was really really bad because The Guardian says it was.
Surely that should be aimed at Blagsta. I never asked how old you are... partly because your immaturity shine through in many of your posts
Like Rich Kid you mean, or True Blue (if it's not the same person)...
I think what you mean is some people of your age will be influenced. Anyone listening for the Radio today will have got more than one viewpoint. Anyone reading history will too. Thing is you have to make up your own mind.
Personally, I think her policies sucked in many cases, weren't thought through in others (such as Poll Tax) and were spot on in others. I think she lead her country from being almost ungovernable (which is what was said at the time) to being strong again. The downside of that was the impact on the "society" when we went from a "we" culture to a "me" one. We are still feeling the effects of that...
TBH if you believe the Guardian then you deserve everything you get. Sadly too many people forget that it has just as much of an agenda as Murdocks Toilet Papers do...
And your immaturity shines through in every post, in the semblance of ultra left liberalism.
I've never been accused of that before...
'crime is crime is crime'
she threw a few spanners into the works over here during her time
infact i hope she dies
These events were not engineered by Thatcher and her government and were mainly caused by the discovery of oil in the late 70s and the resulting shift of production from traded to non-traded goods.
Still spouting your own unique view of history I see.
Not really.
But we might actually have more than we do now. Which would be a fucking bonus, as we lack nearly any. Takes the piss.
Be a bit of a bad situation. Trade Defecits are never fun. A nation that cannot support itself has a critical weakness.
Not even China need be involved - someone in a war blockading us - nothing coming in - oh shit, we are doomed.
The interdependence that trade fosters does mean that a major war would be catastrophic but this very fact makes major war far less likely.......
There is no reason for Britain to have a large manufacturing sector
Surely you would support the development of poorer countries?
The evidence on environmental exploitation as a result of industry movements is mixed......
Did I say any different?
Is it? Quote some.
No-one supports exploitation but I think you will find that the wages paid in most factories in the developing world are far better than those paid to farm labourers in the same country for example and it is easy to lose sight of that....
Yes.......
Conrad, K (1993) – “Taxes and Subsidies for Pollution-Intensive Industries as Trade Policy”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 25(2), pp 121-135.
Rock, M (1996) – “Pollution Intensity of GDP and Trade Policy: Can the World Bank be Wrong?” World Development, 24(3), pp 471-479.
Baumol, W and Oates, W (1988) – “The Theory of Environmental Policy, Second Edition”, Cambridge University Press.
Muradian, R, O’Connor, M and Martinez-Alier, J (2002) – “Embodies Pollution in trade: Estimating the ‘Environmental Land Displacement’ of Industrialised countries”, Ecological Economics, 41, pp 51-67.
Birdsall, N and Wheeler, D (1992) – “Trade Policy and Industrial Pollution in Latin America: Where are the Pollution Havens?” in Low, P (ed) – “International Trade and the Environment”, World Bank Discussion Papers, No. 159, pp 159-168.
No idea if you can get to these as i did it through a library subscription at university.........
If we are forcing women and children to work 18 hour days for a pittance and making it illegal to form trade unions and in fact killing anyone involved in trade union activity, then yes, thats exploitation.
Go on then.
I am sure you realise Naomi Klein's "No Logo" does not compare to proper academic research.....
Like I say the evidence is mixed, there clearly are cases where 'expltation' does occur but how widespread it is and whether it is a common feature of industrialisation in the developed world is not clear.......
But were they doing that before anyway?
Exactly. It is cheaper. Why is it cheaper? Because the economies are less developed etc, but also because there are generally far less stringent labour laws and union activity is stamped out with violence. For example, Coca-Cola in Columbia.
What exactly are you saying?
It seems to me that you are saying that the poor are in a bad way and we are going to leave them like that.
I would have to find out but I am guessing that labour laws etc probably weren't that good in S.Korea 50 years ago and they are probable better now?
Why is that?
One of the reasons I would say is that these countries achieved industrialisation and development (partly with due to the role of foreign companies and investors), that made people better off and in turn gave them a stronger position, as well as leading to a democracy.....
Do you think it is a coincidence that there is such a high correlation between democracy and wealth?