[Closed] Generation Right (Wing)

heard this trailed. This is terribly comendable and terribly sad all at the same time. 😕

They want to support gay marriage. They are relaxed about immigration but they do want to be tough on those who don't want to contribute to society. These mixes of views are not well represented by any of the main political parties.

Found myself agreeing with this statement. Good article.

Listened to this last night. As someone who would define themselves in the same way - economically right of centre but socially liberal, there are some positive aspects and some negative

Positive
1. No expectations of a welfare state - given the ageing and increasingly obese population, the welfare state as it currently stands will lead to a massive tax burden which the electorate are unlikely to be willing to pay for
2. Look after yourself work-wise = likely to lead to entrepreneurialism which could be a driver of economic growth as globalisation eats our lunch
3. Make your money for yourself - maybe the younger generation recognise how stupid it is to get yourself in a much debt as we have

negative
1. Distinct lack of community spirit. Contributing to your community helps resolve a lot of social problems and just makes life a lot nicer
2. very little evidence of an understanding of the benefits of collaboration, which is a great problem-solver
3. Deeply unsympathetic to people with personal issues like alcoholism and drug use. I'm hoping that was immaturity speaking rather than a genuine belief that alcoholics are entirely to blame for their situation
4. They seemed to have swallowed the myth that there's lots of people living the life of riley on benefits. I suspect they're believing too much of what they read in the papers

I'd be interested to know if this is UK-only or pan-Western/pan-European

Its hardly surprising really, is it? If you've spent your entire life in a political climate that champions unrestricted, unregulated capitalism, preached by all political parties, and all the media, with no alternative viewpoint?

Plus, they've figured out by now that the baby boomers spent all the money, then pulled the ladder up behind themselves... how would you feel? Not really a great advert is it?

The welfare state in its present state is ****ed! Totally unfit for purpose. As soon as you have any need to call on it, you realise this. The younger generation have more likelihood than any before them to, as there are no jobs. And nobody cares. So they've learnt what we already know. In todays society, you get into difficulty... you're on your own!

Thatcher has won - "there is no society" would be my summary from the above...

Everyone needs to be made to read from Rousseau's Social Contract onwards and think about where this leads. Either that or we need a proper war (one where we're under direct threat rather than foreign expeditions). Modern people are so far removed from the alternative to a mutually inter-dependant society that we're becoming conditioned to thinking that self-reliance is all we need to survive and prosper, which is pretty deluded.

17 years isn't really a long time and we've Mrs T et all preaching right wing mantra for a lot longer than that, so maybe this is just a result of that and a recent trend...

Failure to acknowledge to true co-dependencies of human society.

3. Deeply unsympathetic to people with personal issues like alcoholism and drug use. I'm hoping that was immaturity speaking rather than a genuine belief that alcoholics are entirely to blame for their situation

Who's responsibility is it then?

Society for encouraging super markets to profit from loss leading alcohol promotions....

Brooess top marks for the most thoughful and balanced responce so far. I totally agree with your comments.

Society for me is as Whinston Churchill metaphor - there should be a ladder up which all should climb and a net beneath which no one should fall. Basically that there shoudl be a safety net for those not able to provide for themselves - what level the net is set is really the question.

Who's responsibility is it then? Who was holding them at gun point or knife point, forcing the substances down their throats or into their veins until they became addicted?

My experience of people with drug and drink problems has been that they tend to be the result of crappy childhoods - abusive or neglectful parents - and the resulting inability of the adult to deal with the ins and outs of life.

No-one I've ever know with a drink or drug problem has wanted to be that way...

Modern people are so far removed from the alternative to a mutually inter-dependant society that we're becoming conditioned to thinking that self-reliance is all we need to survive and prosper, which is pretty deluded.

I was hoping the internet and social media would foster a greater spirit of collaboration (e.g. some of the support we see on STW for people with relationship or depression problems) but according to the program last night, social media is being used now as one-to-one, not many to many.

But then I guess, every adult generation thinks the youth are spoilt, selfish and lazy... so in time when they've experienced a bit more of life, the more negative aspects of Gen Y will morph into a more mature outlook - just like us 😀

Positive
1. No expectations of a welfare state - given the ageing and increasingly obese population, the welfare state as it currently stands will lead to a massive tax burden which the electorate are unlikely to be willing to pay for

More money for myself

2. Look after yourself work-wise = likely to lead to entrepreneurial ism which could be a driver of economic growth as globalisation eats our lunch

More money for myself

3. Make your money for yourself - maybe the younger generation recognise how stupid it is to get yourself in a much debt as we have

More materialism for myself

I honestly don't see how generation Y is not going to get into debt to achieve the above.

I'm afraid the single diver being more money and more money means the consequences you put in the negative will create problems for those who don't fit generation Y's particular mould.

negative
1. Distinct lack of community spirit. Contributing to your community helps resolve a lot of social problems and just makes life a lot nicer
2. very little evidence of an understanding of the benefits of collaboration, which is a great problem-solver
3. Deeply unsympathetic to people with personal issues like alcoholism and drug use. I'm hoping that was immaturity speaking rather than a genuine belief that alcoholics are entirely to blame for their situation

4. They seemed to have swallowed the myth that there's lots of people living the life of riley on benefits. I suspect they're believing too much of what they read in the papers

As Binners says, the political climate here has been to the right for the last 30years, but I've found most people who believe in the above had very thatcherite parents.

When it comes to benefits, a lot of the problems with those these days is due to capitalism, tax credits/child allowances and the like paid to subsidise employers unwilling to pay more/high cost of living, even those who are unemployed long term and who are 40/50 somethings, where are the jobs/retraining for people of this age, and with 4 out of 5 jobs in the UK being created in London, how can they afford to move and live there?

We really have some serious long term problems in this country, which are not going to get solved by generation Y's money only attitude which is to simply cut these people off, considering a lot of generation Y's cushioned upbringing is pretty middle class, its no wonder they don't associate with others with less "fortunate" upbringings.

Think its been drummed into us that there is no help coming to us from govt. Unemployment benefit is just too hard to claim, we can't get on the housing ladder, I can't afford proper driving lessons. I'm chilled about immigration they're just looking for the same better life that I am. Getting a job is a nightmare, loads of my friends are stuck in maccy D or similar and they just know you can't get any other work so screw you over all the time ( extra shifts, zero hours, no breaks, no promotion) mate went for shop floor in waterstones, there were 200 applications, she's got a degree in biology!! Mad

Got no time to look after other people!!

I would be interested to see the sampling method and population for all this.

There is also little mention of other social factors that are widely reported (but may not of course be true in reality) such as young adults living with parents well into late twenties and beyond, pretty unusual when I was young - is this a return to a reliance on family rather than state? If so I'd have though it is likely to be burnt through in a generation.

This may just be a rational response of the young to the nature of society and its direction of travel as global competition for work drives down wages and associated benefits.

I also think that young adults tend not to have experienced the benefits of welfare systems ie parents not yet old enough to need social care, no kids needing education, healthy so not experienced NHS etc. So tax just seems like a black hole down which their wages disappear - probably made worse as they are having to pay for their University education directly as well as this.

I am generation X - so a bit of a slacker when the same age - but easier to do with no student debts and low housing costs - and although I have always worked, I've never really begrudged people on benefits and see benefit in collective public services. I am also tolerant of slightly less than perfect service from NHS etc as I remember the horrors of 2/3 year waiting lists for basic treatments, but in today's service culture I guess young people find it less acceptable and look for more.

How ****ing depressing.

This may just be a rational response of the young to the nature of society and its direction of travel as global competition for work drives down wages and associated benefits.

Simply don't agree. What has happened is that the younger generation have accepted that getting on requires hard work and self reliance. You want a payrise/promotion go get it. If thats not worksing set up your own business. Someone explain why this is not a good thing? What is does is make society more meritocratic.

Walk a mile in a man's shoes before thinking about stealing them.

What is does is make society more meritocratic.

If my "merit" you mean the ability to make lots of money. And success to be measured by the size of your house and newness of your car.

If my "merit" you mean the ability to make lots of money. And success to be measured by the size of your house and newness of your car.

That is exactly the point, its not communism you have a choice. Go out work hard, make lots of money or you could own your own business or do something you want to do but accept that the (monetary) rewards may not be as great.

The point is that the rewards, whatever you define these as, are down to you.

It's all very well moaning about people on benefits and the failings of the welfare state, but as I see it most of the benefits bill is going into private landlord's pockets. There needs to be loads more [i]cheap[/i] social housing built instead of thousands of 'luxury apartments' that no-one can afford to live in.

It's a bit of trap really. It's not like you can just say to yourself "hang on a minute, I'm not a 'consumer', I'm a man" and go and build yourself a hut in the woods and live happily ever after. The Duke of Westminster will come along and say "get off my land".

I sometimes hope for a [i]mild[/i] nuclear holocaust 😉

The point is that the rewards, whatever you define these as, are down to you

Perhaps your right. Perhaps we should dismantle the whole state apperatus. Then teachers and nurses and firemen could charge you what they are really worth and make a bit of money for themselves.

The point is that the rewards, whatever you define these as, are down to you.

You sure, ever heard of social mobility or specifically the lack thereof?

The point is that the rewards, whatever you define these as, are down to you.

Today is the same as it has always been - the most foolproof way to be a rich person is to be born one.

The question is what do you want? Equality or Equality of opportunity? I'd take the second every time.

On that basis if someone said to me, incresae inheritance tax to 100% - I would be sympathetic.

Interesting.

In my work - General Practice - where we do try and collaborate and do stuff to improve the service we and others offer - to improve local services - to support each other, all the leaders and people who are willing to work at it locally are aged 50-60. Getting the 30-40 year olds off their butts and into doing stuff which helps people beyond their immediate responsibility seems absolutely impossible. 🙁

The point is that the rewards, whatever you define these as, are down to you.

Capitlism has always been sold to us as the provision of opportunity for everyone to better themselves through hard work, entrepreneurial spirit etc. And if it were the reality, it'd be difficult to argue against

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rentier_capitalism ]Unfortunately, as todays news on the record rises in property prices graphically illustrate, this is what we have instead[/url]

And as a result, the rewards offered by a genuinely meritocratic capitalist system become further out of the reach of most, while increasing amounts of capital gravitate to those at the top, who do nothing whatsoever to earn it, but accumulate it as a direct result of already owning (usually inherited) wealth

The question is what do you want? Equality or Equality of opportunity? I'd take the second every time.

It might be your question here, but out in the actual world nothing even approaching either option is available to us.

Similarly, among Gen Y, the claim that "the creation of the welfare state is one of Britain's proudest achievements" is now supported by around 20% of people. When it comes to the pre-war cohort born before World War Two, the figure has stayed at around 70%.

Seems quite easily explained by the fact that the people who lived before it existed, know what that was like. The people who've never known anything else don't.

The yoofs barely experience it at present as well. - remember they paid for their education so they have less to value than we did.

I'm consistently struck by how level-headed many Gen Ys are. From the sixth formers who are willingly about to take on the burden of student debt

When 50% of the populus have a degree there will be no "premium" for this.

a political climate that champions unrestricted, unregulated capitalism

Whilst supporting corporatism.

Disconnect, hence failure.

It doesn't matter what we think, as long as we keep buying stuff...

Capitalism and the welfare state go hand in hand, a successful country needs both working well to prosper.

As a young person I disagree with most of the Generation Right views broess points out.

I expect the welfare state to be there when life deals me a blow. Benefits are an absolute last resort for 99% of people, and while there is a small proportion of people who get a good deal out of them most people would rather be doing something else. We have just been marketed a different view by right wing media and governments. The state should provide as much as is reasonably possible like in Sweden to those who need it, and people who are better off because they have benefited from the society they live in should contribute more to fund that.

Better support from the government to my mind would reduce drug taking, alcohol abuse and a lot of crimes relating to money (which is, to a greater or lesser extent, most of them).

I feel like everyone should have a union- I don't like to sit at work being given a bum deal. I believe in almost absolute rights of workers above those of the business provided the business can keep afloat.

Immigration is simply not a worry.

While I appreciate a lot of that is unattainable and a bit idealistic, a right wing society like we live in now is a sure fire way to ruin the lives of the majority of people living in it.

When 50% of the populus have a degree there will be no "premium" for this.

What do you mean when - it's happened already. A BSc / BEng has been devalued hence most professions now ask for MSc / MEng and only from a proper institution. We no longer interview MSCs from some universities as it's fairly obvious they just sell the certificate and don't require any ability to be demonstrated.

Tony B was always banging on about a meritocracy, which probably means it's a bad idea. I suppose it's the modern equivalent of the old feudal justification for the aristocracy and social inequality, but instead of being 'God's will' it's because one is (or is not) 'worthy of merit'.

Its hardly surprising really, is it? If you've spent your entire life in a political climate that champions unrestricted, unregulated capitalism, preached by all political parties, and all the media, with no alternative viewpoint?

This is very true, the question is whose "fault" is it ?

Also very important, imo, is the fact that young people today are sold dreams. Completely unattainable for the vast majority of course but extremely well marketed so that individuals truly believe that it might be them that hits the jackpot. TV "talent" shows contribute greatly to that mindset.

Some years back a former gf was a careers advisor for schools, I remember her telling me how when asked in the interviews "what would you like to do when you leave school" many would answer "become famous". So somewhat exasperated she would ask them what their special talents or skills were and they would just shrug their shoulders.

But they genuinely believed that fame and fortune was attainable for them. When dreams are marketed as effectively as that then it's hardly surprising that the result is a right-wing mindset.

Obviously an awareness of the stark reality that what really awaits them is good shafting throughout their lives is likely to result in a slightly more rebellious attitude.

ernie_lynch - Member

Some years back a former gf was a careers advisor for schools, I remember her telling me how when asked in the interviews "what would you like to do when you leave school" many would answer "become famous".

Similiar story but "be famous" or "be a celebrity" but with no idea what for. Just, famous. So not even getting as far as wondering "what are my skills or what can i do, to achieve this" but no actual thought into what "this" is.

Anyone can be famous, just go on a murdering spree, it's definitely attainable.

Obviously an awareness of the stark reality that what really awaits them is good shafting throughout their lives is likely to result in a slightly more rebellious attitude.

This is why we need to start a mass concreting of large flat areas to create spaces for marching, theres nothing like hours of disciplined marching on cold, wet and hard parade grounds to steel a young mind and bring home the reality of monotony !

This will hopefully also eradicate the current trend for slouching, languidity and slovenliness.

Similiar story but "be famous" or "be a celebrity" but with no idea what for. Just, famous. So not even getting as far as wondering "what are my skills or what can i do

Well, SOMEONE'S got to put out the motorway cones and empty the bins...

Anyone can be famous, just go on a murdering spree, it's definitely attainable.

You should retrain as a Career Advisor...

Well, SOMEONE'S got to put out the motorway cones and empty the bins...

That's what Eastern Europeans are for.

footflaps - Member

You should retrain as a Career Advisor...

There may be some mention of careers advice in my job description.

Its hardly surprising really, is it? If you've spent your entire life in a political climate that champions unrestricted, unregulated capitalism, preached by all political parties, and all the media, with no alternative viewpoint?

I would love to know which country you are referring to here Binners. We are so far away from unregulated capitalism in most of Europe, indeed most of the developed world, that any hints in where to look would be appreciated! 😉

The banking crisis, the current housing market problems and the € crisis, are among the most obvious examples of how we live in anything but unregulated markets and the consequences of that.

Mrs T, "there is no such thing as capitalism" was neither a policy nor an aspiration. It was meant as an observation and a warning. In that sense, it was a pretty astute comment.

Also very important, imo, is the fact that young people today are sold dreams. Completely unattainable for the vast majority of course but extremely well marketed so that individuals truly believe that it might be them that hits the jackpot. TV "talent" shows contribute greatly to that mindset.

A good point. The 40-60s generation lived through a sustained period where expectations were low but outcomes largely exceeded them. Hence they were largely happy. The current generation are now presented with unrealistic expectations and told that they can achieve anything. They will be the generation that will have their inflated expectations largely unfulfilled. Forget the RW generation (even if it exists, which I doubt) and focus on the unhappy generation and all that will go with this (it will take politicians ages to get this). And don't forget that on top of this we have passed on the expenditure/debt that is associated with our consumption bubble that we have enjoyed during our lifetimes to this future generation to fund. They will look on us, less fondly that we look on the WW1 generation I expect.

Mrs T, "there is no such thing as capitalism" was neither a policy nor an aspiration. It was meant as an observation and a warning. In that sense, it was a pretty astute comment.

Talking confused nonsense again THM ? 🙂

Thatcher called herself a capitalist and her crusade for "popular capitalism" was both a policy and an aspiration, as she explains here :

The current generation are now presented with unrealistic expectations and told that they can achieve anything.

No, the current generation (of young adults I presume you mean) are told there's no jobs for them but they can work for free in the hope of later getting a job - and that their parents and grandparents have had all the money so they're unlikely to be able to afford a house if they live in much of the south.

Anyone can be famous, just go on a murdering spree, it's definitely attainable

They will be the generation that will have their inflated expectations largely unfulfilled

It will be much worse for the next lot. Will it make them motivated or will they follow Brand and not vote?

There are jobs, but you have to be in the right area. However, finding a job out of Uni or school has never been easy.

Plus the younger gen do have tendency to p*ss money up the wall 'on essentials', e.g. iphones, gap years and fancy on-suite Uni accommodation. The narrative that it's all the older gens fault is unfair and flawed.

Sorry Ernie, that was a typo on my part. I meant to say "society" not "capitalism", but thanks for the feedback! Nicely put, you charmer 😉 I am surprised by the extent of your Mrs T paraphernalia, it's quite a collection that your draw upon!

But even on capitalism, what she called herself/her supporters attributed to her and what happened under her "reign" were very different things.

You saying she said one thing and then did another 😉
Again i do agree with that - shrewd but deceitful - she was less principled than she spun it and many of her principles [ money supply for example] were either not done or not successful.
I think we are saying they have been handed a worse start in life than previous generations and you cannot just say it is flawed without explaining why.
I think it is hard to argue re employment levels, housing costs, debts [ personal and countries] or social mobility that it is better for this generation than for us or our parents.

Dragon, we have had many years of bringing forward consumption and delaying expenditure through engaging in an orgy of debt financing.

The next generation will have to do the opposite as well as dealing with their inflated expectations. It will not be a happy generation especially with governments stealing their money through extended periods of financial repression. The smart entrepreneurs will capture the market in anti-depressants perhaps?!?!

Plus the younger gen do have tendency to p*ss money up the wall 'on essentials', e.g. iphones, gap years and fancy on-suite Uni accommodation. The narrative that it's all the older gens fault is unfair and flawed.

Who's selling them all that crap though?

The narrative that it's all the older gens fault is unfair and flawed.

Imposing and then raising tuition fees was a crime but I don't recall anyone voting for that

Every generation only sees the faults of the previous generation but doesn't appreciate that many people of that generation who seem to have it all have been through equally hard times or are clinging on to what they have by the skin of their teeth.

The trailers for the programme made it sound interesting but the people on it on the whole like they hadn't been in the real world long enough to have the edges of their opinions knocked off.

The real problem is that even in an island as small as this, the internet and social media make it possible to live in a bubble of like minded people. It becomes easier and easier to believe the us and then stories

I meant to say "society" not "capitalism"

Well that's nonsense too, it's not "a pretty astute comment" as you claim.

She even contradicts that statement herself in the 19 second clip that I posted when at the end she says "That is the way to one nation, one people".

If there is "no such thing as society only individuals" then how can you have "one people" ? Soppy tart.

It's nonsense to claim that there is no such thing as society there clearly is and everybody knows that. Except you apparently.

Thanks for the charmer comment btw, I try my best 🙂

I know you do!!

I just bothered to read and understand the actual quote - it helps. If that means I get labelled in the way you suggest, I can live with that!!! 😉

I just bothered to read and understand the actual quote - it helps.

Oh yeah that one, having realised what a crass and stupid comment that was Maggie's fan club rallied to claim that she had been "misunderstood".

She said that there is no such thing as society, there clearly is. If she meant to say something different then she should have said something different. Simple really.

And in fact years later the Tories were bigging up society by insisting that we should all contribute and make it "big".

[img] [/img]

Clearly the big society campaign was completely contradicting Thatcher and her "pretty astute comment". Which to be fair was the intention.

Getting back on track, I think there is a lot to be said for this. I'm 30 (ish) so just scrape into this demographic and actually think that this quote sums it up very well:

"They want to support gay marriage. They are relaxed about immigration but they do want to be tough on those who don't want to contribute to society. These mixes of views are not well represented by any of the main political parties."

I suspect a lot of people (myself included) want a fairly minimal government that supports those who really need it but by and large let's people get on with what they want to do with minimal interference. One that has clear rewards for those that work hard for it and, I guess by extension, does not offer a great deal of support for those who choose not to.

Did she not also say

[i]It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour [/i]

and

[i]There is no such thing as society. There is living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate.[/i]

According to the Margret Thatcher Foundation Z-11, who ought to know a thing or two about what Thatcher said, this is what she said :

[i]....so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families...[/i]

Read the whole interview here :

http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/106689

Now if despite speaking in a carefully prepared and prearranged interview she said things that could be taken the "wrong way", as claimed by people like you, THM, and other members of Maggie's Fan Club, then that's her failing, and there's nothing "astute" about it.

Maggie, fan club???? Ernie you seem to one that keeps the the flag flying in her more than most. I consisted argue that Thatcherism was largely a myth created by supporters and detractors alike.

Her comments were astute however and history has shown that to be the case. Those who fail to heed the message that (rightly or wrongly) that we need to take responsibility for ourselves will be doomed to pretty miserable old age. The state will not be able or willing to pick up the tab. People who stick their heads in the same will only have themselves to blame.

Yet another piece of Maggie paraphernalia - you are a legend Ernie.

Yet another piece of Maggie paraphernalia - you are a legend Ernie.

Since you don't recognise what the meaning of astute is, a clear demonstration is Ernie being very astute in keeping this "Maggie paraphernalia" handy, just to keep your Maggie T spin class in check.

Ernie you seem to one that keeps the the flag flying in her more than most

That almost makes sense. I assume that 'keeping the flag flying in her' means that you are suggesting that I am a secret Thatcher supporter and admirer ?

Well as they say you can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

So I've finally been busted.

Very drole!

as ernie likes to pick out only part of the sentence to further his POV... the whole part of the answer.

I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand “I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!” or “I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!” “I am homeless, the Government must house me!” and [b]so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and[fo 29] there are families[u] and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations, because there is no such thing as an entitlement unless someone has first met an obligation and it is, I think, one of the tragedies in which many of the benefits we give, which were meant to reassure people that if they were sick or ill there was a safety net and there was help, that many of the benefits which were meant to help people who were unfortunate—“It is all right. We joined together and we have these insurance schemes to look after it”.[/u][/b] That was the objective, but somehow there are some people who have been manipulating the system and so some of those help and benefits that were meant to say to people: “All right, if you cannot get a job, you shall have a basic standard of living!” but when people come and say: “But what is the point of working? I can get as much on the dole!” You say: “Look” It is not from the dole. It is your neighbour who is supplying it and if you can earn your own living then really you have a duty to do it and you will feel very much better!”

There is also something else I should say to them: “If that does not give you a basic standard, you know, there are ways in which we top up the standard. You can get your housing benefit.”

But it went too far. If children have a problem, it is society that is at fault. There is no such thing as society.[fo 30] There is living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate. And the worst things we have in life, in my view, are where children who are a great privilege and a trust—they are the fundamental great trust, but they do not ask to come into the world, we bring them into the world, they are a miracle, there is nothing like the miracle of life—we have these little innocents and the worst crime in life is when those children, who would naturally have the right to look to their parents for help, for comfort, not only just for the food and shelter but for the time, for the understanding, turn round and not only is that help not forthcoming, but they get either neglect or worse than that, cruelty.

EB, there you go you can have a read of the actual text via Ernie or The Lord! Enjoy it.

as ernie likes to pick out only part of the sentence to further his POV... the whole part of the answer.

I posted a direct link to the [u]whole interview[/u] as published on the Margret Thatcher Foundation website, not some leftie website. And I said : "Read the whole interview here".

I have no problem anyone reading the exact context in which Thatcher said that there is no such thing as society - why would I ?

It was a crass and stupid comment to make. There is very clearly such as thing as society and reading the entire interview that she gave to Woman's Own won't change that.

Today Cameron's vision of "the big society" completely contradicts Thatcher's dismissive attitude of society, which of course is the whole point - Cameron above all wants to distance himself from Thatcher as he recognises her enduring unpopularity.

Let's not forget that Thatcher eventually became so unpopular with the British people that the Tories had to sack her and drag unceremoniously out of Downing Street crying.

It's fairly unprecedented for a serving Prime Minister to be sacked midterm by their own party. But she had become so deeply unpopular with, among other things the poll tax, which she called her "flagship policy - very "astute" eh THM ? that she clearly had to go if the Tories stood any chance of winning the following election.

And as we know it did indeed give them respite as they presented the electorate with a "DeThatchered" Tory Party. Cameroon wants to maintain that distance with Thatcher.

Although of course his "big society" was/is just marketing bollocks - he obviously never had any intentions of implement what he preached or build the society he allegedly aspired to build.

And also of course despite being determined to distance himself from Thatcher David Cameron is much more right-wing than she ever was. For example when she argued that privatizing Royal Mail was completely unacceptable she meant it, as she did when she said "the NHS is safe in my hands" - she mostly left the NHS alone unlike this government which wants to change it beyond recognition.

Although it could be argued that Thatcher knew her limitations and what she could get away with that's why she wasn't as right-wing as Cameron is, and I'm sure that's true even though she totally screwed up with the poll tax - she wasn't as clever as some people like to think. And the "there is no such thing as society" was another one of her stupid moments.

Although it could be argued that Thatcher knew her limitations and what she could get away with that's why she wasn't as right-wing as Cameron is

You see it is a hidden love after all! 😉 so Mrs T is to the left of a left of centre CMD. No wonder you have this not-so-secret fetish!!! Try not to dream about her tonight.....

Actually "stupid moment" is not a bad description after all. When you read the actual interview it seems that she is not at all all clear what she means by society. She seems rather confused between state support and society and looking after each other and society. How that ends up with the common interpretation of the now infamous tag line, god only knows. She needed a better script writer for woman's own though.

Astute enough for new labour to take up the baton, don't forget. No there's a damning verdict if ever one was needed. Ernie's secret love, the poster girl of new labour!!! It was tennis balls and white skirts in my day!

A couple of random thoughts to throw into the mix:

1. At 41 and 20+ years out of university I can look at people I went to school/uni with and see a very clear line between the different attitudes different people have taken to their lives. Those that expected a high standard of living to just happen to them, are ok but not particularly thriving (in some cases quite the reverse. Those that set about their careers with energy, focus, bloody hard work and took responsibility for their personal development and career opportunities have been very successful. I would observe from these case studies that taking responsibility for yourself and your life tends to lead to better outcomes. And for those of my friends who've done, this, their high incomes mean they're paying way more tax, so they're directly giving back to society as a result of their hard work

2. Taking responsibility for your own wealth creation does not mean you're a mean git who cares for no-one else. You can still do charity work or otherwise contribute to your community. In my experience those who do take responsibility for themselves are often more capable of giving back to their community, simply because they can use their initiative, and have more experience to draw on from their professional lives.

3. Welfare State. Baby Boomers understand the value of the welfare state as in their early years (late 1940's, early 1950's) the country was a wreck (close to bankrupt) and many many men came back from the war physically or mentally scarred, and it seemed right for the state to contribute to their recovery as they'd only gone to war because the state asked them to.
However, Gen Y don't have this experience so they don't quite expect the same moral contract to be in place. When one of the biggest problems we have as a society (obesity) is clearly a self-inflicted one (in comparison to getting your leg blown off by a German bomb, whilst fighting for your country), then you can understand the view which says "people shouldn't expect the state to dig them out of their own self-inflicted mess"

I'm not sure I entirely agree with that sentiment, it's a bit harsh, but if you compare the early experiences of the Baby Boomers with Gen Y, you can see how that opinion might be formed

Those that set about their careers with energy, focus, bloody hard work and took responsibility for their personal development and career opportunities have been very successful. I would observe from these case studies that taking responsibility for yourself and your life tends to lead to better outcomes.

Not trying to take the piss but really that is all you have said.

No one goes up the career ladder without trying very hard and some , occasionally, have talent beyond hard work.

Not trying to take the piss but really that is all you have said.

Correct - it's with reference to what the Gen Y interviewees said on the programme last night about needing to take responsibility for themselves, and in that respect I think they've got their heads screwed on, especially in light of the job opportunities which are not coming their way.

There's already a trend in a number of industries which has been building for the last 10 years towards contractors instead of perm staff - e.g. I started on a 4 month contract 3 years ago and I'm still in the same organisation after taking a series of different roles. Their employment experience is likely to be more like this than the perm role for 30 years in the same company that my Dad enjoyed.

In understanding that they need to generate work for themselves I think Gen Y have a better chance of the standard of living they're hoping for and for the UK to enjoy economic growth off the back of their efforts. If they'd said they expected to be given a stable job for life then I'd be seriously worried for their futures

You see it is a hidden love after all! so Mrs T is to the left of a left of centre CMD. No wonder you have this not-so-secret fetish!!! Try not to dream about her tonight.....

If I may respond to your silly schoolboy taunting with a serious point, on a purely personal level I had no issues with Thatcher, she served her party and the wealthy class that she married into well, and it is reasonable to expect her to have done so.

Furthermore she didn't make herself leader of the Tory Party and Prime Minister, first of all she was elected by her party and secondly she was elected by millions of voters, she couldn't have done the things she did without the support of those people.

And as politicians go she was fairly honest about where she stood, although she was spectacularly dishonest during the miners strike, and she did create the myths which people still believe to this day with regards to low taxation, low public spending, higher growth, etc.

But as a general rule most people had some idea what they were supporting when gave her their support.

In contrast my feelings for Tony Blair are completely different, I struggle to find words to express the contempt that I feel towards the lying cheating self-serving low life, which I know is a bit unfair to amoebas.

See, when I hear a (on-off) Labour supporter like Ernie express contempt for Blair, I can't help thinking o the indian Snake parable

I haven't supported the Labour Party since 1995 Z-11, and it was continuous support before then. Although I'm sure you're going to tell me that you know better than me.

See Ernie, you and Dan Hodges [i]do[/i] have something in common, both Ex-Labour party supporters 😉

'We must do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living.

We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian-Darwinian theory, he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors.

The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living.'

R Buckminster Fuller (44 yrs ago, he was optimistic at least...)

Z-11 I have something in common with 8.6 million ex-Labour party supporters.

Are you trying to outdo THM with the silly school playground taunting ?

To be fair I think you'd probably win - I reckon THM is just an amateur in the puerile stakes compared to you.

I love the idea of self reliance and being an entrepreneur unfortunetly this becomes very hard with the concentration of wealth and power in a small minority. The role of the government must be to support this. The Tories may say they do this but opportunity is not just about low taxes. It is most about disruption and creating space for individuals supported by the state. For example in the USA the state giving land out to anybody who could farm it in the west. Rightwing parties tend to talk the talk of self reliance but the reality is to remove state control and replace it with unaccountable company control.

If I may respond to your silly schoolboy taunting with a serious point,

For a guy who spend hours on here trying to wind people up, you do seem to have a surprisingly sensitive side!

on a purely personal level I had no issues with Thatcher, she served her party and the wealthy class that she married into well, and it is reasonable to expect her to have done so.

..there really is no need to feel embarrassed about it, we are a very understanding audience. It's clear that you admire what she did/ her more than those you like to taunt as Maggie lovers!! Much better, that you let it all out...other famous men were equally captivated by the Iron Lady.

Although I'm sure you're going to tell me that you know better than me.

Annoying when people do that about your politics isn't it?

Have a nice day.

I blame Thatcher

you do seem to have a surprisingly sensitive side!

Sensitive ? It amuses me greatly that you have to resort to silly schoolboy taunting, why wouldn't it ? 🙂