[Closed] Thatcher!

okay the old lady is ill she clearly cant do much for herself so.. i rather susoect that shes not the one putting a claim in every friday.

how many letters do you think she gets each day.. who opens each and every one and replies to them all..

say she has two staff on 25k plus a manager on 40k plus an office to run i suspect anyone could spend 293 a day very easily and never leave thier comode..

When we have got all of those, when we have got reasonable housing, we will sell it all off, never to be replaced. What's the worst that can happen?

QFT

the old lady is ill she clearly cant do much for herself

Don't we have disability benefit for that ? ........I'm pretty sure it wouldn't come to half a million quid over 5 years. It seems to me that she is an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. She should have saved her pennies when she was working to provide for herself later in life. Rather than expect the state to do it for her.

And as far as her receiving loads of letters is concerned, she is clearly doolally, so I can't see the point of her replying to any of them. Nor of someone doing it for her..... what they going to say, "Lady Thatcher says, is it Christmas yet?".

To be fair I doubt she gets that many letters. How many people would waste time and and effort writing to someone who is obviously living with the fairies ? And if they did, then they don't deserve an answer. Well not one paid by the taxpayer anyway. Can't the Tory Party pay for it ? It's got nothing to do with the business of government. Plus times are hard and the government needs to cut back on unnecessary spending. Apparently.

To be fair I doubt she gets that many letters. How many people would waste time and and effort writing to someone who is obviously living with the fairies ?

Which makes my point aracer - only a muppet would write to Thatcher when she is so obviously doolally. I doubt that she even knows who David Cameron is. Did he get an answer back from her ?

She probably thought this geezer was in the Tory Party :

[img] [/img]

Mind you, there were times when even I had my doubts.

I hate Blair more than Thatcher, at least she was upfront about what was going to happen to us Colonials when we stopped voting for her. Blair WE did vote for, He rooked us knowing the sheep up here would still vote for him.

PS I really hate Thatcher, but my dislike of Blair almost involves wishing he would drive past a grassy knoll in an open top car.

How old are you duckman?

anyway, I'm calling it fraud, she's never once replied to any of the letters I've sent
… and Ive sent her lots 🙂

What's Zelda from the Terrahawks doing at Downing Street?

This scares me. So the Credit card Chancellor can claim as well?

****ing hell fire what a ****ing tool and waste of ****ing space.

Ps. When I saw the title I felt alittle foreboding. Don't post things like that without a title.

What do you expect from her this is a PM you when told about MP,s expenses fraud did nothing but was quite happy to take free milk for school children away from them , i wounder which cost the taxpayer the most ?.

What say you Elf? Or should that be... Tory Boy?

LOL Thats going to Hurt

uplink - Member
How old are you duckman?

I'm 43, just old enough to have been leaving school and trying to get an apprenticeship in 1984. Then when I did get one, meeting Mr Poll Tax while earning £70 a week.

totalshell - Member
okay the old lady is ill she clearly cant do much for herself so.. i rather susoect that shes not the one putting a claim in every friday.

i like that idea its gotta be her layabout son

every other venture hes touched has turned to shit, cashing in his mums pension every week is probably the only source of income he can manage
[img] [/img]

Her old mucka Arfur Scargill is joining in noshing at the trough also.

"FORMER miners’ leader Arthur Scargill is facing legal action in the High Court as he battles to retain his £34,000 a year grace and favour London flat."

"Since standing down in 2002 as president of the NUM Mr Scargill has claimed £280,000 for the apartment as well as an annual salary of £34,000."

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/around-yorkshire/local-stories/scargill_facing_court_battle_for_london_flat_1_3379826

Not as good as MrsT of course but nice work Arfur. Looks like they're all at it.

Especially bad considering the size and turnover of the NUM nowadays.

Not as good as MrsT of course but nice work Arfur. Looks like they're all at it.

Except that there is no comparisons between the two. Scargill isn't receiving money from the taxpayer, so unless Thatcher received the half a million quid from the Tory Party, there is no comparison at all. And as you quite rightly point out, the monies involved aren't comparable either.

Did you have to dig around the internet long, before you realised that you couldn't find a comparable story to deflect criticism and smear the trade unions with, and therefore in an act of desperation would have to settle for non-comparable story without the vaguest connection ?

kimbers - Member
eh? trying to defend fatcha claiming money from the state for doing nothing you post up a quote from her saying people expect too many freebies from the state for doing nothing

10/10

Except that there is no comparisons between the two. Scargill isn't receiving money from the taxpayer, so unless Thatcher received the half a million quid from the Tory Party, there is no comparison at all.

I guess that makes it alright!

This thread is full of some odd arguments, can some let me know what the point of that no society quote was, because I presumed it was highlighting her double standards but apprently it wasnt ❓

You're quite right ernie but only in so far as Scargill snout is one step removed ie. he receives the money from the union which funded by the members, who are taxpayers.

surely anyone who recievs money from any group in the country could have the same thing said about them...

What an incredibly stupid argument Woody. You are claiming that because, according to you, all NUM members are taxpayers, "the taxpayer" is paying for Scargill's London flat ?

You are either taking the piss, or, more probable, really desperate and pathetically clutching straws.

I guess that makes it alright!

I make no comment concerning the rights and wrongs of the NUM flat in London, it has got **** all to do with Thatcher poncing vast amounts of money off the British taxpayer for doing bugger all.

But if it helps you in some strange way, I'll say that Scargill is a very naughty boy......how's that ?

Did you have to dig around the internet long,

No I was quite aware that Arfur had his nose in the trough, a swift google was required to find a non-Daily Wail source however.

And you think there are no comparisons ? OK, fairy nuff.

a swift google was required to find a non-Daily Wail source however.

So your original source was the Daily Mail then ?

It's a brave man who admits to being a Daily Mail reader on STW.........good for you allthepies.

Who's your favourite columnist ?

Gotta love your forum style ernie 😀

Ernie - What about the Union Learning Fund Eh?

£107,670 for Fiscal 2010-2011
£81,308 fiscal 2009-2010

So, I'd call that a fairly nice slice of Taxpayers money gone to the NUM!

Why is the Government funding the unions?

Because it bloody well should.

Because it doesn't otherwise support British workers nearly enough, that's why.

Jeeze the Tory Boys are desperate these days in't they? 🙄

But if it helps you in some strange way, I'll say that Scargill is a very naughty boy......how's that ?

My point was, that while Thatcher is living in relative luxury (I would like to know how the claims are justified too BTW) it is also worth pointing out that she would be very wealthy in her own right (as it appears the vast majority of ex-PM's are) not least because of good old Dennis, who was rather successful long before she became PM.

The analogy was drawn as the NUM was of sufficient size, and with enough members, to be a virtual public body and therefore a comparison is IMO reasonable.

Scargill however, has to be one of the greatest failures in union history if you go by his job remit ie. to look after the welfare and jobs of his members. I'm almost surprised there is still enough money in the kitty to continue to pay for all his excesses - it certainly can't be from current subs 😉

t certainly can't be from current subs

Just over 2000 paying members.

100k of taxpayer funding through the learning fund

Yep, Fifty quid per head of taxpayers money... and Scargill gets 34k plus the flat!

Come on, thats a racket if ever you saw one! 😆

Zulu-Eleven - Member

Ernie - What about the Union Learning Fund Eh?

£107,670 for Fiscal 2010-2011
£81,308 fiscal 2009-2010

So, I'd call that a fairly nice slice of Taxpayers money gone to the NUM!

Why is the Government funding the unions?

Oooou yeah......what about all that money we're giving the unelected EU bureaucrats ? And the money being wasted on work-shy scroungers, the so-called "unemployed" - more like "unemployable" if you ask me . And then there's all them foreigners who come over here to use our health service for free, and they get a big house given to them.

Now I can see it all makes sense......Mrs T is perfectly entitled to ponce half a million quid off the taxpayer. Gawd bless ya Maggie, you help yourself love - you're worth it.

Scargill however, has to be one of the greatest failures in union history if you go by his job remit ie. to look after the welfare and jobs of his members

funny that, i always held the opinion that no one tried harder to look after the welfare and jobs of his union members than scargill. in fact if there were other union leaders at the time that had the guts to stand up to what the govt and their police army were doing to the unions and the workers then the world, or at least the country might be a better place today.

I knew you'd see sense in the end ernie 🙂

Eh Trailmonkey?

Cowan v Scargill specifically showed that Scargill and the union refused to do what was best for the workers, by trying to restrict what their pension fund was invested in, in a manner that was found to against the best interests of the members!

Never forget the quote:

[i]"When someone says we never want to go back to the 1970s, we say 'we do, the quicker the better'."[/i]

From the article [BBC News - shit as usual.]:

In September, she attended a party to mark former Defence Secretary Liam Fox's 50th birthday at his London apartment.

She surely didn't claim for this shit as a public appearance did she? A private party?

Get every single one of these ****s up against the wall. Fox is an cheating, lying **** too. ****s, I say, every last one of them.

It's about time our government and unions grew the **** up and worked towards a relationship similar to the Germans.

vorlich - Member

She surely didn't claim for this shit

Nah, she only claimed for herself, the shit can take care of himself.

It's about time our government and unions grew the **** up and worked towards a relationship similar to the Germans.

Absolutely 🙂

It's totally different over there

[b][i]German air traffic controllers strike
Wednesday 12 October Deal has been made between parties. 5.2% pay raise in two parts. Union to meet on Friday to give the thumbs up.
Sunday 9 October Warning out from Lufthansa website today. Flight disruption to be expected on Monday afternoon in Germany. Due to ground crew employee meetings at several German airports. Flight disruption are expected on Monday afternoon in all German airports..[/i][/b]

What happens in Germany? What country is it that has gross national happiness?

allthepies - Member

I knew you'd see sense in the end ernie

I think it was Zulu-Eleven's cunning attack on the trade unions what done it allthepies.

Up until that point I thought there was no possibility at all of justifying some stinking rich thieving tart who spent her entire life denouncing people for allegedly being a burden on taxpayers, helping herself to half a million quid of taxpayers money for doing sweet **** all.

Then along comes the call-sign fantasist armed with a set of random and mysterious figures purporting to refer to a "union learning fund", and I suddenly realised that the game was up - my argument had indeed collapsed like a house of cards.

Could there be more compelling evidence that Mrs T was fully justified for her breathtaking hypocrisy ? Could there be more compelling evidence that Mrs T was fully justified in poncing half a million quid of taxpayers money for doing bugger all ?

And all because btw, she had a job over 20 years ago - from which she was sacked.