So its not the Labour party at fault- just a rogue entity? He slipped in through the net didn’t he. A plant, Brown et al were all there to sabotage the workers dreams?

Did a bloody good job of it.

Oh, it is most certainly the Labour party at fault. We went from having a party on the right and a party on the left to having a party on the right and a party on the slightly further right.

Her mystical powers know no end Ben!?!

Yes, Hora… Very clever. You’re right though. Her influence evaporated the day she left Downing street, and was confined exclusively to coal mining.

Anyone who didn’t live through it, is not entitled to an opinion? Particularly as her continued legacy has lead to massive youth unemployment (a price worth paying, remember), the removal of housing benefit, and 9 grand a year tution fees, amongst many other things

So… I’d say that any 20 year old looking into her Legacy and expressing an opinion is a good thing, no? Considering the position they presently find themselves in. Or would you rather we had a generation of the apathetic, so the politicians can get away with murder, and somehow someone finally manages to be more politically clueless then even you

Oh, it is most certainly the Labour party at fault. We went from having a party on the right and a party on the left to having a party on the right and a party on the slightly further right.

How was Labour’s collective failure anything to do with an old lady who had been forced out by her own party?

Binners, reel him in. Hes more of a fantasist than you.

The Margaret jar is very clever.

How was Labour’s collective failure anything to do with an old lady who had been forced out by her own party?

There wouldn’t be New Labour without Thatcher. She started the deregulation of the financial system, she started the selloff of public assets, she introduced the idea that there was no such thing as society – everyone is in it for themselves.

I don’t see anything wrong with the tuition fees, it’s like an extra test to see if you are clever enough to go to university.
Borrow some money to further educate yourself, then when you are earning plenty, thanks to your education, you pay it back.
If you don’t earn enough, you don’t pay it back.

I suppose another way of doing it is to rely on those you’ve given the means to make a lot of money to pay back into society off their own backs.
Unfortunately, this is what Thatcher tried and it didn’t work. People are greedy and selfish.

bencooper she was ousted, thrown out by her own party. They didn’t want her. That was over two decades ago.

She’s not the boogyman you know.

bencooper – Member

she introduced the idea that there was no such thing as society – everyone is in it for themselves.

You’ve misunderstood that quote.
She didn’t want people to be selfish, she wanted people to take responsibility for themselves.

“I think we’ve been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it’s the government’s job to cope with it. ‘I have a problem, I’ll get a grant.’ ‘I’m homeless, the government must house me.’ They’re casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There’s no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation.”

bencooper she was ousted, thrown out by her own party. They didn’t want her.

Not strictly true. They still adored her, as emotionally retarded, sexually repressed public schoolboys, with a matron fixation, that they always were/are

But they were bright enough to know that she was now so despised by the electorate that if she lead them into the next election, they would lose it for sure

Labour were in the same boat before the last election with Brown. But the labour party doesn’t possess the electorally ruthless streak of the Tories. Actually… they’re still in the same boat now with Wallace. But again, they’ll do nowt. Too spineless

I do love whataboutery, it’s a good sign of when someone has completely run out of argument.

Using it to argue every point is a sign of something else entirely though.

Labour were in the same boat before the last election with Brown. But the labour party doesn’t possess the electorally ruthless streak of the Tories.

Was Brown as much of an electoral liability as Thatcher was, (well, actually her utterly blind insistence on pursuing the Poll Tax) at the time she was ousted?

Labour lost the 2010 election by how many seats? I heard on R4 the other day that alongside the cabinet that did the ousting, there were in the region of 150 Tory Mp’s in marginal seats saying the poll tax (and therefore Thatcher) was going to lose them their seats and the Conservative party the General Election.

Labour were in the same boat before the last election with Brown

Do you think if Tony had still been in charge they’d have done better, or had people started to hate him enough by then? I still can’t help thinking that he had some inkling of what was coming and got out whilst the going was good. Clearly I’ve also forgotten already who else it was lined up to take his place who was going to do better – it’s not as if they were all clamoring to have that task (and in the long term surely everybody knew it would be a good election to lose – well everybody except Nick anyway).

Actually… they’re still in the same boat now with Wallace.

Do you really think he’s poor enough to lose them it given how unpopular the Tories are making themselves? I’m really baffled by some of the things they’re doing – as pointed out, a lot of them are totally unnecessary and also extremely unpopular – it’s almost like they don’t think one poll tax is enough this time round.

9 grand a year tution fees

Yeah well that might have quite a lot to do with Blair’s desire to dramatically increase the numbers in HE thus both increasing the cost and devaluing the value of HE – plus there aren’t any more graduates needed anyway so many end up unemployed…funny that.

I’d agree with all of that aracer. Blair milked it and then picked the perfect moment to leave. ie: when it all came home to roost. And it was certainly a good election to lose. As will this one, as the tories present suicidal economic policies will be coming home to roost by then too.

I think the Tories knew they were a one term government right from the off, and are setting about doing as much irreversible ideologically-driven damage as possible before the inevitable loss. Then when the Lib/Lab coalition take over they’re going to be faced with choices that are going to make this present term look like a picnic

Do you really think he’s poor enough to lose them it given how unpopular the Tories are making themselves?

Yes.
-media/personality: remember how popular Clegg was made by the a couple of good telly appearances and lots of positive press. The same can be done with Cameron I am sure.
-you can fool lots of people with a manifesto that only bears a passing resemblance with what you really want to do.
-relatively low numbers of “swingable” voters.
-relatively low numbers of swing seats.

*affects poorly-informed pub bore voice*
The wild card is UKIP either splitting the conservative vote enough to lose them lots of marginals, or fighting the election on the Euro referendum and somehow that backfiring. Otherwise Cameron will have to actually bite the head off a child on Newsnight no to win next time.

[EDIT] actually what Binners said make sense too. But is anyone (well, anyone not ‘protest voting’ against the labour or conservative incumbent in a safe seat as I suppose I might consider doing. Again.) actually going to vote lib dem now?

There is no doubt that the financial services industry grew rapidly from the 1980s up until the 2008 crisis. But this concept of ‘liberal’ deregulation – as in some kind of free-for-all – seems quite at odds with my memories of the time.

So during Thatcher:

1. A previously privately regulated (sic) old boys club (stockbroking) was ended with regulation transferring from the players themselves to the state
2. (From above) insider dealing was made illegal (1980) – and anyone who worked in the industry knows how widespread it was
3. The level of bank capital came under new state regulation (Basle 1)
4. New qualifications were required for industry participants – irritating exams!
5. Deposit insurance was introduced to protect depositors
6. Life insurance was re-regulated
7. Selling financial products (savings, insurance) regulated

Not exactly a wild free-for-all.

is anyone (well, anyone not ‘protest voting’ against the labour or conservative incumbent in a safe seat as I suppose I might consider doing. Again.) actually going to vote lib dem now?

Strangely enough I would, but then I didn’t have the same expectations as many of the traditional LibDem supporters seemingly did, and I’m capable of seeing beyond the fact they lied, because they all do that. They were never going to be able to do all the stuff those who feel betrayed think they should have. That’s always of course assuming they manage to field a candidate who isn’t quite so awful as the one we had here last time (unlike the Conservative candidate he didn’t bother moving to the area, and pretty much all of his campaigning seemed to be negative stuff).

mudshark – Member

Yeah well that might have quite a lot to do with Blair’s desire to dramatically increase the numbers in HE thus both increasing the cost and devaluing the value of HE – plus there aren’t any more graduates needed anyway so many end up unemployed…funny that.

But, but, but, it’s their ‘ooman right to go to university!

@binners – have they uncovered your real identity?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/labour-official-apologises-jibe-margaret-2586869

😀 😀

The NUM was ‘attacked’ by the Thatcher Regime, they responded in the only way they could–withdraw their labour– Scargill was their elected leader, with a huge mandate from the membership–more than any politician, he made have made some tactical mistakes–i e not calling on the TUC for support–he knew most of the lilly livered toads wouldn’t have–but at least they would have been under pressure from their members–some workers took unilateral action–rail workers, dockers,and others where they could. I remember NACODs used the strike to enhance their pay etc , as did those scabs in the EEPTU-but to attempt to portray the Arthur Scargill as some sort of equivalent to Thatcher shows how bankrupt your thinking and ideology must be.

There is room for a huge debate on all the sell outs by the so called Labour party– and yes for me Thatcher started the asset stripping, and the baton has been handed down to every govt since, some run a bit quicker than others, like the present lot of fools– i suppose it says more about a political system than anything else, where with the approval of less than a fifth of the adult population you can wreak havoc on every one else and call it ‘democracy’…..

CURSES!!! BUSTED! 😀

Asset stripping?

In the years leading upto Thatchers government many LOSS making companies were nationalised.

In modern times its companies making massive LOSSES like Northern pissing Rock that were nationalised (thanks again Labour), Bradford & Bingley (their loss making side) thanks again Labour. Then there was RBS. Oh cheers Labour! You are spoiling the taxpayer!

Scargill couldn’t gather enough votes to go on strike so he changed the rules (lowering the amount).

Did you read history?

A quick look at the profits and dividends generated by the utility companies in the UK today leads me to believe that if the government had retained a major stake in them then not only would income be generated for the taxpayer but the government would have far greater say in when it comes to price hikes,director pay and bonuses,infrastructure investment and the like.
As I asked days ago where did all the money from privitisation and oil revenue go under Thatcher?

A quick look at the profits and dividends generated by the utility companies in the UK today leads me to believe that if the government had retained a major stake in them then not only would income be generated for the taxpayer but the government would have far greater say in when it comes to price hikes,director pay and bonuses,infrastructure investment and the like.
As I asked days ago where did all the money from privitisation and oil revenue go under Thatcher?

Where did the £22billion go Labour?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/727831.stm

Oh and on Utility companies- cronic under investment and high prices to consumers means big profits are there.

Need investment to rebuild/improve the creaking infrastructure? You ask the government for a loan and/or make your customers pay even more.

She’s going to have part of Madrid named after her…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/12/margaret-thatcher-madrid-street-name?CMP=twt_fd

As for Northern Rock what was the alternative?
Savers losing their savings,staff being laid off with no redundancy pay apart from what the givernment would have been obliged to pay,all other banks that were owed money from NR getting into trouble and a possible run on the banking system?
Or share the pain by the government bailing them out?

As a miner said to me regarding any ballot. “Why do they want a ballot? It’s because they want to vote against the strike but not be seen doing it! You know where you stand, if you were going to vote Yes you’ll be out in any case”.

Deregulation introduced by Margaret Thatcher was long overdue and was a positive in many cases opening up state monopolies to competiton to the benefit of the consumer.Replacing state monopolies with private ones isn’t good and selling off the nation’s assets isn’t either.

Not exactly a wild free-for-all.

Very selective list that teamhurtmore. Seems a lot like you’ve included all the pro’s but none of the con’s. Things like the demutualisation of the building societies, the removal of controls on credit and so forth and so on to name but two.

Where did the £22billion go Labour?

Restoring the shambles left by the previous 18 years at a rough guess, pretty much like will happen post this bunch when they go. Simple current example: Lack of proper road maintainence, the road network is in the process of falling apart. It is blatantly obvious that the current lack of proper maintainence is going to lead to massive future costs.

Nothing more to say currently, as I’m steadfastly maintaining my dignified leftist stance to the old bats passing.

Except that the current ‘lot’ are dealing with labours malcompetence.

Except that the current ‘lot’ are dealing with labours malcompetence.

At what point does the current government have to start taking some responsibility for our current predicament? Never according to some people.

They’re not ‘dealing’ with anything other than their own self-serving ideologically driven political agenda.

You may not have noticed (unbelievable, I know) but their policies are having the exact opposite effect of their stated aim. The deficit is going UP!!

It is odd with politicians.

They can point to every single minute flaw in their predecssers policies but absolutley none of the ones in the policies they bring in to replace them.

Well done Grum- I said by the time they are in their SECOND term

Berm Bandit – Member
Not exactly a wild free-for-all.
Very selective list that teamhurtmore.

Very true BB and wasn’t meant to be otherwise. Merely pointing out that the changes in the city in the early 1980s were not quite as they seemed. I didn’t mean to make that a pro v con list – rather that changes also included important regulation and re-regulation. The rapid rise in Fin Services pre and post dated Thatcher but she is often portrayed as being the woman who created a free-for-all. As i have said before, she must have had mystical powers if that were true.

Chart 1 on page 14 of this gives a useful perspective of the dramatic rise in FS in the UK

http://www.bis.org/review/r091111e.pdf

Well done Grum- I said by the time they are in their SECOND term

Where did you say that? About who? What are you talking about? MATRON!!

I’ll say one thing for you lefties (and plastic-communists like binners), you have staying power (well not in politics but hey).

Are you all related to TJ? 😆