Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is the UK now giving off strong Third World vibes?

Options
1246726

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 29,027 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    the evidence would suggest otherwise.

    britain still has unions, and strong ones at that.

    she only went after the week ones in industries which would have probably closed eventually down the line but never went after the stronger ones, only being able to implement legislation to try but ultimately fail to counteract them.

    she was popular because she sold people a pup, and there was also an engineered war thanks to her cutting the north atlantic fleet covering the malvinas.

    all of the issues with britain today come back to her failed and ultimately bankrupt policies which amounted to giving people a bung while ultimately she robbed them blind.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,078 ✭✭✭salonfire


    Unions all but eliminated in private companies make strikes in the likes of Ford or by lorry drivers impossible today.

    She didn't go after only weak ones, her laws that union members must vote 50+% in favour of action applied to all unions. That simple majority and that simple change in legislation was all it took to smash the unions. There are fair less stikes during and after Thatcher's time and something the UK should be eternally grateful to her for.

    Are you saying that a country crippled by uncollected waste, food and product shortages in the middle of winter due to strikes was better than the country it is today? Do you want to be living in misery? Actually since it's you, don't bother answering that. I already know.

    Post edited by salonfire on


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    A more apt comparison to make with Britain imo is the same country 45-50 years ago. The winter of discontent, 3-day week era.



  • Registered Users Posts: 605 ✭✭✭Fuascailteoir


    Why would that be a more apt comparison to make? Why not the same country a decade ago rather than half a century. If going back in time why not compare it to the country under clement attlee, that was certainly a country with a vision and determination to accomplish it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,949 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    Tbf some of the richest nations have monarchies and the failed/failing ones often have the word "democratic" in the name!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,604 ✭✭✭Shoog


    The culture that lead directly to the winter of discontent was an us Vs them attitude within management which meant that workers had no representation at the board level and so no stake in making sensible decisions. The success of countries such as Germany is based upon having union members sitting on the board making the hard but necessary decisions about the business.

    The class system was what led to the collapse of British industry, destroying the unions was both a symptom of this and the cause of the terminal decline of British industry. The ruling classes in England hate industry and have never taken it seriously as the basis of their wealth. The upper classes are a product of the empire after the empire ceased to exist. The British have not had an industrial policy since the post war era and so there is no overall strategy and policy initiatives.

    Until the English sweep away their deference to their upper classes it will continue its decline. One thing that the elite are taught in their elite schools is never admit you made a mistake and it most important to appear to be competent even when you haven't a clue - and hence they have the current crop of wasters running the country and never showing a shred of shame for their mismanagement.

    The problems the that the UK faces are deeply structural but no one is will to address the fundamental weaknesses so things cannot get better. I predict a general collapse into disorder before things turn a corner.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    More apt than "third world".

    Sounds positive under Atlee - whole point of this thread is that things AREN'T positive there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,027 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    ford has a union or a few unions. but definitely union activity going on.

    unions in plenty of large private companies.

    lack of strikes in the lorry industry is nothing to do with her, but the set up of the industry, and ultimately that industry is paying for some of it's practices via having a shortage of drivers as drivers leave.

    but absolutely no doubt the larger operators do have unions.

    the country is currently crippled by lots of things, including rubbish which is uncollected for weeks, shortages of products on the super market shelves, all down to the very government thatcher once lead, and all down to her bankrupt ideology being taken to it's end conclusion.

    the only difference between her and this lot is she knew where to draw the line, implement her ideology just enough to enrich her friends but not to completely collapse the country.

    ultimately both the uk of now and the uk of the 70s aren't great countries to be living in, nothing worked then and nothing is working now.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,934 ✭✭✭pavb2


    I think Starmer lost any credibility when he sat on the fence instead of taking an anti Brexit stance.

    One thing stated about Brexit was that it couldn’t be reversed. In my mind this is not true, it wouldn’t be easy it may take some time, money and negotiation and eating of humble pie but it could still be reversed. If the Brexit referendum was held today there’s no way the UK would vote for it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭jetsonx



    You're right.

    And a lot of people think Starmer is very smart for not taking a Brexit stance. And a lot of politicians like the middle-of-the-road because it's always electorally safer than the extremes.

    However, in this particular case, things seem to have got so bad over there, an extreme politician is maybe what the electorate would vote for.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    He did have a Brexit stance. He was in favour of a People's Vote until Corbyn led Labour to their worst result in almost a century.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,287 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    It's impossible to reverse the damage of Brexit if nobody can admit the thing is a disaster. The UK is in this bizarre twilight zone of both main parties pretending it was a great idea. No-one can admit the public made a horrendous error in the referendum, nor admit that the public were conned by the shysters who were pushing it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,982 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    there are less NHS beds in the UK now then in 2007, in fact it’s more than halved in the last 30 years.



  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,659 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    Britain since Brexit is a salutary lesson on how a country that embraces the "race to the bottom" with gusto via the Nasty Party (i.e the Conservatives) reaps the consequences of an economy that is very hollow and structurally weak, a badly squeezed and shrinking middle class, deep inequality, crumbling and overloaded infrastructure, a declining quality of life and general growing discontent.

    Certainly a race to the bottom in terms of its body politic which plunged to a complete nadir with Boris and his vile acolytes.

    Brexit did not cause Britain's problems, which are historic, structural and very deep-rooted, but it very much compounded and hastened the decline.

    The argument for Scotland going independent could hardly be stronger.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    What is the answer for Britain then? Is ireland not following the same pathway?



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,243 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus



    No, not really. Not to be smug or anything, but Ireland has stronger economic growth than the UK, and at the same time greater income equality. Furthermore Ireland's income equality is rising, while the UK's is falling. Higher income equality is associated both with national well-being and with political stability. And of course it's impossible to find any self-harming national policy decision that Ireland has made that is remotely comparable to Brexit. We enjoy higher standards both of good government and of political leadership; this was evident when we faced off over Brexit-related issues.

    That's not to say that Ireland has no problems, has never made poor policy choices or will never make poor policy choices. But we are much better situated than the UK is, and we are definitely not following the same pathway as the UK.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Hard to picture that we have greater income equality than the UK.

    We seem to have people on huge wages in the top tier, people on benefits on the upper middle tier, median workers in the middle tier and then lower paid workers on the lower tier.

    Anyone socialising or spending money is generally in the huge wage, top bracket.

    All i hear from the average paid in ireland is how life is unaffordable. I dont think we have the right balance at all here.

    In the UK, the average salaried folks can still afford to socilaise.



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,243 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    This isn't making a lot of sense. If you think that people on benefits are in the upper middle tier, and that anybody socialising or spending money is in the huge wage, top bracket, then you must think that nobody in the upper middle tier or below it socialises or spends money. Clearly, you've never been out on a Friday or Saturday night; the sheltered life you lead is what makes it hard for you to picture the reality.

    The reality is that we absolutely do have greater income equality that the UK. This is confirmed by any of the international measures that you care to look at.

    The redistributive tax and benefits system is part of the reason for this. If we look at distribution of income before tax and benefits, Ireland ranks 32 out of 34 OECD members - i.e. we have quite unequal distribution (more unequal than the UK, even). But if we look at distribution of income after tax and benefits, we are 15th out of 34; we have almost exactly the OECD average income equality.

    Similarly redistributive tax and benefits systems are found in France, Belgium, Finland and Austria, among others. The least redistributive systems in the OECD are in Switzerland, Korea and Chile. In general, the countries that have the greatest pre-tax and benefits income inequality tend to have more redistributive tax and benefits systems. The reasons for this are obvious.

    People's complaints about life being unaffordable aren't evidence of income inequality, but of income levels. In a very poor country, even if income is distributed with perfect equality, everyone is still very poor. Conversely in a rich country, if income is distributed equally, everyone is equally well-off. But if it is distributed unequally, then some people are poor, and the more unequally it is distributed the more people are poor.

    (Plus, complaints about unaffordability don't necessarily mean that people are poor; just that they don't have much money as they think they ought to have, which is not the same thing at all. You can have a relatively rich country where income is distributed relatively equally and people might still complain about finding things unaffordable.)

    Post edited by Peregrinus on


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Inequality exists in most countries, if not all.

    Some of this post is quite confusing. I used to work in hospitality in rural Ireland and I'd see plenty of people in blue collar jobs spending their money in the local pubs. Why do you have to be wealthy to spend money on socialising?

    In the UK, you've got masses of people using foodbanks, for instance. Last time I checked, they outnumbered McDonald's outlets. People in Ireland may be struggling but they can afford the essentials to get by on a daily basis.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Unflushable Turd


    I moved to the south of England three months ago and the Brits love to moan.

    one of my neighbours was having a good rant about the state of the roads through the village and I’m looking at them thinking Christ, if Dum Laoghaire council managed to keep their roads half as well maintained as this it would be a miracle.

    I haven’t tried booking at our local Doctors yet, but a neighbour is a receptionist there and she says it is very hard to get a same day appointment, but also that at any time, 50% of the people waiting to see a doctor have **** all wrong with them, yet they moan that it took three days to get an appointment.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Unflushable Turd


    The UK has some mad salaries which distort a lot of the figures and make good sound bites for people, but in reality mean very little.

    the CEO of bet365 for example, earns over £200m per year, which affects 99% of the population in no way whatsoever, but does stretch wage inequality and means the relative poverty rate is quite high.

    technically, for a family of four in the UK, if they have less than £2,000 per month left over after they have paid their mortgage and other housing costs, they are considered to be in relative poverty.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    The problem with the NHS in these scenarios is that nobody values it because it's free at the point of use. I knew someone with Coeliac disease who used to get her bread on it. She owned two houses.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,731 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    Well the NHS is dead now... sold to the greedy bastards. Watch it impode over the coming years.



  • Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Unflushable Turd




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Nobody but it's been riddled and hollowed out with outsourcing and locumming.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,339 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    I'd say there is still a robust legal system, due process, a capable military, etc...

    The UK just suffered a lot under Brexit and all that nonsense populism.

    NHS, conditions of schools, constant train strikes, etc....

    Still the UK is by far better of under Brexit, than the US under a 2nd term of Trump could be.

    That'll be more into the direction of a failed state if Trump came in again, rather than a third world country.....



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    I go out most weekends. Certainly not a sheltered life. But most of the folks i meet out are either tourists or gemerally people in higher paid jobs. There doesnt seem to be many middle earners (35k to 45k) out in the bars/restaurants.

    The redistribution of tax here is because low earners essentially pay no tax and the upper earners get hammered. Very low tax free threshold here vs the UK (3.3k tax free allowance vs 14kish).

    Income redistribution is not necessarily a good thing.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I never go out at weekends. Just not really my thing but it's nothing to do with money.

    I think income distributions is, one the whole, a good thing. It's odd that you criticise inequality and then redistribution of wealth, the purpose of which is to address inequality.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    I didnt criticise. I said it isn't necessarily a good thing.

    I think where there is uneven wealth redistribution in Ireland is where the median and average workers are concerned.

    Those folks that pay for everything but get very little in return. The unemployed are quite often better off than the average worker and there is something wrong with that equation.(unfair distribution, but even distribution, nonetheless.)

    The 40% tax band starts too low here and catches too many people. The income tax structure makes it less and less viable for people to continue working fulltime, on average or median incomes.

    I understand that the govt are trying to raise the band entry point, but its slow progress and when you compare to the UK, you can see that an average salaried person over there pays much less tax on their earnings.

    No approach is perfect, but our average earners bear a greater tax burden than their UK equals.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,934 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I'm not sure what your point here is since the thread is about the UK.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



Advertisement