Maggie Thatcher death discussion thread - Mod rules in first post

true · 10-04-2013 01:31AM

Nodin wrote: »

It wasn't k-9's point.

About these "millions of immigrants" - what did you mean?

I was directly replying to K-9, and even quoted him before replying. If you want to know what was written read it.

end of the road · 10-04-2013 01:32AM

wonderfullife wrote: »

Unions organising violent protests

they were most likely provoked by the police who wanted to justify themselves to be exempt from any cuts, at least that was the case with the miners from what i can see, even the guardians of the law have their price

Nodin · 10-04-2013 01:32AM

true wrote: »

I was directly replying to K-9, and even quoted him before replying. If you want to know what was written read it.

He never mentioned immigrants. So - what did you mean by "millions of immigrants" and linking them to social welfare?

true · 10-04-2013 01:33AM

karma_ wrote: »

You are perfectly happy to use Germany and Sweden to make your points, .

Actually it was someone else who brought theose 2 specific countries up. Please keep to the topic.

Nodin · 10-04-2013 01:35AM

true wrote: »

Actually it was someone else who brought theose 2 specific countries up. Please keep to the topic.

This was the point he made

Yet both Sweden and Germany have strong social programs and Germany kept it's manufacturing base. It would appear you are grasping at any straw.

You've yet to address it.

karma_ · 10-04-2013 01:38AM

true wrote: »

Actually it was someone else who brought theose 2 specific countries up. Please keep to the topic.

Whoever initially brought those two countries into the debate is irrelevant, you were more than happy to run with it until the point where talking about them became detrimental to your entire argument. You then throw the toys out of the proverbial pram and complain that others are 'dragging' them into the debate?

K-9 · 10-04-2013 01:38AM

true wrote: »

Actually it was someone else who brought theose 2 specific countries up. Please keep to the topic.

Why couldn't the UK match Germany?

Why not?

true · 10-04-2013 01:38AM

Nodin wrote: »

He never mentioned immigrants.

lol You are grasping at straws now. He mentioned some tories wanting to cut or abolish social welfare and I request a link. Do you not have one either? I speculate that if it is true perhaps some of the individuals perceived attidude to immigrants may be a reason?

true · 10-04-2013 01:39AM

K-9 wrote: »

Why couldn't the UK match Germany?

Why not?

Where is your link that some tories want to abolish social welfare ?

You claimed in 646 that "some Tories aren't really opposed to the cost of welfare, they are opposed to the very existence of it. "

Nodin · 10-04-2013 01:40AM

true wrote: »

lol You are grasping at straws now. He mentioned some tories wanting to cut or abolish social welfare and I request a link. Do you not have one either? I speculate that if it is true perhaps some of the individuals perceived attidude to immigrants may be a reason?

Again, this seems to bear little relation to what he said.

Please explain what you mean by "millions of immigrants", what that has to do with social welfare, and who these "individuals" are, and their attitude to immigrants.

K-9 · 10-04-2013 01:44AM

true wrote: »

lol You are grasping at straws now. He mentioned some tories wanting to cut or abolish social welfare and I request a link. Do you not have one either? I speculate that if it is true perhaps some of the individuals perceived attidude to immigrants may be a reason?

I said that is the attitude of some Tories, I can't link to Tories stating the same!

Even UKIP don't state that!

Put it this way, if the welfare budget was halved tomorrow, in a few years some Tories would still be blaming all of societies ills on welfare.

Cameron would still be looking for consensus, borrowing from New Labour, ironically considering it's a Thatcher thread, you'd have a part of the party still looking for drastic cuts. Even her own party and disciples see her as unelectable.

Any payments to welfare are too much for some Tories.

end of the road · 10-04-2013 01:45AM

wonderfullife wrote: »

Maybe it's just me but the actual concept of giving free milk to schoolkids is a bit ridiculous in the first place!! Where does that stop? Give free apples, oranges, bananas?

in fairness back then the working class could barely afford any of these, i'm sure the benefits system wasn't as good back then either, some would argue giving people the basics they need instead of cash would be a better spend.

wonderfullife wrote: »

I don't think it's up to the State to ensure children get enough calcium, vitamins or nutrition. That's a parenting role

yes, but if the parents can't or won't then someone has to.

wonderfullife wrote: »

and Thatcher was quite right to cut that and save money.

no she wasn't, back then people were poorer then they are now, again spending the money on things like milk some would argue is better then giving out cash benefits.

wonderfullife wrote: »

We'd be up in arms if the Government here decided to hand out free milk to children at the cost of however many million to the taxpayer.

some would (probably those who could afford it) some wouldn't (those who can't)

true · 10-04-2013 01:46AM

If you read it you will see it was a query to his allegation that " some Tories aren't really opposed to the cost of welfare, they are opposed to the very existence of it. ". Now care to explain that statement? Or provide a link. Rather than me speculating on a possible reason for that statement, the more I think about it i think I should ask for a link or explanation to that claim first.

Why am I waiting? Now, c'mon, the link please?

true · 10-04-2013 01:48AM

K-9 wrote: »

Any payments to welfare are too much for some Tories.

care to elaborate? Exactly which tories want no social welfare payments? MP's names?

karma_ · 10-04-2013 01:48AM

true wrote: »

If you read it you will see it was a query to his allegation that " some Tories aren't really opposed to the cost of welfare, they are opposed to the very existence of it. ". Now care to explain that statement? Or provide a link. Rather than me speculating on a possible reason for that statement, the more I think about it i think I should ask for a link or explanation to that claim first.

Why am I waiting? Now, c'mon, the link please?

That is in no way a controversial statement to make, and I believe you know this to be the case. I imagine it's just the smokescreen you deploy to avoid answering difficult questions you have no answers for.

true · 10-04-2013 01:52AM

I am still waiting to know what tories want to abolish social welfare in the UK. I have googled it and nothing has come up. Not even a minor tory politician can be found to back up this astonishing claim. Is it something K-9 just made up? There has to be some source for it if its true?

K-9 · 10-04-2013 01:54AM

true wrote: »

Where is your link that some tories want to abolish social welfare ?

You claimed in 646 that "some Tories aren't really opposed to the cost of welfare, they are opposed to the very existence of it. "

It's a bit like Thatcher was responsible for property programmes, I don't blame her solely for New Designs, Escape to the Country, the guy with the long stringey curly hair from a few years back, her infatuation with property was a bad thing, she seemed to see property as a great thing, saw no hypocrisy in Government subvention for land, though she hated intervention.

Some Tories hate welfare, Howe and others questioned giving money to Liverpool after the Toxteth riots. To her credit she sided with more liberal elements of her party, Heseltine and Clarke spring to mind, people with a little social conscience.

Nodin · 10-04-2013 01:54AM

true wrote: »

I am still waiting to know what tories want to abolish social welfare in the UK. I have googled it and nothing has come up. Not even a minor tory politician can be found to back up this astonishing claim. Is it something K-9 just made up? There has to be some source for it if its true?

That really makes your statement more baffling, if you thought his wasn't true.

What did you mean by "millions of immigrants" and linking them to social welfare?

true · 10-04-2013 01:58AM

Nodin wrote: »

What did you mean by "millions of immigrants" and linking them to social welfare?

If you read it you will see it was a question querying the astonishing - and shown since to be untrue and unfounded - claim that "some Tories aren't really opposed to the cost of welfare, they are opposed to the very existence of it"

K-9 · 10-04-2013 01:58AM

Some Tories advocated starving Liverpool of funding, that's the mindset I'm getting at. To deny that there was a war going on, and Liverpool was seen as a major front on that is undeniable. This was before Derek Hatton, it'll be interesting to see what views come out over the next few years.

Nodin · 10-04-2013 02:02AM

true wrote: »

If you read it you will see it was a question querying the astonishing - and shown since to be untrue and unfounded - claim that "some Tories aren't really opposed to the cost of welfare, they are opposed to the very existence of it"

Yes. And from that was a bounding leap to "millions of immigrants" and a link between them and social welfare. Thats what I want you to explain. What have immigrants to do with it? Why should he look at london and Bradford?

P_1 · 10-04-2013 02:02AM

For a fictional TV series I think that the original version of 'House of Cards' sums up the attitude of some within the Tory party of the 80's and 90's quite well

Lingua Franca · 10-04-2013 02:05AM

true wrote: »

a million people bought their own council home. The average quality of housing increased in the UK in the period in question. Would you prefer if most people or everyone lived in tower blocks or slums?

Are you aware that this sale of council houses has left Britain with a massive shortage of social housing?

Are you aware that Thatcher ordered the councils NOT to use the money raised from sales of council properties to build new properties?

Are you aware that about a 3rd of ex-council houses are now in the hands of private landlords instead of ordinary homeowners? For example Charles Gow, the son of Thatcher's housing minister owns at least 40 of 120 ex council flats in one London estate.

Are you aware that there is a chronic shortage of affordable housing as a direct result of her thoughtless policy?

Of course you aren't. Please do continue, you were saying something about immigrants and welfare?

K-9 · 10-04-2013 02:08AM

true wrote: »

If you read it you will see it was a question querying the astonishing - and shown since to be untrue and unfounded - claim that "some Tories aren't really opposed to the cost of welfare, they are opposed to the very existence of it"

You for some odd reason brought immigration into it, Thatcher loved globalsim and a consequence of it is immigration. We're talking about a legacy here, not fine political points.

P_1 wrote: »

For a fictional TV series I think that the original version of 'House of Cards' sums up the attitude of some within the Tory party of the 80's and 90's quite well

Indeed, what a show, and it was loosely based on Thatcher.

wonderfullife · 10-04-2013 02:08AM

K-9 wrote: »

Why couldn't the UK match Germany?

Why not?

There is one MASSIVE reason that gave the Germans a huge advantage over the UK in terms of their manufacturing base in the last decade.

The Euro.

Germany was one of the only European countries with a balance of payments surplus when the Euro began. As such, the deutschmark would have been a hell of a lot stronger than the new currency, the euro. As such, Germany could export a lot cheaper than would have been the case and gave them an almost unique boost in not only maintaining but expanding its manufacturing base.

There are other reasons, of course, the low levels of private debt in Germany, partly down to a cultural dislike of debt (the word for borrowing in German is the same word for guilt - Germans view debt as failure). Then you have the system where almost 1/4 of all secondary school students in Germany take up apprenticeships (and unlike in Ireland, the UK etc) there is no concept of dead-endness to apprenticeships.

It also has to be pointed out under German employment law, people work fewer hours per week than to be laid off. So you get people accepting a trade-off of doing 20 hours a week whereas in the UK they just get laid off as the company has no work for them.

German manufacturing is thriving, no doubts, but they have (and had) far more advantageous conditions to allow that to happen than the UK.

true · 10-04-2013 02:12AM

K-9 wrote: »

Some Tories advocated starving Liverpool of funding, that's the mindset I'm getting at.

Nobody wanted Liverpool starved. Where did you get such hatred for the Tory pary? It was in the interests of the Tory part that Liverpool would prosper and be part of a strong UK. The people of Sunderland and Derby got Nissan and Toyota and their spin off industries.

P_1 · 10-04-2013 02:13AM

K-9 wrote: »

Indeed, what a show, and it was loosely based on Thatcher.

Well you may say that but I couldn't possibly comment.

youreadthat · 10-04-2013 02:17AM

true wrote: »

Nobody wanted Liverpool starved. Where did you get such hatred for the Tory pary? It was in the interests of the Tory part that Liverpool would prosper and be part of a strong UK. The people of Sunderland and Derby got Nissan and Toyota and their spin off industries.

Some Tories thought about letting Liverpool rot, this is a fact.

wonderfullife · 10-04-2013 02:17AM

true wrote: »

Nobody wanted Liverpool starved. Where did you get such hatred for the Tory pary? It was in the interests of the Tory part that Liverpool would prosper and be part of a strong UK. The people of Sunderland and Derby got Nissan and Toyota and their spin off industries.

K-9 has strong feelings over the Hillsborough disaster where the Liverpool fans (96) died and the subsequent handling of the affair by the Thatcher government of the day, the Metropolitan police, The Sun newspaper.

By proxy, he's unlikely to send any Tories, Sheffield coppers or Murdoch family any Christmas cards. Ever.

Nodin · 10-04-2013 02:20AM

wonderfullife wrote: »

K-9 has strong feelings over the Hillsborough disaster where the Liverpool fans (96) died and the subsequent handling of the affair by the Thatcher government of the day, the Metropolitan police, The Sun newspaper.

By proxy, he's unlikely to send any Tories, Sheffield coppers or Murdoch family any Christmas cards. Ever.

There is more than one reason to have little gra for the Tory party, tbh.

Maggie Thatcher death discussion thread - Mod rules in first post

Comments