Why was Thatcher hated so much?

[TheHibernator]

The thatcher years were before my time so I have no personal memory of her being in power, have heard stories about the poll tax etc but don't know any real details about it, admittedly politics isn't my bag

For those old enough to remember, what specifically was it that has caused her to be hated by such a large percentage of the population, particularly in Scotland?

[Cataplana]

The thatcher years were before my time so I have no personal memory of her being in power, have heard stories about the poll tax etc but don't know any real details about it, admittedly politics isn't my bag

For those old enough to remember, what specifically was it that has caused her to be hated by such a large percentage of the population, particularly in Scotland?

She was a bit arrogant, lacked compassion, made it clear that she was favouring the South over the North, and latterly she was just plain insane (started to use the royal "we" when referring to herself, eg "we have become a grandmother.")

[Ozyhibby]

The thatcher years were before my time so I have no personal memory of her being in power, have heard stories about the poll tax etc but don't know any real details about it, admittedly politics isn't my bag

For those old enough to remember, what specifically was it that has caused her to be hated by such a large percentage of the population, particularly in Scotland?

She took on a lot of vested interests and won. She closed down subsidised industries. Britain was a lot richer by the time she left office than when she came to power.
Poll tax was a massive mistake though. And she was warned about it but like Blair with Iraq she could not see past her own opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

For those old enough to remember, what specifically was it that has caused her to be hated by such a large percentage of the population, particularly in Scotland?

Closed down whole industries with barely a sketch of a plan of what to do with their employees.
Patronising tone.
"There is no such thing as society."

[Kato]

She took on a lot of vested interests and won. She closed down subsidised industries. Britain was a lot richer by the time she left office than when she came to power.
Poll tax was a massive mistake though. And she was warned about it but like Blair with Iraq she could not see past her own opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




Some people were a lot, lot richer but many more were far poorer. Saying Britain was richer might be true in monetary terms but she cleaved the country into the haves and you lot are getting nowts. She also left the country socially and morally poorer.

She had a pre-meditated vindictive plan to destroy certain communities in the UK.

The high-handed vindictive part is why she was hated.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Closed down whole industries with barely a sketch of a plan of what to do with their employees.
Patronising tone.
"There is no such thing as society."The plan was the "managed decline" of communities I.e. shoving generations onto the dole.

Find "The Ridley Report" online, the 80's are all laid out in a report she commissioned before she took power.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Cataplana]

She used the Metropolitan police like a quasi military force to smash a democratic strike by miners. This included putting sleepers into mining communities (like they do in totalitarian regimes); the police were also used to provoke violence at Orgreave. She gave sanctuary to General Pinochet when he was to stand trial for crimes against humanity, she took a sympathetic approach to the South African government.

[lapsedhibee]

The plan was the "managed decline" of communities I.e. shoving generations onto the dole.

Find "The Ridley Report" online, the 80's are all laid out in a report she commissioned before she took power.


Wasn't aware of The Ridley Report, though remember Ridley. The public-slogan approach of the time to sudden unemployment seemed only to be "Get On Your Bike" from Tebbit.

[CloudSquall]

Her management of the oil revenue was top drawer also.


Norway's sovereign wealth fund earned 140bn last year, couldn't find what Scotland's fund earned though..

[JeMeSouviens]

Closed down whole industries with barely a sketch of a plan of what to do with their employees.
Patronising tone.
"There is no such thing as society."

This. Ripped the heart out of communities right up and down the industrialised bits of the UK. In the case of the miners, carried out premeditated revenge in a show of power. Admittedly Scargill & co's hubris walked right into the jaws of the trap but still. And yes, the industries were failing due to decades of poor industrial relations and chronic underinvestment and by then might not have been salavageable but the sheer ruthlessness with which she consigned people to the scrapheap was truly something to behold. She was very lucky to have N sea oil pumping at the max to pay the benefits bill.

[DaveF]

"There is no such thing as society."

The book of that name is excellent. A ride through the 80'sbso worthwhile picking up a copy if that's your era.

[JeMeSouviens]

She used the Metropolitan police like a quasi military force to smash a democratic strike by miners. This included putting sleepers into mining communities (like they do in totalitarian regimes); the police were also used to provoke violence at Orgreave. She gave sanctuary to General Pinochet when he was to stand trial for crimes against humanity, she took a sympathetic approach to the South African government.

I'd forgotten about that. Yes, the UK stood practically alone in resisting commonwealth sanctions against SA.

[JeMeSouviens]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATDWY3jTCz0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATDWY3jTCz0

[BroxburnHibee]

Despised in Scotland for forcing the poll tax on us a year before England. Ripped families apart.

[Ozyhibby]

Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach.
The premise of OP is wrong anyway. She wasn’t deeply unpopular. She was an election winning machine. She won three very comfortable majorities because the things she was doing were the things the public wanted her to do. Her tactics were often disgraceful but in the end the public sanctioned it every time. We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BroxburnHibee]

https://youtu.be/xmmomV-ax-s

[JeMeSouviens]

Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach.
The premise of OP is wrong anyway. She wasn’t deeply unpopular. She was an election winning machine. She won three very comfortable majorities because the things she was doing were the things the public wanted her to do. Her tactics were often disgraceful but in the end the public sanctioned it every time. We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She did, but benefited greatly from the state of Labour and the brief excitement of the SDP defection splitting the Labour vote. I don't think we've ever had a senior politician before or since that was hated as much by so many.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t4-zDem1Sk

[Kato]

Her management of the oil revenue was top drawer also.


Norway's sovereign wealth fund earned 140bn last year, couldn't find what Scotland's fund earned though..The ten-eleven years of her tenure saw the Tories pay out dole money more or less exactly the equivalent of the oil revenue we gained.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Cataplana]

She let the Falklands happen on her watch. Did not take Argentina seriously enough.

[wpj]

I grew up in Bo'ness, she destroyed communities and was instrumental in changing britain for the worse. If anything at least she had perhaps the last generation to get off their erchies to protest instead of watching TV in dodgy trackies scratching their hee haws while doing nothing about anything.

[Kato]

She let the Falklands happen on her watch. Did not take Argentina seriously enough.The Falklands was an American construct and Thatcher knew exactly what was happening. It undermined Galtieri, boosted Thatchers popularity among those who liked flags and imagined there was still an empire and just as the entire worlds press was settling to watch it allowed the Isrealis to march into Beirut and murder 6-8000 thousand people and march out again an incident relegated to page 5 in most newspapers. Distraction and political fall-out was the aim and gain.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Cataplana]

The Falklands was an American construct and Thatcher knew exactly what was happening. It undermined Galtieri, boosted Thatchers popularity among those who liked flags and imagined there was still an empire and just as the entire worlds press was settling to watch it allowed the Isrealis to march into Beirut and murder 6-8000 thousand people and march out again an incident relegated to page 5 in most newspapers. Distraction and political fall-out was the aim and gain.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

When you put it in those terms, I just despise her more.

[Ozyhibby]

I grew up in Bo'ness, she destroyed communities and was instrumental in changing britain for the worse. If anything at least she had perhaps the last generation to get off their erchies to protest instead of watching TV in dodgy trackies scratching their hee haws while doing nothing about anything.

So you think Britain is worse now than 1978-79?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

There was so much about her to dislike much of which has been covered above so I'll opt for her unswerving support for, and loyalty to General Pinochet, despotic mass murderer of his own people.



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Cataplana]

I'm disappointed we've got this far and nobody has mentioned her stopping the free milk at playtime.

[Cataplana]

So you think Britain is worse now than 1978-79?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Credit where it's due. We have a devolved parliament now. Pretty much due to the behaviour of one woman. It's not all bad.

[lapsedhibee]

I'm disappointed we've got this far and nobody has mentioned her stopping the free milk at playtime.
Snatcher and snatch.

[Bostonhibby]

I'm disappointed we've got this far and nobody has mentioned her stopping the free milk at playtime.Can I just say

Margaret Thatcher, children's milk snatcher.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[G B Young]

The thatcher years were before my time so I have no personal memory of her being in power, have heard stories about the poll tax etc but don't know any real details about it, admittedly politics isn't my bag

For those old enough to remember, what specifically was it that has caused her to be hated by such a large percentage of the population, particularly in Scotland?

She was in fact massively popular in electoral terms. She even won a now unthinkable 22 seats in Scotland when she came to power.

[Bristolhibby]

Great song and great play.

Billy Elliot the Musical.

Merry Christmas Maggie Thatcher.

https://youtu.be/HCAtNrK2G-g

[Cataplana]

She was in fact massively popular in electoral terms. She even won a now unthinkable 22 seats in Scotland when she came to power.

How many did she have by the time she was removed from office?

[Kato]

Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979.

That's one way of viewing it I suppose.

By the way "electricity only three days a week" is a downright lie. The last power cuts were in the winter of 1973-74. There were no power cuts in the "Winter of Discontent". Did you know that or are you at the ham?

You've also very conveniently omitted the fact that 1979 was the culmination of 6 years fighting rampant inflation (26.6 at it's peak) after the Oil Crisis of 1973 during which the oil price rose 400% never to come down again. The Oil Crisis was also the direct cause of the power cuts, not any domestic political policy. Every and any political party would have found themselves in exactly the same situation by 1979, but obviously that didn't stop the Tories blaming Labour just as they did/still do for the Global Credit crisis in recent history.

All the workers groups you mention above were being paid a pittance before the crisis and the subsequent inflation just exacerbated the situation. IIRC at start of the last coal strike miners wages were 2/3s the average pay in the UK.


To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach.

No doubt she had difficult things ahead of her when she took power but those difficulties were mainly self-appointed so she could execute the Ridley Plan, but that in itself didn't require the premeditated, gleeful attacks on parts of this countries' population.

The "glee" part contributes heavily to the fact that she is still hated.


The premise of OP is wrong anyway. She wasn’t deeply unpopular. She was an election winning machine. She won three very comfortable majorities because the things she was doing were the things the public wanted her to do. Her tactics were often disgraceful but in the end the public sanctioned it every time.

She was popular with some, not everybody. Some of the public wanted her to do those things. Some of the public sanctioned her methods. Some also hated her deeply and with good cause.


We all benefited from what she done for British industry.

She destroyed British industry (part of the Ridley Plan) which has never recovered. We became importers rather than exporters relying heavily on what crumbs the financial "service industries" deem to throw out as taxes, which isn't much given what is siphoned off as tax avoidance/evasion. That is never healthy for any country. She also brought in the laws which allowed said tax revenue to disappear to the "havens", which is now normalised but is hardly ever discussed in a serious historical context. (As an aside the first person to take advantage of those new laws was Dave Cameron's old man, the day after the law came in he set up his "financial advice" company facilitating the drain on our tax revenues. "Greed is Good" I suppose.)

When we did have industry the habit of sucking every penny available out as profit with very little being reinvested has more to do with it's decline. Once huge re-investment was required for it continue, which it certainly could have, it was goosed and chucked on Ridley's bonfire.


We are all richer for it now.

...again a huge generalisation. Something you never really saw on British streets prior to her tenure was people begging for pennies on the street, there was tramps and a few who preferred a life on the road, but I certainly can't remember beggers or thousands of homeless people living in bed and breakfasts etc aspects which are taken for granted now. "We" are not all richer, financially or as a set of communities. Some people might think they are rich but they are poorer for not giving a monkeys about those who have been trampled upon.

For those of a certain mindset, and you see this aspect as a be all and end all in discussions around Scottish Independence, all that matters is the fiscal cost - conveniently ignoring the cost to social cohesion, the lack of even the idea of a Social Contract, the cost in fractured communities and fractured people. I doubt that even enters the heads of some ("society doesn't exist") , if it does then ignoring them is compounding the crimes she committed while in power.

Look at the disparity figures and the way the rich have got richer since 1980.

I don't hate much and hardly find any hate in my heart for many people, but I hate her unashamedly and still even though she's dead. Only dying the once was way too lenient for her.

I don't like or support any political party, I'll vote Green if I do vote. Not a Labour supporter or SNP supporter. However I'll never, ever have a good word to say about the Tory Party i.e. The British Ruling Class. They are the most instinctively divisive, deliberately conniving, naturally avaricious, collectively psychopathic, evil force existing in the nation and have systematically screwed the population for centuries. They have supporters given they do throw out the odd bone out to the middle classes every now and again when it's convenient, along with the rampant, never ending propaganda that there isn't another path available. The pervasive trend in that party of gaining a cocaine habit hasn't helped in the empathy stakes either.

The only reason I would support independence for Scotland would be because it would cut all ties with that lot and even then if it was won they would find a way to try and screw Scotland as they did with Ireland a century ago.

[Cataplana]

Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach.
The premise of OP is wrong anyway. She wasn’t deeply unpopular. She was an election winning machine. She won three very comfortable majorities because the things she was doing were the things the public wanted her to do. Her tactics were often disgraceful but in the end the public sanctioned it every time. We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the three day week was in 1973 - 4, under Grocer Heaths watch. We had electricity seven days a week though.

Most of us were living in cardboard boxes, trying to pick up co op stamps off the street to feed ourselves though.

[pollution]

That's one way of viewing it I suppose.

By the way "electricity only three days a week" is a downright lie. The last power cuts were in the winter of 1973-74. There were no power cuts in the "Winter of Discontent". Did you know that or are you at the ham?

You've also very conveniently omitted the fact that 1979 was the culmination of 6 years fighting rampant inflation (26.6 at it's peak) after the Oil Crisis of 1973 during which the oil price rose 400% never to come down again. The Oil Crisis was also the direct cause of the power cuts, not any domestic political policy. Every and any political party would have found themselves in exactly the same situation by 1979, but obviously that didn't stop the Tories blaming Labour just as they did/still do for the Global Credit crisis in recent history.

All the workers groups you mention above were being paid a pittance before the crisis and the subsequent inflation just exacerbated the situation. IIRC at start of the last coal strike miners wages were 2/3s the average pay in the UK.



No doubt she had difficult things ahead of her when she took power but those difficulties were mainly self-appointed so she could execute the Ridley Plan, but that in itself didn't require the premeditated, gleeful attacks on parts of this countries' population.

The "glee" part contributes heavily to the fact that she is still hated.

[quote]The premise of OP is wrong anyway. She wasn’t deeply unpopular. She was an election winning machine. She won three very comfortable majorities because the things she was doing were the things the public wanted her to do. Her tactics were often disgraceful but in the end the public sanctioned it every time.

She was popular with some, not everybody. Some of the public wanted her to do those things. Some of the public sanctioned her methods. Some also hated her deeply and with good cause.



She destroyed British industry (part of the Ridley Plan) which has never recovered. We became importers rather than exporters relying heavily on what crumbs the financial "service industries" deem to throw out as taxes, which isn't much given what is siphoned off as tax avoidance/evasion. That is never healthy for any country. She also brought in the laws which allowed said tax revenue to disappear to the "havens", which is now normalised but is hardly ever discussed in a serious historical context. (As an aside the first person to take advantage of those new laws was Dave Cameron's old man, the day after the law came in he set up his "financial advice" company facilitating the drain on our tax revenues. "Greed is Good" I suppose.)

When we did have industry the habit of sucking every penny available out as profit with very little being reinvested has more to do with it's decline. Once huge re-investment was required for it continue, which it certainly could have, it was goosed and chucked on Ridley's bonfire.



...again a huge generalisation. Something you never really saw on British streets prior to her tenure was people begging for pennies on the street, there was tramps and a few who preferred a life on the road, but I certainly can't remember beggers or thousands of homeless people living in bed and breakfasts etc aspects which are taken for granted now. "We" are not all richer, financially or as a set of communities. Some people might think they are rich but they are poorer for not giving a monkeys about those who have been trampled upon.

For those of a certain mindset, and you see this aspect as a be all and end all in discussions around Scottish Independence, all that matters is the fiscal cost - conveniently ignoring the cost to social cohesion, the lack of even the idea of a Social Contract, the cost in fractured communities and fractured people. I doubt that even enters the heads of some ("society doesn't exist") , if it does then ignoring them is compounding the crimes she committed while in power.

Look at the disparity figures and the way the rich have got richer since 1980.

I don't hate much and hardly find any hate in my heart for many people, but I hate her unashamedly and still even though she's dead. Only dying the once was way too lenient for her.

I don't like or support any political party, I'll vote Green if I do vote. Not a Labour supporter or SNP supporter. However I'll never, ever have a good word to say about the Tory Party i.e. The British Ruling Class. They are the most instinctively divisive, deliberately conniving, naturally avaricious, collectively psychopathic, evil force existing in the nation and have systematically screwed the population for centuries. They have supporters given they do throw out the odd bone out to the middle classes every now and again when it's convenient, along with the rampant, never ending propaganda that there isn't another path available. The pervasive trend in that party of gaining a cocaine habit hasn't helped in the empathy stakes either.

The only reason I would support independence for Scotland would be because it would cut all ties with that lot and even then if it was won they would find a way to try and screw Scotland as they did with Ireland a century ago.



" Only dying the once was way to lenient for her ". Really!!

[Kato]

[QUOTE=Kato;6104171]

" Only dying the once was way to lenient for her ". Really!!Yup

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[weecounty hibby]

Great post Kato. I wish I could have been so eloquent. I too was absolutely delighted that she died, I grew up through the 80s in a working class industrial town and saw the devastation she caused. I actually cheered when I heard the news of her demise and it's just a pity that it wasn't decades sooner.

[Radium]

Different parts of the country had different experiences. UB40 or Loadsamoney.

She won the UK elections but never won a majority in Scotland, an area of the UK where traditional industries were decimated (per the song).

1987 election result

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200302/248d6c9561fcd8129840d78bbb14c0db.jpg



Unemployment was rife and people were told to get on their bike by Tebbit. The uncaring Tories became a real thing.

Why did she win? 80% off your council house if you want to buy it. A very supportive media and an abject failure by a Labour leader who moved to the left and split the party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bangkok Hibby]

Fantastic post Kato. Way more eloquent than I could have posted.
I was just going to say "because she was a ****"

[wpj]

So you think Britain is worse now than 1978-79?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It depends, I spent the 90s away from UK, I didn't feel any affinity with Britain, I lived in Germany and USA. I came back in 1999, to London and felt massively depressed. Lived here since. I hope we can do something, I have a daughter who has a stake in the future, if she wants to protest I will walk her there and proudly watch her scream and shout. We fought long and hard for the right. While I disagree with some political views I will still stand up to them. Thatcher? Hated her, did, and always will.

[Kato]

Great post Kato. I wish I could have been so eloquent. I too was absolutely delighted that she died, I grew up through the 80s in a working class industrial town and saw the devastation she caused. I actually cheered when I heard the news of her demise and it's just a pity that it wasn't decades sooner.Ta. Shared experience. I was brought up in Niddrie and saw a few mates dead before the 80s were out along with far too many lifes doomed to the "managed decline".

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Fantastic post Kato. Way more eloquent than I could have posted.
I was just going to say "because she was a ****"Works for me. [emoji106]

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

Ta. Shared experience. I was brought up in Niddrie and saw a few mates dead before the 80s were out along with far too many lifes doomed to the "managed decline".

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk[emoji106]

Can identify with a lot of what you say, I've no doubt the managed decline was deliberate and born of a contempt for those communities and ways of life.

Wasn't sorry at her passing.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[stuart-farquhar]

I worked for her. She was domineering, demanding and not interested in opposing views. Typical politician really.

[Cataplana]

I worked for her. She was domineering, demanding and not interested in opposing views. Typical politician really.

Typical psychopath, often the same thing.

[Kato]

[emoji106]

Can identify with a lot of what you say, I've no doubt the managed decline was deliberate and born of a contempt for those communities and ways of life.

Wasn't sorry at her passing.


Cheers, man. For those who lived through Thatcher's years and could see through what the tories were doing to communities it's easy, but I want to emphasize there is no doubt it was deliberate.

Some will argue, like Ozyhibby has, that there wasn't any other option and that the wholesale societal changes brought about "needed to be done". Nothing of the sort needed to be done, investment in industry could have happened, however long overdue, and the rampant inflation and accompanying problems could have been fought but that just wasn't on their agenda, they wanted societal change on a huge scale.

The Ridley Plan wasn't just an idea thought up on the spot, it had been around from 1977 and had been discussed at party level and was nuanced and amended throughout the Thatcher years. Nicholas Ridley's motivation was revenge for the nationalisation of the coal mines including those "belonging" to his family. (The post-war Labour govt really should have just Nationalised the land which would have done away with all these feudal, entitled weirdos.)

The initial Ridley plan can be seen here....

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/110795 follow the link to a pdf of scans of.

The "managed decline" doesn't have to gain belief or looked at as in "mm, maybe this is what happened" , it is a matter of historical fact. It was part of a "civilising offensive", an attack on the structures and communities within the working class. A "civilising offensive" can be just a fancy term for "divide and rule". In Ridley's plan it was seen as a means to de-civilise working class structures, the forefront being Trade Unionism but by extension inter-union cooperation, an attack on working class communities, institutions and "the feeling of well-being" leaving a fractured, distrusting aura around even the words "trade unionism" and a denial that the "working class" is even a thing any more. Nobody can deny that is a inheritance of the Thatcher years.

Disparity ( I don't like the term "inequality") had decreased from the 50's to the late 70's but since the late 80's has soared to levels not seen since Victorian times, which was exactly the result and "values" expected.

In 1985 it was noted, ‘Thatcher’s six years in office have followed with eerie precision the pattern laid out in the Ridley report’

The above is from the link below, a long read but lays out exactly how a civilising offensive works. Skip to the heading "Thatcherism" for the sake of the subject matter here.

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/h/humfig/11217607.0004.106/--thatcher-s-civilising-offensive-the-ridley-plan?rgn=main;view=fulltext

Ozyhibby, wittingly or unwittingly, employs a tactic of the civilising offensive when he says in his post above, " Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach."

..inferring that "nothing else could be done".

...as well as the lie...

We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.

No reference to the Oil Crisis which was the true root of the 1979 winter or the fact that the ruling class just wanted their nationalised industries back and didn't really care how that was achieved or the human cost, in fact they reveled in the human cost. Hence the hatred.

There is an ongoing civilising offensive from the Tories in Brexit i.e. blaming the symptoms of austerity (a political choice, not an inevitability) as well as the broken communities left-over from the 80's on immigrants.

"Take Back Control" Say it often enough and it becomes common parlance like "the enemy within" or "loony lefties". In the 80's a civilising offensive was a long term project but social media just makes it far, far easier.

[JeMeSouviens]

Cheers, man. For those who lived through Thatcher's years and could see through what the tories were doing to communities it's easy, but I want to emphasize there is no doubt it was deliberate.

Some will argue, like Ozyhibby has, that there wasn't any other option and that the wholesale societal changes brought about "needed to be done". Nothing of the sort needed to be done, investment in industry could have happened, however long overdue, and the rampant inflation and accompanying problems could have been fought but that just wasn't on their agenda, they wanted societal change on a huge scale.

The Ridley Plan wasn't just an idea thought up on the spot, it had been around from 1977 and had been discussed at party level and was nuanced and amended throughout the Thatcher years. Nicholas Ridley's motivation was revenge for the nationalisation of the coal mines including those "belonging" to his family. (The post-war Labour govt really should have just Nationalised the land which would have done away with all these feudal, entitled weirdos.)

The initial Ridley plan can be seen here....

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/110795 follow the link to a pdf of scans of.

The "managed decline" doesn't have to gain belief or looked at as in "mm, maybe this is what happened" , it is a matter of historical fact. It was part of a "civilising offensive", an attack on the structures and communities within the working class. A "civilising offensive" can be just a fancy term for "divide and rule". In Ridley's plan it was seen as a means to de-civilise working class structures, the forefront being Trade Unionism but by extension inter-union cooperation, an attack on working class communities, institutions and "the feeling of well-being" leaving a fractured, distrusting aura around even the words "trade unionism" and a denial that the "working class" is even a thing any more. Nobody can deny that is a inheritance of the Thatcher years.

Disparity ( I don't like the term "inequality") had decreased from the 50's to the late 70's but since the late 80's has soared to levels not seen since Victorian times, which was exactly the result and "values" expected.

In 1985 it was noted, ‘Thatcher’s six years in office have followed with eerie precision the pattern laid out in the Ridley report’

The above is from the link below, a long read but lays out exactly how a civilising offensive works. Skip to the heading "Thatcherism" for the sake of the subject matter here.

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/h/humfig/11217607.0004.106/--thatcher-s-civilising-offensive-the-ridley-plan?rgn=main;view=fulltext

Ozyhibby, wittingly or unwittingly, employs a tactic of the civilising offensive when he says in his post above, " Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach."

..inferring that "nothing else could be done".

...as well as the lie...

We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.

No reference to the Oil Crisis which was the true root of the 1979 winter or the fact that the ruling class just wanted their nationalised industries back and didn't really care how that was achieved or the human cost, in fact they reveled in the human cost. Hence the hatred.

There is an ongoing civilising offensive from the Tories in Brexit i.e. blaming the symptoms of austerity (a political choice, not an inevitability) as well as the broken communities left-over from the 80's on immigrants.

"Take Back Control" Say it often enough and it becomes common parlance like "the enemy within" or "loony lefties". In the 80's a civilising offensive was a long term project but social media just makes it far, far easier.

The only thing I would quibble about in your excellent posts, K, is the term "managed decline". In a lot of cases it was completely unmanaged, just abrupt closure and **** them.

[Smartie]

The only thing I would quibble about in your excellent posts, K, is the term "managed decline". In a lot of cases it was completely unmanaged, just abrupt closure and **** them.

Properly "managed decline" would have been understandable and acceptable. Some sort of plan that saw an evolution of industry that had largely ceased to be economically viable but moving it to something that was viable, taking the people with it, would have been fine.

The nastiness of leaving millions to rot was just vicious and there are many places and people who have never recovered.

I'm open to the idea of "centre right" thinking (free markets, low regulation - where possible) but I'm dead against the far right and the sort of viciousness that Thatcher was proud of. One of the biggest problems with Thatcher's legacy is that it is so toxic it is impossible for many (understandably) to separate "decent Tories" from the truly despicable ones and this prevents us from being able to consider all of the best options to cope with the problems our country has (the ageing population and how we care for it). Unfortunately (see the recent stories about how Priti Patel behaves towards colleagues) we seem to have recently purged most of the decent ones and are left with the lunatics, of whom Thatcher would be proud.

[Kato]

True regarding that term "managed decline". It mainly consisted of chucking the oil revenue out as dole money. "We wont let them starve" I think she said. Nice sound bite though and the term was used mainly in private correspondence.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Cheers, man. For those who lived through Thatcher's years and could see through what the tories were doing to communities it's easy, but I want to emphasize there is no doubt it was deliberate.

Some will argue, like Ozyhibby has, that there wasn't any other option and that the wholesale societal changes brought about "needed to be done". Nothing of the sort needed to be done, investment in industry could have happened, however long overdue, and the rampant inflation and accompanying problems could have been fought but that just wasn't on their agenda, they wanted societal change on a huge scale.

The Ridley Plan wasn't just an idea thought up on the spot, it had been around from 1977 and had been discussed at party level and was nuanced and amended throughout the Thatcher years. Nicholas Ridley's motivation was revenge for the nationalisation of the coal mines including those "belonging" to his family. (The post-war Labour govt really should have just Nationalised the land which would have done away with all these feudal, entitled weirdos.)

The initial Ridley plan can be seen here....

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/110795 follow the link to a pdf of scans of.

The "managed decline" doesn't have to gain belief or looked at as in "mm, maybe this is what happened" , it is a matter of historical fact. It was part of a "civilising offensive", an attack on the structures and communities within the working class. A "civilising offensive" can be just a fancy term for "divide and rule". In Ridley's plan it was seen as a means to de-civilise working class structures, the forefront being Trade Unionism but by extension inter-union cooperation, an attack on working class communities, institutions and "the feeling of well-being" leaving a fractured, distrusting aura around even the words "trade unionism" and a denial that the "working class" is even a thing any more. Nobody can deny that is a inheritance of the Thatcher years.

Disparity ( I don't like the term "inequality") had decreased from the 50's to the late 70's but since the late 80's has soared to levels not seen since Victorian times, which was exactly the result and "values" expected.

In 1985 it was noted, ‘Thatcher’s six years in office have followed with eerie precision the pattern laid out in the Ridley report’

The above is from the link below, a long read but lays out exactly how a civilising offensive works. Skip to the heading "Thatcherism" for the sake of the subject matter here.

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/h/humfig/11217607.0004.106/--thatcher-s-civilising-offensive-the-ridley-plan?rgn=main;view=fulltext

Ozyhibby, wittingly or unwittingly, employs a tactic of the civilising offensive when he says in his post above, " Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach."

..inferring that "nothing else could be done".

...as well as the lie...

We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.

No reference to the Oil Crisis which was the true root of the 1979 winter or the fact that the ruling class just wanted their nationalised industries back and didn't really care how that was achieved or the human cost, in fact they reveled in the human cost. Hence the hatred.

There is an ongoing civilising offensive from the Tories in Brexit i.e. blaming the symptoms of austerity (a political choice, not an inevitability) as well as the broken communities left-over from the 80's on immigrants.

"Take Back Control" Say it often enough and it becomes common parlance like "the enemy within" or "loony lefties". In the 80's a civilising offensive was a long term project but social media just makes it far, far easier.

I inferred nothing else could be done because nobody else was offering a solution. The country was in a terrible state before Thatcher came in and by the time she left it was in a lot better state. If there was an alternative, who was offering it? The Labour Party?
I’m not defending her tactics, individual policies or any of her foreign policy. And she seemed like a thoroughly unlikable woman but she was all that was on offer to a country that was on its knees.
When Hibs lose to Hearts I don’t blame Hearts, I blame Hibs. When Boris won the election in december, the blame doesn’t lie with him, it lies with Corbyn. When the NO vote won in 2014, I don’t complain about what they did to win, I worry about what YES failed to do. And if Thatcher manages to win three election in a row then people really need to direct their ire towards the self indulgent Labour opposition of the time. Complaining about Tories doing Tory things is absolutely pointless. Always looking to blame the winners is a sure fire way of staying a loser.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

I'm open to the idea of "centre right" thinking (free markets, low regulation - where possible)


Same here. That's why I tend to use the term disparity rather than inequality. Inequality will always exist and a Communist/idealist solution is just pie in the sky. I also like the idea (outdated now I suppose) that some working class person can work hard, have some great idea or is good enough at football/music/art and becomes a millionaire maybe even a multi-millionaire. No problem with that. No one has worked hard enough to be a billionaire however, no-one has the right to be brought up in our society, have that great idea/skill that makes them rich then follow through by shifting their tax burden off-shore or pay those who work for them a pittance on a zero-contract basis. It might be legal but it's deeply immoral, the laws installed are part of the civilising offensive. Inequality will always exist but a huge level of disparity can easily be avoided. It only exists because it's been deliberately invoked and created.


An argument against that will be "oooh that's the politics of envy", a slime-ball emotive counter to argue against those who see a monetary mechanism favouring the few and which could be undone. It's not envy, it's concern verging on anger. I'm not envious of canny, rich people, in fact I admire the "glory" of that, but the phenomena of billionaires or massive inherited wealth and the sense of entitlement that accompanies it just isn't healthy for anyone. Bloody revolutions in history always have their roots when the gulf in disparity is allowed to go unfettered and any semblance of a social contract is ripped up.

[Kato]

I inferred nothing else could be done because nobody else was offering a solution. The country was in a terrible state before Thatcher came in and by the time she left it was in a lot better state. If there was an alternative, who was offering it? The Labour Party?
I’m not defending her tactics, individual policies or any of her foreign policy. And she seemed like a thoroughly unlikable woman but she was all that was on offer to a country that was on its knees.
When Hibs lose to Hearts I don’t blame Hearts, I blame Hibs. When Boris won the election in december, the blame doesn’t lie with him, it lies with Corbyn. When the NO vote won in 2014, I don’t complain about what they did to win, I worry about what YES failed to do. And if Thatcher manages to win three election in a row then people really need to direct their ire towards the self indulgent Labour opposition of the time. Complaining about Tories doing Tory things is absolutely pointless. Always looking to blame the winners is a sure fire way of staying a loser.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Winners in football can always conduct themselves in a sporting manner.

Winners in politics can always choose to be humane.

[lapsedhibee]

All that I've said in this thread

:not worth

[Bristolhibby]

I inferred nothing else could be done because nobody else was offering a solution. The country was in a terrible state before Thatcher came in and by the time she left it was in a lot better state. If there was an alternative, who was offering it? The Labour Party?
I’m not defending her tactics, individual policies or any of her foreign policy. And she seemed like a thoroughly unlikable woman but she was all that was on offer to a country that was on its knees.
When Hibs lose to Hearts I don’t blame Hearts, I blame Hibs. When Boris won the election in december, the blame doesn’t lie with him, it lies with Corbyn. When the NO vote won in 2014, I don’t complain about what they did to win, I worry about what YES failed to do. And if Thatcher manages to win three election in a row then people really need to direct their ire towards the self indulgent Labour opposition of the time. Complaining about Tories doing Tory things is absolutely pointless. Always looking to blame the winners is a sure fire way of staying a loser.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not sure about your analogy. Your team can do everything to prepare and be ready. Play to their maximum ability and still lose.

It’s a bit of both. You have to look at why one won and the other lost to see the real reason for defeat.

Same in Brexit and the election. Both sides contribute to the result.

J

[wpj]

Cheers, man. For those who lived through Thatcher's years and could see through what the tories were doing to communities it's easy, but I want to emphasize there is no doubt it was deliberate.

Some will argue, like Ozyhibby has, that there wasn't any other option and that the wholesale societal changes brought about "needed to be done". Nothing of the sort needed to be done, investment in industry could have happened, however long overdue, and the rampant inflation and accompanying problems could have been fought but that just wasn't on their agenda, they wanted societal change on a huge scale.

The Ridley Plan wasn't just an idea thought up on the spot, it had been around from 1977 and had been discussed at party level and was nuanced and amended throughout the Thatcher years. Nicholas Ridley's motivation was revenge for the nationalisation of the coal mines including those "belonging" to his family. (The post-war Labour govt really should have just Nationalised the land which would have done away with all these feudal, entitled weirdos.)

The initial Ridley plan can be seen here....

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/110795 follow the link to a pdf of scans of.

The "managed decline" doesn't have to gain belief or looked at as in "mm, maybe this is what happened" , it is a matter of historical fact. It was part of a "civilising offensive", an attack on the structures and communities within the working class. A "civilising offensive" can be just a fancy term for "divide and rule". In Ridley's plan it was seen as a means to de-civilise working class structures, the forefront being Trade Unionism but by extension inter-union cooperation, an attack on working class communities, institutions and "the feeling of well-being" leaving a fractured, distrusting aura around even the words "trade unionism" and a denial that the "working class" is even a thing any more. Nobody can deny that is a inheritance of the Thatcher years.

Disparity ( I don't like the term "inequality") had decreased from the 50's to the late 70's but since the late 80's has soared to levels not seen since Victorian times, which was exactly the result and "values" expected.

In 1985 it was noted, ‘Thatcher’s six years in office have followed with eerie precision the pattern laid out in the Ridley report’

The above is from the link below, a long read but lays out exactly how a civilising offensive works. Skip to the heading "Thatcherism" for the sake of the subject matter here.

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/h/humfig/11217607.0004.106/--thatcher-s-civilising-offensive-the-ridley-plan?rgn=main;view=fulltext

Ozyhibby, wittingly or unwittingly, employs a tactic of the civilising offensive when he says in his post above, " Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach."

..inferring that "nothing else could be done".

...as well as the lie...

We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.

No reference to the Oil Crisis which was the true root of the 1979 winter or the fact that the ruling class just wanted their nationalised industries back and didn't really care how that was achieved or the human cost, in fact they reveled in the human cost. Hence the hatred.

There is an ongoing civilising offensive from the Tories in Brexit i.e. blaming the symptoms of austerity (a political choice, not an inevitability) as well as the broken communities left-over from the 80's on immigrants.

"Take Back Control" Say it often enough and it becomes common parlance like "the enemy within" or "loony lefties". In the 80's a civilising offensive was a long term project but social media just makes it far, far easier.

A long time reader of the Holy Ground, usually on a commute. As a poster Kato you are very eloquent. It is easy for me to agree with you much of the time but while you can express your opinions I am not able to do so. All contributions are welcome. Appreciate yours.

[Kato]

You have to look at why one won and the other lost to see the real reason for defeat.

One of the most effective posters during the 1979 election was the "Labour Isn't Working" slogan, showing a queue ostensibly for the dole. A blatant distortion given she then threw 3,000,000 onto the dole with another couple of million out of work but not claiming.

She could have promised everyone a go on her pet dinosaur at that election and still won.

Still " a better country by 1990" is an opinion I suppose - if you ignore the human cost still ongoing then with a huge influence on the country's make-up and psyche today.

"A means to an end".

[Kato]

I am not able to do so. All contributions are welcome. Appreciate yours.

Cheers, mate btw what's stopping you giving your opinion?

[Bostonhibby]

I’m not defending her tactics, individual policies or any of her foreign policy. And she seemed like a thoroughly unlikable woman but she was all that was on offer to a country that was on its knees.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're definitely right with this part of what you say above, mediocrity and being popular in your own small world, ala Corbyn, does offer opportunists the chance to fill a void if there's no real alternative.

You could say there were more unifying and caring ways to do it but Thatcher exploited the void by keeping loyalists and the already rich on board, then used council house sales and other bargain basement sales of previously public held assets to create more voters like them.

Once that threshold was met and she could get a majority the rest were treated with absolute contempt.

A democracy like ours needs credible opposition and it's been a while sadly.



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[wpj]

Cheers, mate btw what's stopping you giving your opinion?

I struggle with the prose, I know what I want to say but often agree with others so dont need to say it. I think a few of us come from pretty similar places. Hibernian are a broad spectrum but I have always found us to be pretty aware socially. While I often point the finger at Hearts I know my maroon pals will always support a cause. Just get to FK wi the 5-1 pish haha just had a long chat with my Jambo pal and we wont talk again until the semi 🙂

[Colr]

How many did she have by the time she was removed from office?

Malcolm Rifkind was my local MP. He retained the seat until Blair knocked the tories into the stands in 1997.

[Cataplana]

Malcolm Rifkind was my local MP. He retained the seat until Blair knocked the tories into the stands in 1997.

Any advance on one?

[Pagan Hibernia]

Rubbish piling up in the street, bodies not being buried, NHS staff blocking the entrances to hospitals and electricity only three days a week. That’s what she inherited in 1979. To turn that around does not require a gently gently approach.
The premise of OP is wrong anyway. She wasn’t deeply unpopular. She was an election winning machine. She won three very comfortable majorities because the things she was doing were the things the public wanted her to do. Her tactics were often disgraceful but in the end the public sanctioned it every time. We all benefited from what she done for British industry. We are all richer for it now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

people forget she was deeply unpopular in the first few years of her ‘reign’ before the falklands war saved her in ‘82. It’s all ifs and buts and she may well have still overcome Foots hapless Labour Party in 83 but had labour got its act together earlier and the flag waving euphoria that followed the falklands not happened its highly unlikely she would have seen a second term

[Pagan Hibernia]

As others have said her seemingly unconditional support for the butcher Pinochet was a black stain on her record.
she also played no positive role in the tinderbox situation in Northern Ireland, being obsessed with ‘defeating’ the IRA at all costs (which was as impossible as the IRA defeating the British army) rather than trying to find a workable solution to bring the violence to an end.
Many will laud her economic achievements. To my eyes she turned Britain into the service sector economy we see today, full of crap precarious jobs. And frittered away billions in oil revenue in the process.

Not really a great legacy tbh

[Bostonhibby]

They're seemingly putting up a statue of her in Grantham soon.

I'll need pop up for a "visit".

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Cataplana]

This is how much Scotland liked her. She lost 12 seats I'm 8 years, whilst gaining ground in England.

The party's fortunes recovered somewhat in 1979 under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher, but her tenure as Prime Minister was to see the party's fortunes drop further from holding 22 seats in 1979 to 10 in 1987. The party increased its share of the vote and number of MPs to 11 in 1992 under John Major's leadership before dropping to 17.5% of the popular vote and failing to have any MPs returned from Scotland in 1997. It continued to return only a single MP from Scottish constituencies at the 2001, 2005, 2010 and 2015 general elections, before winning 13 seats in 2017.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

There is no doubt that politics have never been the same since Mrs Thatcher. Even today, her name can be decisive. There has probably never been such a skilled politician since her. Her politics and genuine lack of compassion for the weak and vulnerable appalled me, but that was the predicate for austerity and disenfranchising those who would not vote for you anyway was certainly effective.

[lapsedhibee]

BBC4 documentary on Vietnamese 'boat people' last night suggested that Thatch might have been personally compassionate towards the refugees but to keep her wider party happy had to pretend to be against letting them land in Britain.

(They were on big ships from Hong Kong, not dinghies from Vietnam, 'case you're wondering.)

[Cataplana]

BBC4 documentary on Vietnamese 'boat people' last night suggested that Thatch might have been personally compassionate towards the refugees but to keep her wider party happy had to pretend to be against letting them land in Britain.

(They were on big ships from Hong Kong, not dinghies from Vietnam, 'case you're wondering.)

Would that "compassion" have anything to do with the sums of money they would bring?

[heretoday]

She sold off the council houses and now young folk are in the grip of landlords.

[Bostonhibby]

Available in all colours.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200307/2c22649dfd83a7ff3acd72f604f47756.jpg

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

She sold off the council houses and now young folk are in the grip of landlords.

The problem was not in the selling of council homes, the problem is in not building more houses. The planning system in the UK is useless and adds about £120k to the price of a house in some areas. We are building nowhere near enough houses in Scotland and that’s totally in the control of the SNP and their record on it is just as shameful as the Tories down south. The problem is, nobody blames the planning system. Better to blame greedy landlords. Most landlords are just ordinary people who have one or two properties for their retirement, usually because they do not have an occupational pension. They are not greedy and the do not set prices. They take whatever price the market sets.
Always amazes me that we know we don’t have enough houses but we think that that is the fault of the people who supply houses. Free up the planning system and house prices would begin to fall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

We seem to build houses firstly to make money from them and secondly, for people to live in.

[Tomsk]

The problem was not in the selling of council homes, the problem is in not building more houses. The planning system in the UK is useless and adds about £120k to the price of a house in some areas. We are building nowhere near enough houses in Scotland and that’s totally in the control of the SNP and their record on it is just as shameful as the Tories down south. The problem is, nobody blames the planning system. Better to blame greedy landlords. Most landlords are just ordinary people who have one or two properties for their retirement, usually because they do not have an occupational pension. They are not greedy and the do not set prices. They take whatever price the market sets.
Always amazes me that we know we don’t have enough houses but we think that that is the fault of the people who supply houses. Free up the planning system and house prices would begin to fall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Only if by doing so this increased supply - which, I hope is what you are saying. Otherwise, if the cost of build decreases because planning restrictions are lifted but the level of supply just stays the same, then the profitability for builders will increase but buyers will still be willing to pay the prices they are currently paying. Good for builders.

The supply of stock is one factor determining house prices. The other is the supply of money. Borrowing is cheap and still readily available. An easy way to reduce house prices would be to increase interest rates. :wink: However, reduce the profitability on new house building then builders won't build - nobody sets out to lose money. And God help the government that increases interest rates.

There's so much vested interest in maintaining high house prices - by sellers and buyers, borrowers and lenders - that any kind of shake-up of the market would take a lot of courage by government.

[Cataplana]

We seem to build houses firstly to make money from them and secondly, for people to live in.

We seem to buy houses for the same reason. Is there a country in the world so obsessed with property prices?

[Ozyhibby]

We seem to buy houses for the same reason. Is there a country in the world so obsessed with property prices?

Yes. America and Australia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Only if by doing so this increased supply - which, I hope is what you are saying. Otherwise, if the cost of build decreases because planning restrictions are lifted but the level of supply just stays the same, then the profitability for builders will increase but buyers will still be willing to pay the prices they are currently paying. Good for builders.

The supply of stock is one factor determining house prices. The other is the supply of money. Borrowing is cheap and still readily available. An easy way to reduce house prices would be to increase interest rates. :wink: However, reduce the profitability on new house building then builders won't build - nobody sets out to lose money. And God help the government that increases interest rates.

There's so much vested interest in maintaining high house prices - by sellers and buyers, borrowers and lenders - that any kind of shake-up of the market would take a lot of courage by government.

Borrowing is not readily available. It’s very difficult for first time buyers just now with the size of deposit required and also the paperwork involved tends to rule out a lot of young self employed people.
Fix the planning system and the supply of stock will increase. The planning system has become so expensive there are no small volume house builders left. Only the giant builders are left so the quality drops as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tomsk]

Borrowing is not readily available. It’s very difficult for first time buyers just now with the size of deposit required and also the paperwork involved tends to rule out a lot of young self employed people.
Fix the planning system and the supply of stock will increase. The planning system has become so expensive there are no small volume house builders left. Only the giant builders are left so the quality drops as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


To some extent, but profitability would decrease as the volume of available stock increased. I think they call it the law of diminishing returns ... or sumfin. As I said before nobody sets out to make a loss, and modifying planning laws alone will not solve the problem.

Borrowing may not be as relatively readily available as it was pre-crash but it's still readily available. UK and Scottish governments have start up schemes for first time buyers and you can still borrow at 4.5 x salary.

What improvements would you wish to see in planning system? Maybe I'm missing something - not impossible. :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

To some extent, but profitability would decrease as the volume of available stock increased. I think they call it the law of diminishing returns ... or sumfin. As I said before nobody sets out to make a loss, and modifying planning laws alone will not solve the problem.

Borrowing may not be as relatively readily available as it was pre-crash but it's still readily available. UK and Scottish governments have start up schemes for first time buyers and you can still borrow at 4.5 x salary.

What improvements would you wish to see in planning system? Maybe I'm missing something - not impossible. :greengrin

I would privatise the planning system. Give the power to architects through a licensing system. Small firms get licenses for small developments and so on. The presumption should be for yes, so long as it is designed by a certified architect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

I would privatise the planning system. Give the power to architects through a licensing system. Small firms get licenses for small developments and so on. The presumption should be for yes, so long as it is designed by a certified architect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am curious. The planning system has a much wider impact than just producing housing units.

If you build houses then the presumption is people will live in them. Those people will need and use statutory services or services within the remit of local authorities - primary and secondary schools, GPs, health clinics, refuse collection, street lighting and street repairs, public transport links etc etc etc.

In order to ensure these services are available then local authorities and health boards need to know what projections there are for new units. That’s why they work with Scottish Government around their own strategic housing investment plans and local housing strategies, and why they have oversight of private planning applications.

Deregulating the process without a clear plan about how to address this brings the risk of putting greater and unnecessary strain on public services, for what appears to be fast-tracked profits for architects and those with the money to put into the build.

Plus it raises huge huge questions about compliance. Are we trusting people with a self-interest to regulate their own work?

[Glory Lurker]

I am curious. The planning system has a much wider impact than just producing housing units.

If you build houses then the presumption is people will live in them. Those people will need and use statutory services or services within the remit of local authorities - primary and secondary schools, GPs, health clinics, refuse collection, street lighting and street repairs, public transport links etc etc etc.

In order to ensure these services are available then local authorities and health boards need to know what projections there are for new units. That’s why they work with Scottish Government around their own strategic housing investment plans and local housing strategies, and why they have oversight of private planning applications.

Deregulating the process without a clear plan about how to address this brings the risk of putting greater and unnecessary strain on public services, for what appears to be fast-tracked profits for architects and those with the money to put into the build.

Plus it raises huge huge questions about compliance. Are we trusting people with a self-interest to regulate their own work?

Totally agree, MA, and if we agree it must be right :-)

[Mibbes Aye]

Totally agree, MA, and if we agree it must be right :-)

Never saw that coming :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

I am curious. The planning system has a much wider impact than just producing housing units.

If you build houses then the presumption is people will live in them. Those people will need and use statutory services or services within the remit of local authorities - primary and secondary schools, GPs, health clinics, refuse collection, street lighting and street repairs, public transport links etc etc etc.

In order to ensure these services are available then local authorities and health boards need to know what projections there are for new units. That’s why they work with Scottish Government around their own strategic housing investment plans and local housing strategies, and why they have oversight of private planning applications.

Deregulating the process without a clear plan about how to address this brings the risk of putting greater and unnecessary strain on public services, for what appears to be fast-tracked profits for architects and those with the money to put into the build.

Plus it raises huge huge questions about compliance. Are we trusting people with a self-interest to regulate their own work?

Can’t we trust consumers to regulate their work?
The system you describe sounds amazing except for one thing, people are sleeping in the street and we are not building nearly enough houses.
You talk about profit as if was a dirty word but in markets where there is profit to be made there is no need to ration products the way we do with houses. Housing is way too expensive in this country. Everyone agree we need more houses, just not beside where they live.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sudds_1]

She sold off the council houses and now young folk are in the grip of landlords.

This...she instilled a culture of greed in this country...
, ( remember loadsamoney and the redbraced city stockbrokets?...killed manufacturing in favour of the stockmarket, created a north south divide, starved the health service of resources , froze nurses police fire service pay and rewarded capitalist greed....redmist coming down now 🤬🤬

...sold off/privatised large public utilities for a song...allowing spwculators in to make akilling at the public purse expense...same with council housing. Treated public service like a disease.....its not really recovered.

[Ozyhibby]

This...she instilled a culture of greed in this country...
, ( remember loadsamoney and the redbraced city stockbrokets?...killed manufacturing in favour of the stockmarket, created a north south divide, starved the health service of resources , froze nurses police fire setvice pay and rewarded capitalist greed....redmistcoming down now [emoji2959][emoji2959]

She never froze police pay. They did pretty well out of her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sudds_1]

She never froze police pay. They did pretty well out of her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She not only imposed a pay cap she reduced numbers...all on a platform of crime reduction. Simply put additional strain on an already under pressure force

[Colr]

I'm disappointed we've got this far and nobody has mentioned her stopping the free milk at playtime.

Was that just England? I remember still being served disgusting warm milk right up to P7

[Mibbes Aye]

She not only imposed a pay cap she reduced numbers...all on a platform of crime reduction. Simply put additional strain on an already under pressure force

She introduced a 45% pay rise shortly after taking office in 1979 and I think police numbers in England and Wales were higher when she left office in 1990, but happy to be corrected if I am mistaken.

[Mibbes Aye]

Can’t we trust consumers to regulate their work?
The system you describe sounds amazing except for one thing, people are sleeping in the street and we are not building nearly enough houses.
You talk about profit as if was a dirty word but in markets where there is profit to be made there is no need to ration products the way we do with houses. Housing is way too expensive in this country. Everyone agree we need more houses, just not beside where they live.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You have not answered any of my points.

How can the state (whether local, regional or national) plan and resource and develop the infrastructure required if housing development is a free-for-all? Ensuring public services and utilities are in place take years and impacts for years.

As for self-regulation, no, I don’t think we can or should trust people to self-regulate when regulation will lower their profits and more importantly, cause harm to the populace because corners have been cut. Grenfell was a failure of statutory agencies to properly regulate, but it wouldn’t have been a failure if those who developed, owned and maintained it had done the right thing. And that was in an environment which you think is over-regulated.

[Ozyhibby]

You have not answered any of my points.

How can the state (whether local, regional or national) plan and resource and develop the infrastructure required if housing development is a free-for-all? Ensuring public services and utilities are in place take years and impacts for years.

As for self-regulation, no, I don’t think we can or should trust people to self-regulate when regulation will lower their profits and more importantly, cause harm to the populace because corners have been cut. Grenfell was a failure of statutory agencies to properly regulate, but it wouldn’t have been a failure if those who developed, owned and maintained it had done the right thing.

I’m not saying there should be a free for all in Building standards which is different from planning permissions. Again though, a licensing system could be just as effective.
Councils can’t cope with the work load and it’s been that way for years. The result is that less building happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

I’m not saying there should be a free for all in Building standards which is different from planning permissions. Again though, a licensing system could be just as effective.
Councils can’t cope with the work load and it’s been that way for years. The result is that less building happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I definitely agree with you about work load. Councils have legal obligations in a number of areas but some are more binding than others. They have to prioritise education and social care and while they aren’t doing as well as they would want in those areas, the impact on everything else is magnified by the fact that those other services - like planning - take a disproportionate hit to ensure education and care get funding.

[lapsedhibee]

Was that just England? I remember still being served disgusting warm milk right up to P7

:protest: Maggie Thatcher, milk snatcher :protest: 1971ish -

[Smartie]

I got a wee bottle of milk at school every day at my first primary school, I left there in primary 2, about 1984.

They didn't do that at my next school.

[speedy_gonzales]

I got a wee bottle of milk at school every day at my first primary school, I left there in primary 2, about 1984.

They didn't do that at my next school.

I had free milk right through to leaving P7 in '86.
Not sure if different schools had different policies?

[lapsedhibee]

I got a wee bottle of milk at school every day at my first primary school, I left there in primary 2, about 1984.

They didn't do that at my next school.

Thatcher only stopped milk for children over 7 - could it be that you changed schools about age 7?

[Smartie]

Thatcher only stopped milk for children over 7 - could it be that you changed schools about age 7?

Yep - I was six when I moved.

I'm pretty sure they'd never had it at the school I moved to though, I seem to remember asking.

[Mibbes Aye]

I’m not saying there should be a free for all in Building standards which is different from planning permissions. Again though, a licensing system could be just as effective.
Councils can’t cope with the work load and it’s been that way for years. The result is that less building happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, if planning was deregulated as you suggest, how do public bodies with statutory duties meet their legal requirements to ensure they deliver the services they are meant to?

[Mibbes Aye]

I got a wee bottle of milk at school every day at my first primary school, I left there in primary 2, about 1984.

They didn't do that at my next school.

I am a couple of years older than you and I got milk at primary until P7.

The jannie (who was in control of the milk) was a relative of Gary Mackay and Gary was in his office fairly regularly to visit him. In hindsight I feel I should have asked him about how his medal count was going - Gary, not the jannie, obviously. Though the jannie may have accumulated various medals for all I know. It would have been awkward if it turned out he was a war veteran with all sorts of commendations......

We also had had a regular round of fluoride mouthwashes at primary that were nothing to do with the school but came from on high. There were a few of us whose parents were really against it, mine included, so we were always excluded. Seems bizarre now. Not sure that was down to Thatcher.

[Kato]

Again, if planning was deregulated as you suggest, how do public bodies with statutory duties meet their legal requirements to ensure they deliver the services they are meant to?Set up a useless quango full of people who know nothing about planning but are well open to financial inducements?

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Bristolhibby]

She never froze police pay. They did pretty well out of her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My mates Dad was in the Met in the early 80s.

Made enough money on overtime during the miners strike to put down a 30% deposit on his first house.

They did fine. *******s!

J

[Bristolhibby]

I’m not saying there should be a free for all in Building standards which is different from planning permissions. Again though, a licensing system could be just as effective.
Councils can’t cope with the work load and it’s been that way for years. The result is that less building happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Put Council Tax up and hire more planners.

Wait a minute, you can’t put Council Tax up. I forgot.

J

[Ozyhibby]

Put Council Tax up and hire more planners.

Wait a minute, you can’t put Council Tax up. I forgot.

J

Build more houses and you collect more council tax.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cataplana]

I definitely agree with you about work load. Councils have legal obligations in a number of areas but some are more binding than others. They have to prioritise education and social care and while they aren’t doing as well as they would want in those areas, the impact on everything else is magnified by the fact that those other services - like planning - take a disproportionate hit to ensure education and care get funding.

Not in Edinburgh, where building a tram line overrules everything else.

[GlesgaeHibby]

The problem was not in the selling of council homes, the problem is in not building more houses. The planning system in the UK is useless and adds about £120k to the price of a house in some areas. We are building nowhere near enough houses in Scotland and that’s totally in the control of the SNP and their record on it is just as shameful as the Tories down south. The problem is, nobody blames the planning system. Better to blame greedy landlords. Most landlords are just ordinary people who have one or two properties for their retirement, usually because they do not have an occupational pension. They are not greedy and the do not set prices. They take whatever price the market sets.
Always amazes me that we know we don’t have enough houses but we think that that is the fault of the people who supply houses. Free up the planning system and house prices would begin to fall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not sure I agree. Circa 5 million people and 2.4 million houses. Many in the wrong places may be the problem.

More houses being built each year at present than annual population growth. Just over 20,000 last year in Scotland.

[Smartie]

Not sure I agree. Circa 5 million people and 2.4 million houses. Many in the wrong places may be the problem.

More houses being built each year at present than annual population growth. Just over 20,000 last year in Scotland.

Yeah, I keep hearing about the shortage of new housing but my eyes tell me there are new houses popping up everywhere.

[Ozyhibby]

Not sure I agree. Circa 5 million people and 2.4 million houses. Many in the wrong places may be the problem.

More houses being built each year at present than annual population growth. Just over 20,000 last year in Scotland.

Population goes up by about 30000 every year I’m sure. And it’s all focused on the cities. Mostly Edinburgh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Radium]

She introduced a 45% pay rise shortly after taking office in 1979 and I think police numbers in England and Wales were higher when she left office in 1990, but happy to be corrected if I am mistaken.

Merlyn Davies, Labour Home Secretary set up the Edmund Davies review in 1977 which reviewed police pay and conditions - and recommended the pay rise.

Like many workers, police pay and conditions have improved under Labour governments and fallen under the tories eg Sheehy, Windsor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sudds_1]

She introduced a 45% pay rise shortly after taking office in 1979 and I think police numbers in England and Wales were higher when she left office in 1990, but happy to be corrected if I am mistaken.

I remember that in 79....but did she not also phase over 3 years with condition that forces rationalised structures and reduced manpower accordingly? I could be wrong on this one i admit. Defo did it with nurses and docs.

[pollution]

My mates Dad was in the Met in the early 80s.

Made enough money on overtime during the miners strike to put down a 30% deposit on his first house.

They did fine. *******s!

J


At the time there was a police joke that most of the new conservatories in London were paid for by the miners.

[Cataplana]

Imagine the political ramifications, not to mention logistical nightmare, of supplying every primary school child with milk today.

Bottles - glass or plastic, or should we have bottles at all.
Milk - soya, almond, coconut, cows, goats, formula.
Straws - metal, paper, plastic.

On top of that, if people don't like milk, could a juice or some other alternative be offered, at the risk of all kids being denied milk if it wasn't?

[GlesgaeHibby]

Population goes up by about 30000 every year I’m sure. And it’s all focused on the cities. Mostly Edinburgh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Was around 13000 for 2018.

Edinburgh is pulling in more and more people. I'm sure I saw something recently suggesting Scotland wide population growth over last decade had been around 4%, but Edinburgh area was around 13%.

[Beefster]

Any advance on one?

They won 10 Scottish seats in 1987. About 50% more popular, seats-wise, after 8 years of Thatcher than they are now. Percentage-wise, it’s about even.

[Cataplana]

They won 10 Scottish seats in 1987. About 50% more popular, seats-wise, after 8 years of Thatcher than they are now. Percentage-wise, it’s about even.

My reading is that if you go from 22 seats to 10 seats during the course of your premiership, people don't like you as much as they used to. In fact they disliked you so much that it took nearly 30 years to get anywhere near that figure, such was the discord and distrust you sowed.

I agree it's about even though, people hate her just as much now as they did when she was alive.

[Cataplana]

At the time there was a police joke that most of the new conservatories in London were paid for by the miners.

There was a group of Metropolitan police who had been deployed to the shires. They used to drink in The Warren, and had ties with the letter ASPTM (Arthur Scargill Pays the Mortgage.) I was there as a guest of a friend who had recently joined the Met.

[Kato]

I'm up for an annual Thatcher day.

The kids can all get free milk, there could be models of factories or steel works which get knocked down in the evening, dragging effigies of her up and down the streets with exaggerated u- turns then hang them from lampposts. Fun stuff like that.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

Many hated her so much (I still do, though I was only a child when she was PM) because she commodified everything. The market was the basis of human interaction for Maggie, thus our humanity was stripped away and people only viewed each other as a financial transaction. Everything was reduced to "what's in it for me?" The majority suffered (especially those outside the south-east of England) but the neoliberal model was described by Maggie and her media pals as necessary for our survival: "There is no alternative", she said. Yes there was an alternative, but she didn't like it so dismissed it. Millions saw their horizons reduced whilst those already at the top saw their wealth explode. To put it at i's most basic, it was money before people; it was brutal, especially for the weakest, whom, IMHO, should be the top priority in a civilised society.

[hibsbollah]

Many hated her so much (I still do, though I was only a child when she was PM) because she commodified everything. The market was the basis of human interaction for Maggie, thus our humanity was stripped away and people only viewed each other as a financial transaction. Everything was reduced to "what's in it for me?" The majority suffered (especially those outside the south-east of England) but the neoliberal model was described by Maggie and her media pals as necessary for our survival: "There is no alternative", she said. Yes there was an alternative, but she didn't like it so dismissed it. Millions saw their horizons reduced whilst those already at the top saw their wealth explode. To put it at i's most basic, it was money before people; it was brutal, especially for the weakest, whom, IMHO, should be the top priority in a civilised society.

Agree.

Sadly what she did was just a foreshadowing of the shameless immoral thieving shower that we have at the moment. I can only hope this generation do what the last one did with the poll tax and take to the streets to protest. Because unless the Govt change tack on poverty thousands will actually die. We are living through The worst government ever, to me looking back on Thatcher is actually a distraction.

[LewysGot2]

Was that just England? I remember still being served disgusting warm milk right up to P7

Education devolved so must be. She was PM from 79 and she it was prior to being PM when she acted on the free school milk.We got minging (in the summer) free school milk all the way through primary and that was after that time.
Can still remember the ice on the milk in winter (as it was stored in crates outside to try and keep it chilled) and the warm, minging version as soon as air temperature started to rise...😬
And we forced to drink it for "our good" 🤢

[LewysGot2]

When she was PM we lived in very ideologically driven times where poverty was seen as something you could always just work harder toget out of. She was almost puritanical about it. No money? No opportunity where you live? Just work harder or uproot yourself was the mantra. Get on your bike a la Norman Tebbitt.

She didn't come from the spoiled privileged elite Eton background of many of the current lot and had a relatively ordinaryish- but not impoverished- upbringing. Maybe that gave her the fervour of the born again Christian when she got to the highest office in the land. You "just had to work hard" wasn't ever offset against geographical, sociopolitical barriers of those in typically industrial heartlands - especially as she went about dismantling those industries in a relatively short time.
She hated anywhere that stood up to the ideology or challenged the changes and, more importantly, the manner of how they were made. Liverpool, Scotland, the miners...and she went about trying to crush the resistance , and with that, those people.
Boys From The Black Stuff was a mirror to our society in communities up and down the country, not just Liverpool.

It was bleak for many years but even now I feel that this lot of entitled, privileged charlatans in charge now are worse in so many ways. Thatcher was undoubtedly ideologically driven, to the point of obsession. She lacked compassion- there's no such thing as society - and her belief that you just worked harder blinded her to the real plight many lived in. I'm alright Jack mentality definitely cane to the fore, then it escalated.
This lot, though, are simply self-serving, unscrupulous, selfish, dishonest and ambitious only for themselves. She'd quite probably hate them, too - for different reasons. They're the worst of us.

[Crunchie]

Agree.

Sadly what she did was just a foreshadowing of the shameless immoral thieving shower that we have at the moment. I can only hope this generation do what the last one did with the poll tax and take to the streets to protest. Because unless the Govt change tack on poverty thousands will actually die. We are living through The worst government ever, to me looking back on Thatcher is actually a distraction.
Rest assured, thousands will not die of poverty in the UK.

[Kato]

Rest assured, thousands will not die of poverty in the UK.Thanks, Jacob

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Callum_62]

Rest assured, thousands will not die of poverty in the UK.It's not poverty that killed them its was lack of food and heating

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Keith_M]

I'm up for an annual Thatcher day.

The kids can all get free milk, there could be models of factories or steel works which get knocked down in the evening, dragging effigies of her up and down the streets with exaggerated u- turns then hang them from lampposts. Fun stuff like that.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk


We could play the Number One song, 'the witch is dead'.

[WhileTheChief..]

Rest assured, thousands will not die of poverty in the UK.

The hatred being shown towards us and the nonsense being spouted by a few on here is climbing to new levels!!

[Kato]

The hatred being shown towards us and the nonsense being spouted by a few on here is climbing to new levels!!

"Us?"

..and..

What nonsense?

Maybe you could give a list of all the good things they have done recently for ordinary people and counter what you see as nonsense.

[grunt]

Rest assured, thousands will not die of poverty in the UK.https://www.ippr.org/files/2019-06/public-health-and-prevention-june19.pdf#page=8


Notably, there is strong evidence showing that the social pressures and stress created by poverty, deprivation and inequality are powerful influencing factors which stimulate and encourage adverse health behaviours (Lawson 2018). This plays out across the behaviours we are focussing on.


The likelihood of smoking is up to four times higher in the most deprived areas of England compared to the most affluent (ONS 2018). Significant reductions in smoking prevalence were reported among every group in England between 2001 and 2008, except among those facing multiple disadvantages such as unemployment, low incomes or insecure housing tenure (Hiscock et al 2012).

People with lower incomes or who live in deprived areas are more likely to be obese. Almost 13 per cent of children living in the most deprived areas were either overweight or obese, as opposed to only 5 per cent of those raised in the least deprived areas (CSJ 2017), while adults living the most deprived areas where up to 46 per cent more likely to be obese than those living in the least deprived areas (Baker 2018).

Disadvantaged adults are also more likely to face graver health consequences as a result of alcohol and drug abuse. Men and women in routine occupations were found to be 3.5 and 5.7 more likely to suffer an alcohol-related death respectively, than their counterparts in the highest level occupations (Jones and Sumnall 2016). Poverty, deprivation and inequality have all been found to have strong links with problem drug use (Shaw et al 2007).

[lapsedhibee]

"Us?"

..and..

What nonsense?

Maybe you could give a list of all the good things they have done recently for ordinary people and counter what you see as nonsense.

'Us' is the silent/cancelled/oppressed minority that is never ever heard from because they are literally thrown in jail if they speak their thoughts out loud.

[WhileTheChief..]

The 'us' is for Conservative voters.

I thought it was pretty obvious.

[Hibernia&Alba]

The 'us' is for Conservative voters.

I thought it was pretty obvious.


Staunch


https://www.military-history.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/maggietank.jpg

[Hibrandenburg]

The hatred being shown towards us and the nonsense being spouted by a few on here is climbing to new levels!!I might be part of a small minority or maybe even on my own but I feel that hate for the Tories and those who burden us with them is pretty much justifiable.

Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

Staunch


https://www.military-history.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/maggietank.jpg

:top marks

[WhileTheChief..]

I might be part of a small minority or maybe even on my own but I feel that hate for the Tories and those who burden us with them is pretty much justifiable.

Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk

You're definitely not in the minority on here, the hatred towards anything Conservative is rife across multiple threads.

[Hibernia&Alba]

You're definitely not in the minority on here, the hatred towards anything Conservative is rife across multiple threads.

Perhaps there is a reason for that.....

[grunt]

You're definitely not in the minority on here, the hatred towards anything Conservative is rife across multiple threads.:hmmm: Wonder why that might be ...?

[WhileTheChief..]

Perhaps there is a reason for that.....

I don’t hate anyone for who they support politically.

Do you?

As in, do you actually hate people like me because of who we vote for??

[Hibernia&Alba]

I don’t hate anyone for who they support politically.

Do you?

As in, do you actually hate people like me because of who we vote for??

No, in a democracy people are entitled to express their view; they shouldn't be hated for it. Hate is a strong word, and I try to avoid hating anybody, but some members of the current government put that to the test. Anyone who deliberately makes the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable more difficult is no friend of mine. Governments have to choose their priorities, and I have no respect for those in positions of power and wealth who consciously choose to punch down upon those least able to defend themselves. I don't like bullies.

[Hibrandenburg]

You're definitely not in the minority on here, the hatred towards anything Conservative is rife across multiple threads.I don't hate anything Conservative just things like them:

Creating child poverty.

Killing disabled people.

Being in cahoots with a brutal Russian dictator.

Covering up reports about them being in cahoots with a brutal Russian dictator.

Siphoning off billions of taxpayer's money and filling their and their friends pockets with it.

Partying whilst hundreds of thousands couldn't even say goodbye to dying relatives or attend their funerals.

Eradicating worker's rights.

Destroying the NHS.

Crossing the line between patriotism and nationalism.

Fueling race hate.

Lies, lies and more lies.

Creating the need for food banks.

Making poor people choose between feeding themselves, their children or heating their homes.

Three word slogans.

The relentless cuts to public services.

Greed.

Creating a benefits system unfit for purpose.

Making it almost impossible for refugees to seek refuge in the UK.

Enlisting a dodgy spin doctor with dodgy connections to influence election/referendum results.

Refusal to be accountable for their ghastly deeds.

Taking the UK out of the biggest tariff free market in the world.

Taking away the privileges and rights that we enjoyed from our children.


That's just off the top of my head. Now let me turn to things I like about the Conservatives........nope, I'm struggling, you'll have to help me.







Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

No, in a democracy people are entitled to express their view; they shouldn't be hated for it. Hate is a strong word, and I try to avoid hating anybody, but some members of the current government put that to the test. Anyone who deliberately makes the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable more difficult is no friend of mine. Governments have to choose their priorities, and I have no respect for those in positions of power and wealth who consciously choose to punch down upon those least able to defend themselves. I don't like bullies.

We are in agreement here at least.

My point that it seems like a lot of posts on here 'hate' anything Conservative. I'm glad that, in your case, it doesn't extend to actual voters like myself.

I don't fancy independence but I have never slated or insulted anyone who does. Likewise, I have never hated on any SNP supporters on here, ever.

It's not the same the other way round though.

As a Conservative voter, I see hate directed at me on various threads on an almost daily basis - "anyone who votes for that lot" etc etc.

[grunt]

I don't like bullies.


We are in agreement here at least.


https://youtu.be/C9MUwBEJRwk

[lapsedhibee]

As a Conservative voter, I see hate directed at me on various threads on an almost daily basis - "anyone who votes for that lot" etc etc.

What is the etc etc that makes you interpret the criticism that follows as hate? :dunno: Hate and (for example) mildly pitying someone's credulousness are shirley not the same things.

[Bostonhibby]

We are in agreement here at least.

My point that it seems like a lot of posts on here 'hate' anything Conservative. I'm glad that, in your case, it doesn't extend to actual voters like myself.

I don't fancy independence but I have never slated or insulted anyone who does. Likewise, I have never hated on any SNP supporters on here, ever.

It's not the same the other way round though.

As a Conservative voter, I see hate directed at me on various threads on an almost daily basis - "anyone who votes for that lot" etc etc.I'd truly hate to see it reduced to an attack like that on an individual who I've never met, because of how they voted, I know and respect a number of people down here who vote that way and they do so for a variety of different reasons.
Equally there are posters on here who have what I believe are conservative leanings and they are deserving of respect because of how they express themselves.

I would not like to think I've vented on them personally just because of their voting habits.

I have no problem letting rip on the actual elected politicians, especially those who deceive, or worse and maybe it's because theyve been around a while but the current government is full of such deserving targets.

For the record I held the same low opinion of Nick Clegg and the latter day Tony Blair.....



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Kato]

You're definitely not in the minority on here, the hatred towards anything Conservative is rife across multiple threads.You see it as hatred. I see it as cold hard common sense to treat the Tory Party as a toxic, corrosive, Russian financed entity which just isn't good for the general population, national security or the future of our children.

Those who vote for them are either useful, gaslit idiots or the tiny minority who actually benefit from their policies aren't worth hating.

I hate Thatcher though always have done. Jacob Rees-Mogg is getting there.

You can always turn away from the "woe is me" posts and argue the what benefits their policies are brining to the country.

Maybe you could tell me what use this is?

https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/1511686483698139138?t=qf3tf6P8YMUS1i6KYOXU0w&s=19

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

I don’t hate anyone for who they support politically.

Do you?

As in, do you actually hate people like me because of who we vote for??

What use would there be in hating you?

You are reading harsh criticisms of a political party and feeling it personally.

Are you that invested in them?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

I don’t hate anyone for who they support politically.

Do you?

As in, do you actually hate people like me because of who we vote for??But you hate socialism. Do you hate Socialists?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

I'd truly hate to see it reduced to an attack like that on an individual who I've never met, because of how they voted, I know and respect a number of people down here who vote that way and they do so for a variety of different reasons.
Equally there are posters on here who have what I believe are conservative leanings and they are deserving of respect because of how they express themselves.

I would not like to think I've vented on them personally just because of their voting habits.

I have no problem letting rip on the actual elected politicians, especially those who deceive, or worse and maybe it's because theyve been around a while but the current government is full of such deserving targets.

For the record I held the same low opinion of Nick Clegg and the latter day Tony Blair.....



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

Good to hear, that's exactly the way it should be :)

I obviously disagree with an awful lot of posters in the Holy Ground. I can have decent exchanges and chat with some, but with others, it's a needless stream of smart ass replies as if I'm somehow responsible for the Government's actions!!!

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

You're definitely not in the minority on here, the hatred towards anything Conservative is rife across multiple threads.

Hatred is perhaps a bit strong or perhaps subjective. I think that the cliché of the Nasty Party is a tag that some Tories don't actually mind. It's a handy vehicle to stimey any in depth debate or analysis, if there's a collective agreement that someone hates you.

[Bostonhibby]

Good to hear, that's exactly the way it should be :)

I obviously disagree with an awful lot of posters in the Holy Ground. I can have decent exchanges and chat with some, but with others, it's a needless stream of smart ass replies as if I'm somehow responsible for the Government's actions!!![emoji106]well you did vote for them so I'll put you down for 0.000000000000000000001% of the blame[emoji6]

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Kato]

"anyone who votes for that lot" etc etc.

Don't think I've ever written that so that's me off the hook.

Quit whining, stick up for your Party. Tell us why they are worth voting for.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

Hatred is perhaps a bit strong or perhaps subjective. I think that the cliché of the Nasty Party is a tag that some Tories don't actually mind. It's a handy vehicle to stimey any in depth debate or analysis, if there's a collective agreement that someone hates you.Nasty party is a pretty decent collective noun for the cabal that masquerades as a cabinet.



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

[emoji106]well you did vote for them so I'll put you down for 0.000000000000000000001% of the blame[emoji6]

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

I can handle that :cb

[lapsedhibee]

Good to hear, that's exactly the way it should be :)

I obviously disagree with an awful lot of posters in the Holy Ground. I can have decent exchanges and chat with some, but with others, it's a needless stream of smart ass replies as if I'm somehow responsible for the Government's actions!!!

Of course you're responsible! If it's not your fault that the current government is the current government, whose is it?

[Moulin Yarns]

Good to hear, that's exactly the way it should be :)

I obviously disagree with an awful lot of posters in the Holy Ground. I can have decent exchanges and chat with some, but with others, it's a needless stream of smart ass replies as if I'm somehow responsible for the Government's actions!!!

You helped elect the government, so, in a way you are responsible!

I await your tirade against me again 😉

[grunt]

Of course you're responsible! If it's not your fault that the current government is the current government, whose is it?


You helped elect the government, so, in a way you are responsible!

They're right, you know.

[Kato]

Of course you're responsible! If it's not your fault that the current government is the current government, whose is it?Childlike, like Brexit voters claiming 'that's not the Brexit I voted for'. Caught red handed but sheepishly don't want the blame. Difficult to hate that level of dim.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

[emoji106]well you did vote for them so I'll put you down for 0.000000000000000000001% of the blame[emoji6]


Think you might have slightly overestimated the number of people who voted Tory in the last election there. :tsk tsk:

[Bostonhibby]

Think you might have slightly overestimated the number of people who voted Tory in the last election there. :tsk tsk:Aye, but I factored out the ones I really dont like.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

Of course you're responsible! If it's not your fault that the current government is the current government, whose is it?

My fault??!!

You make it sound like I made a mistake!

[lapsedhibee]

My fault??!!

You make it sound like I made a mistake!

Think you're probably just trolling now, even if you haven't been all along.

[WhileTheChief..]

I was trying to be light hearted ffs!

Look, if you want to carry on blaming me for whatever, fine. It's really not that important, it's only politics.

[Kato]

Think you're probably just trolling now, even if you haven't been all along.

Always suspected it.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[LewysGot2]

Staunch


https://www.military-history.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/maggietank.jpg
It’s Liz Truss :greengrin

[green leaves]

Siphoned all the oil money to pay for infrastructure on in the SE of England,promoted the greed is good culture,caused the death of soldiers in her vanity war in the Falkland.
Best mates with Saville and Mercer(he's deid).

[Kato]

10th anniversary of the Blessed Margaret's demise.

Time to dig up the grave and make sure she is still brown bread.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Skol]

And there was an uproar about the cartoon in the times.

[Kato]

And there was an uproar about the cartoon in the times.Not from me. Don't pile me together with others thanks, and I won't pile you in with skirt clutching curtain twitchers. Thanks.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[The Modfather]

10th anniversary of the Blessed Margaret's demise.

Time to dig up the grave and make sure she is still brown bread.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Poor and unnecessary post.

[Kato]

Poor and unnecessary post.Don't actually care. Really.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

F her. Literally thousands died due to her policies and deliberate mistreatment of working class communities.

[Edina Street]

I don't hate Maggie Thatcher, but I know a man that does.

Ex soldier that suffers longterm from PTSD was sent to fight in the Falklands. He claims that during the fighting that much ammunition was used that they ran out, and had to resort to killing men with baronets and fighting hand to hand combat. He claims he went into a state of fight or flight, and ended up killing men with his bare fists and went into overkill and never mentally recovered from this experience. He claims that it was either kill or be killed, and that he still wakes up during the night in cold sweats having nightmares about it. To this day he is still under medical supervision for severe mental trauma. He explained to me that he hates Maggie Thatcher for sending him to the other side of the world to claim that Argentina's backyard belongs to Britain, and he believes that he was a stupid and impressionable young man in the first place for ever signing up to the army. He believes that Maggie Thatcher and the rest of the British government do not give a damn about the young mens lives that they ruin, and he wishes that politicians would all get in a ring and fight it out for themselves, if fighting is the answer over academic debate.

[Kato]

I don't hate Maggie Thatcher, but I know a man that does.

Ex soldier that suffers longterm from PTSD was sent to fight in the Falklands. He claims that during the fighting that much ammunition was used that they ran out, and had to resort to killing men with baronets and fighting hand to hand combat. He claims he went into a state of fight or flight, and ended up killing men with his bare fists and went into overkill and never mentally recovered from this experience. He claims that it was either kill or be killed, and that he still wakes up during the night in cold sweats having nightmares about it. To this day he is still under medical supervision for severe mental trauma. He explained to me that he hates Maggie Thatcher for sending him to the other side of the world to claim that Argentina's backyard belongs to Britain, and he believes that he was a stupid and impressionable young man in the first place for ever signing up to the army. He believes that Maggie Thatcher and the rest of the British government do not give a damn about the young mens lives that they ruin, and he wishes that politicians would all get in a ring and fight it out for themselves, if fighting is the answer over academic debate. A war she helped manipulate into existence.

A tiny facet of her spiteful tenure.

We now live in the her wake.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[ErinGoBraghHFC]

I don't hate Maggie Thatcher, but I know a man that does.

Ex soldier that suffers longterm from PTSD was sent to fight in the Falklands. He claims that during the fighting that much ammunition was used that they ran out, and had to resort to killing men with baronets and fighting hand to hand combat. He claims he went into a state of fight or flight, and ended up killing men with his bare fists and went into overkill and never mentally recovered from this experience. He claims that it was either kill or be killed, and that he still wakes up during the night in cold sweats having nightmares about it. To this day he is still under medical supervision for severe mental trauma. He explained to me that he hates Maggie Thatcher for sending him to the other side of the world to claim that Argentina's backyard belongs to Britain, and he believes that he was a stupid and impressionable young man in the first place for ever signing up to the army. He believes that Maggie Thatcher and the rest of the British government do not give a damn about the young mens lives that they ruin, and he wishes that politicians would all get in a ring and fight it out for themselves, if fighting is the answer over academic debate.

Totally agree with your pal, the government continues to target naive young boys to go fight in their colonial power trips.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colr]

The thatcher years were before my time so I have no personal memory of her being in power, have heard stories about the poll tax etc but don't know any real details about it, admittedly politics isn't my bag

For those old enough to remember, what specifically was it that has caused her to be hated by such a large percentage of the population, particularly in Scotland?

The privatisation of rail, water/sewage, gas and electricity are now looking like a bit of a disaster even to Tories.

[Edina Street]

The privatisation of rail, water/sewage, gas and electricity are now looking like a bit of a disaster even to Tories.

I too have been skeptical of privatisation for a long time now. Though my concerns are probably quite simple. Why if all those enterprises were so unprofitable, did tycoons like Richard Branson bother investing in them? I guess though to do a proper analysis on the subject, one would have to study privatisation in ancient Greece and the Roman Empire to find out whom Thatcherism better benefits. The state, or, the aristocracy?

[Kato]

I too have been skeptical of privatisation for a long time now. Though my concerns are probably quite simple. Why if all those enterprises were so unprofitable, did tycoons like Richard Branson bother investing in them? I guess though to do a proper analysis on the subject, one would have to study privatisation in ancient Greece and the Roman Empire to find out whom Thatcherism better benefits. The state, or, the aristocracy?The ancient Greeks and Romans had huge nationalised projects. They did this because it's simply common sense to provide certain infrastructures for your citizens.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[ErinGoBraghHFC]

The ancient Greeks and Romans had huge nationalised projects. They did this because it's simply common sense to provide certain infrastructures for your citizens.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Bloody communists


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WeeRussell]

And there was an uproar about the cartoon in the times.

Where, on here?

One poster pointed out they don’t like the depicting of killings, another said it’s problematic.. and others (myself included) weren’t offended but didn’t think it was of any comedy value whatsoever.

If that’s an uproar you should try the main board now and then.

[WeeRussell]

The 'us' is for Conservative voters.

I thought it was pretty obvious.

I don’t hate you, or any poster on here for that matter. I do think you seem to like making edgy/somewhat controversial comments and then complain at people being argumentative or not very nice when you do get the reaction you are apparently seeking. But nowhere near hatred.

I can confirm I ****ing despise the Tory party though 😁

I had previously thought you just happened to vote Tory in the most recent election. Are you now describing yourself as a fully pledged tory supporter? (Clearly you do not have to answer that as it’s nobody’s business unless you want it to be)