Maggie Thatcher Is Dead.

[chiang mai]

I have enjoyed this debate and I've even learned from it, but now it's time for me to call it quits because I don't think we can sensibly go much further in trying to sway, influence or convince, the lines of demarkation are irrevocably etched into the ground, never to be erased it seems.

Yes and above all you have shown you have a sense of humour stating that when Thatcher left office she was almost destitute. Had I known that at the time I would have organized a collection in the mining area my family hail from. One good thing is that thanks to her reforms she would have known which department to apply to for financial help. She resigned in 1990 and by 1991 she was ensconced in Chester Square part of Belgravia, no doubt in one of those cardboard boxes that were such a feature of that time.

How sad it is when you are unable to acccurately and genuinely find fault with Margaret Thatcher's history and you have to resort to ridiculing one of my posts istead, never mind, there's always the consolation prize!

Edited April 21, 2013 by chiang mai

[KarenBravo]

You would think given what the banks have done to the UK economy and not only the UK economy, that trade unions running wild would be the least of your memories or problems. 1985 the year of financial deregulation when banks, building societies, mutuals were allowed to covert into being gambling casinos.

The 1985 "Big Bang" made the UK the world's financial centre. Britain made a fortune because of this.

[pitrevie]

You would think given what the banks have done to the UK economy and not only the UK economy, that trade unions running wild would be the least of your memories or problems. 1985 the year of financial deregulation when banks, building societies, mutuals were allowed to covert into being gambling casinos.

The 1985 "Big Bang" made the UK the world's financial centre. Britain made a fortune because of this.

There is no such person as Britain, some people made a very fast buck and now we are seeing the results. Of course those who made a very fast buck or even those who lost a great many bucks were able to walk away very rich people.

[pitrevie]

I have enjoyed this debate and I've even learned from it, but now it's time for me to call it quits because I don't think we can sensibly go much further in trying to sway, influence or convince, the lines of demarkation are irrevocably etched into the ground, never to be erased it seems.

Yes and above all you have shown you have a sense of humour stating that when Thatcher left office she was almost destitute. Had I known that at the time I would have organized a collection in the mining area my family hail from. One good thing is that thanks to her reforms she would have known which department to apply to for financial help. She resigned in 1990 and by 1991 she was ensconced in Chester Square part of Belgravia, no doubt in one of those cardboard boxes that were such a feature of that time.

How sad it is when you are unable to acccurately and genuinely find fault with Margaret Thatcher's history and you have to resort to ridiculing one of my posts istead, never mind, there's always the consolation prize!

I posted a reply to that which somehow got lost so I will try again. How about the hereditary peerage awarded to her son via Dennis. The financial deregulation of 1985 that allowed banks, building societies and mutuals to convert into gambling casinos. The lack of an industrial policy, as Jim Prior observed at the time it is easy to destroy but far more difficult to create. Her selling off of the family silver which proved too much for a former prime minister of her own party. Conning the British Public to buy something they already owned so that the proceeds could be used to finance tax cuts to the well off. The squandering of Britain's oil, the proceeds again being used to finance tax cut unlike the Norwegians who took a different long term view. The banning of trade unions while praising them in other countries. Is that enough?

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

I have enjoyed this debate and I've even learned from it, but now it's time for me to call it quits because I don't think we can sensibly go much further in trying to sway, influence or convince, the lines of demarkation are irrevocably etched into the ground, never to be erased it seems.

Yes and above all you have shown you have a sense of humour stating that when Thatcher left office she was almost destitute. Had I known that at the time I would have organized a collection in the mining area my family hail from. One good thing is that thanks to her reforms she would have known which department to apply to for financial help. She resigned in 1990 and by 1991 she was ensconced in Chester Square part of Belgravia, no doubt in one of those cardboard boxes that were such a feature of that time.

How sad it is when you are unable to acccurately and genuinely find fault with Margaret Thatcher's history and you have to resort to ridiculing one of my posts istead, never mind, there's always the consolation prize!

I posted a reply to that which somehow got lost so I will try again. How about the hereditary peerage awarded to her son via Dennis. The financial deregulation of 1985 that allowed banks, building societies and mutuals to convert into gambling casinos. The lack of an industrial policy, as Jim Prior observed at the time it is easy to destroy but far more difficult to create. Her selling off of the family silver which proved too much for a former prime minister of her own party. Conning the British Public to buy something they already owned so that the proceeds could be used to finance tax cuts to the well off. The squandering of Britain's oil, the proceeds again being used to finance tax cut unlike the Norwegians who took a different long term view. The banning of trade unions while praising them in other countries. Is that enough?

The banning of Trade Unions ?

[pitrevie]

Rajab Al Zarahni

The banning of Trade Unions ?

Yes exactly that, Trade Unions were banned at GCHQ Cheltenham in 1984. When the new Labour Government was elected in 1997, Robin Cooke the Foreign Secretary restored those rights. Its amazing that the extreme left and extreme right have one thing in common, their hatred of Free Trade Unions. Thatcher showed her true colours when that ban came into effect while at the same time arguing for Free Trade Unions in Eastern Europe.

[7by7]

I can only assume that pitrevei means the reforms which meant that union power was taken away from overpaid oligarchs and handed back to the members by bringing in secret ballots.

The reforms which made the intimidation of people who wanted to work by mass pickets illegal.

Etc.

The ordinary union member benefited from these reforms.

The people who lost out were the likes of Scargill, who used his violent thugs to intimidate members, members whose interests he was supposed to represent, in order to further his own political ambitions.

Thank God he failed and Thatcher won!

Having said that, banning union membership at GCHQ was a mistake; but as I have repeatedly said, she was not perfect.

It must be remembered that the ban was legally challenged and eventually upheld, first by the Court of Appeal and then by the House of Lords, on national security grounds. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service

Edited April 21, 2013 by 7by7

[pitrevie]

I can only assume that pitrevei means the reforms which meant that union power was taken away from overpaid oligarchs and handed back to the members by bringing in secret ballots.

The reforms which made the intimidation of people who wanted to work by mass pickets illegal.

Etc.

The ordinary union member benefited from these reforms.

The people who lost out were the likes of Scargill, who used his violent thugs to intimidate members, members whose interests he was supposed to represent, in order to further his own political ambitions.

Thank God he failed and Thatcher won!

Having said that, banning union membership at GCHQ was a mistake; but as I have repeatedly said, she was not perfect.

Well you have assumed wrongly. In fact to keep on about Scargill as if he was the entire union movement when there were millions of trade unionists that never went on strike. I have to confess that in a working life of over 40 years I did go on strike for one day but at that time I was under the direct orders of Moscow and had no option but to obey.

The news headlines today are very interesting when we see that there are more calls for even tougher union legislation as if that is the principle cause of the economic mess we are in at present. If you look at the so called damage done by trade unions and then compare that to what the banks have managed to achieve in the last 20 years that not even the most rabid trade union leader as ever got anywhere near. However when it comes to banks and to the people who have done such great damage all we see is crooks walking away from disasters for which they are wholly responsible and with lottery type payoffs but very little mention of legislation or putting those responsible behind bars where they belong.

I have always been in favour of secret ballots and against mass picketing, I am not sure what is included in etc.

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

Rajab Al Zarahni

The banning of Trade Unions ?

Yes exactly that, Trade Unions were banned at GCHQ Cheltenham in 1984. When the new Labour Government was elected in 1997, Robin Cooke the Foreign Secretary restored those rights. Its amazing that the extreme left and extreme right have one thing in common, their hatred of Free Trade Unions. Thatcher showed her true colours when that ban came into effect while at the same time arguing for Free Trade Unions in Eastern Europe.

I agree with your narrower assertion that she banned Trade Unions at GCHQ.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Rajab Al Zarahni

[sustento]

When I went to work for British Rail in 1971 not only was I told that I HAD to join a union in order to get the job - I was even told which union I HAD to join. I had no choice at all.

[pitrevie]

Rajab Al Zarahni

The banning of Trade Unions ?

Yes exactly that, Trade Unions were banned at GCHQ Cheltenham in 1984. When the new Labour Government was elected in 1997, Robin Cooke the Foreign Secretary restored those rights. Its amazing that the extreme left and extreme right have one thing in common, their hatred of Free Trade Unions. Thatcher showed her true colours when that ban came into effect while at the same time arguing for Free Trade Unions in Eastern Europe.

I agree with your narrower assertion that she banned Trade Unions at GCHQ.

Well either people are free to join trade unions or they are not its a very simple issue.

[pitrevie]

When I went to work for British Rail in 1971 not only was I told that I HAD to join a union in order to get the job - I was even told which union I HAD to join. I had no choice at all.

I was never in favour of closed shops but if you said to someone who didn't want to join a union that they should negotiate their own pay and conditions and not automatically accept what the union had got on their behalf then somehow they thought that was very unfair. Many people didn't mind accepting all the benefits of trade union membership, health and safety, salary negotiations, holiday entitlements but they were just reluctant to pay the membership fees. As you can imagine employers were falling over themselves to improve pay and conditions when there were no trade unions.

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

Rajab Al Zarahni

The banning of Trade Unions ?

Yes exactly that, Trade Unions were banned at GCHQ Cheltenham in 1984. When the new Labour Government was elected in 1997, Robin Cooke the Foreign Secretary restored those rights. Its amazing that the extreme left and extreme right have one thing in common, their hatred of Free Trade Unions. Thatcher showed her true colours when that ban came into effect while at the same time arguing for Free Trade Unions in Eastern Europe.

I agree with your narrower assertion that she banned Trade Unions at GCHQ.

Well either people are free to join trade unions or they are not its a very simple issue.

It isn't a simple issue.The right to be a member of a Trade Union is a human right as such but human rights legislation has always made provision for the variation or curtailment of these rights where for example there is the clash of different human rights and has provided for nation states to vary or limit them on,for example,the grounds of national security. I don't agree with the Trade Union ban at GCHQ but I don't believe it was done as an act of malice, rather through a process of perverse reasoning.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Rajab Al Zarahni

[7by7]

I have to confess that in a working life of over 40 years I did go on strike for one day but at that time I was under the direct orders of Moscow and had no option.

Thank you; that one sentence proves my point far better than i ever could.

Etc. includes things like closed shops. I am glad that you seem to be in favour banning these, banning mass picketing, imposing secret ballots and maybe other union reforms under Thatcher.

I am not against unions per se; I was actually a union representative whilst I was in the civil service, I am just against them, or rather their leaders, abusing their power for political ends rather than doing what they're paid for; looking after the interests of their members.

Unfortunately, there are still some 'old school' union leaders about. Bob Crow being a prime example; calling his members out on strike in protest over redundancies LUL had no plans of making!

Hopefully the RMT members have seen through him and will oust him at the earliest opportunity.

You talk of banking disasters over the last 20 years; but forget that Labour were in power for 10 of those years.

If Thatcher's banking policies were so wrong, why did neither Blair nor Brown do anything about them? Instead they used taxpayers money to bail failing banks out.

Saying that bankers deserve to be behind bars is ridiculous; unless they have committed a crime, of course.

What crimes are you accusing them of?

[sustento]

When I went to work for British Rail in 1971 not only was I told that I HAD to join a union in order to get the job - I was even told which union I HAD to join. I had no choice at all.

I was never in favour of closed shops but if you said to someone who didn't want to join a union that they should negotiate their own pay and conditions and not automatically accept what the union had got on their behalf then somehow they thought that was very unfair. Many people didn't mind accepting all the benefits of trade union membership, health and safety, salary negotiations, holiday entitlements but they were just reluctant to pay the membership fees. As you can imagine employers were falling over themselves to improve pay and conditions when there were no trade unions.

From the day I left British Rail I have never joined a union since. If I was offered a job now that came with union membership as compulsory I'd turn it down. I've managed to negotiate my own pay and conditions without any help from a union for the past 40 years.

[MAJIC]

I have enjoyed this debate and I've even learned from it, but now it's time for me to call it quits because I don't think we can sensibly go much further in trying to sway, influence or convince, the lines of demarkation are irrevocably etched into the ground, never to be erased it seems.

Yes and above all you have shown you have a sense of humour stating that when Thatcher left office she was almost destitute. Had I known that at the time I would have organized a collection in the mining area my family hail from. One good thing is that thanks to her reforms she would have known which department to apply to for financial help. She resigned in 1990 and by 1991 she was ensconced in Chester Square part of Belgravia, no doubt in one of those cardboard boxes that were such a feature of that time.

How sad it is when you are unable to acccurately and genuinely find fault with Margaret Thatcher's history and you have to resort to ridiculing one of my posts istead, never mind, there's always the consolation prize!

I posted a reply to that which somehow got lost so I will try again. How about the hereditary peerage awarded to her son via Dennis. The financial deregulation of 1985 that allowed banks, building societies and mutuals to convert into gambling casinos. The lack of an industrial policy, as Jim Prior observed at the time it is easy to destroy but far more difficult to create. Her selling off of the family silver which proved too much for a former prime minister of her own party. Conning the British Public to buy something they already owned so that the proceeds could be used to finance tax cuts to the well off. The squandering of Britain's oil, the proceeds again being used to finance tax cut unlike the Norwegians who took a different long term view. The banning of trade unions while praising them in other countries. Is that enough?

And thus creating the richer voters,who she was so fond of,and she sold off the Ordinary Peoples Property,to make them even Richer and Greedier! she presided over,and orchestrated the Financial Rape of the UK, and now the Revenue from our Utilities are sent out of the Country into the hands of foreign ownership.

[pitrevie]

Rajab Al Zarahni

It isn't a simple issue.The right to be a member of a Trade Union is a human right as such but human rights legislation has always made provision for the variation or curtailment of these rights where for example there is the clash of different human rights and has provided for nation states to vary or limit them on,for example,the grounds of national security. I don't agree with the Trade Union ban at GCHQ but I don't believe it was done as an act of malice, rather through a process of perverse reasoning.

I think with Thatcher it was malice, she was fond of referring to trade unionists as the enemy within and some of her allies such as Pinochet and Reagan were not known to be in favour of Trade Unions either.

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

Rajab Al Zarahni

It isn't a simple issue.The right to be a member of a Trade Union is a human right as such but human rights legislation has always made provision for the variation or curtailment of these rights where for example there is the clash of different human rights and has provided for nation states to vary or limit them on,for example,the grounds of national security. I don't agree with the Trade Union ban at GCHQ but I don't believe it was done as an act of malice, rather through a process of perverse reasoning.

I think with Thatcher it was malice, she was fond of referring to trade unionists as the enemy within and some of her allies such as Pinochet and Reagan were not known to be in favour of Trade Unions either.

Unfortunately trade unionists are not a homogeneous group. If Margaret Thatcher had an unfavorable or indeed hostile view of trade unionists it was probably for reason of witnessing the madness of the the 1970's,culminating in the winter of discontent and her experience of the inflexible and hostile behavior of Scargill.

[MAJIC]

I have to confess that in a working life of over 40 years I did go on strike for one day but at that time I was under the direct orders of Moscow and had no option.

Thank you; that one sentence proves my point far better than i ever could.

Etc. includes things like closed shops. I am glad that you seem to be in favour banning these, banning mass picketing, imposing secret ballots and maybe other union reforms under Thatcher.

I am not against unions per se; I was actually a union representative whilst I was in the civil service, I am just against them, or rather their leaders, abusing their power for political ends rather than doing what they're paid for; looking after the interests of their members.

Unfortunately, there are still some 'old school' union leaders about. Bob Crow being a prime example; calling his members out on strike in protest over redundancies LUL had no plans of making!

Hopefully the RMT members have seen through him and will oust him at the earliest opportunity.

You talk of banking disasters over the last 20 years; but forget that Labour were in power for 10 of those years.

If Thatcher's banking policies were so wrong, why did neither Blair nor Brown do anything about them? Instead they used taxpayers money to bail failing banks out.

Saying that bankers deserve to be behind bars is ridiculous; unless they have committed a crime, of course.

What crimes are you accusing them of?

Gordon Brown had no choice other than to bail out the Banks,the alternative collapse of the Banking Industry would have been far worse,and would have created a domino effect Banking meltdown,but i'm sure you know that!

[7by7]

Rajab Al Zarahni

It isn't a simple issue.The right to be a member of a Trade Union is a human right as such but human rights legislation has always made provision for the variation or curtailment of these rights where for example there is the clash of different human rights and has provided for nation states to vary or limit them on,for example,the grounds of national security. I don't agree with the Trade Union ban at GCHQ but I don't believe it was done as an act of malice, rather through a process of perverse reasoning.

I think with Thatcher it was malice, she was fond of referring to trade unionists as the enemy within and some of her allies such as Pinochet and Reagan were not known to be in favour of Trade Unions either.

If it was malice, why did both the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords (the Law Lords, now called the Supreme Court, not the whole house) agree that it was necessary in the interests of national security?

[7by7]

Gordon Brown had no choice other than to bail out the Banks,the alternative collapse of the Banking Industry would have been far worse,and would have created a domino effect Banking meltdown,but i'm sure you know that!

He did what he thought necessary to safeguard the UK's financial industry; just as Thatched had done in the 1980's.

Prior to deregulation the UK's financial sector was run by old men who had all gone to the same few public schools and knew each other; even though they knew nothing about running a modern financial centre.

Had that continued, the UK would have lost it's status as one of the world's leading financial centres and the millions of pounds in 'invisibles' that go with that status.

Deregulation was necessary.

It threw open the doors so that people were employed and promoted on merit, not the old boy network. Employed and promoted because of what they knew, not because of who they knew.

I would have thought you would have approved of this.

Who benefited from this (apart from the country as a whole)?

Working class people who under the old system would have found it impossible to rise above messengers and clerks.

Yes, some of these were crooks, e.g. Nick Leeson, but not everyone pre deregulation was honest, either.

[transam]

And thus (privatisation) creating the richer voters,who she was so fond of,and she sold off the Ordinary Peoples Property,to make them even Richer and Greedier! she presided over,and orchestrated the Financial Rape of the UK, and now the Revenue from our Utilities are sent out of the Country into the hands of foreign ownership.

Most purchasers of shares when the utilities etc. were privatised were ordinary people, not the 'rich and greedy' or pension funds and the like.

If those ordinary people and pension funds chose to sell their shares on to make a profit that is hardly Thatcher's fault.

BTW, in an earlier post you told us that both you and your son are very high earners. How much of that very high income do you give away to charities etc.?

Or are you rich and greedy, too?

So ordinary working folk spent their wages on shares.

[KarenBravo]

People are forgetting that this financial crisis started in the USA with sub-prime borrowing.

To cut the risk, portions of sub-prime risk was bundled together with other financial instruments.

Money knows no borders and travels at light speed, which is why the rest of the world was infected.

Nothing to do with Thatcher, or her policies. In fact it goes against her beliefs, one of which was thrift.

[Scott]

Inflammatory post and replies have been deleted. Stay on topic.

[chiang mai]

And in the year 2021, as the last explosions from the nuclear onslaught explode and the very last traces of mankind are extinguished, 2,000 years of human history destroyed in a matter of moments, there amongst the rubble is the very last survivor of planet earth, pitrevie, falling to his knees but still holding his sign high, it read, "it was all Maggies fault, she's to blame I'm certain".

[wigantojapan]

Little or no talk about the NHS .That was somehting all of Britain was rightly proud about..First out the door wee the laundrey workers.Then the kitchen staff,followed by the porters,.followed by the auxillery nurses.

3 nurses to 40 patients,then 2 on any given shift.

IN came management with little or no knowledge of nursing.

Anyone want to add anything to thing

The effect of this THatcher legislation is very much felt today

There was more much much more.

[Scott]

The topic is about Maggie Thatcher.

Stop blowing your own horns. Stay on topic and keep it civil.

[7by7]

People are forgetting that this financial crisis started in the USA with sub-prime borrowing.

To cut the risk, portions of sub-prime risk was bundled together with other financial instruments.

Money knows no borders and travels at light speed, which is why the rest of the world was infected.

Nothing to do with Thatcher, or her policies. In fact it goes against her beliefs, one of which was thrift.

That's not going to stop her critics on this topic; any stick with which to beat her will do for them.

Even if it's events outside her control or that happened after she left office!

I see no point in participating any further; let them continue their hate fest if they so wish.

[Scott]

This thread seems to have served it's purpose and has now reached it's conclusion.

//Closed//