Jump to content

COVID-19 UK & Beyond


Rog
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Just try really really really hard to put your appallingly selfish right wing views to one side for a moment and think that on the receiving end of Thatcher's dreadful policies were real people.

I know you're going to struggle with that, what with your age and everything, but it might give you some insights as to why Thatcher was such a divisive PM and is consequently hated and reviled for her heartless actions and quite rightly.

Her stupid policies also caused the Falklands Conflict but that didn't stop her revelling in the "victory" despite the casualty list. Especially the tragedy that was the Belgrano which no 10 et al then all lied about...

The people affected by what had to be done were unfortunate casualties of just that.  What had to be done. Take mining.  Where was the economic sense in spending much more to extract coal from the UK than it could be imported for from Poland? UK coal meant that the UK electricity consumers were subsidising a lame duck industry riddled with over manning, Spanish Practices, and union obstruction. 

In effect hard working tax payers were paying over the odds to allow coal mining communities to live the way that they wanted to and not the way that the value of what they produced justified and that wasn't right.

So faced with that situation what would YOU have done?

Falklands?  The Argentinian government made a huge miscalculation and Galtiairi tried to use what he thought was indifference about our interest in the Falklands but what was actually more about improving relations between the UK and Argentina in order to take attention off the pigs ear his government was making at home.  As for the Belgrano, papers later released show that in spite of the ship being outside of the absolute exclusion zone as a military vessel it was a legitimate target of war PLUS as since was made public  it had a route set in to enter into the absolute exclusion zone hopefully unobserved.

Mrs Thatcher hated and reviled? Sadly yes but on the positive side by the people who supported and still support the policies and strategies that brought our country to the brink or just have idea of what's utter mess she and her government faced.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Rog said:

The people affected by what had to be done were unfortunate casualties of just that.  What had to be done. Take mining.  Where was the economic sense in spending much more to extract coal from the UK than it could be imported for from Poland? UK coal meant that the UK electricity consumers were subsidising a lame duck industry riddled with over manning, Spanish Practices, and union obstruction. 

In effect hard working tax payers were paying over the odds to allow coal mining communities to live the way that they wanted to and not the way that the value of what they produced justified and that wasn't right.

So faced with that situation what would YOU have done?

Falklands?  The Argentinian government made a huge miscalculation and Galtiairi tried to use what he thought was indifference about our interest in the Falklands but what was actually more about improving relations between the UK and Argentina in order to take attention off the pigs ear his government was making at home.  As for the Belgrano, papers later released show that in spite of the ship being outside of the absolute exclusion zone as a military vessel it was a legitimate target of war PLUS as since was made public  it had a route set in to enter into the absolute exclusion zone hopefully unobserved.

Mrs Thatcher hated and reviled? Sadly yes but on the positive side by the people who supported and still support the policies and strategies that brought our country to the brink or just have idea of what's utter mess she and her government faced.

Energy, like staples such as food, are strategic. Which makes it a stupid decision. End of.

The Japanese must have been pleased the Belgrano went down as it survived their attack on Pearl Harbour!

Yes it was that old and a clapped out old ex-USN Cruiser has absolutely zero chance against a Carrier Battlegroup supported by nuclear submarines.

In blocking an influx of Hong Kong Chinese Thatcher's govt disenfranchised the Falkland Islanders. They also announced they were doing away with South Atlantic support ship HMS Endurance. In other words the stupid bitch sent out all the wrong political messages which were inevitably picked up by the Argies.

She is hated and reviled for good reasons. Nobody would dispute things had to change.

But not the way she did it. Revolting woman...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Energy, like staples such as food, are strategic. Which makes it a stupid decision. End of.

The Japanese must have been pleased the Belgrano went down as it survived their attack on Pearl Harbour!

Yes it was that old and a clapped out old ex-USN Cruiser has absolutely zero chance against a Carrier Battlegroup supported by nuclear submarines.

In blocking an influx of Hong Kong Chinese Thatcher's govt disenfranchised the Falkland Islanders. They also announced they were doing away with South Atlantic support ship HMS Endurance. In other words the stupid bitch sent out all the wrong political messages which were inevitably picked up by the Argies.

She is hated and reviled for good reasons. Nobody would dispute things had to change.

But not the way she did it. Revolting woman...

Energy?  We were able to provide for our need for energy by importing coal on the world market just as we import so many other staples on the world markets such as cereals from Canada.

Honkers?  I really don't see that prohibiting the HK residents from having right to reside in the UK in any way disenfranchised the British Faulkland Islanders so maybe I could have that explained to me. The Belgrano trying to sneak in? A self inflicted wound.

So how do you think the basket case that the Thatcher government  were faced with should have been dealt with?  In her position what might you have done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rog said:

Energy?  We were able to provide for our need for energy by importing coal on the world market just as we import so many other staples on the world markets such as cereals from Canada.

Honkers?  I really don't see that prohibiting the HK residents from having right to reside in the UK in any way disenfranchised the British Faulkland Islanders so maybe I could have that explained to me. The Belgrano trying to sneak in? A self inflicted wound.

So how do you think the basket case that the Thatcher government  were faced with should have been dealt with?  In her position what might you have done?

Every time we import a necessity we weaken our position.

If only there was a trading organisation we could join that would guarantee essential supplies.

Errrr..... wait a minute!

If you don't understand the political ramifications that led to the Falklands Conflict then you need to educate yourself.

I do know I would not have destroyed the communities of my fellow citizens irrespective of their political leanings. After all, as PM I would have a duty of care towards their well being.

Isn't that right Roger?

How could you possibly think I envy you?

Words fail me.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, P.K. said:

Every time we import a necessity we weaken our position.

If only there was a trading organisation we could join that would guarantee essential supplies.

Errrr..... wait a minute!

If you don't understand the political ramifications that led to the Falklands Conflict then you need to educate yourself.

I do know I would not have destroyed the communities of my fellow citizens irrespective of their political leanings. After all, as PM I would have a duty of care towards their well being.

Isn't that right Roger?

How could you possibly think I envy you?

Words fail me.....

the uk has.......the wto........

eu isn't about trade......

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Every time we import a necessity we weaken our position.

If only there was a trading organisation we could join that would guarantee essential supplies.

Errrr..... wait a minute!

If you don't understand the political ramifications that led to the Falklands Conflict then you need to educate yourself.

I do know I would not have destroyed the communities of my fellow citizens irrespective of their political leanings. After all, as PM I would have a duty of care towards their well being.

Isn't that right Roger?

How could you possibly think I envy you?

Words fail me.....

Necessities have costs, when the cost of providing from ourown resource far exceeds the cost of  importing them them then it makes no sense to do other than import them providing that by so doing does not result in an exposure.  Joining a trading Bloc?  Sure!  That's what two referendums supported BUT that is NOT what the European Community morphed into when it became the European Union.

Falklands conflict? Oh yes, I certainly do know the background, especially the incompetence or civil servants even then as well as the opportunism and duplicity of the Galtiairi cabal.

Communities depending on industries that were unsustainable such as coal production? There is no way that they were attacked because of political affiliation though it certainly was political affiliation that resulted in rioting  against the government that had to be suppressed at all costs. 

Duty of care? Certainly but primarily a duty of care to the people of the UK who were not fighting against the democratically elected government.  They were not persecuted, they were provided with the essentials of life and then some and in addition supported to make new lives for themselves in the new world of opportunities that the Thatcher government created. A leaner fitter England that opened the door into a world where people were able to make the best for themselves - and most did. My close friends and colleagues certainly did.

Remember when she announced that there was no such thing as society?

How right she was.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thatcher was certainly right to take on the work-shy boomers and their unions. She wasn’t a facist, but she did defeat one (albeit in a war that she could have avoided). Her economic policies were sometimes too simplistic, she wasn’t sympathetic or understanding enough to consider the regions that had been relying on obsolete industries for a decade or two past their sell-by-date, particularly Scotland. She had to be tough and couldn’t afford to be touchy-feely because she wasn’t just the first female leader of a U.K. political party, but one of the first female leaders of any major country (her contemporary Indira Ghandi was infinitely more brutal). She should be praised for overseeing the transformation of Britain away from socialism and positioning it reasonably well for the post Cold War, post-Maastricht, boom, but squandered Scotland’s North Sea bonanza on dole payments, failed to invest in post-industrial regions, trusted the spivs a bit too much and mishandled Northern Ireland completely. She was a scientist - in most of her situation and data analysis she was correct, but she didn’t have much of a grasp on the intangibles. I think she will be remembered as a tough woman who put her country first, managed to defeat Galtieri, Scargill, and Foot, and created the Britain of the last thirty odd years - an economic success story but one riven by nationalism, regionalism, hideous inequality and greed that is no longer really capable of rational discourse and likely to fall apart. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Freggyragh said:

Thatcher was certainly right to take on the work-shy boomers and their unions. She wasn’t a facist, but she did defeat one (albeit in a war that she could have avoided). Her economic policies were sometimes too simplistic, she wasn’t sympathetic or understanding enough to consider the regions that had been relying on obsolete industries for a decade or two past their sell-by-date, particularly Scotland. She had to be tough and couldn’t afford to be touchy-feely because she wasn’t just the first female leader of a U.K. political party, but one of the first female leaders of any major country (her contemporary Indira Ghandi was infinitely more brutal). She should be praised for overseeing the transformation of Britain away from socialism and positioning it reasonably well for the post Cold War, post-Maastricht, boom, but squandered Scotland’s North Sea bonanza on dole payments, failed to invest in post-industrial regions, trusted the spivs a bit too much and mishandled Northern Ireland completely. She was a scientist - in most of her situation and data analysis she was correct, but she didn’t have much of a grasp on the intangibles. I think she will be remembered as a tough woman who put her country first, managed to defeat Galtieri, Scargill, and Foot, and created the Britain of the last thirty odd years - an economic success story but one riven by nationalism, regionalism, hideous inequality and greed that is no longer really capable of rational discourse and likely to fall apart. 

#doomers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Freggyragh said:

Thatcher was certainly right to take on the work-shy boomers and their unions. She wasn’t a facist, but she did defeat one (albeit in a war that she could have avoided). Her economic policies were sometimes too simplistic, she wasn’t sympathetic or understanding enough to consider the regions that had been relying on obsolete industries for a decade or two past their sell-by-date, particularly Scotland. She had to be tough and couldn’t afford to be touchy-feely because she wasn’t just the first female leader of a U.K. political party, but one of the first female leaders of any major country (her contemporary Indira Ghandi was infinitely more brutal). She should be praised for overseeing the transformation of Britain away from socialism and positioning it reasonably well for the post Cold War, post-Maastricht, boom, but squandered Scotland’s North Sea bonanza on dole payments, failed to invest in post-industrial regions, trusted the spivs a bit too much and mishandled Northern Ireland completely. She was a scientist - in most of her situation and data analysis she was correct, but she didn’t have much of a grasp on the intangibles. I think she will be remembered as a tough woman who put her country first, managed to defeat Galtieri, Scargill, and Foot, and created the Britain of the last thirty odd years - an economic success story but one riven by nationalism, regionalism, hideous inequality and greed that is no longer really capable of rational discourse and likely to fall apart. 

I agree with most of this, except that virtually all of the activists and agitators in the unions faced down by Thatcher were older than boomers who were youngsters at the time. All generations have their share of the slothful,  but in general,  boomers are seen as aspirational. They had good fortune in the time they happened onto the scene, of course,  but by and large they made the most of it. I don't believe that Thatcher was without empathy. She genuinely believed that her drive to deregulate and reduce the role of the state would make things better for everyone. You hit the nail on the head though in your assessment that her economic comprehension was simplistic. It certainly was and it made policy vulnerable to influence and hijacking by self-interested darker forces for their own enrichment. Maggie got the blame. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, woolley said:

I agree with most of this, except that virtually all of the activists and agitators in the unions faced down by Thatcher were older than boomers who were youngsters at the time. All generations have their share of the slothful,  but in general,  boomers are seen as aspirational. They had good fortune in the time they happened onto the scene, of course,  but by and large they made the most of it. I don't believe that Thatcher was without empathy. She genuinely believed that her drive to deregulate and reduce the role of the state would make things better for everyone. You hit the nail on the head though in your assessment that her economic comprehension was simplistic. It certainly was and it made policy vulnerable to influence and hijacking by self-interested darker forces for their own enrichment. Maggie got the blame. 

When Thatcher is front and centre on MF opinion is, inevitably, divided.

In the past it seemed to be that those who did not face those times were quite pro Thatcher although how they formed that opinion was difficult to pin down.

Of those who did live through those terrible times, and believe me they were really awful, the split was between those who cared about the poor people involved and those who only cared about themselves.

Whole communities just left to wither on the vine. Disgusting is the way I describe it.

The Falklands Conflict was caused by Thatcher but, of course, the right whingers would never, ever believe that. A bit like claiming that Boris Johnson is not an inveterate liar despite all the evidence that shows beyond all doubt that he is.

The island is very right wing, you only need to see the piles and piles of Daily Wails delivered to island newsagents every day to know that, which is reflected on MF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, P.K. said:

When Thatcher is front and centre on MF opinion is, inevitably, divided.

In the past it seemed to be that those who did not face those times were quite pro Thatcher although how they formed that opinion was difficult to pin down.

Of those who did live through those terrible times, and believe me they were really awful, the split was between those who cared about the poor people involved and those who only cared about themselves.

Whole communities just left to wither on the vine. Disgusting is the way I describe it.

The Falklands Conflict was caused by Thatcher but, of course, the right whingers would never, ever believe that. A bit like claiming that Boris Johnson is not an inveterate liar despite all the evidence that shows beyond all doubt that he is.

The island is very right wing, you only need to see the piles and piles of Daily Wails delivered to island newsagents every day to know that, which is reflected on MF.

I lived through the years of the Thatcher led governments and the years preceding the Thatcher government years.

I remember both very clearly. I remember freezing my tuchus off living in an out of season holiday chalet next to the Bacton Gas terminal where I was working during the "Three Day Week" with no electricity most of the time and electric heating the only means of heating and cooking and all because of a weak government faced by a scutch of communist and even USSR subsidised unions that were pissing all over the democratically elected government that were replaced by Wilson who bought the miners off but caused such devestation to the UK domestic economy he had to beg for a loan from the IMF that reduced the value of the UK pound BIG TIME.

Ten along came Callaghan who continued the screwing up of the UK and even refused to see just what was taking place.  He was replaced by the Thatcher government and the recovery started.

The Thatcher government and Mrs Thatcher in particular were like a surgeon faced with a patient suffering from terminal cancer for whom the only hope was courageous and radical surgery.  She had the guts to take it on.  The surgery was a success but the patient suffered post operative pain during recovery though he did recover leaner and fitter than he had been for decades.

Only seven kinds of bloody fool would hate the surgeon who had caused that pain as the price of having his life saved.

Now PK, go figure.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

In the past it seemed to be that those who did not face those times were quite pro Thatcher although how they formed that opinion was difficult to pin down.

Of those who did live through those terrible times, and believe me they were really awful...

Sorry to hear that. Did the moment pass you by then? You didn't benefit in any way from Thatcherism? 

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

The Falklands Conflict was caused by Thatcher but, of course, the right whingers would never, ever believe that.

So it wasn't an armed invasion of a British sovereign territory, imprisonment and hostage of British citizens for selfish politic gain costing many hundreds of lives. No. You were likely in the job at the time, what did you think then? 

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

The island is very right wing, you only need to see the piles and piles of Daily Wails delivered to island newsagents every day to know that, which is reflected on MF.

Why do you insist on disparagment? What would you prefer, a nice agreeable little arrangement where everyone indulged in group-thinks and soft-soaping?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rog said:

I lived through the years of the Thatcher led governments and the years preceding the Thatcher government years.

I remember both very clearly. I remember freezing my tuchus off living in an out of season holiday chalet next to the Bacton Gas terminal where I was working during the "Three Day Week" with no electricity most of the time and electric heating the only means of heating and cooking and all because of a weak government faced by a scutch of communist and even USSR subsidised unions that were pissing all over the democratically elected government that were replaced by Wilson who bought the miners off but caused such devestation to the UK domestic economy he had to beg for a loan from the IMF that reduced the value of the UK pound BIG TIME.

Ten along came Callaghan who continued the screwing up of the UK and even refused to see just what was taking place.  He was replaced by the Thatcher government and the recovery started.

The Thatcher government and Mrs Thatcher in particular were like a surgeon faced with a patient suffering from terminal cancer for whom the only hope was courageous and radical surgery.  She had the guts to take it on.  The surgery was a success but the patient suffered post operative pain during recovery though he did recover leaner and fitter than he had been for decades.

Only seven kinds of bloody fool would hate the surgeon who had caused that pain as the price of having his life saved.

Now PK, go figure.

How many more times do people like you have to be told before you get it?

Nobody is disputing that action had to be taken.

Nobody.

Is that finally clear enough...?

Lonan3 put it a lot better on here than I can but it's not so much what was done but HOW it was done.

London and the tory shires did very nicely under Thatcher. The rest could go hang.

Which is why her demise (I wish her well) caused such an outpouring of hatred for her that I have never seen directed against a UK PM before or since.

There was a reason for that. Can you guess what it is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...