Margaret Thatcher has died
- Thread starter SoggySoape
- Start date
My situation is fine, I work in a security industry that boomed in those times
Not everyone can move though and not everyone wants to. House prices in this country are vastly overinflated which in turn has driven up private rent.
Thatcher taught us all that greed was good, that money was more important than anything. She was so wrong
Not everyone can move though and not everyone wants to. House prices in this country are vastly overinflated which in turn has driven up private rent.
Thatcher taught us all that greed was good, that money was more important than anything. She was so wrong
What's your point here?
I'm arguing for less benefits; that applies to employed, unemployed and part time workers across the board.
But in of itself I have no issue if a taxpayer get's some kind of benefit like a tax credit. Of course the specific situation you describe is not desirable and not something I would like to see. I'm not sure what gave you the impression I would ??
I'm arguing for less benefits; that applies to employed, unemployed and part time workers across the board.
But in of itself I have no issue if a taxpayer get's some kind of benefit like a tax credit. Of course the specific situation you describe is not desirable and not something I would like to see. I'm not sure what gave you the impression I would ??
jmclaughlin07
New member
Surely the winter of discontent was actually driven by government mishandling of the inflation level (26.9% at its height.)
Unions were representing their members interests (which at the time was around 80% of the working population)
Unions were representing their members interests (which at the time was around 80% of the working population)
AlexisInfectious®
Active member
Unfortunatly it is more common then you would think.
Whilst were on the subject on benefits, where do you stand on state pensions?
As they make up a large percentage of total benefits, do you feel they should be reduced?
Whilst were on the subject on benefits, where do you stand on state pensions?
As they make up a large percentage of total benefits, do you feel they should be reduced?
madeintheusa1234
New member
You know having thought about it, her legecey in this country is she taught us all that people are nothing more than 'pounds, shillings & pence. Now whether we'd of come to the same conclusion eventually is entirely possible but our (her) close links with the US probably haven't helped.
acredhead113
New member
Oh, so now its our fault now, great.
(Totally with you on our obsession with money here in the U.S.)
(Totally with you on our obsession with money here in the U.S.)
KronsteenofSpectre
Member
I find it creepy too. I even found it morbid that people partied over bundy's death too. and osama. and hussein.
True.
Indeed. This i agree with too.
I think though big difference between being indifferent to someone's death (not giving a crap) and actually taking to the streets to party and sing ding dong the witch is dead. I certainly understand people who want to party because someone who hurt them is dead. If Im honest with myself, I will say yay in my head if i ever heard the worst offender bully i ever had had died. I dont think i'll go party though.
and about her policies, I didnt like that she'd buddy buddy up with pinochet but thought of mandela as a terrorist and didnt like him.
And what everyone else here said.
True.
Indeed. This i agree with too.
I think though big difference between being indifferent to someone's death (not giving a crap) and actually taking to the streets to party and sing ding dong the witch is dead. I certainly understand people who want to party because someone who hurt them is dead. If Im honest with myself, I will say yay in my head if i ever heard the worst offender bully i ever had had died. I dont think i'll go party though.
and about her policies, I didnt like that she'd buddy buddy up with pinochet but thought of mandela as a terrorist and didnt like him.
And what everyone else here said.
I think we tried to adopt a system that works for a country of your size and try and use the template in a country of this size. Our system at the time wasn't broken although nobody can argue it needed fixing.
She changed the way we thought. Everyone got greedy and we're now just starting to really pay for it because all the silver is gone and we're up to our necks in debt. It's our fault
She changed the way we thought. Everyone got greedy and we're now just starting to really pay for it because all the silver is gone and we're up to our necks in debt. It's our fault
Basically it would have taken one hunter-killer submarine such as Conqueror carrying out regular patrols around the islands.Eighteen months before the invasion the BBC made a film aboard Endurance and the captain warned that cuts would send out the wrong message.Compare how much one submarine patrol would cost to how much it cost us in the end.A full scale invasion force and a garrison that we are still paying for more than thirty years later.
The unions brought the country almost to its knees with the three day week in the Seventies, they were simply too powerful when they got together. We had a situation where three unions getting together could effectively dictate to the state and bring the country to its knees through not going to work.
It's a flawed concept when you think about it. You're effectively shooting yourself in the foot and making the situation much worse by taking action. The state owned the industry and paid the workers. The workers pay the state taxes, the state spends the taxes on the welfare of it's people.
You strike in that situation and who are you ultimately hurting?
Yourself!
Now you either elect politicians to run the country and the national industry (as it was then) or you hand power over to the unions. The country can't function as it should if it's both. that's the situation that had to be ended, and it was thanks to somone who had the fortitude and will to stand up to them.
It's a flawed concept when you think about it. You're effectively shooting yourself in the foot and making the situation much worse by taking action. The state owned the industry and paid the workers. The workers pay the state taxes, the state spends the taxes on the welfare of it's people.
You strike in that situation and who are you ultimately hurting?
Yourself!
Now you either elect politicians to run the country and the national industry (as it was then) or you hand power over to the unions. The country can't function as it should if it's both. that's the situation that had to be ended, and it was thanks to somone who had the fortitude and will to stand up to them.
chelseaat]
Member
Valar Morghulis
Hindsight is great, but when you have to make big decisions there are consequences either way.
People on this thread have been complaining about money and how it is spent. There's not an unlimited supply, so sometimes cutbacks are made. Now of course with hindsight that they did invade makes it all the more a mistake - with hindsight. But there are always mistakes. Spending that money would have meant taking it from somewhere else.
A calculated risk was taken that the Argentinians would not take it that far and money could be better spent elsewhere at the time - it was the wrong call, in hindsight. But in reality no one can predict the future in the way you wish to paint.
People on this thread have been complaining about money and how it is spent. There's not an unlimited supply, so sometimes cutbacks are made. Now of course with hindsight that they did invade makes it all the more a mistake - with hindsight. But there are always mistakes. Spending that money would have meant taking it from somewhere else.
A calculated risk was taken that the Argentinians would not take it that far and money could be better spent elsewhere at the time - it was the wrong call, in hindsight. But in reality no one can predict the future in the way you wish to paint.
KarateDude13
New member
I think state pension should be based on a persons situation. There are people getting a state pension who don't need it to get by. That could free up good money for those that do need more help.
I would just like to see as fair system as possible really. I know people who are well off yet they get a state pension purely on the basis that they are entitled to it because they made contributions in their working life.
I don't really agree with that. You should only take or be given what you need to survive humanely from the state. That's my basic outlook on state handouts.
In the broader sense, ideologically I would like too see more movement towards private schemes and private sector across the board., not just pensions.
Employers will soon have to offer all employees the option to opt in to pension schemes offered by them, which the employer will have to make an equal contribution, or something along those lines.
I would just like to see as fair system as possible really. I know people who are well off yet they get a state pension purely on the basis that they are entitled to it because they made contributions in their working life.
I don't really agree with that. You should only take or be given what you need to survive humanely from the state. That's my basic outlook on state handouts.
In the broader sense, ideologically I would like too see more movement towards private schemes and private sector across the board., not just pensions.
Employers will soon have to offer all employees the option to opt in to pension schemes offered by them, which the employer will have to make an equal contribution, or something along those lines.
sorry, i'm just kind of jumping into the situation so i don't have the pages of backstory here. but when it comes to state pensions, i've always got the same kind of thought.
why is a pension considered a handout? in my mind, it's not a handout; it's payment that's been deferred until later. if i work and abide by my employment contract, why should i miss out on the pension that is legally owed me?
why is a pension considered a handout? in my mind, it's not a handout; it's payment that's been deferred until later. if i work and abide by my employment contract, why should i miss out on the pension that is legally owed me?
Thats how I feel about EI in canada. Employment Insurance. Workers and sometimes their employers put some money into the kitty that the workers can usewhen they're not working. Its not welfare, though, its different, for one thing, its not taxpayers money. Its theirs, they're entitled. But the harper government has changed all that and making it seem almost like some sort of crime. You should have heard about the EI police going around actually going to people's houses to make sure they arent "cheating the system" like they're some sort of suspects.
boohbahs
Member
i'll give you the illinois example because i know the most about it. anyway, there was a great study by a university of illinois springfield professor that found that in the seventies and eighties, republican administrations, woefully underfunded the state's pensions. now, the republican party is telling us that we've got this massive problem, and all those teachers/firefighters/police are just going to have to take a haircut. but why didn't your party fund the pensions as you were legally required to all those years? ugh.
i'm all for making rules to ensure that people don't abuse the system. but if you you sign a contract with workers in your state to pay them, then you pay them.
i'm all for making rules to ensure that people don't abuse the system. but if you you sign a contract with workers in your state to pay them, then you pay them.