Well that is echoed around Europe certainly and to an extent many other parts of the world which is why getting out of this recession is proving so hard - there are no real powerhouses thriving - US, Germany and Japan all have little growth - as does the EU as a whole - and they are important export markets
Strange this recession business. I work for a company that suffered really badly in the first one, laid off thousands. Anyhow a change of owner, accounting system and work ethos and they are making more money than they know what to do with- they do actually, employ graduates to fill in tick box spread sheets. The company has two main product lines one sells like there is no tomorrow and the plants cant make enough and the other, oh dear, oh dear. You can guess wich one generates more publicity and is the saviour of the company, can't see why myself. Harking back to the MT thing one thing keeps being said was she divided the country. It was divided before she ever got near Downing Street: James Callaghan, the more militant unions and the winter of discontent saw to that. Easy to criticise when the victim can't answer back.
I think those that have some insight on the scum that run our country, would well salute those sentiments, I'll shake his hand any day!................
As abhorrant that those inflicting terror on innocent people in boston are, they pale into insignificance compared to state sponsored 'terror'----- in 1981 the SAS were secretly used to 'train' the khymer rouge in the planting of mines--mainly in rice fields--this was vehemently denied at the time --but later John Major admitted his predecessor had indeed sanctioned this operation personally--thousands of children were maimed and killed over many years--do we need to look at the dealings with Saddam Hussein-- whilst he was busy gassing kurdish iraqis --the uk govt doubled his 'export credit' for arms--- lovely woman that Thatcher--and you wonder why she was hated with a passion ?
You should spread your net a little further rudebwoy - do some research into the role of the Harold Wilson led labour government into the supply of arms to the Nigerian government at the height of the Biafran civil war. Wilson stood up in Parliament and denounced the genocide at the same time as Armed Cars were being loaded onto ships bound for Nigeria. But no doubt that will be excuseable as was Blair's illegal war....how many 1,000's of cilivians have been killed in Iraq and Afghan because of Blair and Brown?
No doubting there was dissent, Brag, but I do not believe the country was truly divided at that point - class system notwithstanding. Even after the First World War when so many communities were shot to pieces, literally: with the upper class generals and middle class captains sending the working class soldiers over the top into a hail of bullets. "Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria mori" An oversimplification? Perhaps, but not too far from the truth. Soldiers being shot for cowardice when therir only crime was to suffer a nervous breakdown call it shell-shock, traumatic stress disorder or whatever. "A home fit for heroes". Yeah, right. 20 years later we were doing it all over again because we just did not learn. Even after WWII we messed it up again - the creation of Israel was probably the right thing to do, but not at the expense of Palestine. Nearly 70 years later and no end to the misery in sight. The Utopian vision of a truly united nation is never likely to happen. Capitalism creates winners and losers and a heirarchal structure based on finance: low wages for the workers - enough to keep them wanting to work, little enough so they need to work. Communism creates a flatline, everybody is equal (invariably some will be more equal than others) stifles free thinking, enterprise and individual growth. Neither is satisfactory but I doubt there is the wherewithal for change. An alternative? Perhaps a religious based state where 'god' or the priests are in charge and ancient scripture is literally applied? Twelfth century thinking with twentyfirst century weapons.... oh hang on.... So what was Thatchers legacy in the UK? In my opinion she drove a wedge into the heart of this nation. She allowed the cheap sale of council houses to to divide working communities and deprive the local authorities of income ultimately affecting the most vulnerable. She changed employment law to allow greater control over the workers. She deliberately created unemployment (Sir Keith Joseph let that cat out of the bag once in power) to keep wages low and make those in work fearful of their jobs. She changed benefit law so that all the contributions made throughout the working life counted for nothing, just the previous 12 months alone and if that was already less than you had been contributing before then tough. She set the police against the workers to enforce new employment laws and prevent a repeat of 1973... that is what it was about, to spite the miners / dockers /ship builders / steelworkers / carworkers in fact any one in medium to heavy industry. And yes, I am old enough to remember the powercuts and the litter and all the rest of it including turning up for school to find there was no milk to drink anymore. I didn't need it my family were able to feed me properly, but there were other kids who did. She shut the mines, gave away the oil and closed the heavy factories - everything that helped make this nation great. As I said previously: an island on coal, surrounded by oil, industrious. She helped destroy it. I agree it is easy to criticize when the victim can't answer back, but in this case she is not a victim and she has had her say and the legacy is clear. Defending the indefensible is another matter. Uncaring, Un-Christian, Undemocratic.
indeed -- blair is a war criminal --he is also a product and acolyte of Thatcher-- that millipede is no different, they are all happy to sanction 'war' if it benefits big business.....
I think Hitler may have had something to do with WW2. So where else would anyone have been able to create Israel? . Thatcher was confrontational and divisive - but as others have said there were deep divisions in society - fuelled by Union Boss Power - for their benefit not their men. Cheap council homes went to the existing tenants - not the rich - who had often paid rent for years - the mistake was not building more houses - those sold did not evaporate - and all govenments in the last 100 uyears are more or less guilty of that. She closed non viable industries. It is only socialists who believe in non-jobs where you pay people to do jobs that should not exist. In the long term that destroys an economy and ours was declining in the 60's and 70's. When cars replace horses you lose blacksmiths - only the Unions don't allow their jobs to go as they pay their leaders' fat wages. The police have always been expected to uphold the law I thought. Try blaming the decline in manufacturing on cheap labour in Asia - economies develop first into agriculature, then manufacturing and then service industries. That is why those industries you mention went - to continue subsidising them ad infinitum is daft. Days lost to strikes topped 29 million per annum under Callaghan - dropped to 2m under Thatcher. That lost production did not help our industries at all. An island that had exhausted commercially viable coal, with less than 0.1% of the world's oil supply and with loss making inefficient state run industires - she helped turn it around so that our economy gew faster in eighties and nineties than almost all other countries - creating thousands of jobs. Thatcher was personally both Christian (not that I can see that matters in today's irreligious society) and Democratic - she did not destroy the Unions but gave them the right to democratic secret ballots - replacing the previous public mob rule show of hands in public. Criticise Thatcher if you like (I can think of plenty to criticise her for) but do not distort facts and economic inevitability
