Margaret Thatcher: a legacy fueled by greed

Share This Article

That’s it, she’s gone. And just like when in power, controversy surrounding The Iron Woman is as ever prominent. For those of you who’ve endured my recent Twitter bashing will know all too well; I will not be shedding tears for the loss. It’s not that I seek to disrespect the dead, but with her life ended, it is time to reflect, and it’s her own doing that this reflection contains deep hatred and resentment.

Decisions of mass destruction

Thatcher’s time as Prime Minister saw her make a decision, a decision between the economy and the people. As the Government raked in taxes, privatised companies and closed mines, the economy grew whilst the people saw their homes, their jobs, their livelihoods stamped on by one woman’s self-obsessed greed. Thatcher personifies capitalist ruthlessness, and backbone or not, there is no silver lining to that fact.

Communities destroyed

It takes little effort to notice the way she single-handedly abolished the entire community of the working class. Today just to drive through an old mining town is all you need to see. Windows boarded up, streets empty, workingmen’s clubs abandoned. This wasn’t the doing of a women building Britain for a better future, she in fact paralysed a country socially reliant on these communities. She “tore the heart out of the mining communities of the North” said David Hopper, the general secretary of Durhan Miners’ Association, “although millionaires like those in David Cameron’s Cabinet certainly did alright”. Greed was the cornerstone of Thatcher’s leadership. Her lust for money, her desire for power, her stubbornness.

This was all too evident in her dealing of Governmental businesses; tossing responsibility of public paid investments to the highest bidder. So little regard for how it would affect the quality says so much of Thatcher’s carelessness. Carelessness that’s still prominent today; I often travel by train in the UK and don’t envy those commuters amongst you, enduring delayed, overpriced services, day in, day out. But you’ve Thatcher to thank for that.

The Funeral

When it comes to the burial, the proposal that an individual who destroyed a state would be buried by it’s own resources is ludicrous. If her actions were replicated in any other country, we would condemn them as a tyrant, demand that they step down, are extradited. Yet in the UK, the elite go on giving destructive people like Thatcher a completely unjustified respect, using money ordinary people have earned and neglecting the fact that the Thatcher’s sit on a comfortable sixty-six million. I say justice would be to bury out of her own pocket, and to allow those who lost their livelihoods to be given what they deserved two decades ago.

The cover up

And how can we forget the cover up. Another shining example of her ruthless neglect was her part to play – or indeed the part she didn’t play – in the Hillsborough disaster. The tragedy on that day, the loss of life and the corruption involved in its cover-up remains a disgrace to this day. It was carried out by an evil, twisted woman, willing to tarnish an entire city’s reputation and scar the lives of hundreds of families.  This is symbolic of Thatcher’s regard for the people of the north. Just yesterday, both Dave Whelan and John Madejski twisted the knife even further into the backs of those associated with Hillsborough; favouring a minute silence at all games this weekend (a weekend that coincides with the 24th anniversary of Hillsborough). Again, a stark reminder of the insensitivity drilled into her minions.

I can stretch only so far as to accept she was determined, but what use does determination serve if it’s to follow-through with her warped vision?  Obama claimed she had “broken the glass ceiling for other women”, I can only hope that she is no role model for anyone else in the future.

Share This Article

Comments

69 comments
TiggerPitman
TiggerPitman

Great article. It's a shame you now choose to mimic her and demonise the poor and vulnerable scapegoats of Benefits Street.

Yareth_6_Trash
Yareth_6_Trash

I completely agree with you Joey. In Spain we've got this woman called Esperanza Aguirre who used to be head of the Comunidad de Madrid council really admires here and has done the same in Madrid, privatizing everything she can, starting with the hospitals and the school system. She's now managed to name a street after here, Spain is madness at the moment.

tonyjardine
tonyjardine

As a former racing driver it depends what one of the which where about do you mean mate because I'm not sure where you mean. ok? OK?!

GabrielVrabely
GabrielVrabely

JE détéste cette  femme   elle a mis des milliers de gens dans la pauvreté  et laisser mourrir des gens en prison bobby sands

Notimeforsheeple
Notimeforsheeple

A) I corrected Joey's spelling and grammar, not yours. B) I am wary about statistics as they can be very misleading. C) I am highly sceptical about reading governmental reports such as the UN one you refer to. As I said previously, I prefer to make judgements on what I know to be fact, not what I read. As you rightly say, google is not entirely accurate but in the same vein you cannot always trust books or other sources such as reports. I find your tone a little patronising and you are making assumptions about me which are actually incorrect. The one fact I DO believe in is that too many people in the Western Hemisphere are too hung up on money and material possessions unlike those in the rest of the world where cases of depression are much much lower.

SqueakNZ78
SqueakNZ78

Comment for Notimeforsheepie.  Your argument is rather like Adam Smith's in "The Wealth of Nations" where his defense of capitalism is that a poor man living in a hovel in London is like a King compared to a poor person in Africa. Your argument that privatization has led to cheaper train fares is pretty silly. I guess that means its cheaper for the "majority" of people to trudge to their "man-machine" jobs, earning just enough to pay off their ever increasing debt, to save enough to pay for their own retirement as their government can no longer afford to assist them, while continuing to pay the majority burden of taxes to bail out corporate institutions (see anywhere in Europe and the United States) who dodge taxes through massive tax repatriation (legally registering their corporations offshore to avoid paying the majority tax share), all the while gambling with "our" money, enriching themselves, while most of us continue to struggle, and if it fails we're all on the hook for it (talk to the people in Cyprus about how they feel about this). The gap between the wealthy and the non-wealthy continues to grow, and 5% of the world's population continues to manage 95% of the world's wealth. Perhaps we should privatize everything, so only those who can afford it can send their kids to good schools, while those that simply have the misfortune to be born without any choice into poverty have no chance at redemption by going to a good school. Or maybe like Bechtel did in Bolivia we can privatize the water supply, charging more than a person makes in a month for running water, and then threatening people with arrest if they caught rainwater in buckets on their rooftops as it threatened the monopoly they had on private water supply. Fact is privatization, globalization and capitalization are false gods, that merely continue the 'serf' system that has been in place for hundreds of years. One of the worlds biggest capitalists, Bill Gates claims that our system is flawed when its more of a priority for pharma companies to come up with a cure for male baldness than it is to come up with a cure for Malaria. Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and the like encouraged were not bastions of democracy, but supported regimes, that tortured, murdered, imprisoned and assassinated people that merely asked for the chance of a better life (e.g. Chile, where a "Democratically elected President was forced to commit suicide with an AK-47 after the presidential palace was assaulted by Fighter Jets). Domestically they cut off the impoverished, and used authoritarian methods to stifle any protest. Economically both were only saved by their own treasuries bailing them out (something they can not do these days). Joey is absolutely spot on with his assessment of Margaret Thatcher. While I don't necessarily think she should be vilified, our societal nature to respect people such as "The Iron Lady"  is incorrect. You don't have to dig too deep to look at the societal consequences of Thatcher and Reagan's policies and continuation of this destructive system that teaches all to look out for ourselves rather than for each other.

ConorQuinn
ConorQuinn

how any footballer can try to call a politican greedy is beyond me.. how much are you on you ugly chav

Notimeforsheeple
Notimeforsheeple

I can't even be bothered to read everything you say when I see that you are thirty years old and weren't even born when Margaret Thatcher came into power!! I read as far as privatisation, then decided to comment. I am fifteen years older than you and more experienced in life, sorry. I actually WORKED for BR twenty five years ago and saw tremendous waste going on. Fares were high, too. You certainly could not get cheap fares by booking in advance like you can do in today's competitive rail industry. It may not be perfect but it is much improved in my opinion since privatisation. Mines? Britain could simply not compete against cheaper imported coal. It's sad, but there's no room for sentiment in business. That's a fact of life. I work now in our family's business so once again, I'm speaking from life experience. I also know an ex miner who was as happy as Larry when the mines closed since he didn't have to endure further years of dirty, dangerous work, plus he received a handsome payout and is still referred to locally as "million dollar man". He found another job quickly too. That's all I need to say because I'm not qualified to make political comments which are not based on FACT rather than opinion. I'm not a student of politics or British constitution, but I am a realist and I'm just glad I'm not banging on about outdated "class" issues in society. People should see the global picture, look to the future and stop drivelling on about trying to pin the blame for every ill in society on one Prime Minister. Educate yourselves before you start bleating and worry about the FAR MORE SINISTER dealings afoot within the Eurpean Parliament.

rjinker
rjinker

Greed? What like moving to QPR for £80k a week, a newly promoted team likely to struggle, when you had the ability to play for a Europa League team?

AlienSKP
AlienSKP

Thank you so much, Joey. Your best post so far. 

pongotastic
pongotastic

The modern football fan has a lot to answer to. For years fans have complained that the footballer is far removed from the average man on the terraces. However, now the social technology exists to lessen the divides we all find ourselves moaning because we find out that the majority of footballers are in fact morons.

hughbevan
hughbevan

What is more greedy, trying to make people work to earn money, and doing what is best for the economy which in turn makes life easier for everyone in the long run OR sitting around doing nothing earning a very comfortable living off the state? 

The issue with left wingers is that they refuse to see the downside of handing out benefits. The labour government got us in the mess we are in right now yet left wingers like yourself blame the banks when in reality if the government had done what they should have done and what economics has told us to do for years then we would not be in the mess we are in right now at all.

Margaret Thatcher may have had to make some tough decisions but saying she disregarded the north etc is just not true. Socialist policies were the reason the mines had to be closed. No business would have continued with the mines so why should the government pay to keep them around? The trade unions were ruling the country and sending us downhill and she stopped that. Whilst I understand those who have been deeply affected by her may not want to mourn her death but they should educate themselves as to why she did what she did.

Celebrating her death as some have done is barbaric and utterly disgraceful. 

cervantes01
cervantes01

well said, I'm fed up with how the right wing press and media of this country are trying their best to deify this woman, whilst simultaneously trying to censor any dissenting voices.  My area suffered under her policies and continues to do so today thanks to her policies of social greed which ultimately drained the nation's wealth into the hands of a few Oligarchs.

0191_rob86
0191_rob86

I live in pit village in country durham and what she done to the pits and the people who work in them and there family was sickening people had no money to put food on the table brand a the enemy of the state by Thatcher and its happen now with Thatcher love child no jobs no money and every think getting put up so people why people wants to celebrate the death of thatcher thats y

GregMacKinnon
GregMacKinnon

This is not a time for singing "Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead". No, that merely diminishes the humanity of those who do so, no matter how badly hurt they were by the policies of Mrs Thatcher. Rather, as you say Joey, this is a time for reflection. A reflection on the countless lives this woman ruined the length and breadth of the UK. There will be those who say that the reforms she made were necessary; that she grasped the nettle where previous governments had shrunk in the face of unionised bullying intent on bringing the country to its knees. Well, maybe. But the fact remains that she did more than break the back of the unions. Perhaps we can blame Labour, for rejecting Barbara Castle's "In Place Of Strife" which would have effectively dealt with union excesses, and on terms conducive to the values of the Left. Instead this was rejected, and carte blanche was handed to Thatcher to wield the axe. And wield she did, with gusto. She destroyed entire communities, sending thuggish police forces from the south to literally bloody the resolve of traditional northern communities who had produced nothing but salt-of-the-earth hard working people with a sense of decency and obligation to their fellows. Men who had toiled in the unimaginable blackness of the pit for an honest day's wage to bring heat and light to the rest of the nation. The sickening smear campaigns endorsed by her poisonous government, aided and abetted by the filthy Murdoch press, which saw working men and women characterised as the "enemy within". And then Hillsborough, the apotheosis of this appalling creed. Only now is the true horror emerging; the traducing of the city of Liverpool, the profanation of the memories of the 96 dead, the corruption, the Government's abject failure to pursue the truth, and the unfathomably ugly face of the right wing press, personified by the likes of Kelvin MacKenzie, laid bare for all to see. As the Tories queue up to deliver their sycophantic eulogies, I for one know just how utterly ruinous this woman's legacy has been for the UK. I will not mourn her, but nor will I dance on her grave; it's called decency, it's called dignity, and it is something that ordinary people need to recover if we are to face the onslaught of her radicalised political offspring; this bastard government too stupid, privileged, inexperienced and blindly ideological to realise the damage they are doing.

afansopinion
afansopinion

I can't understand celebrating her death. But I didn't live through her government. If I had, maybe I'd understand.... but you think it's hard now, in a 21st century recession? We have no idea how lucky we are. We have everything we need. We just want more. I can't judge something I didn't experience but, my parents suffered the consequences of an 80's Government, but my kids will suffer the consequences of a 90's one. I know which I hate more.

afansopinion
afansopinion

I have struggled to gain an opinion on her as I didn't live through her government or experience myself the impact of her decisions but, I have been disappointed with the usual hypocrital democracy that's already sprung it's ugly head. The Daily Mail a perfect example of this. Deciding that if you don't want to mourn Thatcher, you're therefore full of evil & disrespectful.... funny that. Cause that's exactly what all these folk celebrating her death think she was.

I understand the hatred. She destroyed communities. But many celebrating her death have without knowing, benefited from her decisions. had since she died. I wont judge anyone for their views because they obviously have reasons for them. But nobody should be told that an opposing view is wrong, just because she has died. Death brings out the most passionate feelings towards people. Let those feelings be known. Let people be heard.

Good read Joey. Honest and heart felt.

Hamiltonaccie
Hamiltonaccie

You have an opinion on everything but knowledge of nothing. You are barely literate yet you choose to attempt to write a blog. You have the time and money to be properly educated but not the application. You have no excuse and this laziness damages the causes you claim to support. To give you an analogy you might understand, your blog is to reasonable debate what Daniella Westbrook was to Burberry.

votenixon72
votenixon72

Thatcher personifies capitalist ruthlessness, and backbone or not, there is no silver lining to that fact.

 

There are plenty of silver linings to that. Do you honestly think that the country would be in a better place if there was still only one telephone company in the UK, with a monopoly on lines? Phones used to take 12 weeks or more to install, now it is the work of minutes, thanks to deregulation. British Airways was a loss making mess, now it is one of the more well regarded companies in the world. British airspace, long the most open of all of Europe, hosts half a dozen low price airlines that keep the flag carriers honest in both price and service. Gas, electricity and water are all delivered cheaper and more efficiently now (in real terms taking into account no hidden government subsidies) and the only utility that you name check is the British Rail, which was privatised under John Major – nothing to do with Maggie.

 

Would you really want to go back to an industrial landscape where millions of hours were lost to closed-shop unions who, in the case of British Leyland, allowed sub-standard cars to roll off productions lines on Friday because they wanted to get home early?  

 

Our heavy industry and mining had been in inevitable decline for decades, and as one of the previous posters points out, Wilson closed more mines under his premiership than Thatcher did in hers. Coal mining had been an inefficient loss maker for years, are we as taxpayers supposed to subsidise it as an industry for ever? The Dock work in your native North West largely (though not totally) left due to union intransigence toward containerisation and the shipbuilding in my native North East had already started to fade out not because of the evil machinations of Montgomery Burns and assorted Fat Cats in smoke filled rooms but because South Korea & Taiwan could and did build ships cheaper and faster. These are economic realities, inevitable and irreversible and while you can ignore reality, you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.

 

Do I need to mention 83% tax rates, capital controls, Sunday trading, IMF bailouts, 25% inflation and the fact that Jim Callahan when PM said if he were a young man he would emigrate.

 

You quote the David Hopper and his usual hate. I was born in Durham, and grew up in a pit village before moving to an area surrounded by collieries and I can tell you any organization like the Durham Miners Association that marches without shame under banners of Marx and Lenin does not need to be lecturing anyone about economics. 

 

You, me and every single person reading this blog benefits daily from the Thatcher's economic legacy witnessed, if by no other fact, than in 13 years Labour reversed none of it whatsoever.

 

Atlee
Atlee

 @scooke7 

 

You mentioned how Blair and New Labour failed to rid the wrongs which you described in - what sounded to me - quite a cynical tone. This was done in conjunction with you claiming Joey Barton to be limited in his knowledge of politics.

 

I think, however, in doing so you have contradicted yourself. It is a well known fact that New Labour accepted the political ideology of Thatcherism. That is to say that Labour, when under the stewardship of Blair/Brown, were not a party of the Left. They did not intend to rid the British political landscape free of Thatcherite policies. In fact, Blair was quick to champion 'the third way': "it's not about left, it's not about right, it's about efficiency."

 

So, you see, what I am trying to say is this: in viewing New Labour as a failed project which intended to set Britain in motion towards a new direction away from Thatcher is a grave misunderstanding of the issue. They were not Socialists when in government, neither did they intend to act in such a manner. In fact, he actually changed Labour's identity from being 'Democratic Socialists' to 'Social Democrats.'

 

As Thatcher herself claimed, her greatest legacy was New Labour. 

 

Moreover, your first observation you ended with is, I would say, somewhat misplaced. At the peak of her popularity the Tories won a majority of 44%. Now, in a general election that is a considerable percentage. But when viewing her popularity in general, it gives a somewhat distorted reflection. There were still 56% of Britons against her. Against her ruthless approach to austerity. The problem was that there was no viable voice in opposition. I don't believe the people trusted people such as Kinnock. 

 

I would also say this: she entered government on the back of a miserable attempt at running the country by Callaghan. She, in 83, won a landslide victory after the victory of the Falklands which buoyed the entire nation. Add this to there being no reasonable alternative, then, perhaps, you can understand why - although her policies did much to atomize society - she was still voted in.

OliverDurcan
OliverDurcan

The right to buy destroyed poor working class communities- it was no act of compassion. Flogging council houses meant more money in the governments pocket and deprived a generation of cheap, affordable social housing, a situation which to this day has not been rectified. Police are worried about left-wing activity at this burial of hers- she's that far to the right that the church of england is left wing by comparison.

clarky121
clarky121

And if she didnt care about the working class why give them the opportunity to buy shares and their coucil houses!!

scooke7
scooke7

I really didn't think I was going to read a properly researched article on why Maggie was bad for Britain by Joey Barton of all people. And I was not disappointed. If you're going to talk about coal mines, you need to at least find out what was happening with the mines for 5-10 years before Maggie came to power in 1979. If you're going to talk about railway privatisation, you need to at least study what was happening with British Rail for the 5-10 years before Maggie came to power. Also, when there is a recession & there is high unemployment, governments are not able to "rake in taxes" because when income is 0, no income tax is payable. This has a direct bearing on how much the government is able to spend. Yes, governments borrow money. But that borrowing has to be under control. It's called fiscal responsibility. Just look at your adopted country of France on how to be fiscally irresponsible & the impact it is having.

You write about her greed as though she was interested in hoarding money from being PM. Of course, you are on minimum wage as a professional footballer, aren't you? And look at Blair who's is raking in the money now.

The problem with people like you is that you are a male chauvinist who can't stand women who are decisive. Stubborness & being decisive are 2 sides of the same coin. Like you, she also made mistakes. It's ok for you to refuse to admit that you totally "lost it" when you got sent off on the last day at Man. City last season. But it's not ok for Maggie to not admit making mistakes.

And although Maggie may have made mistakes in the aftermath of the  Hillsborough disaster, it is important to note 2 things: Maggie DID NOT tell the FA to hold the FA Cup semifinals at Hillsborough where the previous year Spurs fans were nearly involved in a crush. Maggie also DID NOT tell the police to allocate the smaller Leppings Lane End to the larger Liverpool crowd instead of the larger "Kop" end.

I want to end with 2 observations:

Maggie won 3 elections with 13million + votes. So, people did vote for her. It's not as if she fiddled with votes to win & stay in power.

Tony Blair and & his mates had 13 years to "fix" many things that Maggie got "wrong". People rioted against the poll tax/community charge/council tax. So why didn't Blair do something about it? Why didn't Blair nationalise the railways? In fact, for the first 2 years after 1997, Gordon Brown actually stuck to the same spending limit of the Major government. Why?

Running a country is a big responsibility & is more difficult when there is very little money. Until you understand exactly how it works, I suggest that you stay away from talking or writing about it. Your tiny brain does not have enough ability to solve a Rubik's cube, let alone governing a country of 60 million+ people.

 

 

clarky121
clarky121

You are a complete idiot! The mines etc wete losing billions subsidised by the taxpayer! If they were so great why did they not survive once private? The only people who were greedy were miners who wanted more money from the taxpayer for themselves without a care for imrpoving thebusiness! She just had the bottle to do what neded doing howevwr callus it may look! She turbed the country from a third world country into the power house we are today!! So she made a few people jobless! Big business go bust all the time and there is no outcry then! You also bear no mention to endibg the cold war which could have resulted in another world war!! Taking back the falklands, forging relationships with soviet union and usa and more importantly stopping us entering thw euro which we all know would have been a disaster!! So whats your fuckin argument you idiot? Miners out of work? Look at the facts u twat 3000 mines exiated pre war only 300 when she took over so what happener to the rest you fuckin moron!! The hillsborough cover up? Fuckin balls! I imagine far worse has been covered up over the years!! Come back with a better argument you retard!

alfi
alfi

AGree with all you say. She never did anything for me or my family. They all just look after themselves. Same goes for the royals. I won't miss any of them.

Sandyann64
Sandyann64

Joey, you say here what many are feeling. To those saying that to speak badly of her when she has only just passed away as its upsetting for her family, I would counter that the families of the Hillsborough victims went through much worse in the aftermath of the disaster. Maggie did sell off the family silver, decimate mining communities and support Pinochets evil regime- Liverpool fans didn't urinate on and steal from the dead and yet that is what was claimed and she and those in power at the time did nothing to uncover the truth!

paddym1878
paddym1878

the money she made the country through her actions came at too high a cost. people in the cities and towns that relied upon these industries did not stand a chance- she was okay with that. 'Made the rich richer and the poor poorer' is what my nan always told me. I hope her grave has a dancefloor.

PhilHarrison1
PhilHarrison1

I can only refer to this and the comments made by the Right Honourable Glenda Jackson to give a clear depiction; to those who weren't there, of what it was actually like to live under the shadow of the Thatcher regime. The fear expressed in that magical speech (and echoed here) draw specific attention to the re-emergence of this greedy, selfish, ruthless brand of Conservatism in this country. I implore you to do what you can to rid us of this cancer. The Tories point to Labour overspending but this investment was only necessary because of the lack of Conservative investment in things that were/are of intrinsic social worth. At least our tax deductions were being ploughed into things of human value under Labour tenure. It's hard to maintain restraint when talking of Thatcher and her inhumane brand of Conservatism. All I can say is that I was there the first time. God help me if I have to suffer the same indignity again.

FredG
FredG

Come on now Joey, no one is going to take anything you have to say seriously if you can't produce a balanced argument.

nrogers959
nrogers959

Wilson closed over 100 more mines than Thatcher, she took over a country on its knees, crawling to the IMF for a handout. When she left Downing Street, having been democratically elected 3 times, the UK was the 6th richest country in the world. She elicited a huge rebate from the EU which is paid back to the UK every year, somewhere in the region of £3.5bn a year since 1984. I think she has done enough to deserve the same level of respect in death as others PM's given the honour of a ceremonial funeral such as Gladstone and Disraeli.

aussieagle
aussieagle

Praise to Maggie, she fucked the Unions & the Commies, she might be dead but her legacy lives on, well done Maggie

Ryjones1988
Ryjones1988

yes, for real people of england she was bad, but for the fear she brought to other countries with the financial gain she made for the country itself was amazing. i agree with your points in all aspects but come on, just because she's dead it doesnt mean we can slay her now because it was 20 years ago.. she made this country debtless more feared but went the wrong way.. what she did with the hillsbrough disater made me lose respect for her all together but still. she got a family and its there time to mourne over her, not our time to call her all the names under the sun

Notimeforsheeple
Notimeforsheeple

 @SqueakNZ78 I'd be very interested to know your experience of public sector versus private sector employment. Perhaps, rather than spouting random historical "facts" you could give us YOUR answer to how YOU would solve the problem of public institutions hemorrhaging money, as I have experienced also during my fifteen years working in the education system, plus what I have witnessed in the NHS whilst attending appointments at hospitals with members of my family where, for example, noisy waiting rooms are equipped with televisions that nobody can hear, let alone wants to watch. The problems you speak of that we are experiencing now are a culmination of years and years of a succession of incompetent administration, not just one woman. Yes, I'm aware of the 95% of wealth being owned by 5% of the people; that will probably never change but frankly if I'd never picked up a book, newspaper or read this anywhere - would it have ever have affected my quality of life? Probably not. Who actually knows if this is true or not? Incidentally, what makes you think that paying for education gets you a better education? It is not mandatory for private schools to employ QUALIFIED teachers - google it - whereas state schools have to employ fully qualified teachers, so I know where I'd rather send my child to be educated .

I never blindly believe anything unless I have actually experienced it myself - that's why I disagreed with Joey. Incidentally Joey, check your spelling and grammar - FUELLED is the English spelling and "it's" means IT IS so it shouldn't be "it's own resources". There are probably more mistakes but as I said before, I can't be bothered to finish reading this "argument".

 

BrunoMunter
BrunoMunter

 @Notimeforsheeple "You certainly could not get cheap fares by booking in advance like you can do in today's competitive rail industry." Simply that sentence makes a mockery of your entire argument.

streetlybaggie
streetlybaggie

@Notimeforsheeple Never mind the European Union, it's the greed and sinister dealings of the banks that have put us where we are now.

paddym1878
paddym1878

 @TruthHurts8  There would be no reason for you to celebrate our loved ones dying, they have not done aything to you. She destroyed a lot of lives and hurt a lot of people. Okay, she allowed people to buy council houses, how is that possible for the hundreds and thousands that were jobless through factories and coal mines closing down. She's a heartless bitch.

streetlybaggie
streetlybaggie

@TruthHurts8 Open and honest? You need to catch up on your Thatcher history!

Redders79
Redders79

@OliverDurcan these people didn't have to buy their council houses!!!

streetlybaggie
streetlybaggie

@scooke7 Your final sentence regarding tiny brain undid everything else you wrote prior. No need for the slagging off after making all of those points.

navbasiTLW
navbasiTLW

 @Ryjones1988 Where was the mourning for 96 innocent lives over the last 24 years. She knew the "Truth" but for 20+ years kept quiet in order to keep the establishment safe. Where was her remorse? There wasn't any so there shouldn't be any now about her death and the mourning that her family are going through. Her son is a "Sir" in the UK but because of his arms convictions can't enter the USA. That says everything about the UK establishment, as long as you look after your own, the rest can fend for themselves.

SqueakNZ78
SqueakNZ78

 @Notimeforsheeple  @SqueakNZ78 I didn't realize this was a discussion on my personal grammar? And my arguments were in relation to the world on the whole, not specifically towards Great Britain. I'm glad you would rather send your kids to state schools over private schools, but I think empirical evidence would indicate that the chances of children with a private school education succeeding over those with a public school education would be much higher. Not that this was the point in any case. It was that the schools, public or private in poor residential areas tend to lack facilities/qualities in comparison to those that wealthier people, or wealthier communities can afford. P.S. Google is not a reliable source (commercially driven results search engine there buddy??). I grew up in a country with a socialized system of government in regards to healthcare and education and think its far superior to the privatized system I currently live in, here in the United States, where one serious medical issue can set you back thousands of dollars and is the number one cause of bankruptcy here. I would say inconvenience and an almost "free" healthcare system would be better than that, but hey, maybe that's just me. In regards to the Public Sector perhaps we have informed people, experts or academics consult on the consolidation and streamlining of institutions. I'm not for privatization, but that doesn't mean that corporate methods can't be used to make a more effective government. My argument against mass privatization with no regulation is that it runs unchecked, which is what led us to the first industrial era and the gilded era in the United States. Asking for profit business to be socially responsible is like giving weapons to an army and asking them never to fight. I don't believe I was spouting random historical facts, i was merely giving facts to back up an argument i was making. Its called a debate. Google it, i'm sure you'll find some instructions. You're being hypocritical by asking me for a solution, when you state that you understand that 5% of people manage 95% of the worlds wealth, but it will always be that way. Why ask me for a solution when you don't want to even bother? Or are you too busy scanning my every word for a spelling mistake rather than making a rational argument. Incidentally if you don't believe this is true, then you can "google" it again (your reliable source) or yes, you could actually read a book, or several of them, or statistical data that actually supports what I am saying. Maybe you could look up the United Nations Reports on World Poverty Indicators for 2012?  Although apparently you don't think that reading a book can change your life. i believe there are many people, world leaders, artists, philosophers, scientists and the like, who would possibly disagree with you. If you're trying to quantify your argument by your experience of 15 years in the education system in GB, so what. Many people have worked or had experience in the public sector or private sector (I have had both) , that doesn't make them any more of an expert than another. What does, is data. And existing empirical data is on my side.  Privatization and Capitalism has bought the greatest amount of wealth to this planet in history, and also its greatest disparity between those with wealth, and those without it.  I suggest you should have used your 15 years in the education system to read a little more thoroughly on the economic and physical consequences of a socially irresponsible system without regulation. Oh, and by the way, almost all Western Capitalist countries succeeded after WW 2 due to tariffs, huge subsidies, many affecting education and/or healthcare (see The Marshall Plan, or the GI Bill) and protection of local industries. So before you criticize the public sector you may want to pause? Or you can comb through this and correct my grammar again, which i'm sure is a much more efficient use of your time.

cervantes01
cervantes01

 @paddym1878  @TruthHurts8

 She didn't actually, ordinary people had the right to their council homes from as early as 1968 under the Harold Wilson government.  Tennants also got discounts too to encourage home ownership.  All Thatcher did was to steal the idea and promote it as her own.

  • Joey On Sport
  • Joey On Culture
  • Joey On Politics
  • Joey On The Journey