Errrr
Yes because keeping a load of unprofitable coal mines open would have been such a great idea...

Thousands are losing their jobs now and many more will in the next couple of years. Shame they don't all have a union to go and cry to...
(jackhiggs no longer a v!rgin as of..., Mon 22 Dec 2008, 23:40, 1 reply)

It's called Thatcherism
It screwed anyone who didn't have a white collar job in the 1980s.

It's screwing everyone now.

As much as I detest New Labour, I detest Thatcherism just as much.

Anyone who understands politics will know why.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Mon 22 Dec 2008, 23:52, closed)

But, y'know, it was a brilliant thing, seeing as it didn't affect anyone rich enough to be regarded as important.
And anyone who complains is just bitter and a pleb.

Note for readers who are less quick on the uptake: I am being sarcastic.
(WANKERTRON you say "prick", I say "wanker", Tue 23 Dec 2008, 1:40, closed)

Please stop it
Please stop complaining about Margaret Thatcher (I've seen your posts in this regard before and they smack of dogma. A one sided opinion ony any subject is no opinion at all).

The coal mining industry and other state run enterprises, not to mention the entire British economy were in a state of dissolution long before Margaret Thatcher began economic reforms.

The UKs economic woes (before Margaret Thatcher came to power) are well documented, and were, to summarise, a combination of a heavily state controlled economy, and too much political power in the hands of trade unions with poor economic judgement (there is an absolute litany of evidence to support this, and economic problems the world over have been caused by exactly the same problems).

Since nationalisation of many of the major industries by Prime Minister Clement Atlee (just after WW2), the industrial output of the UK has fallen steadily, year by year (I think most left wing dogma would have you believe this was purely the result of Margaret Thatcher).

Union dogma and state bureacracy meant that state run industries were never able to adapt and change as market conditions changed, and as time progressed, they became less and less profitable until the tax payer was called upon to make up for the losses in the balance sheets. Our industries were slowly dying, and such was the political and economic situation, there was nothing that could be done.

Even elements of the Labour party were aware of this problem, and Barbara Castle authored the White Paper "In Place of Strife" in 1969 (which was opposed and defeated by Jim Callaghan).

As I understand it, by the time of Margaret Thatcher's economic reforms, the UK tax payer was funding the UK steel industry alone (not taking in to consideration other state run industries) to the tune of £100 per household (at late 70s prices), per year! (Of important note, the UK output of steel has steadily increased since the late 1970s)

If you want to blame anyone for the mining industry collapsing, blame the mining unions, who always seem to escape any sort of reproach when this subject is discussed. If the unions had allowed slow change and progress within the industry, jobs may well have been lost, but, the shock of sudden collapse could well have been avoided (when the government cut the purse strings), with job losses being buffered as the economy slowly changed.

I've gone on long enough for now, but there is so much that can be said on this subject, that frankly, completely refutes left wing populist dogma.
(dunkindogdo, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 20:53, closed)

I'm sorry, but I've got to take you up on this statement
"A one sided opinion ony any subject is no opinion at all"

Are you insane? Thats *exactly* what an opinion is! It is one persons view on a topic, which by definition can only be one sided as it's only coming from one person.

As for the rest of your argument, carry on.
( LemonEntryMyDearWatson This time, Moriarty, the hand is on the other foot, Tue 23 Dec 2008, 22:27, closed)

Re:
That's a typo on my part, it should have read "An opinion based on one sided argument....".

As for carrying on, no way, I haven't the time, it's too big a subject. Do some reading, look at ALL of the political and economic theories, recent history, facts and figures, etc....then comment on Margaret Thatcher.
(dunkindogdo, Wed 24 Dec 2008, 0:05, closed)

She did not
have the traits or charisma that a modern leader requires. She was so cut off from the majority of the population - even Gordon Brown seems human by comparison.

However, anyone in power during those years would have had a rough time - and I agree with all your arguments. At the end of the day these industries were on their knees long before Maggie.
(jackhiggs no longer a v!rgin as of..., Wed 24 Dec 2008, 11:23, closed)