Thatcher is to blame for the mess we are in now
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
The retail debt spiral we are in, caused by excessive and deliberate de regulation of retail lending has hit middle England harder than anything since the decimation of Flanders.
So, unless you're saying the banks were forced to lend more than was sensible - which in a deregulated market cannot possibly have been the case - we see that the problems were caused by the banks' excessive lending.Ozzie Osmond said:
How many fat people are there in Yorkshire?!
£10m in 5 years = £2m a year.
Say £30,000 for a "specialist vehicle"
Are they really buying one a week just to shift the pies?
The vehicle will be the cheapest part. The real cost will be the specialist training. £10m in 5 years = £2m a year.
Say £30,000 for a "specialist vehicle"
Are they really buying one a week just to shift the pies?
The driver needs training on the new vehicle, the guys in the back need training on shifting enormous weights and they all need diversity training so as not to make jokes about harpoons.
Still. Fat f
kers won't be needing long term care, expensive drugs or be clogging up the housing ladder. All they cost is a few bits of specialist kit, a couple of operations, some basic heart drugs etc. They will be long, long dead before they start costing real money like those little wine that hang on, fighting off cancer, dementure, joints and organs packing up and being replaced and then 15 years in a home.
Not only do older fat people die earlier but younger ones don't burgle houses or mug people. They are too tired for white collar crime as well.
The more fat people there are the less strain on the welfare state. Stuff the
s full of doughnuts and save the economy. 
Edited by DonkeyApple on Monday 24th October 23:06
Happy82 said:
s3fella said:
I'm going to post "Well what do you expect if you put a Bird in charge?"
Please do this, you'll convert Mumsnet to an extreme pro-Thatcher organisation overnight 
DonkeyApple said:
Thatcher is to blame.
It was her concepts of free market and de-regulation that was copied by New Labour and magnified 1000 fold to create artificially inflated asset values and massive debt and thus ever increasing tax revenues.
They also copied her concept of paying off the peasants and going to war.
They took some of the smart ideas of Thatcher and slammed them into a drug fuelled overdrive, going ever bigger and bigger and bigger until it all burst horribly.
So yes. Thatcher did start it. She was Blair's spiritual mother, idol and inspiration.
I agree that Thatcher was the spiritual mother of T Blair. They would have worked well together. Ideologically very similar.It was her concepts of free market and de-regulation that was copied by New Labour and magnified 1000 fold to create artificially inflated asset values and massive debt and thus ever increasing tax revenues.
They also copied her concept of paying off the peasants and going to war.
They took some of the smart ideas of Thatcher and slammed them into a drug fuelled overdrive, going ever bigger and bigger and bigger until it all burst horribly.
So yes. Thatcher did start it. She was Blair's spiritual mother, idol and inspiration.
However the current economic woes must be the responsibility of Blair and Brown. As others have said it all went wrong on their watch.
Just as well they are both on nice sinecures with good pensions. Thats Politics.
Ozzie Osmond said:
So, unless you're saying the banks were forced to lend more than was sensible - which in a deregulated market cannot possibly have been the case - we see that the problems were caused by the banks' excessive lending.
It's a 3 way argument depending on what point you want to make. Brown deregulated retail lending with the deliberate aim of inflating retail spending and creating an economic boom.
The banks, once released from the chattels of balance sheet restraints looked for ways to maximise this sudden release while controlling risk. Hence wrapping up debt parcels and selling on.
But who to buy this debt? Brown solved that by de regulating what our pensions could invest in.
And thus the spiral was created, so long as people could be relied to do what they had always done in the past when put in an environment with no boundaries. Move to excess after excess.
The state we are in could only be reached by the banks doing what banks will do and the people doing what people will do and a political group changing the law and removing the restrictions that had been put in place to prevent it from happening.
Since the dawn of banking all governments have known they must be regulated. Just as the people must be regulated.
So why would someone who knew this have de regulated the banks? Someone who was obsessed with controlling the masses give them fiscal freedom?
There are three groups that can be blamed but just like every event in the past 2000 years it's not the fault of the 'Jews' bu they will carry the blame and absolve those responsible.
Steffan said:
I agree that Thatcher was the spiritual mother of T Blair. They would have worked well together. Ideologically very similar.
However the current economic woes must be the responsibility of Blair and Brown. As others have said it all went wrong on their watch.
Just as well they are both on nice sinecures with good pensions. Thats Politics.
I'm not so sure they would have worked well together. I suspect she would have seen him for what he was. However the current economic woes must be the responsibility of Blair and Brown. As others have said it all went wrong on their watch.
Just as well they are both on nice sinecures with good pensions. Thats Politics.
I don't blame Thatcher. She did good things. She did bad things. She shouldn't have closed the mines without ensuring replacement work for those people but we had North Sea oil and the mining unions were threatening the welfare of the State so had to be taken out. Etc etc.
No, my point was that New Labour took the things that Thatcher was perceived to have got right and did them to extremes that were so mental that we have found ourselves where we are today. Broke. Penniless. Having saved nothing, invested nothing and borrowed more than we can repay.
DonkeyApple said:
Steffan said:
I agree that Thatcher was the spiritual mother of T Blair. They would have worked well together. Ideologically very similar.
However the current economic woes must be the responsibility of Blair and Brown. As others have said it all went wrong on their watch.
Just as well they are both on nice sinecures with good pensions. Thats Politics.
I'm not so sure they would have worked well together. I suspect she would have seen him for what he was. However the current economic woes must be the responsibility of Blair and Brown. As others have said it all went wrong on their watch.
Just as well they are both on nice sinecures with good pensions. Thats Politics.
I don't blame Thatcher. She did good things. She did bad things. She shouldn't have closed the mines without ensuring replacement work for those people but we had North Sea oil and the mining unions were threatening the welfare of the State so had to be taken out. Etc etc.
No, my point was that New Labour took the things that Thatcher was perceived to have got right and did them to extremes that were so mental that we have found ourselves where we are today. Broke. Penniless. Having saved nothing, invested nothing and borrowed more than we can repay.
How long will recovery take.
That is assuming we stop falling further into recession in about three years?
Steffan said:
Agreed +1
How long will recovery take.
That is assuming we stop falling further into recession in about three years?
The big question. How long will recovery take.
That is assuming we stop falling further into recession in about three years?
With Europe being pretty much our largest trading partner we need to make sure they keep their fraudulent dream alive.
The other issue we have is sentiment. The cuts we are doing are pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things. They aren't really cuts. More a slow down in spending or at worst moving back to spend levels of just a few years ago. The real problem is thT not much will change until the population think things are on the up again.
The last recession actually began to improve quote sharply from 91 onwards but people didn't stop saying we were in a downturn for quite a few years after that.
mumsnet said:
My opinion is that fuel poverty, lack of social housing, crap and expensive public transport and the massive rich/poor divide can all be traced back to her.
Thoughts?
I think it can all be traced back much further than that.Thoughts?
Thoughts?
It is interesting how history began in 1979 in some peoples versions of events. Never mind the lack of electricity and 3 day working week (when they werent on strike) of the 70s or the fact it wasnt that long since Britain was the Portugal/Greece/Ireland of Europe by begging for a bailout from the IMF ('sick man of europe') before Thatcher took over.
DonkeyApple said:
The big question.
With Europe being pretty much our largest trading partner we need to make sure they keep their fraudulent dream alive.
40% of exports are to Europe IIRC. Although frankly the free trade area has more to do with that than anything else.With Europe being pretty much our largest trading partner we need to make sure they keep their fraudulent dream alive.
A decade or more ago, Edward Heath visited my school for a debate (it was that kind of school). I asked whether it would have been more sensible to become the "51st state". He blustered a little and didn't really answer.
NAFTA would be much closer to the kind of customs union we are actually looking for, and I think the NAFTA countries would look kindly on our application to join (change the "A" to "Atlantic" and we're golden).
Derek Smith said:
Atlee gave us the welfare state and regardless of the fact that others following have not managed it at all well, the benefits are still with us in the sense that we have a healthy population.
50% of males obese by 2030:http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/08August/Pages/half-of...
Obligatory Wail headline - 11 year olds getting gastric implants:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2052581/...
Life expectancy to level off or decline in lower socio economic groups...
http://www.ipe.com/news/uk-life-expectancy-to-leve...
I fking detest that forum, they've all been graced with a keyboard with 26 letters on, yet they're all still too lazy to type Husband, and so it ends up as DH for that, or DS for son, boils my piss when I'm trying to read their drivel and they're using crap acronyms when there's no need for it.
I always ponder who's looking after their kids when their posting there crap on there, or more importantly, who's let them have access to the internet in the kitchen??
king detest that forum, they've all been graced with a keyboard with 26 letters on, yet they're all still too lazy to type Husband, and so it ends up as DH for that, or DS for son, boils my piss when I'm trying to read their drivel and they're using crap acronyms when there's no need for it.I always ponder who's looking after their kids when their posting there crap on there, or more importantly, who's let them have access to the internet in the kitchen??
dandarez said:
Much of that I would agree with, but 'we have a healthy population'... do we?
Depends on your view on obesity. Statistics show that more than 60 per cent of adults in England and a third of 10 and 11-year-olds are now obese. Those statistics are frightening.
It's been claimed that obesity and and associated chronic health conditions such as high blood pressure and diabetes cost Britain £20B a year in terms of lost productivity alone.
The population is so healthy that during the past five years Yorkshire's Ambulance Service alone has spent nearly £10 million on specialist vehicles just to transport obese patients.
Perhaps I meant the opportunity to be healthy. The problem with fizzy drinks full of fructose and fast foods full of fat is not really the problem of the health service. It is a social problem. One could, of course, point to no health service America and the comparative fatness stats.Depends on your view on obesity. Statistics show that more than 60 per cent of adults in England and a third of 10 and 11-year-olds are now obese. Those statistics are frightening.
It's been claimed that obesity and and associated chronic health conditions such as high blood pressure and diabetes cost Britain £20B a year in terms of lost productivity alone.
The population is so healthy that during the past five years Yorkshire's Ambulance Service alone has spent nearly £10 million on specialist vehicles just to transport obese patients.
I sympathise with fat people.
I was ill for a long time and a side effect of the pills I was taking was to put on weight. I cycled regularly before I was ill and all but disappeared sideways - hence the fact that so many drivers couldn't see me I suppose - and then went up to over 18 stone (I'm 6'3"). Since getting better I've managed to drop a couple of stone or more. It is amazing how much being fat slows you down. It is a viscious circle. Can you imagine how much I ate when cycling over 150 miles a week? It is quite a shock to sit down for lunch with two thin slices of brown bread with butter so thin it is transparent, and a bit of chicken? I used to have six slices with BLT and a bun afterwards for lunch.
I used to take six bananas with me to work and I'd eat two en route.
Ozzie Osmond said:
DonkeyApple said:
The retail debt spiral we are in, caused by excessive and deliberate de regulation of retail lending has hit middle England harder than anything since the decimation of Flanders.
So, unless you're saying the banks were forced to lend more than was sensible - which in a deregulated market cannot possibly have been the case - we see that the problems were caused by the banks' excessive lending.Randy Winkman said:
This is PH - so in the UK it was Blair/Brown's fault since it was "on their watch", but in the US, it was Clinton's fault since "he started it".
It is simply a fact that the collapse in the UK could not have mechanically happened pre 1997. While both the UK and US have been unable to handle the collapse as well as they could have done because their governments have been over spending. Again, this is a post 97 fact for us.
The US does differ as their deregulation of retail lending and lax regulation of what was left allowed for massive, massive fraud by mortgage salesmen and with banks de regulated so that in theory this risk was no longer theirs then obviously the banks had less need to monitor the sales actions.
In the US you can blame Clinton for the deregulation, Greenspan for the lies and Brownesque no more boom and bust, credit rating agencies for incorrect rating of assets and Bush for structural overspend.
KingNothing said:
I fking detest that forum, they've all been graced with a keyboard with 26 letters on, yet they're all still too lazy to type Husband, and so it ends up as DH for that, or DS for son, boils my piss when I'm trying to read their drivel and they're using crap acronyms when there's no need for it.
IMO the OP's OH should read PH.king detest that forum, they've all been graced with a keyboard with 26 letters on, yet they're all still too lazy to type Husband, and so it ends up as DH for that, or DS for son, boils my piss when I'm trying to read their drivel and they're using crap acronyms when there's no need for it.HTH
Cheers,
The Moose
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff