[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40217526]How would have you fixed the problems afflicting Britain in 1979 then?
You have a country that's in economic decline, has to keep borrowing money, and is keeping a lot of unprofitable industries ongoing.[/QUOTE]
BUCKFAST. ULTRAVIOLENCE. FULL COMMUNISM.
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;40217649]BUCKFAST. ULTRAVIOLENCE. FULL COMMUNISM.[/QUOTE]
NADSAT
Tailand thought the Queen was Thatcher
[img]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/09/article-2306182-1930F1C0000005DC-623_634x413.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/09/article-2306182-1930F1B4000005DC-339_634x458.jpg[/img]
Taiwan not Thailand....Thailand used Meryl Streep image to report Thatcher's death
I have to admit there's a lot of unpaid respect due to Harry Enfield on my behalf for loadsamoney - I'd never made the connection between it and the context until now... given how utterly [i]pathetic[/i] the premise is... I'm embarrassed. Of [i]course[/i] it had to be social commentary if it was on 80s-era C4. (I'd succumbed to the temptation to link it to SNL's placid character-driven comedy...)
I wonder if anyone will share more fake MLK quotes in the wake of her death.
[QUOTE=butt2089;40217303]Considering Farage was only 26 when she left office, I doubt it. Although, she deeply regretted signing the Single European Act, was coerced into joing the ERM and was an [B]opponent to German re-unification[/B] - so undoubtedly would have held similar views.[/QUOTE]I have to admit, that's new to me, what on earth did she have against it?
Fucking hell, she wasn't responsible for the mass murder of a whole group of people... It wasn't genocide, wasn't pedophilia, wasn't bestiality, none of that shit, she may have corrupted this country, but you don't have to spit on her grave.
!!!DUMB RATINGS INBOUND!!!
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/A3N2QQv.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;40217666]NADSAT[/QUOTE]
Creech that there word again and you'll get a real horrorshow tolchock on the gulliver.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;40220204]I have to admit, that's new to me, what on earth did she have against it?[/QUOTE]
The three continental wars between France and Germany within 70 years coupled with Germany's industrial dominance meant she felt that if Germany was re-unified it would only seek to become geographically dominant once more.
Interestingly, today it was revealed the [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/9981932/Helmut-Kohl-I-acted-like-a-dictator-to-bring-in-the-euro.html]Helmut Kohl admitted[/url] he acted like a dictator over the Euro
[QUOTE=Bobie;40217255][url]http://www.prisonplanet.com/former-british-prime-minister-thatcher-dies.html[/url][/QUOTE]
[quote]MI6 agent Stephen Dorril exposed Mandela as an MI6 agent in 2000[/quote]
[QUOTE=butt2089;40217520]The City is doing well and is hugely beneficial for the UK economy. The banking crisis could have wrought absolute havoc on the economy but it didn't.
Barclays and HSBC managed to find their own source of capital injection in the crisis - RBS, HBOS and Northern Rock relied on the government's bank rescue package.
Northern Rock, based in Yorkshire, failed due to it's exposure to US sub prime mortgages. HBOS, based in Edinburgh, failed due to catastrophic management errors that would have led to collapse [I]without[/I] the financial crisis. RBS, based in Edinburgh, was weak following the overpaid purchase of ABN AMRO - the main problems were retail, not investment as is widely believed.
[editline]a[/editline]
Also Thatcherism was not continued under Labour, as Thatcher would not have advocated rampant public spending or bailing out of banks, to name but a few policies that went wrong.[/QUOTE]
When she left power the economy was going into recession, [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/oct/18/deficit-debt-government-borrowing-data#_l]the Conservatives ran a deficit equal to Labour[/url] (pre-2008) as a result. Labour was not the party who abandoned 'Thatcherism', the Conservatives themselves abandoned it.
The measures that Labour took may have been short sighted, but they were not necessarily wrong. When Tony Blair left power [url=http://www.standard.co.uk/news/tony-blair-a-progress-report-6310837.html]unemployment was low and the capital richer[/url], until the financial crisis, you can't really attribute that or the handling of the crisis to Thatcher.
It's also good to point out that the financial crisis may be directly related to [B]bank de-regulation that took place under Thatcher.[/B]
[url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f8aaf08-a122-11e2-bae1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2PzXH2iQh.]She dun fucked up.[/url]
[QUOTE=RAG Frag;40221151]When she left power the economy was going into recession, [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/oct/18/deficit-debt-government-borrowing-data#_l]the Conservatives ran a deficit equal to Labour[/url] (pre-2008) as a result. Labour was not the party who abandoned 'Thatcherism', the Conservatives themselves abandoned it.
The measures that Labour took may have been short sighted, but they were not necessarily wrong. When Tony Blair left power [url=http://www.standard.co.uk/news/tony-blair-a-progress-report-6310837.html]unemployment was low and the capital richer[/url], until the financial crisis, you can't really attribute that or the handling of the crisis to Thatcher.
It's also good to point out that the financial crisis may be directly related to [B]bank de-regulation that took place under Thatcher.[/B]
[url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f8aaf08-a122-11e2-bae1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2PzXH2iQh.]She dun fucked up.[/url][/QUOTE]
The economy went into recession in 1993 which was attributed to "[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_Kingdom]US savings and loan crisis leading to the Early 1990s recession.[/url]". No, the Conservatives had a total deficit of [B]£256.4 bn[/B] or an average of [B]£14.2 bn[/B] per year, conversly Labour had a total deficit of [B]£406.1 bn[/B] or an average of [B]£31.2 bn[/B] - that's taken from your own link.
Regardless, my point was not that between the Conservatives and Thatcherism but more towards the often asserted point that Labour continued Thatcherism.
Before I go any further, you say that the economic benefits of the past decade are due to Blair and not attributable to Thatcher - but that the financial crisis was due to what happened under Thatcher? Please back that up without an FT article.
When Tony Blair left power? The article you linked is from 2002, 5 years before he left power. Now, if you actually looked at the figures of inflation, interest rates, and public debt between 1997 and 2007 you would see that they stayed flat, whereas the article states that they've decreased.
There was no bank de-regulation under Thatcher, there was the 'Big Bang' that opened up the Stock Exchange externally.
You might want to look at what Gordon Brown did regarding the BoE and FSA in 1997.
No the economy went into recession in 1990, it even says so in the wikipedia article you posted. Where in my link does it say that, keep in mind that I was comparing their deficits before the financial crisis - which the conservatives did not have to deal with.
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/oct/09/big-bang-1986-city-deregulation-boom-bust]How about this article instead of FT[/url]
Sorry, I picked up the wrong article and should have checked it a little more, but looking at these statistics there is a [url=https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/explore?ds=z8o7pt6rd5uqa6_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:uk&fdim_y=seasonality:sa&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment%20rate%20uk]notable decrease in unemployment[/url], although I can't find the specific article I'm looking for I'm pretty sure London was left richer after Blair had stepped down.
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/oct/09/big-bang-1986-city-deregulation-boom-bust]There was bank de-regulation during the 'Big Bang'.[/url]
I can't find what you are referring to apart from the setting up of the FSA in 1997 which I would assume to be a good thing, can you elaborate on this. Even if the organisation failed to act I'm not sure why this can be attributed as Gordon Brown helping to cause the crisis by trying to add safeguards.
This thread needs lightening up
[img]http://i.imgur.com/QJdqhkF.png[/img]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJC6VizJUos[/media]
[QUOTE=RAG Frag;40222440]No the economy went into recession in 1990, it even says so in the wikipedia article you posted. Where in my link does it say that, keep in mind that I was comparing their deficits before the financial crisis - which the conservatives did not have to deal with.
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/oct/09/big-bang-1986-city-deregulation-boom-bust]How about this article instead of FT[/url]
Sorry, I picked up the wrong article and should have checked it a little more, but looking at these statistics there is a [url=https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/explore?ds=z8o7pt6rd5uqa6_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:uk&fdim_y=seasonality:sa&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment%20rate%20uk]notable decrease in unemployment[/url], although I can't find the specific article I'm looking for I'm pretty sure London was left richer after Blair had stepped down.
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/oct/09/big-bang-1986-city-deregulation-boom-bust]There was bank de-regulation during the 'Big Bang'.[/url]
I can't find what you are referring to apart from the setting up of the FSA in 1997 which I would assume to be a good thing, can you elaborate on this. Even if the organisation failed to act I'm not sure why this can be attributed as Gordon Brown helping to cause the crisis by trying to add safeguards.[/QUOTE]
My mistake, I was looking at GDP unadjusted for inflation. GDP growth went negative in the last quarter of 1990 after Thatcher had left office and originated outside the UK.
The conservatives had two recessions, one in 1980s and again in the 1990s - even in keeping those and excluding the years of financial crisis, Labour still had a greater budget deficit. I worked it out myself from the figures given.
Have you read the entire article? Because it actually touches upon Gordon Brown's actions which you question. It doesn't actually give a solid view that the Big Bang was bad - in fact a lot of the people interviewed and quoted say that it was good until de-regulation slipped away.
A notable decrease in unemployment? Between 1997 and 2007 it decreased by 0.7%, and that's bearing in mind that 850,000 public sector jobs were created from thin air.
You've posted the same article again, the only thing that could be claimed as banking de-regulation was that the banks were allowed to have a bigger influence on stock trading and stock markets.
The FSA was took up responsibilities that were previously held by the Bank of England - therefore the control of the monetary supply and the financial regulations became separate. The FSA repeatedly failed to take any notice of the impending crash in 2008, when interestingly Sir Mervyn King -head of the BoE - acknowledged the impending crash and writes to this day that the seperation of the FSA and BoE was a key factor in the crisis in the UK.
[QUOTE=butt2089;40220814]The three continental wars between France and Germany within 70 years coupled with Germany's industrial dominance meant she felt that if Germany was re-unified it would only seek to become geographically dominant once more.
Interestingly, today it was revealed the [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/9981932/Helmut-Kohl-I-acted-like-a-dictator-to-bring-in-the-euro.html"]Helmut Kohl admitted[/URL] he acted like a dictator over the Euro[/QUOTE]So basically not a particularly good reason, then. Germany had been more thoroughly de-Nazified by that point than a doctor being scubbed down before surgery.
It's like the old fart who lives next door to me who shouts at any passing Russians about the Winter War.
Also, the Euro had nothing to do with my question, but how efficient of you to get in a jab against the EU at the same time.
Conspiracy theorist website created by that fat fuck Alex Jones.
responding to prison planet post above.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;40227221]So basically not a particularly good reason, then. Germany had been more thoroughly de-Nazified by that point than a doctor being scubbed down before surgery.
It's like the old fart who lives next door to me who shouts at any passing Russians about the Winter War.
Also, the Euro had nothing to do with my question, but how efficient of you to get in a jab against the EU at the same time.[/QUOTE]
Further to my post, French Prime Minister François Mitterrand was also staunchly against German re-unification, together they both believed two things; firstly that Germany, with it's central European power, would cause destabilisation and secondly that it would hinder Gorbachev's progress in dismantling the Soviet Union.
Personally, I think whether they were right or not falls down to whether you think Germany is a stabilising force in Europe today or not.
My link to Helmut Kohl on the Euro is therefore very significant, he was German Chancellor whilst Thatcher was in power - he also states about the issue of the Euro, a currency which is beneficial for Germany but crippling for much of the rest of Europe.
Can someone PM me with some information on this lady? Fair and unbiased description of the "she was good" and "she was bad" side.
I am genuinely curious.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;40220204]I have to admit, that's new to me, what on earth did she have against it?[/QUOTE]
Because it's Germany. The Germany that Britain and France fought twice. The Germany that humiliated France twice. The Germany that threaten British naval power. There's nothing Britain and France can do about it when the Soviets and the Americans gave the green light.
[QUOTE=redhaven;40230141]Because it's Germany. The Germany that Britain and France fought twice. The Germany that humiliated France twice. The Germany that threaten British naval power. There's nothing Britain and France can do about it when the Soviets and the Americans gave the green light.[/QUOTE]
Three wars, the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Prussian_War]Franco-Prussian war in 1870[/url] was the first of the three wars between Germany and France in 70 years.
[QUOTE=butt2089;40229373]My link to Helmut Kohl on the Euro is therefore very significant, he was German Chancellor whilst Thatcher was in power - he also states about the issue of the Euro, a currency which is beneficial for Germany but crippling for much of the rest of Europe.[/QUOTE]
Ironically, the Euro was a French idea and pushed by the French (both the Socialists and the Gaullists) with the reason that it would destroy the German Mark, thus end German dominance. The Germans didn't wanted it.
I've heard of her but never knew exactly why she was hated. Something about messing up Unions and communities was it?
[QUOTE=God dammit;40231558]I've heard of her but never knew exactly why she was hated. Something about messing up Unions and communities was it?[/QUOTE]
To put it mildly. The UK is still taking damage from her ideas.
[QUOTE=God dammit;40231558]I've heard of her but never knew exactly why she was hated. Something about messing up Unions and communities was it?[/QUOTE]
That would depend on who you asked. I would say the Unions were the ones messing up the country and Thatcher put a stop to it, a very harshful stop to it but it got the job done.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;40231649]That would depend on who you asked. I would say the Unions were the ones messing up the country and Thatcher put a stop to it, a very harshful stop to it but it got the job done.[/QUOTE]
Except there was right way to do it, and that wasn't it. The unions need reigning in, but she did it by smashing the lower classes outright, creating destitution and a top-heavy economy. She could have retooled the economy, kept the jobs making useful shit, but instead you've got the damned city.
Fuck, at least the coal mines made something useful. Not like those fucking speculators.
And that's before we get into her virulent homophobia and bigotry.
[QUOTE=Jeep-Eep;40231795]Except there was right way to do it, and that wasn't it. The unions need reigning in, but she did it by smashing the lower classes outright, creating destitution and a top-heavy economy. She could have retooled the economy, kept the jobs making useful shit, but instead you've got the damned city.
Fuck, at least the coal mines made something useful. Not like those fucking speculators.
And that's before we get into her virulent homophobia and bigotry.[/QUOTE]
The employment rate when she left office was barely higher than when she came into office - those people who lost their jobs got other jobs, the economy and country was better for her changes.
The coal mines were extracting a tonne of coal at the cost of £44 - a tonne of Australian coal could be imported for £30. Do you think really that's better than the City of London which gives a trade surplus of over £55 bn a year?
I also wouldn't consider voting to decriminalise homosexuality as homophobic.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
