ChezGiven 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 Bring back Thatcher! She's the cause, without a doubt. We're approaching three generations in now and that's probably irreversible. She had the right idea though with suggesting that the focus should be on taking responsibility for your own actions and putting an emphasis on family. Sort of falls down when you think of the industries she destroyed overnight without any long-term thought (or concern) for the communities that were devastated as a consequence. It was a very much a case of 'I'm alright Jack'. Did the civil servants who advised the Tories to close the mines include the costs incurred since 1982 in regenrating the north east? I doubt it. If i ever had the time, i'd love to look at the financial data used to justify the decision to get rid of the coal industry in the north east and see whether it took account of the money they are now spending to try and maintain communities on social welfare and regenerative projects (including those from the EU etc). Yes Adam, but I've got you down as soft right whereas Thatch was hard right. I dont believe in ideology James. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Bring back Thatcher! She's the cause, without a doubt. We're approaching three generations in now and that's probably irreversible. She had the right idea though with suggesting that the focus should be on taking responsibility for your own actions and putting an emphasis on family. Sort of falls down when you think of the industries she destroyed overnight without any long-term thought (or concern) for the communities that were devastated as a consequence. It was a very much a case of 'I'm alright Jack'. Did the civil servants who advised the Tories to close the mines include the costs incurred since 1982 in regenrating the north east? I doubt it. If i ever had the time, i'd love to look at the financial data used to justify the decision to get rid of the coal industry in the north east and see whether it took account of the money they are now spending to try and maintain communities on social welfare and regenerative projects (including those from the EU etc). Yes Adam, but I've got you down as soft right whereas Thatch was hard right. I dont believe in ideology James. I can believe that as when you put your mind to it you can come across as quite the existentialist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4416 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Just to clarify I'm not implying any kind of real comparison between the McCann's and "real" child abuse - I was mainly alluding to the opinion which I tend to support that an "underclass" family who'd done the same in Benidorm would have been treated with a lot less sympathy. My point was that assuming being poor or however else you define it does not make people more or less likely to be child abusers and the rich have an "abuse culture" of their own. I'd even count a lack of discipline from middle class families as an abuse of sorts in allowing their kids to grow up without a concept of considering other people. Of course "decent" working class discipline which I was subject to doesn't have to involve physical abuse. Turning to the points about Thatcher and the industries she killed I honestly think economics were way down the list of her motivations below real spite and at best a misguided notion that people would be "Better" in some kind of brave new world she imagined (but wasn't prepared to create). There is a sort of shallow sense in her "society" stance in that looking after your family should be your main ambition. Where she got it wrong was that thinking that if everybody did that, then things would fall into place for everyone else - I think once your family are sorted then the decent thing is consider others and also appreciating that working with other people is in fact a way of benefiting yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 10053 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. Late Capitalism doesn't want (can't support) full employment or broadened ideas of education and self-awareness...If this happenned the whole house of cards would collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4416 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Who was in power when the parents of the "problem generation" were growing up? WHo preached the greed is good mantra? Who were happy to have 4.5m on the dole as part of monetarism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22055 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Aye, because that's exactly what happened last time you obnoxious cockney tit head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Aye, because that's exactly what happened last time you obnoxious cockney tit head. Well, yes it did, pain for long term gain. the winter of discontent made our current situation look like childs play. Labour have form for fucking this country big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4416 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Well, yes it did, pain for long term gain. the winter of discontent made our current situation look like childs play. Labour have form for fucking this country big time. What long term gain? For whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Well, yes it did, pain for long term gain. the winter of discontent made our current situation look like childs play. Labour have form for fucking this country big time. What long term gain? For whom? 90% of this country. The Tories handed over an economy on the up to Gordon Brown and Labour. Rather than making the most of the boom times handed to them, Labour borrowed heavily in a boom, sold gold at an all time low and built an economy on a consumer credit house of cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4416 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Well, yes it did, pain for long term gain. the winter of discontent made our current situation look like childs play. Labour have form for fucking this country big time. What long term gain? For whom? 90% of this country. The Tories handed over an economy on the up to Gordon Brown and Labour. Rather than making the most of the boom times handed to them, Labour borrowed heavily in a boom, sold gold at an all time low and built an economy on a consumer credit house of cards. 90% is a massive exaggeration, the gold sale was an EU directive, it was the Tories who relaxed credit controls and the only reason Labour had to borrow was because the people of this country are too stupid to realise you have to increase taxes to pay for things they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 David Cameron was political advisor to Norman Lamont, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, during the problems of Black Wednesday, and can be spotted at Lamont's side in news film of Lamont's announcement of British withdrawal from the ERM that evening. I did not know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Well, yes it did, pain for long term gain. the winter of discontent made our current situation look like childs play. Labour have form for fucking this country big time. What long term gain? For whom? 90% of this country. The Tories handed over an economy on the up to Gordon Brown and Labour. Rather than making the most of the boom times handed to them, Labour borrowed heavily in a boom, sold gold at an all time low and built an economy on a consumer credit house of cards. 90% is a massive exaggeration, the gold sale was an EU directive, it was the Tories who relaxed credit controls and the only reason Labour had to borrow was because the people of this country are too stupid to realise you have to increase taxes to pay for things they want. Which EU directive? I cant think of any EU law that would force the UK to sell its gold reserve. Yes the Tories made credit more accessible but it was Labour who refused to control an out of control credit market. Unemployed people with credit cards under the Tories? Do me a favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Social change supercedes political change in this case. I dont agree that a government who came in in 1997 is responsible for a social underclass in the UK. Thats just fucking stupid tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Can we ban Danny for bring a right wing knobber instead of just being a cockney WUM, Mods? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Social change supercedes political change in this case. I dont agree that a government who came in in 1997 is responsible for a social underclass in the UK. Thats just fucking stupid tbh. I am not saying they are responsible but they have certainly encouraged it. It is more profitable to be out of work than in it for some. 1 in 5 in certain towns on the sick? Labour is responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Social change supercedes political change in this case. I dont agree that a government who came in in 1997 is responsible for a social underclass in the UK. Thats just fucking stupid tbh. I am not saying they are responsible but they have certainly encouraged it. It is more profitable to be out of work than in it for some. 1 in 5 in certain towns on the sick? Labour is responsible. Everything Labour has done to the tax structure has been designed to encourage people on low incomes to work more. The tory tax structure they inherited was designed to reward the middle and upper classes. Shut up tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4416 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I am not saying they are responsible but they have certainly encouraged it. It is more profitable to be out of work than in it for some. 1 in 5 in certain towns on the sick? Labour is responsible. What changes did Labour make that makes them responsible? If anything the minimum wage should mean less people can claim to be better off not working than under Tory anything goes policies. Did you care about the underclass when there was at least twice as many unemployed under the Tories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I am not saying they are responsible but they have certainly encouraged it. It is more profitable to be out of work than in it for some. 1 in 5 in certain towns on the sick? Labour is responsible. What changes did Labour make that makes them responsible? If anything the minimum wage should mean less people can claim to be better off not working than under Tory anything goes policies. Did you care about the underclass when there was at least twice as many unemployed under the Tories? If you think that the 3m reached by the tories is going to go as deep as the current lot you have another thing coming. Labour took the control of the UK markets out of the control of BOE and handed it to the incompetent FSA. We are now paying the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Everything Labour has done to the tax structure has been designed to encourage people on low incomes to work more. Would you mind expanding on that please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt 0 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Are Tories recognising society exists now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted November 20, 2008 Author Share Posted November 20, 2008 Everything Labour has done to the tax structure has been designed to encourage people on low incomes to work more. Would you mind expanding on that please? http://www.taxcredits.inlandrevenue.gov.uk...TaxCredits.aspx http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/life/b...king_tax_credit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4416 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I am not saying they are responsible but they have certainly encouraged it. It is more profitable to be out of work than in it for some. 1 in 5 in certain towns on the sick? Labour is responsible. What changes did Labour make that makes them responsible? If anything the minimum wage should mean less people can claim to be better off not working than under Tory anything goes policies. Did you care about the underclass when there was at least twice as many unemployed under the Tories? If you think that the 3m reached by the tories is going to go as deep as the current lot you have another thing coming. Labour took the control of the UK markets out of the control of BOE and handed it to the incompetent FSA. We are now paying the price. Do you for one moment think the Tories would have regulated the banks any differently? The de-regulation was inline with the rest of the world - you can blame global capitalism but not individual governments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 10053 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 (edited) It's not a new phenomenon, there is a section of the population that just can't function in a society, never has been able to and never will, but there's one hell of a lot more of the fuckers these days. 11 years of labour rule. It has fostered a "I dont have to do anything I dont want to attitude in England". We need a Tory government who are willing to act like a tory government to get these fucks back into society and functioning again. If thety dont, let them starve IMO. Social change supercedes political change in this case. I dont agree that a government who came in in 1997 is responsible for a social underclass in the UK. Thats just fucking stupid tbh. You're right, it's not solely this governments fault nor is it all down to Thatcher. The "underclass" has always been there (I'm 50 btw and they were there when I was a kid) but the change through my lifetime has been that the underclass' existence has been made easier and easier by successive governments and social changes. I think it is sad that Thatcher gets all the blame (by many) because "she threw everyone out of work" and as a result they turned to crap. By sad I don't mean I have any particular sympathy for Thatcher BUT it is highly dissrespectfull to the working man - who in significant numbers of cases were and are "decent" members of society and even in the face of adversity/hardship remained so, and made damn well sure so did their families. The Thatcher destroyed industry and turned millions to crap is a phallacy IMO Edited November 20, 2008 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now