Thatcher Dead

[The6Bells 0]

i scent rebellion in the air; the IDS £53 protest, bedroom tax protests, this dead tyrant's funeral, even the fascist who manages the tramps - all these are adding fuel to the fire.

 

comrades, the time is close to rise up & smash the state; this time the tories don't have the filth as their state sponsored thugs.

 

executions of the ruling elite from every lamp post.......

 

Not even close. The Mackems were falling over themselves to point out that they didn't give a shit if PDC was a fascist as long as he kept them up. And the mackems are supposedly hardcore lefties. More like hard core idiots (I'm convinced some to this day still don't even know what a fascist is).

[Christmas Tree 4729]

I regularly watch newsnight. It's not exactly new to me.

 

I just think you choose your arguments & move the goal posts when someone rumbles you.

 

There's nothing to rumble. Some people like what she did others don't. That's politics.

[Christmas Tree 4729]

Which you then decide is shite after reading the following morning's Sun and usually post what it says on here

 

Yawn.

 

Examples?

 

Thought not

[The6Bells 0]

Meaningful debate?

 

You are so clueless about the EU it's ridiculous. What EU stuff are you dealing with - matchtick production in Latvia?

 

I'm clueless? You've not said a single thing about the EU that even relates to the EU. Maybe it makes sense in lizard land, but that's about it.

 

As for what I do, I probably haven't got the time to put it into words that a nutjob like you would probably understand, so how about just 'railways an shit'?

[Gene_Clark 12]

Yawn.

 

Examples?

 

Thought not

 

 

oh fuck off you stupid, worthless cunt Fritzl

[Gene_Clark 12]

Not even close. The Mackems were falling over themselves to point out that they didn't give a shit if PDC was a fascist as long as he kept them up. And the mackems are supposedly hardcore lefties. More like hard core idiots (I'm convinced some to this day still don't even know what a fascist is).

 

irrelevant & wrong

 

there's a revolution coming......

 

piggies going to squeal when they burn......

[Happy Face 29]

Top Ten Ways Margaret Thatcher’s Policies Made our World more Unequal

 

The late Margaret Thatcher had an enormous impact on Britain and the world, but her legacy has been a more unequal, less prosperous Britain and world. She championed the wealthy and threw the national income to them; she systematically undermined the poor and middle classes. She championed neo-militarism and refusal to compromise in world affairs, undermining diplomacy.

 

1. In some part because of Margaret Thatcher’s policies, the share of British income of the top 1% had increased from 7.1% in 1970 to 14.3% in 2005. That is, the wealthiest 620,000 Britons take home twice as much of the national income every year as they did before Thatcher. The share of the working and middle classes plummeted in the same period.

 

2. In 2008, the top .1 percent, 62,000 Britons, received 5 percent of the country’s income, constituting a new aristocracy of wealth and privilege.

 

3. Half of the increase in income inequality at the top has gone to professionals in financial services, even though moving money around isn’t all that helpful to the economy compared to actually making something of value, and even though the financial sector was enabled by deregulation to engage in vast fraud and unsound investment practices, destroying the world’s economies in 2008. It was Thatcherite deregulation that laid the basis for this rise of the finance oligarchs. People celebrating that she kept the British pound and declined to enter the Eurozone, thus saving Britain from the current continental malaise ignore that the adoption of Thatcher-like policies on the continent is what produced that malaise!

 

4. At the same time, tax rates on the wealthy have plummeted, which means that the government cannot mitigate the consequences of the inequality, and has been forced to cut services for the poor and middle classes.

 

5. Current British government plans, following in the Thatcherite neoliberal direction, “would . . . lead to public sector job cuts of 710,000, more child poverty and a hike in university fees.”

 

6. In 1980 14% of the UK was in poverty. Today some 33% suffer multiple forms of financial insecurity.

 

“Over 30 million people (almost half the population) are suffering some degree of financial insecurity;

Almost 18 million people cannot afford adequate housing conditions;

Roughly 14 million cannot afford one or more essential household goods;

Almost 12 million people are too poor to engage in common social activities considered necessary by the majority of the population;

About 5.5 million adults go without essential clothing;

Around 4 million children and adults are not properly fed by today’s standards…

Around 1.5 million children live in households that cannot afford to heat their home.”

7. In 1980, five percent of households could not afford to heat the living areas of their homes. Last winter, 29 percent had to turn the heating down or heat only one or two rooms. Thatcherism has literally made them cold!

 

8. By selling off the one-third British government stake in BP, the oil giant, Thatcher’s privatization policies made the company unaccountable to any public and allowed it to pursue naked profit-seeking and disregard of the environment. The Gulf oil spill would have looked different and perhaps had a different outcome if the company had still been in part publicly owned. As it is, it is complaining about paying reparations to Gulf residents whose livelihoods it ruined! And, public ownership would have made it more open to pursuing green energy (as the governments of the UK and Scotland increasingly are) instead of doubling down on deadly hydrocarbons.

 

9. Thatcher’s absolute refusal to negotiate or compromise over the Northern Ireland issue undoubtedly worsened and prolonged that conflict. Only when she was out of office did George Mitchell demonstrate that a settlement was possible, in the mid-1990s.

 

10. Thatcher denied that there was any Palestine and her refusal to accept the Palestine Liberation Organization as a negotiating partner (at the time it represented almost all Palestinians) helped derail any peace process, allowing the Israelis to go ahead with the colonization of the Occupied Territories and the expropriation of Palestinian property.

 

http://www.juancole....s-policies.html

[Park Life 71]

I'm clueless? You've not said a single thing about the EU that even relates to the EU. Maybe it makes sense in lizard land, but that's about it.

 

As for what I do, I probably haven't got the time to put it into words that a nutjob like you would probably understand, so how about just 'railways an shit'?

 

The IMF and the EU are seperate things who have maybe different approaches. Yes?

 

The IMF are now involved cause the ECB itself is in trouble, so will Germany soon.

 

You can't differentiate betweent the two can you?

 

What the IMF want at this time isn't necessarily the long term EU project is it? Right?

 

When you understand that then you might get somewhere.

 

Lordy!

 

Is this a new debating trick where I give you the answers???

Edited April 8, 2013 by Park Life

[The6Bells 0]

What have Credit Default Swaps and the layered packaging of credit risk got to do with socialism?

 

Just for clarity, the example of the Mumbai railways was meant to serve as an example of social externalities, a branch of welfare economics that was poorly understood in the 70s and 80s. Dont be fooled by the word welfare either, it's a branch of micro-economics that has driven policy for nearly a century.

 

I was an academic economist for a few years but have spent the last 14 years working in the worlds biggest companies. I definitely don't know anyone worth their salt who considers unfettered liberal market ideology as a solution to anything. Thatcher's legacy in this regard was once, for a brief time, seen relatively positively. I think the world has now caught up with a very pragmatic wing of economics that has always argued against ideology and for the pragmatic.

 

Thatcher's world view was all about the dichotomies of politics; society versus the individual, the market versus the state, efficiency versus equity, substitution effects versus income effects. Where Ken Livingstone was right was that in everything she has been proven wrong. That's not to say her opponents have been proven right. What history has taught us is that ideologues like Thatcher are dangerous as policy driven from the conviction of principle is never measured enough to produce socially and economically optimal outcomes. Hence the Mumbai railways example.

 

Once again, let's all remind ourselves that Thatcher never said that there was no such thing as society. She also never said that the market could replace the state. I;ve never even heard of her contrasting efficiency and equity, so God knows what that's about. Thatcher's Britain had many examples of welfare economics, if the intent is to use that label for things the government spends money for long term societal benefits but short term financial losses. And Ken Livingston is a man who couldn't even beat Boris Johnson in an election, he is hardly in a position to comment on the achievements of someone like Thatcher. The very idea that he could even be a minister is laughable, let alone a head of a government. Boris Johnson has acheived more as Mayor of London to change real (ie working class) Londoners lives than Red Ken ever managed while he was the leader of a glorified council.

[The6Bells 0]

The IMF and the EU are seperate things who have maybe different approaches. Yes?

 

The IMF are now involved cause the ECB itself is in trouble, so will Germany soon.

 

You can't differentiate betweent the two can you?

 

What the IMF want at this time isn't necessarily the long term EU project is it? Right?

 

When you understand that then you might get somewhere.

 

Lordy!

 

Is this a new debating trick where I give you the answers???

 

Just one question. Where did I ever mention the IMF? Or, if you intended one of your posts to be making a point about it, can you point it out to me, as I've missed it. All I've ever seen you do is argue that the EU is socialist and that the railways need to be nationalised. I thought thats' what we were arguing about. Fuck knows where you got the IMF from.

[Tom 14013]

There's nothing to rumble. Some people like what she did others don't. That's politics.

 

Fair one

[Happy Face 29]

Not really a fair one. The harm she did is quantifiable and gross.

 

Even if a majority liked what she was about they would be wrong... But there isn't. She's rightly reviled.

[The6Bells 0]

Top Ten Ways Margaret Thatcher’s Policies Made our World more Unequal

 

The late Margaret Thatcher had an enormous impact on Britain and the world, but her legacy has been a more unequal, less prosperous Britain and world. She championed the wealthy and threw the national income to them; she systematically undermined the poor and middle classes. She championed neo-militarism and refusal to compromise in world affairs, undermining diplomacy.

 

1. In some part because of Margaret Thatcher’s policies, the share of British income of the top 1% had increased from 7.1% in 1970 to 14.3% in 2005. That is, the wealthiest 620,000 Britons take home twice as much of the national income every year as they did before Thatcher. The share of the working and middle classes plummeted in the same period.

 

2. In 2008, the top .1 percent, 62,000 Britons, received 5 percent of the country’s income, constituting a new aristocracy of wealth and privilege.

 

3. Half of the increase in income inequality at the top has gone to professionals in financial services, even though moving money around isn’t all that helpful to the economy compared to actually making something of value, and even though the financial sector was enabled by deregulation to engage in vast fraud and unsound investment practices, destroying the world’s economies in 2008. It was Thatcherite deregulation that laid the basis for this rise of the finance oligarchs. People celebrating that she kept the British pound and declined to enter the Eurozone, thus saving Britain from the current continental malaise ignore that the adoption of Thatcher-like policies on the continent is what produced that malaise!

 

4. At the same time, tax rates on the wealthy have plummeted, which means that the government cannot mitigate the consequences of the inequality, and has been forced to cut services for the poor and middle classes.

 

5. Current British government plans, following in the Thatcherite neoliberal direction, “would . . . lead to public sector job cuts of 710,000, more child poverty and a hike in university fees.”

 

6. In 1980 14% of the UK was in poverty. Today some 33% suffer multiple forms of financial insecurity.

 

“Over 30 million people (almost half the population) are suffering some degree of financial insecurity;

Almost 18 million people cannot afford adequate housing conditions;

Roughly 14 million cannot afford one or more essential household goods;

Almost 12 million people are too poor to engage in common social activities considered necessary by the majority of the population;

About 5.5 million adults go without essential clothing;

Around 4 million children and adults are not properly fed by today’s standards…

Around 1.5 million children live in households that cannot afford to heat their home.”

7. In 1980, five percent of households could not afford to heat the living areas of their homes. Last winter, 29 percent had to turn the heating down or heat only one or two rooms. Thatcherism has literally made them cold!

 

8. By selling off the one-third British government stake in BP, the oil giant, Thatcher’s privatization policies made the company unaccountable to any public and allowed it to pursue naked profit-seeking and disregard of the environment. The Gulf oil spill would have looked different and perhaps had a different outcome if the company had still been in part publicly owned. As it is, it is complaining about paying reparations to Gulf residents whose livelihoods it ruined! And, public ownership would have made it more open to pursuing green energy (as the governments of the UK and Scotland increasingly are) instead of doubling down on deadly hydrocarbons.

 

9. Thatcher’s absolute refusal to negotiate or compromise over the Northern Ireland issue undoubtedly worsened and prolonged that conflict. Only when she was out of office did George Mitchell demonstrate that a settlement was possible, in the mid-1990s.

 

10. Thatcher denied that there was any Palestine and her refusal to accept the Palestine Liberation Organization as a negotiating partner (at the time it represented almost all Palestinians) helped derail any peace process, allowing the Israelis to go ahead with the colonization of the Occupied Territories and the expropriation of Palestinian property.

 

http://www.juancole....s-policies.html

 

 

Well, the bloke is lying his ass off about the Northern Ireland issue, so one wonders where he pulled the rest of this shit from? It's a long time since I last saw someone wandering the streets lacking "essential clothing" for example, yet 5.5m is a big chunk of society, and I'm pretty sure the claimed correlation between state ownership of oil companies and their environmental record is 100% jackanory too.

[Tom 14013]

Not really a fair one. The harm she did is quantifiable and gross.

 

Even if a majority liked what she was about they would be wrong... But there isn't. She's rightly reviled.

 

I know that - obviously - what I'm saying is CT is allowed his say. No matter much of a cunt she was.

[Happy Face 29]

 

 

Well, the bloke is lying his ass off about the Northern Ireland issue, so one wonders where he pulled the rest of this shit from? It's a long time since I last saw someone wandering the streets lacking "essential clothing" for example, yet 5.5m is a big chunk of society, and I'm pretty sure the claimed correlation between state ownership of oil companies and their environmental record is 100% jackanory too.

 

Follow the link. There's references all over the article if you want sources.

[Meenzer 15561]

I know that - obviously - what I'm saying is CT is allowed his say. No matter much of a cunt he is.

 

[The6Bells 0]

irrelevant & wrong

 

there's a revolution coming......

 

piggies going to squeal when they burn......

 

Ha. Even rioters are Thatcherites nowadays. It's pervaded every sector of society, to its base core. Victory. Victory. Victory.

[Meenzer 15561]

Meanwhile:

 

[Happy Face 29]

Caressing her jewels like a cliche of a comic witch.

 

Brass eye could not have done better.

 

[Park Life 71]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/owen-jones-thatcherism-was-a-national-catastrophe-that-still-poisons-us-8564858.html

[The6Bells 0]

Follow the link. There's references all over the article if you want sources.

 

Well, I followed the Northern Ireland one, and it's hilarious. Thatcher demanded an end to bombings before negotiations would start? Thatcher did not want peace because she was personally targetted? She didn't send condolences to Bobby Sands? She publicly questioned the morals of people who bombed women and kids and yet objected to being criminalised? This is evidence that Thatcher "refused to negotiate or compromise" or that she "prolonged the conflict". Fuck me sideways! Not to mention the fact that it contains the claim that the UDR, whch is a British infantry regiment, was one of the paramilitary groups fighting the IRA. A genuine error or an indication of the bias which pervades that piece? Hard to say given how outrageous it is. He can't seem to make his mind up whether she never negotiated and the sources prove that, or that she just didn't give in to their demands quickly enough (funnily enough the Anlog-Irish agreement was just mentioned on Newsnight, pretty sure that counts as evidence of attempted compromise)

 

And if this joker thinks the Troubles are over, he's clearly never been to the province since the Good Friday Agreement was signed. The bombing might have stopped, but the conflict not only still exists, it has been institutinalised by the person this buffoon lauds as the person who did a better job than Thatcher at resolving it. This bloke has for example not even considered the fact that the IRA were forced to those very negotiations because they realised that in military terms they could not win this war, and in public relations terms they could not win it either.

 

No, if the IRA example is anything to go by, he's drawn his conclusions from a very biased and quite frankly ridiculous reading of the actual historical facts.

[The6Bells 0]

Meanwhile:

 

 

 

That's over the top, even for the Daily Mail. Still, if you don't like it, vote for change. If there's anything socialists like better, it's controlling newspapers.

[The Fish 10876]

Dennis, is that you?

[Rayvin 5227]

Dennis, is that you?

 

It's getting a bit scary now isn't it? 41 posts dedicated to the defence of Thatcher...

[Meenzer 15561]

And all the front pages at a glance: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BHXHdGaCMAAeZ2S.jpg:large