RIP Michael Foot

[Causer]

It has nothing to do with Socialism, it's to do with Castro.

 

If it were based on political systems they wouldn't trade with communist China.

 

China abandoned communism with Deng Xiaoping's reforms.

[View From The Top]

China abandoned communism with Deng Xiaoping's reforms.

 

It is still a one party communist state, something the USA overlooks and the blinkered on this thread ignore.

 

It also shows how idiotic the embargo on Cuba really is.

[solentstars]

He was probably just jealous, bearing in mind that Atlee had just wiped the floor with him!

its funny how the toffs come up with silly quotes when their was mass poverty,thank god we had a giant like atlee in those days and we got a nhs to be proud of.

[Hamilton Saint]

It is still a one party communist state, something the USA overlooks and the blinkered on this thread ignore.

 

It also shows how idiotic the embargo on Cuba really is.

 

The U.S. has never had troubling dealing with (and assisting) one-party states, dictatorships, and military juntas - as long as they're far-to-the-right, as opposed to far-to-the-left.

Edited 8 March, 2010 by Hamilton Saint
punctuation

[Causer]

It is still a one party communist state, something the USA overlooks and the blinkered on this thread ignore.

 

It also shows how idiotic the embargo on Cuba really is.

 

One party true but definitely not communist. What is still communist about China?

The embargo on Cuba is an outdated relic of the cold war and should be abolished.

[View From The Top]

One party true but definitely not communist. What is still communist about China?

The embargo on Cuba is an outdated relic of the cold war and should be abolished.

 

Like it or not China is still a one party communist state. No matter how they've "adapted" it in the costal areas due to trade it remains, firmly, communist.

[dune]

Every Labour administration has left office with Taxes higher and having spent all the money.We are going the same way with Brown, and like Thatch, the next Tory leader will have to clear their mess up again.What sums up Labour is the Working Family Tax Credits. A system where a worker is taxed out of his income and then gets a tax credit back via his bank account. Anyone with half a brain, would cut out the middle man and reduce the tax taken out of his wages. If he's entittled to £10 Tax Credit, then tax him £10 a week less. However that would cut down on bureaucracy, which Labour loves, and people in "non jobs" dishing out the Credits would be out of work (Labour supporters).Labour's way is to create more and more layers of bureaucracy and jobs, so they can control everything from the top down.

 

There's a very fine line between Socialism and Comunism.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

There's a very fine line between Socialism and Comunism.

 

Is that really the second time you've posted that today with regards to the policies of New Labour?! You are up there with St.George as being one of the most uneducated idiots who inhabits this forum! Have you ever picked up a history book or a newspaper that has no 'Page 3' and more than 100 words per article?

 

Have a read of 'The Communist Manifesto' and the works of Marx and then see if you agree that New Labour and Communism are one and the same. For that matter, go into Waterstones (that is the shop with lots of books with it, however not all of them have pictures so you may be out of luck on this one) and pick up ANY book on the history of the USSR/Leninism/Stalinism and come back on here and tell me that New Labour and Communism are 'partners in crime'.

 

I am not a Communist, I am Socialist and while it can be argued that Socialism naturally feeds into Communism, any attempt on your part to label New Labour as being a Socialist party (or heaven forbid a 'Communist Party') will be met with 'rolled eyes' by 99.9% of people reading this thread, including myself.

 

You obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about and should have paid more attention in your history class.

Edited 8 March, 2010 by Thorpe-le-Saint

[Wes Tender]

its funny how the toffs come up with silly quotes when their was mass poverty,thank god we had a giant like atlee in those days and we got a nhs to be proud of.

Atlee a giant? You're having a laugh, mush.

[speculator]

LOL at all the lefties banging on about the banking collapse.

 

I have a few points to make on this:

 

1. Where did the governments get the cash to bail them out? Yep, that's right, not the magic socialist money tree, but the taxes ultimately paid for by the wealth created from the private sector

 

2. Not all countries banking systems suffered or failed, just those where the governments FAILED to regulate properly.

 

3. The banking system collapse is less about pure capitalism and more to do with stupidy and fraudulent behaviour. Lending money to people who are unlikely to pay it back generally does not generate profit. This is not capitalism at work, but more akin to gambling

 

4. Packaging dodgy loans into complex financial vehicles is not capitalism....in my mind it is bloody fraud and people should be prosecuted.

 

 

 

The banking system needs capitalism to thrive, but gambling and fraud in their own rights are not capitalism. In order for capitalism to thrive, you do, believe it or not, need regulation to ensure that the greedy and reckless are not left unchecked. This whole crisis was caused by the failure of those in charge to regulate properly. I call Gordon Fraudon becuase he spent 10 years banging on about prudence when the Northern Rock were giving away 125% mortgages. The guy is a fraud.

 

Anyway, carry on......

 

Good post most of which I agree. However, I would argue it was not gambling and more like greed or a bet to nothing in an easy bull market where for a good few years you couldn't lose provided you made good use of the assets on your balance sheet to generate cash for more 'bets'.

 

It's not fraud to package a few good headline assets with a load of toxic junk but to then sell them under some trumped up name of Collateralised Debt Obligations is perhaps stretching things to far.

 

125% LTV Mortgages; salary multiples of 5 times plus any other income sources, i.e. The Tooth Fairy taken into account; average house prices 9 times the average salary and yet no one in the Government past or present predicted the crash? RIP Labour let alone the scholarly foolhardy Foot. Put's Blair's now infamous 'no more boom and bust' catchphrase into perspective - bust doesn't even get close to quantifying the levels of debt we have incurred under Labour.

[solentstars]

Good post most of which I agree. However, I would argue it was not gambling and more like greed or a bet to nothing in an easy bull market where for a good few years you couldn't lose provided you made good use of the assets on your balance sheet to generate cash for more 'bets'.

 

It's not fraud to package a few good headline assets with a load of toxic junk but to then sell them under some trumped up name of Collateralised Debt Obligations is perhaps stretching things to far.

 

125% LTV Mortgages; salary multiples of 5 times plus any other income sources, i.e. The Tooth Fairy taken into account; average house prices 9 times the average salary and yet no one in the Government past or present predicted the crash? RIP Labour let alone the scholarly foolhardy Foot. Put's Blair's now infamous 'no more boom and bust' catchphrase into perspective - bust doesn't even get close to quantifying the levels of debt we have incurred under Labour.

 

i agree same thing happened under tories,they are all the same

[dune]

I am not a Communist, I am Socialist and while it can be argued that Socialism naturally feeds into Communism, any attempt on your part to label New Labour as being a Socialist party (or heaven forbid a 'Communist Party') will be met with 'rolled eyes' by 99.9% of people reading this thread, including myself.

 

I've deleted the silly school boy comments (you're not in the classroom now TLS) and will focus on your ill informed comment above. After 13 years of Socialism we have clearly seen that Blair and Brown firmly believe in taxing the public as much as possible. They, like the comunists, don't believe in trusting people to spend their own money, rather they take the money and waste it on the inefficient and bureucratic public sector. And as has been mentioned it's no co-incidence that so many Socialists end up working in the public sector - it's the easy option in life afterall.

[solentstars]

Atlee a giant? You're having a laugh, mush.

read your history books and see what they achieved compared to the idiots who have run this country since the 60.s to the present time.

[solentstars]

Is that really the second time you've posted that today with regards to the policies of New Labour?! You are up there with St.George as being one of the most uneducated idiots who inhabits this forum! Have you ever picked up a history book or a newspaper that has no 'Page 3' and more than 100 words per article?

 

Have a read of 'The Communist Manifesto' and the works of Marx and then see if you agree that New Labour and Communism are one and the same. For that matter, go into Waterstones (that is the shop with lots of books with it, however not all of them have pictures so you may be out of luck on this one) and pick up ANY book on the history of the USSR/Leninism/Stalinism and come back on here and tell me that New Labour and Communism are 'partners in crime'.

 

I am not a Communist, I am Socialist and while it can be argued that Socialism naturally feeds into Communism, any attempt on your part to label New Labour as being a Socialist party (or heaven forbid a 'Communist Party') will be met with 'rolled eyes' by 99.9% of people reading this thread, including myself.

 

You obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about and should have paid more attention in your history class.

why worry what he thinks hes unimportant,hes says what alot of fantastical toryboys say .

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I've deleted the silly school boy comments (you're not in the classroom now TLS) and will focus on your ill informed comment above. After 13 years of Socialism we have clearly seen that Blair and Brown firmly believe in taxing the public as much as possible. They, like the comunists, don't believe in trusting people to spend their own money, rather they take the money and waste it on the inefficient and bureucratic public sector. And as has been mentioned it's no co-incidence that so many Socialists end up working in the public sector - it's the easy option in life afterall.

 

I really should just ignore you but I'm in a foul mood tonight...

 

You're a lost cause; if you're unwilling to actually do some reading into a subject because you might have to think differently then I pity you. Why I didn't take BTF's advice a few weeks ago and ignore you is beyond me.

 

The public sector an easy option? Sure, you just keep telling yourself that one matey.

 

Furthermore, if asking you to read in order to become more informed on a subject makes my comments 'school boy' insults, then I apologise...by the way 'coincidence' is one word.

[speculator]

i agree same thing happened under tories,they are all the same

 

They can be all the same but the size of the c o c k up does make a difference and whereas Mrs Thatcher had an £11bn deficit to overcome in 1979 I dread how Cameron and Co can even start to address a debt so huge it is beyond most people's financial comprehension. What is evident is that the last thing we need is for those who helped mastermind the events leading to our position of today, is to give them another 5 years to try and rectify the mess. I and no doubt many others would settle for a lesser c o c k up than carry on massaging the current one.

[Causer]

Like it or not China is still a one party communist state. No matter how they've "adapted" it in the costal areas due to trade it remains, firmly, communist.

 

If China was a truly communist state it would not tolerate the vast disparities of wealth between its citizens that exist today.Private enterprise and foreign investement would not be tolerated as opposed to encourage as it is in Modern China with the Special Economic Zones

[norwaysaint]

I've only read a few posts on here as I was wondering how a thread about Michael Foot had gone so far.

 

I'll just point out that Norway would be classed by most as a socialist country.

 

-It was probably the least affected by the economic crisis in the world,

-a country with a surplus rather than a deficit

-and is consistently ranked as the best place in the world to live.

 

It doesn't really seem to match certain posters' ideas of socialism being an outright failure. there are pros and cons in all systems. Balance is important.

[Johnny Bognor]

The public sector an easy option? Sure, you just keep telling yourself that one matey.

 

I agree with you there, because compared to sitting on your arse claiming benefits, it is definately not the easiest option.

[dune]

I really should just ignore you but I'm in a foul mood tonight...

 

You're a lost cause; if you're unwilling to actually do some reading into a subject because you might have to think differently then I pity you. Why I didn't take BTF's advice a few weeks ago and ignore you is beyond me.

 

The public sector an easy option? Sure, you just keep telling yourself that one matey.

 

Furthermore, if asking you to read in order to become more informed on a subject makes my comments 'school boy' insults, then I apologise...by the way 'coincidence' is one word.

 

Don't you get your red biro out on my posts.

 

Why is it that we are hearing so many stories of public sector workers planning strikes because the govt. has asked them to accept pay freezes or other reasonable requests? I'll tell you, it's because so many public sector workers are Socialists and they, like those who make a life choice to live on benefits, think they are special and have ingrained sense of being owed something. I hope you have many years in the public sector, but i'd love to see you try and hack it in the real world.

[Johnny Bognor]

They can be all the same but the size of the c o c k up does make a difference and whereas Mrs Thatcher had an £11bn deficit to overcome in 1979 I dread how Cameron and Co can even start to address a debt so huge it is beyond most people's financial comprehension. What is evident is that the last thing we need is for those who helped mastermind the events leading to our position of today, is to give them another 5 years to try and rectify the mess. I and no doubt many others would settle for a lesser c o c k up than carry on massaging the current one.

 

 

Indeed at the last count it was £923,524,200,015

 

It is now at £923,524,629,000

 

It climbed by more than £425,000 in that 1.5 minute window.

 

Since working that out, it now stands at £923,525,198,451.

 

Basically in the space of 4 minutes, another £1m has been added.

 

If you want to see how horrific this is look at http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/, about two thirds of the way down the page.

[solentstars]

They can be all the same but the size of the c o c k up does make a difference and whereas Mrs Thatcher had an £11bn deficit to overcome in 1979 I dread how Cameron and Co can even start to address a debt so huge it is beyond most people's financial comprehension. What is evident is that the last thing we need is for those who helped mastermind the events leading to our position of today, is to give them another 5 years to try and rectify the mess. I and no doubt many others would settle for a lesser c o c k up than carry on massaging the current one.

 

i agree but the bankers who got us in this mess our the same people cameron and his gang hobnob with on their yachts ,so all that will happen is more of the same for the next ten years and tax avoiders who do not live in this country such has lord ashcroft will want his payoff for funding them and then will be replaced by new labour again,the only guy i got any respect for is vince cable .

[Johnny Bognor]

Indeed at the last count it was £923,524,200,015

 

It is now at £923,524,629,000

 

It climbed by more than £425,000 in that 1.5 minute window.

 

Since working that out, it now stands at £923,525,198,451.

 

Basically in the space of 4 minutes, another £1m has been added.

 

If you want to see how horrific this is look at http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/, about two thirds of the way down the page.

 

 

Now £923,525,527,000 which is £3m in the last 15 minutes......

 

Go on lefties, I know it's the Times, but just take a quick look to see what mess Fraudon & Co have created.

[dune]

They can be all the same but the size of the c o c k up does make a difference and whereas Mrs Thatcher had an £11bn deficit to overcome in 1979 I dread how Cameron and Co can even start to address a debt so huge it is beyond most people's financial comprehension. What is evident is that the last thing we need is for those who helped mastermind the events leading to our position of today, is to give them another 5 years to try and rectify the mess. I and no doubt many others would settle for a lesser c o c k up than carry on massaging the current one.

 

I'm sure even Peter Storie would struggle to do a worse job than the Socialists.

[Wes Tender]

-and is consistently ranked as the best place in the world to live.

 

 

That's not strictly correct. It is ranked the best place in the World to live in the summer.

[Wes Tender]

read your history books and see what they achieved compared to the idiots who have run this country since the 60.s to the present time.

 

I am prefectly well versed in British History, thank you. Bone up on your English grammar and spelling would be my return advice to you; both are poor.

 

I mainly object to the use of the adjective "giant". He might have been a giant in the Labour Party, but it is hyperbole to credit him with being a giant elsewhere in the Political spheres.

[solentstars]

I am prefectly well versed in British History, thank you. Bone up on your English grammar and spelling would be my return advice to you; both are poor.

 

I mainly object to the use of the adjective "giant". He might have been a giant in the Labour Party, but it is hyperbole to credit him with being a giant elsewhere in the Political spheres.

maybe not to you but wikipedia differ

the government he led put in place the post-war settlement, based upon the assumption that full employment would be maintained by Keynesian policies, and that a greatly enlarged system of social services would be created – aspirations that had been outlined in the wartime Beveridge Report. Within this context, his government undertook the nationalisation of major industries and public utilities as well as the creation of the National Health Service. After initial Conservative opposition to Keynesian fiscal policy, this settlement was broadly accepted by all parties[1] until Margaret Thatcher became leader of the Conservative Party in the 1970s and neoliberalism became mainstream.

 

His government also presided over the decolonisation of a large part of the British Empire when India, Pakistan, Burma, Sri Lanka and Jordan obtained their independence. The British Mandate of Palestine also came to an end with the creation of Israel on the day of British withdrawal.

 

In 2004, he was voted the greatest British prime minister of the 20th century in a poll of 139 professors organised by MORI.[2]:Di think he are churchill were giants compared to the muppet leaders who have run this country since the 1960.s

[Wes Tender]

maybe not to you but wikipedia differ

the government he led put in place the post-war settlement, based upon the assumption that full employment would be maintained by Keynesian policies, and that a greatly enlarged system of social services would be created – aspirations that had been outlined in the wartime Beveridge Report. Within this context, his government undertook the nationalisation of major industries and public utilities as well as the creation of the National Health Service. After initial Conservative opposition to Keynesian fiscal policy, this settlement was broadly accepted by all parties[1] until Margaret Thatcher became leader of the Conservative Party in the 1970s and neoliberalism became mainstream.

 

His government also presided over the decolonisation of a large part of the British Empire when India, Pakistan, Burma, Sri Lanka and Jordan obtained their independence. The British Mandate of Palestine also came to an end with the creation of Israel on the day of British withdrawal.

 

In 2004, he was voted the greatest British prime minister of the 20th century in a poll of 139 professors organised by MORI.[2]:Di think he are churchill were giants compared to the muppet leaders who have run this country since the 1960.s

Ah, Wikepedia, the fount of all knowledge. The World's most respectable oracle on any subject. Anything they say about anything must be true as nothing posted on there is the opinion of the person who posted it and contributors must be the most brilliant minds of their generation.

 

But where in that article did they say that he was a political giant? I must have missed it. Oh, you reached that conclusion as your own opinion. Well, as I said, I am well enough versed in British history and my opinion differs to yours. But he was ranked number one British PM of the 20th Century by a poll of Professors? And these were all Professors of History I take it? Can you please confirm? As most Professors live their lives closseted in the halls of Academia, they are renowned for not living in the real World. As a group, they have a reputation for eccentric dottiness. As a group, they mostly lean a long way to the left also. Frankly, I would have been surprised if they did not vote Attlee as the greatest PM of the 20th Century. Never in a million years would they have voted for Maggie Thatcher and yet her claim is at least as strong as Atlee's, but you would never accept that either.

 

PS. There is no need to shout or to accentuate certain of your thoughts in a different colour to emphasise them. It rather smacks of you losing your temper like a little child. If you have any cogent points, then I'm sure that most intelligent readers are capable of recognising whether it is a good argument without having to be guided as to which points you believe are worthy of emphasis.

[solentstars]

Ah, Wikepedia, the fount of all knowledge. The World's most respectable oracle on any subject. Anything they say about anything must be true as nothing posted on there is the opinion of the person who posted it and contributors must be the most brilliant minds of their generation.

 

But where in that article did they say that he was a political giant? I must have missed it. Oh, you reached that conclusion as your own opinion. Well, as I said, I am well enough versed in British history and my opinion differs to yours. But he was ranked number one British PM of the 20th Century by a poll of Professors? And these were all Professors of History I take it? Can you please confirm? As most Professors live their lives closseted in the halls of Academia, they are renowned for not living in the real World. As a group, they have a reputation for eccentric dottiness. As a group, they mostly lean a long way to the left also. Frankly, I would have been surprised if they did not vote Attlee as the greatest PM of the 20th Century. Never in a million years would they have voted for Maggie Thatcher and yet her claim is at least as strong as Atlee's, but you would never accept that either.

 

PS. There is no need to shout or to accentuate certain of your thoughts in a different colour to emphasise them. It rather smacks of you losing your temper like a little child. If you have any cogent points, then I'm sure that most intelligent readers are capable of recognising whether it is a good argument without having to be guided as to which points you believe are worthy of emphasis.

 

well we have to disagree and i leave it up to others if those achievements were not important and i find it hard to think of any british prime minster since the war (apart from churchill ) to have left a legacy like that in our history books.

[ecuk268]

 

As most Professors live their lives closseted in the halls of Academia, they are renowned for not living in the real World. As a group, they have a reputation for eccentric dottiness. As a group, they mostly lean a long way to the left also.

 

Have you got any hard evidence for this vague generalisation. You sound more like the Daily Mail with every post.

[Whitey Grandad]

well we have to disagree and i leave it up to others if those achievements were not important and i find it hard to think of any british prime minster since the war (apart from churchill ) to have left a legacy like that in our history books.

So how would he compare with, Churchill, say?

[solentstars]

So how would he compare with, Churchill, say?

churchill was a great wartime leader in those darkdays and warned the country of the dangers of hitlers facism and the soviet union communism . ,so i would say churchill would be was our greatest leader because of the freedoms enjoyed today followed by attlee who was in churchills government coalition 1940 to 1945.

it seems since the 60,s to the present day we have had no giants has leaders.

wilson and thatcher were small fry compared to those great leaders.

[ecuk268]

Strange that Churchill got booted out in 1945. You would have thought that he would be re-elected easily.

 

It would be interesting to hear from someone who was around at the time what the feeling was in the country that led to Attlee's government.

[solentstars]

Strange that Churchill got booted out in 1945. You would have thought that he would be re-elected easily.

 

It would be interesting to hear from someone who was around at the time what the feeling was in the country that led to Attlee's government.

i agree but i think people then wanted a different britain,their was alot of poverty pre-war and you had to pay to see a docter .

the Labour Party and its allies in the media ran an effective propaganda war on the home front. They vilified members of the pre-war Conservative party as having been appeasers of Hitler, and of having been responsible for the failure to re-arm Britain. And they painted the 1930s in dismal colours as an era of poverty and mass unemployment. At the same time, they held out theprospect of a new social order that would ensure better housing, free medical services and employment for all

i expect this vision won it for labour in 1945 even though churchill had a 78% approval rating himself.

[Whitey Grandad]

Strange that Churchill got booted out in 1945. You would have thought that he would be re-elected easily.

 

It would be interesting to hear from someone who was around at the time what the feeling was in the country that led to Attlee's government.

I'll ask me mum. She knows everything.

[Lord Duckhunter]

it seems since the 60,s to the present day we have had no giants has leaders.

wilson and thatcher were small fry compared to those great leaders.

 

What a load of old pony.

 

Before Thatcher, Heath Wilson and Callaghan had made Britain the Sick Man of Europe. Thatcher won 3 election victories and made Britain a home owning, share owning, enterprise country and she is respected the world over.She set the Country free from the Socialist dogma and lily livered wet Tory's that had caused the Country to grind to a halt. The rich were taxed at 82% and the poor at 33%, and the Country was held to ransom by the unions.

 

It is only the bitter left wing and left leaning establishment of this Country, that decry her achievements. She was a great Leader, and even now Brown wanted to be seen inviting her to number 10. To compare her to Wilson (with his corrupt lavender list) is quite simply an insult.

[solentstars]

What a load of old pony.

 

Before Thatcher, Heath Wilson and Callaghan had made Britain the Sick Man of Europe. Thatcher won 3 election victories and made Britain a home owning, share owning, enterprise country and she is respected the world over.She set the Country free from the Socialist dogma and lily livered wet Tory's that had caused the Country to grind to a halt. The rich were taxed at 82% and the poor at 33%, and the Country was held to ransom by the unions.

 

It is only the bitter left wing and left leaning establishment of this Country, that decry her achievements. She was a great Leader, and even now Brown wanted to be seen inviting her to number 10. To compare her to Wilson (with his corrupt lavender list) is quite simply an insult.

 

i,m not a socialist and if you want to kiss maggies ass thats up to you blair won 3 elections and was the longest premier in history ,so what ,

history has already forgotten about them.

they don,t compare to churchill or attlie for acheivements such has fighting facism and nhs.

[Lord Duckhunter]

i,m not a socialist and if you want to kiss maggies ass thats up to you blair won 3 elections and was the longest premier in history ,so what ,

history has already forgotten about them.

they don,t compare to churchill or attlie for acheivements such has fighting facism and nhs.

 

Blair was not the longest serving Prime Minister in history, you just made that up.

 

History has not forgotton about Thatcher either, you made that up as well.

 

Her legacy will live on for many years after her death. The fact that the Labour party had to reinvent it's self as a left of centre Tory party is down to the fact that she changed Britain for the better. It is unthinkable that we would own a car company, an airline and the phone company. Unthinkable that people had to go cap in hand to a Building Society Manager, after saving with them for years, to get a mortgage. And unthinkable that the unions could grind the Country to a halt, with secondary picketting and strikes called without a ballot. This is a completely different Country than the one pre 1979, and that is down to Mrs Thatcher and her policies.

[ecuk268]

Blair was not the longest serving Prime Minister in history, you just made that up.

 

History has not forgotton about Thatcher either, you made that up as well.

 

Her legacy will live on for many years after her death. The fact that the Labour party had to reinvent it's self as a left of centre Tory party is down to the fact that she changed Britain for the better. It is unthinkable that we would own a car company, an airline and the phone company. Unthinkable that people had to go cap in hand to a Building Society Manager, after saving with them for years, to get a mortgage. And unthinkable that the unions could grind the Country to a halt, with secondary picketting and strikes called without a ballot. This is a completely different Country than the one pre 1979, and that is down to Mrs Thatcher and her policies.

 

If she was so wonderful, why did her own party stab her in the back and boot her out?

[Whitey Grandad]

If she was so wonderful, why did her own party stab her in the back and boot her out?

She'd done her job and was past her sell-by date.

[solentstars]

If she was so wonderful, why did her own party stab her in the back and boot her out?

thats because she was so great,ha ha,let the guy dream,its know skin of my nose.

i,ve forgotten about the mass unemployment and polltax ,riots,sky high interest rates,greed is good and no such thing has society rubbish,vat going up from 5 to 17.5 % and the falkands war which saved her bacon.

shes just like wilson in the 1960,s who was the suppose to be a great leader.

she will only be remembered for being the first women prime minister of this country and a divisive figure .

[View From The Top]

I will take a day off to celebrate Thatcher's death and once she is buried I shall and dance a merry jig on her grave.

[Whitey Grandad]

I will take a day off to celebrate Thatcher's death and once she is buried I shall and dance a merry jig on her grave.

Oh dear. We're not bitter, are we?

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

What a load of old pony.

 

Before Thatcher, Heath Wilson and Callaghan had made Britain the Sick Man of Europe. Thatcher won 3 election victories and made Britain a home owning, share owning, enterprise country and she is respected the world over.She set the Country free from the Socialist dogma and lily livered wet Tory's that had caused the Country to grind to a halt. The rich were taxed at 82% and the poor at 33%, and the Country was held to ransom by the unions.

 

It is only the bitter left wing and left leaning establishment of this Country, that decry her achievements. She was a great Leader, and even now Brown wanted to be seen inviting her to number 10. To compare her to Wilson (with his corrupt lavender list) is quite simply an insult.

 

What is so wrong with rich being taxed far more than the poor!? That is how it should be!

[View From The Top]

Oh dear. We're not bitter, are we?

 

Life is too short to be bitter, a lesson you could well do with absorbing.

[Sour Mash]

I will take a day off to celebrate Thatcher's death and once she is buried I shall and dance a merry jig on her grave.

 

I can certainly see why individuals would disagree with Thatcher on some of her policies, but why that level of hatred? Genuine question.

[View From The Top]

I can certainly see why individuals would disagree with Thatcher on some of her policies, but why that level of hatred? Genuine question.

 

1979 - 1990.

 

Greed. Me. Me. Me. Pull Up The Ladder Jack. Little Englander.

 

Everything I despise in politics.

 

Plus she stole my milk.

[solentstars]

I can certainly see why individuals would disagree with Thatcher on some of her policies, but why that level of hatred? Genuine question.

has i said earlier post she was a devise figure ,you had small group of people who did very well out of her and a lot of people who had it hard despite us having north sea oil to pay for mass unemployment and house repossessions because of her party s mismanagement of the economy in her early years.

[CB Fry]

Blair was not the longest serving Prime Minister in history, you just made that up.

 

History has not forgotton about Thatcher either, you made that up as well.

 

Her legacy will live on for many years after her death. The fact that the Labour party had to reinvent it's self as a left of centre Tory party is down to the fact that she changed Britain for the better. It is unthinkable that we would own a car company, an airline and the phone company. Unthinkable that people had to go cap in hand to a Building Society Manager, after saving with them for years, to get a mortgage. And unthinkable that the unions could grind the Country to a halt, with secondary picketting and strikes called without a ballot. This is a completely different Country than the one pre 1979, and that is down to Mrs Thatcher and her policies.

 

 

Thatcher changed Britain completely in her time. No question.

 

Atlee did similar in his time - he built the welfare state which is sneered at these days but was reward for a nation shattered by war and was a phenomenal achievement.

 

He did the kind of things that Obama is doing in the US with healthcare now. It's not a perfect comparison but the same spirit.

 

Anyone who knows anything about British political history would put Clement Atlee up there as one of the great Prime Ministers in the twentieth century alongside Lloyd George, Churchill and Thatcher.

[Wes Tender]

has i said earlier post she was a devise figure ,you had small group of people who did very well out of her and a lot of people who had it hard despite us having north sea oil to pay for mass unemployment and house repossessions because of her party s mismanagement of the economy in her early years.

It really is difficult to take your views seriously when both your grammar and spelling are so poor.