Maggie

[Libero]

She didn't support Apartheid, she refused to embargo SA because of it. I recommend reading her memoirs where she illustrates just how tough a decision that was. Anyone could see at the time that the embargoes hurt the (mostly black) poor and did nothing to stop the rich white people doing what they were doing. Any embargo would have been an empty political statement - something we've got very used to in the last 16 years.

Good Points Scara. Also to add, She stripped the Miners of their dignity? I think they did that themselves by agreeing to what amounted to an illegal strike given the lack of a proper national ballot. For the way their lifestyles changed in that 12 months and forever after, they have Scargill to thank just as much if not more than Thatcher.

The Unions needed sorting out anyway, It caused mayhem in the 70s and she wasn't going to blindly let that happen again. Scargill and his cronies were too bloody minded to see that their actions were playing right into her hands.

Fact is that as a country in terms of domestic issues and on the wider world stage, we were left in a better place upon her departure than what she walked into whether you like it or not.

 

[Baleforce]

the long term causes of the miners strike are interesting to me, it's like the entire industry ignored what was happening around it, British Rail's modernisation from coal burning steam to diesel in the 60's, the opening of nuclear power stations, the mass adoption of gas heating in the home

hopefully it's a lesson learned for the future

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

It's thought control. Greed is natural, greed is good. The right wing justify their ideology by turning a vice into a virtue. They also mindlessly repeat invalid generalizations, i.e. northerners are all work shy. Labour voters only support the party to safe guard their un-productive public sector jobs etc, etc.

Clement Attlee was the greatest peace time leader of this country, by a mile. Thatcher was not fit to lick his boots.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

the long term causes of the miners strike are interesting to me, it's like the entire industry ignored what was happening around it, British Rail's modernisation from coal burning steam to diesel in the 60's, the opening of nuclear power stations, the mass adoption of gas heating in the home

hopefully it's a lesson learned for the future

Ah. The railways. The Beeching Report. Did you watch the Ian Hislop programme on this? Excellent, I thought. And an insight. The railway network was decimated in the north, Scotland, Wales and the S/W because of Beeching. The south east was virtually untouched, in comparison. There were accusations of the survey work being flawed. So the transport infrastructure was decimated for some areas, but not all. Sound familiar? This really was the very beginning - the not so green shoots, if you like - of the north-south divide, IMHO. Beeching retired to Godalming afterwards, with an active railway station on his doorstep. Sums it up really.

The coal industry? There were still large markets for coal in the 1880's/1990's, and many 'uneconomic' pits were either borderline (so mothball them, until technology changes that) or profitable, with some investment. The industry was closed down, near entirely, on political reasons, principally. Once closed, its then far more expensive to reopen it, unless sites have been mothballed. Or was it deliberately destroyed/pits pulled apart to ensure they were never reopened?

Then there is the argument about cheaper coal elsewhere. The 'cheaper' alternatives I remember being used at the time were not Australia, but Poland and Venezuala, which was kind of ironic as the first was a communist state (so no love there for Thatcher) and the second had a dreadful reputation for sending children of 8 or 9 down the mines in slave labour conditions. My brother in law (a very highly qualified and very senior manager in the mining and quarrying industry. Private, incidentally) and I have discussed this many times. The above is his professional opinion.

Last there is the issue of 'cheaper foreign coal'. You get rid of your own industry. Then the price goes up elsewhere. It happened, and coal wasn't the only example.

The lesson learned? You protect staple industries. You invest and modernise them. You may make efficiencies. But you don't destroy them.

 

[Baleforce]

invest and modernise is indeed the key, something unions always seem to be against as modernisation tends to involve shrinking the workforce

not thats its an important point but its interesting to note that the heritage railways in this country all buy polish coal for their running steam engines, more for its quality than price

 

[Sheffield Spur]

Interesting point this. It does make you wonder why major employers aren't interested in the area. Transport is decent, rent is minimal. My suspicion (although nothing more than that) is that the entrenched beliefs of a workforce are unappealing.

Or that central Government should have been acting as a counter-checker to channel companies around the country. Not just to the S/E. It hasn't. It has shunted various public sector bodies north, but all that has done is principally move people from south to north. Not created new jobs in the north. The latest example is the BBC to Manchester.

Or that, ahem, 'incentives' have not been made to companies to move to South Yorks. Mmmm. Nissan to Sunderland? No comment. Thatcher's Government in the 1980's was never going to influence any employers of any merit or importantly, size, to move here.

One thing I disagree with you on is your comment on it having decent transport here. It doesn't, or at least it isn't good enough. Its an area which has long been lacking in this area. The electrification of the main north-south rail route has been decades in coming, and now it is, its not even going through Sheffield city centre! What a joke. The other critical area lacking is not having a major route/motorway west to east, through Sheffield. Leeds comparative success (amongst other reasons) is it got the M62 connecting the east coast to west coast, and connecting Hull, Manchester and Liverpool with Leeds. It opened in the 1970's. Very timely for it. All of this is down to central government.

 

[scaramanga]

It's thought control. Greed is natural, greed is good. The right wing justify their ideology by turning a vice into a virtue. They also mindlessly repeat invalid generalizations, i.e. northerners are all work shy. Labour voters only support the party to safe guard their un-productive public sector jobs etc, etc.

Clement Attlee was the greatest peace time leader of this country, by a mile. Thatcher was not fit to lick his boots.

<Insert not sure if serious gif here>

He was the man who carved the mill stone which still hangs around all our necks. Were it not for his hubris, Thatcher wouldn't have had to do all the good she did in the 80s.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

invest and modernise is indeed the key, something unions always seem to be against as modernisation tends to involve shrinking the workforce

We agree then. Unions have had to adopt reality in the last few decades. Read my original post.... the bit about about unions. But what unions won't agree with is the destruction of a workforce and industry. Alongside 'modernisation' should come investment and new jobs. That never happened here in anywhere the neccessary balance here. It was cast adrift.

not thats its an important point but its interesting to note that the heritage railways in this country all buy polish coal for their running steam engines, more for its quality than price

Well they pretty much couldn't buy British coal, could they!

 

[Baleforce]

not complete agreement, I don't think modernisation should include provision of new jobs unless its financially viable to do so

 

[scaramanga]

Or that central Government should have been acting as a counter-checker to channel companies around the country. Not just to the S/E. It hasn't. It has shunted various public sector bodies north, but all that has done is principally move people from south to north. Not created new jobs in the north. The latest example is the BBC to Manchester.

Or that, ahem, 'incentives' have not been made to companies to move to South Yorks. Mmmm. Nissan to Sunderland? No comment. Thatcher's Government in the 1980's was never going to influence any employers of any merit or importantly, size, to move here.

One thing I disagree with you on is your comment on it having decent transport here. It doesn't, or at least it isn't good enough. Its an area which has long been lacking in this area. The electrification of the main north-south rail route has been decades in coming, and now it is, its not even going through Sheffield city centre! What a joke. The other critical area lacking is not having a major route/motorway west to east, through Sheffield. Leeds comparative success (amongst other reasons) is it got the M62 connecting the east coast to west coast, and connecting Hull, Manchester and Liverpool with Leeds. It opened in the 1970's. Very timely for it. All of this is down to central government.

I'm not sure why government has any responsibility whatsoever to show favouritism and send industry to particular parts of the country. I think transport to some extent is a government issue, but whilst Sheffield may not be as easy to get to as London, Manchester, Birmingham, etc it is comparable to a number of other places in the country that manage to keep employment reasonably high.

 

[scaramanga]

I am a kid. I don't deny it. I was barely out of my toddler shorts when the Conservatives stabbed Maggie in the back, and spent my formative and teenage years in Dubai, blissfully unaware of the reasons why my parents moved or what became of my many relatives still living in the north of England whom I'd never met or even seen.

But I have enough of a grasp on history, and enough stories garnered from the family members I know who were part of the great industrial masses she destroyed, to form my own opinions. I've gone from the UK, to the UAE, to the UK again and then on to Canada, and have seen the best and worst of all three countries. I've had enough of an advanced education to analyse why that is so. And my conclusions point me in one direction when it comes to the UK.

If I seem to have lived in the Thatcher years, it is because a large portion of my university career was spent exhaustively studying them, writing about them and listening to my relatives rage against them. I certainly do not mean to deceive people as to my origins or my past.

Did you study economics then?

If so, you are quite literally the first person I've ever had a discussion with who studied economics (and I've spoken to a fair few) who still has left-leaning tendencies.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

I'm not sure why government has any responsibility whatsoever to show favouritism and send industry to particular parts of the country. I think transport to some extent is a government issue, but whilst Sheffield may not be as easy to get to as London, Manchester, Birmingham, etc it is comparable to a number of other places in the country that manage to keep employment reasonably high.

Government has a major and pivotal role in influencing. Often via civil service departments, which are a tool of any Government.

Its not favouritism. Its part of a Govenments role to ensure the well-being of all of the whole country. Not just part of it. The whole country votes. Not just part of it. To neglect part of the country is dereliction of duty. People are people. Perhaps were are getting to the core of the issue here. Thatcher didn't believe in this, I suspect. She therefore, wasn't fit for office. You, no doubt, don't agree

And yes, I have done economics and business studies. And I am not left wing, per se. I never have been. I do believe that the whole country is important, though. Not just part of it.

 

[scaramanga]

Government has a major and pivotal role in influencing. Often via civil service departments, which are a tool of any Government.

Its not favouritism. Its part of a Govenments role to ensure the well-being of all of the whole country. Not just part of it. The whole country votes. Not just part of it. To neglect part of the country is dereliction of duty. People are people. Perhaps were are getting to the core of the issue here. Thatcher didn't believe in this, I suspect. She therefore, wasn't fit for office. You, no doubt, don't agree

And yes, I have done economics and business studies. And I am not left wing, per se. I never have been. I do believe that the whole country is important, though. Not just part of it.

I suspect that you and I will disagree on the point of the role of government long into the distant future. But let's step through a 'what if' just for the fun of it.

Let's say that the government sees there's not enough employment in Sheffield so they tell Nissan (who are looking to set up a factory in the UK) that they can only build in Sheffield.
Not much problem with that, Sheffield has a large number of people looking for work, a red brick uni and comparatively low land costs.
All is going well during the build, until some bright spark in Sheffield hears that the government forced Nissan to choose Sheffield and that no other options would have been allowed.
Said person in Sheffield tells everyone about the situation so they form a collective (let's say a union) and decide that the national minimum wage is not for them.
Sheffield sets a local minimum wage of £25 per hour knowing that Nissan has to pay this as they can't go elsewhere for their factory.
Nissan becomes completely unproductive and has to double the price of their cars to cover the increase in costs.
The European public (quite sensibly) chooses not to pay BMW money for Nissans
The Nissan factory shuts, leaving lots of people without jobs
Everyone in Sheffield complains that the government hasn't provided jobs for them.

Of course, this is an entirely unlikely situation as at the point where Sheffield sets the local minimum wage, Nissan would say "fudge that" and build a factory in Germany.

 

[Superhudd]

Although I side with the Thatcher did good phalanx, I don't think she should be given an all but in name State Funeral. A minute silence for the whole nation at a certain time should have been enough. Hopefully there will be a 2 mile area cordoned off so not to have the mayday protestor types sullen the door of what is at the end of the day, someone's passing.

 

[scaramanga]

Although I side with the Thatcher did good phalanx, I don't think she should be given an all but in name State Funeral. A minute silence for the whole nation at a certain time should have been enough. Hopefully there will be a 2 mile area cordoned off so not to have the mayday protestor types sullen the door of what is at the end of the day, someone's passing.

Not to mention that she didn't want a state funeral anyway. I'm sure the hedgemonkeys will find their way through the cordons somehow.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

I'm not sure why government has any responsibility whatsoever to show favouritism and send industry to particular parts of the country. I think transport to some extent is a government issue, but whilst Sheffield may not be as easy to get to as London, Manchester, Birmingham, etc it is comparable to a number of other places in the country that manage to keep employment reasonably high.

Don't agree.

'Some other cities' were not as badly wrecked as Sheffield was in the 1980's, and therefore did not have such a dire and acute situation to recover from, as here. Sheffield had its (by far) main employment ripped out, in steel and heavy engineering, in a very short time scale. Then the coal industry went in the periphery of Sheffield, and all the supplying private companies that went to the wall as a consequence.

The places you mention and others were and are regional centres, with a much more diverse industry and commerce base/job base, which, whilst they suffered losses, were not so utterly trashed as Sheffield was. I don't think even Liverpool was as badly mauled...proportionately, as Sheffield was. Sheffield still had a very large population. About 690,000, combined with Rotherham, in 1980. The bigger the population, the bigger the problem.

Neither you nor anyone else has yet given a credible employment alternative for the population here, bearing in mind the calamity it suffered. Then again, its easy to destroy, but not so easy to create.

 

[Sheffield Spur]

I suspect that you and I will disagree on the point of the role of government long into the distant future. But let's step through a 'what if' just for the fun of it.

Let's say that the government sees there's not enough employment in Sheffield so they tell Nissan (who are looking to set up a factory in the UK) that they can only build in Sheffield.
Not much problem with that, Sheffield has a large number of people looking for work, a red brick uni and comparatively low land costs.
All is going well during the build, until some bright spark in Sheffield hears that the government forced Nissan to choose Sheffield and that no other options would have been allowed.
Said person in Sheffield tells everyone about the situation so they form a collective (let's say a union) and decide that the national minimum wage is not for them.
Sheffield sets a local minimum wage of £25 per hour knowing that Nissan has to pay this as they can't go elsewhere for their factory.
Nissan becomes completely unproductive and has to double the price of their cars to cover the increase in costs.
The European public (quite sensibly) chooses not to pay BMW money for Nissans
The Nissan factory shuts, leaving lots of people without jobs
Everyone in Sheffield complains that the government hasn't provided jobs for them.

Of course, this is an entirely unlikely situation as at the point where Sheffield sets the local minimum wage, Nissan would say "fudge that" and build a factory in Germany.

A helluva lot of assumptions there mate!

In answer, why has that not happened in Sunderland. I don't think it would here either.

I think people here just want a fair wage. And with Nissan or similar, that means more than minimum wages, which go nowhere.

Go to Germany? The wages would be much higher there.

 

[scaramanga]

Don't agree.

'Some other cities' were not as badly wrecked as Sheffield was in the 1980's, and therefore did not have such a dire and acute situation to recover from, as here. Sheffield had its (by far) main employment ripped out, in steel and heavy engineering, in a very short time scale. Then the coal industry went in the periphery of Sheffield, and all the supplying private companies that went to the wall as a consequence.

The places you mention and others were and are regional centres, with a much more diverse industry and commerce base/job base, which, whilst they suffered losses, were not so utterly trashed as Sheffield was. I don't think even Liverpool was as badly mauled...proportionately, as Sheffield was. Sheffield still had a very large population. About 690,000, combined with Rotherham, in 1980. The bigger the population, the bigger the problem.

Neither you nor anyone else has yet given a credible employment alternative for the population here, bearing in mind the calamity it suffered. Then again, its easy to destroy, but not so easy to create.

My credible alternative is that those who spent so much time not working improved their level of education instead of killing taxi drivers. Tone down the accent and move to London. Or, or course, show up to work in the first place for the wage you've already agreed and keep some of the jobs in the area.

Not just aimed at Sheffield btw, I think there were areas with far fewer opportunities that had similar regional issues.

 

[scaramanga]

A helluva lot of assumptions there mate!

In answer, why has that not happened in Sunderland. I don't think it would here either.

I think people here just want a fair wage. And with Nissan or similar, that means more than minimum wages, which go nowhere.

Go to Germany? The wages would be much higher there.

I think you've sort of missed the point there. The reason why it doesn't happen in Sunderland is because the government didn't force Nissan to go to Sunderland. The government offered incentives to Nissan, as they would any major company to make the UK in general more appealing than the competition.

The people of Sunderland did the rest by agreeing to all be a part of a fairly half-arsed union that doesn't have a history of strikes and by offering labour at a competitive rate. Something any other city could have done had they wanted the work enough.

 

[Mumorn]

Nice to see "Ding Dong The Witches Dead" number 2 in the charts.