MSE News: Margaret Thatcher 'leader to knock Britain into shape'

gt94sss2

JuicyJesus wrote: »

This bears repeating (a redux, as it were...) Britain currently doesn't actually make anything.

The UK actually makes quite a lot and remains one of the top 10 manufacturing countries in the world - though that's not to say we couldn't do more.

However, as you more into more 'advanced' manufacturing, you tend to need less but more highly qualified people.

From Wikipedia but there are several sources:

Although the manufacturing sector's share of both employment and the UK's GDP has steadily fallen since the 1960s, data from the OECD shows that manufacturing output in terms of both production and value has steadily increased since 1945. A 2009 report from PricewaterhouseCoopers, citing data from the UK Office for National Statistics, stated that manufacturing output (gross value added at 2007 prices) has increased in 35 of the 50 years between 1958 and 2007, and output in 2007 was at record levels, approximately double that in 1958.

This is a trend common in many mature Western economies. Heavy industry, employing many thousands of people and producing large volumes of low-value goods (such as steelmaking) has either become highly efficient (producing the same amount of output from fewer manufacturing sites employing fewer people- for example, productivity in the UK's steel industry increased by a factor of 8 between 1978 and 2006) or has been replaced by smaller industrial units producing high-value goods (such as the aerospace and electronics industries).

Regards
Sunil

gt94sss2

villa2010 wrote: »

How much was the levy and was it in proportion to the inequality that a lot of people experinced in the 80s..!?

I think it was about 20% of their annual profits.

No idea what you mean about 'in proportion to the inequality' - it was a much more equal society compared to now in many ways.

Regards
Sunil

Consumerist

dunstonh wrote: »

A lot of people on here have pointed out negatives of Mrs Thatcher. However, they conveniently forget the mess Labour left the country in the 70s and perversely doing it again in the 2000s.

. . . and some of us conveniently forget that we are now reaping the "benefit" of these euphemistically called "negatives".

villa2010

gt94sss2 wrote: »

I think it was about 20% of their annual profits.

No idea what you mean about 'in proportion to the inequality' - it was a much more equal society compared to now in many ways.

Regards
Sunil

From what I saw it bought in 400 million..! which is not a lot when you think about it. Its a bit like me paying £! a year - great.

How many people were unemployed under Thatcher.

How many Tories were voted in, in Scotland, Ireland and Wales after her reign.

How many industries where ruthlessly destroyed

Who Bennifited from Thatcher.

tagq2

gt94sss2 wrote: »

The UK actually makes quite a lot and remains one of the top 10 manufacturing countries in the world - though that's not to say we couldn't do more.

Top 10 by _____. To say that we had a substantial manufacturing base in the '70s meant self-sufficiency in products and jobs and that British companies owned the factories. It meant that we didn't have to rely on the capriciousness of intangible industries.

To say that we are a top manufacturing country today merely means that we build a number of high-value products for specialist industries often owned by foreign companies. And we do OK with cars.

Of course increased efficiency and technology mean fewer workers may be needed. But there's enough manufacturing work to do which has moved abroad because it's more cost effective thanks to lower costs and/or because the government/culture are more interested in pushing investment in industry. China's poor treatment of citizens may make things easier, but it's not needed to give an economy a manufacturing edge: Germany's doing not so badly with ~20% of jobs in manufacturing.

We have the choice to slow down a bit and increase self-sufficiency, aiming for stable profitability rather than eternal growth, just as Iceland did and Greece should be doing. But we won't. It's not in the interests of anyone with a sufficiently powerful propaganda machine. At least I have my fellow man to blame.

gt94sss2

villa2010 wrote: »

From what I saw it bought in 400 million..! which is not a lot when you think about it. Its a bit like me paying £! a year - great.

I'm not here to debate your (slightly distorted) view of history or to depend the record of any political party.

I was only correcting some of the factually incorrect things you stated.

FWIW £400m in 1981 adjusted for inflation is roughly £1.2bn now.

If you do want my (non political) view:

Sadly, many of those industries which went during the 1980s were uncompetitive and deserved to go - its a natural form of human progress I'm sure the farmers felt the same, when people started to move to cities and the luddites certainly did when the industrial revolution started..

By all means, train people in engineering etc and encourage them to manufacture things but this should be done in addition to the UK having a financial industry - not instead of.

Part of the problem with this country is that too many schoolchildren leave with insufficient skills or go to university when it doesn't benefit them (or the country as a whole) and they would be better off learning other skills or entering the workforce..

Regards
Sunil

villa2010

I'm not here to debate your (slightly distorted) view of history or to depend the record of any political party.

I was only correcting some of the factually incorrect things you stated.

FWIW £400m in 1981 adjusted for inflation is roughly £1.2bn now.

So how could she not afford Milk for children...?

If you do want my (non political) view:

Sadly, many of those industries which went during the 1980s were uncompetitive and deserved to go - its a natural form of human progress I'm sure the farmers felt the same, when people started to move to cities and the luddites certainly did when the industrial revolution started..

It was the ruthless manner in which she did this, No sympathy or empathy what so ever. No thought was put in to what would replace these industries it was almost done over night. Just talk to the Welsh or Northern Folk. This has led to generations of mass unemployment in these industries and has created an underclass.


By all means, train people in engineering etc and encourage them to manufacture things but this should be done in addition to the UK having a financial industry - not instead of.

Who is actually saying that

Part of the problem with this country is that too many schoolchildren leave with insufficient skills or go to university when it doesn't benefit them (or the country as a whole) and they would be better off learning other skills or entering the workforce..

Insufficient skills - Evidence.

How many people were unemployed under Thatcher.

Selling off the utilities was a shocker long term.

Thats your oppinion..

norapower

Its really sad that their are so many idiots out there. Thatcher was the worst thing that happened to working class people in this country. I suppose that most of the people that voted for her must be millionaires greedy bankers fat cat utility bosses or young people who never lived through the dark ages of that loathsome, twisted, bitter woman. God help us.

dunstonh

Its really sad that their are so many idiots out there.

And most of them voted Labour at the last election.

tagq2

dunstonh wrote: »

And most of them voted Labour at the last election.

I think we can all agree that most of them voted for one of the mainstream parties. :A

There is one neo-liberal party which occasionally panders specifically to the businessmen which sponsor it.

There is one neo-liberal party which occasionally panders specifically to the unions which sponsor it.

There is one lapdog.

The general direction of government has not changed since the mid '80s. Whether raw Thatcherism or the smiling face of Thatcherite Blair, the philosophy was the same. Both maintained public debt around 40% of GDP; both were blamed for global crises and successes while in power, even when that particular government's policies had little to do with it; both gradually sold off state assets and counted it against debt; both relentlessly increased corporate welfare while demonising individuals who claim on the NICs they've paid.

We're experiencing the same boom and bust cycle the West has seen for a century. But when we had much more debt than we panic about today we directed the government to invest in expanding local industry. Today we cut, cut, cut.

OK, let's cut. Let's end up with insufficient jobs at minimum wage and no allowance. We return to employment below NMW - today via the corporate welfare that is the "work programme", where rather than the business having to pay any sort of market rate for employees we have the government subsidising wages.

Let's cut. Businessmen will just spring up naturally with things to build. I mean, we don't need to invest in huge, expensive, smelly factories - let the people over there do that sort of thing. No, the best men and women will have had the merit-based education combined with the willingness of banks to offer loans which produced so many technically skilled entrepreneurs in the early '80s, right? And the country's full of people awash with money to spend.

Let's cut. People will have to learn to live within their means and spend less. Even though the measures and the aims are not to reduce inflation and to balance the budget in the long term - no, we remain entirely dependent on growth. To run so we can dream to stand still. Hey, isn't it about time for another VAT increase? Yeah, that'll make up for it. We hate Europe but we love this invention of theirs.

Let's cut. I know what it's like to have to live on handouts, comrade, lacking the wits or the ability to find a real job. I've a £4 million trust fund I did nothing to work for and I'll be using my role to responsibly protect my tax position while I put a dent in yours. You voted for me and I'm privileged that we're all in this together.