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

villa2010

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Why do you think the Tories were so dead set against the Alternative Vote system? It would lead to them being utterly curb-stomped in every election, in every seat except the bluest of the blue.

And why do you think they're so insistent on reducing the number of MPs? It's basically gerrymandering. The changes round my parts will result in a solid Lib Dem seat and a solid Tory seat becoming two solid Tory seats, with no real good reasons for the change.

I'm rather more furious with the Lib Dems for enabling these c**** to act the way they are. They should have known better.

I agree with you - The Tories know there days are numbered they have lost the media and a lot of their financial backing. So the only way they can win is by fixing it so votes suit them, hence the reshaping of the political boundaries.

I voted for the AV. I was amazed that not more Labour and Libs were not more proactive in this.

Catherine_Johnson_2

Caterina wrote: »

Scary result. I came into this country when Thatcher was only just starting to ruin it, I remember it when it was still a prosperous and democratic place, then I suffered first hand from Thatcher's awfully narrow-minded politics, she made me redundant! Twice! By abolishing the GLC first and then the ILEA.

I also suspect that most of the people who voted for her in this poll do not remember the Thatcher years!

Your post doesn't make much sense, I'm afraid.

If you came to the UK when Thatcher was PM then you obviously weren't here in the decade prior to that. You therefore wont be aware of how Labour and the Unions brought the country to it's knees, almost literally.

It's unfortunate, perhaps, that you were made redundant from both the GLC and the ILEA, but not too many people will have been sad to see the passing of those particular authorities.

Doc_N

Catherine_Johnson wrote: »

Your post doesn't make much sense, I'm afraid.

If you came to the UK when Thatcher was PM then you obviously weren't here in the decade prior to that. You therefore wont be aware of how Labour and the Unions brought the country to it's knees, almost literally.

It's unfortunate, perhaps, that you were made redundant from both the GLC and the ILEA, but not too many people will have been sad to see the passing of those particular authorities.

What was wrong with the GLC and ILEA? They both did a perfectly good job, and it was only Thatcher's political motivation that got rid of them. Why do you feel that things are better in London now?

They certainly both did a much better job than the present administration is doing.

villa2010

Catherine_Johnson wrote: »

Your post doesn't make much sense, I'm afraid.

If you came to the UK when Thatcher was PM then you obviously weren't here in the decade prior to that. You therefore wont be aware of how Labour and the Unions brought the country to it's knees, almost literally.

It's unfortunate, perhaps, that you were made redundant from both the GLC and the ILEA, but not too many people will have been sad to see the passing of those particular authorities.

Lol :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Bring a country to its knees.

You mean like:

making 4 million people unemployed
destroying local communities and industries
Privatization - for short term revenue.
snatching milk from the youth.
causing Riots.

Nice one.

JuicyJesus

Catherine_Johnson wrote: »

You therefore wont be aware of how Labour and the Unions brought the country to it's knees, almost literally.

Sorry to be a pedant, but the country could never have been literally brought to its knees as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland does not have legs.

This is unless I'm missing something and one of Labour's central policies involved everyone pretending to be a dwarf by shuffling around on their knees.

wouldbeqaulitymoneysaver

The fact that MSE members think Thatchers return is what is going to kickstart the Economy only shows how much their opinions and intellect are being shaped by their Superiors (aristos! bow now!) and not independently using their own brains, with their own resources!!!!:mad::mad:
I am really !!!!ed off at attitudes to those on benefits on this forum.
That's why I am not putting up with it and have a zero tolerance policy.
If you look at the financial suffering and difficulties of benefits claimants here then you might consider changing your deluded views.

pqrdef

wouldbeqaulitymoneysaver wrote: »

If you look at the financial suffering and difficulties of benefits claimants here then you might consider changing your deluded views.

No they wouldn't, they'd just laugh. You credit them with too much humanity.

MeanParent

redux wrote: »

Perhaps if her unpopularity hadn't been repaired by the Falklands War campaign, she wouldn't have survived the trebling of unemployment and doubling of inflation and the city centre riots, and the consequential loss of confidence of the electorate and her party, and she wouldn't be considered for this dubious honour.

As I understand it, the Tory party at the time were getting such a drubbing in the opinion polls and heading for the next election that she had nothing to loose and all to gain for the Falklands war. I.e. If we lost then she would be out, but she expected to be out anyway and if we won, then of course she would benefit.

Now sending soldiers and sailors to their deaths to win an election is crass beyond the pale and she had the audacity to go an stand at the Cenotaph!

dunstonh

villa2010 wrote: »

Lol :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Bring a country to its knees.

You mean like:

making 4 million people unemployed
destroying local communities and industries
Privatization - for short term revenue.
snatching milk from the youth.
causing Riots.

Nice one.

unlike Labour which had virtually bankrupted the country and almost turned us into 3rd world status? (the first part sounding very familiar)

Any Govt that follows one that has borrowed too much and spent too much is going to have to make painful decisions where potentially large numbers will lose out.

Some of the people posting here seem to want to attack the Govts that have to sort out the mess but praise the ones that got us into it. The Labour model is very good. Spend lots of money you dont have and make people happy. Most of whom dont have a clue about how its paid for or who is going to pay for it.

The LibDems getting a taste of power is a very good thing. They may finally realise (signs that some do) that you cant just say things that are popular knowing you are not going to get into power. You actually have to make decisions which are unpopular or compromises.

Labours position is on the one hand to say we should spend more money (we dont have) but on the other, their cuts were only £20 billion less than ConLib Govt. So, things would be just as painful under them. However, instead they can snipe from the sides and reap the rewards of not being the Govt mopping up the mess.

I agree with you - The Tories know there days are numbered they have lost the media and a lot of their financial backing. So the only way they can win is by fixing it so votes suit them, hence the reshaping of the political boundaries.

The current system favours Labour. The Conservatives have to get more votes just to equal Labour due to the distribution.

gt94sss2

villa2010 wrote: »

10 million people voted for the Tories
8 million - Labour
6 - Million Lib.

Which tells us more people are slightly left of center.

No, it doesn't.

Arguably, more people are slightly right of centre in the UK - witness Labour having to rebrand itself as 'New Labour' to appeal to the swing vote.

Many Lib Dems are also centre right - ex. tories who can't bring themselves to vote labour. Of course, many are ex. labour supporters who couldn't bring themselves to vote conservative. I suspect you will find large regional variations in this (and that the lib dems would promote different policies in different areas).

Though, left and right wing mean very little really - in America, even the most 'right wing' UK people would probably be considered democrats..

Regards
Sunil