The overtaxed middle starting to get seriously narked...

A._Badger

CLAPTON wrote: »

In what way did we have a London centric policy... were there special subsidies for London based companies or specially cheap housing to attract workers? How did it work? .

Moreover, weren't there huge regeneration programmes (in Liverpool for one) and the wholesale re-siting of government departments (tax offices to Scotland and the North) and much, much more?

A._Badger

kabayiri wrote: »

Deregulation of the credit markets for one was a specific policy. Are you saying there wasn't a specific aim to make London one of the foremost finance centres in the world?

Taking regulatory brakes away hardly counts as a subsidy! Particularly when the taxable proceeds are scatered to the four corners of the country, as they have been.

Generali

There are still plenty of subsidies out there moving money from the productive to the unproductive:

http://www.ukbusinessgrants.org/blog/?s=government+subsidies+uk

BobQ

It is a testament to the woman that we still debate what she said and what she meant 20+ years on. No one will change my view of "that woman!" any more than they will change A Badgers.

Some of the things that Cameron is currently arguing (and the views promoted on these threads today by some of Thatchers children) do illustrate the impact she had. I can concede that any system that is based on being sympathetic to those in temporary trouble is open to abuse by some indvividuals and in that sense MT and others are right that society is not a nebulous benefactor with bottomless pockets but the collective efforts of those that are fortunate to not require help from the state. Equally I would hope that most can agree that any benefits system should be based on the reasonable expectation that most people should find help if they need society to help them for temporary periods (unless they have a very disabling health issue). I can therefore concede that some people are taking society for a ride.

Where I think the "there is no such thing as society" phrase resonates and grates is that she helped spawn a culture in which too many people believed (indeed believe) that all that mattered were individuals and a very selfish me-first, money obsessed culture exemplified by Loads of Money. Most people I suggest do not like others thinking of them in these terms even if they personally identify with the philosophy. its ironic that Enfield was trying to caricature what was wrong with some peoiple at the time, instead his character became a role model of sorts.

Personally I do not like people taking "society " for a ride and I am content that some measures are taken to address it. But neither do I want to believe that there is no such think as society and that those who need help in difficult times should be left homeless, cold, ill and hungry just to satisfy a philiosphy of selfishness.

For one brief period I thought that Cameron and Clegg were serious, that the Big Society meant something and that we were indeed all in it together etc, but this did not last long before it became another divisive Tory Government, doing some good things to tackle the benefits culture but having no real commitment to tacklling other areas of unfairness. The usual things are happening, in their efforts to apply dogma real people are becoming "necessary" casualties, be they the old and vulnerable or the young unemployed. The Big Society is meaningless as the enabling charities go to the wall and we are becoming an even more divided nation. Whatever that woman really believed in her prime, I for one believe that there is such a thing as society.

A._Badger

How you can write what you just have without, even for a moment, reflecting on the Blair/Brown years, beggars belief.

It's high time the Left stopped obsessing about Margaret Thatcher and looked long and hard at the monsters it spawned in Tony Blair and Mr 'no more boom and bust' Brown.

You want an example of greed, avarice, lies, corruption and a total contempt for democracy? Look no further than the Blair legacy..

Compared with Blair, Mrs Thatcher was, indeed, 'The Blessed St Margaret.'

globalds

I think anybody living anywhere else but London would think that London gets preferential treatment over the rest of the country.

Infrastructure is massively developed in comparison to Birmingham for example. Which is supposed to be the 2nd city ...And where they have a single tram alongside trains and buses and could you imagine Londoners accepting that the M25 be a Toll road ?

I am not knocking London and the South East but it is a huge magnet ...There couldn't be another part of the country that came anything close to London ...It would have to be far better ...And the consequence on London would be same as London has on other regions ..It would suck all the talent up.

ukcarper

:rotfl:

globalds wrote: »

I think anybody living anywhere else but London would think that London gets preferential treatment over the rest of the country.

Infrastructure is massively developed in comparison to Birmingham for example. Which is supposed to be the 2nd city ...And where they have a single tram alongside trains and buses and could you imagine Londoners accepting that the M25 be a Toll road ?

I am not knocking London and the South East but it is a huge magnet ...There couldn't be another part of the country that came anything close to London ...It would have to be far better ...And the consequence on London would be same as London has on other regions ..It would suck all the talent up.

It is if you want to cross river in the east

kabayiri

Mr McKenzie is indeed right that the prosperous parts of the country subsidise the rest.

But exactly what is his proposed solution? If Londoners got greater tax breaks wouldn't the additional income just inflate already high house prices and rents?

It's pretty easy to have a moan. It's much harder to come up with a solution which is an easy political sell to the electorate.

The middle classes across the length and breadth of the country will be asked to stump up more in years to come. It's hardly surprising. They are the easiest group to collect additional money from.

StevieJ

A._Badger wrote: »

And you should reread my post a little more carefully - noting the word 'repeating'.

I'm sure Margaret Thatcher's legacy will survive both your contempt and your complete mischaracterisation of her period in Government. Harry Enfield's, too, I shouldn't wonder. A fan of Blair, wasn't he?

Then again Blair was fan of Maggie, as Jim would no doubt have put it, Blair Left winger, My Ar5e

Zero_Sum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16235349