We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Grangemouth dispute: Ineos says petrochemical plant will close
Comments
-
I have expressed no support whatsoever for communists or their money.
You have continually been an apologist for communism and have told me to get over my 'fretting' about them
You continue to be an apologist for communists and do not accept any of our post war industrial problems were due to the home grown communists.
The continual strikes: dockers, steel, car, miners, three day week, printing union, winter of discontent all stirred up by committed communists wanting to score political points and encourage dissent and revolution.
Instead, you see our expenditure on arming ourselves against the very real USSR threat as the main post war problem.
Certainly a lot of the industrial leadership was poor but introducing new working practices and machinery virtually always led to strikes and refusal to work the new machinery properly.
Your rediculous suggestion that new productive machinery could always avoid job losses by simply increasing sales, just shows your total lack of any commercial knowledge or experience or even common sense.
Some strikes were stirred up by communists but for a strike to happen the members must be in favour although you don't want to admit it there were underlying problems that made it possible to stir up the members. I know you think we should all doff our caps and takes what scraps we are offered fortunately a lot of people don't agree.0 -
Some strikes were stirred up by communists but for a strike to happen the members must be in favour although you don't want to admit it there were underlying problems that made it possible to stir up the members. I know you think we should all doff our caps and takes what scraps we are offered fortunately a lot of people don't agree.
most strikes were called on site and voted by show of hands : no way of knowing what the majority actually thought
many of the leaders were active communists with active links to the USSR
of course there were real issues: but preventing moderisation and productivity improvements, however heroic and understandable simply ensured they were consigned to the rubbish heap
do you still celebrate the brave miners led by Scargill or the pointless printer workers riots at Wapping ?0 -
most strikes were called on site and voted by show of hands : no way of knowing what the majority actually thought
many of the leaders were active communists with active links to the USSR
of course there were real issues: but preventing moderisation and productivity improvements, however heroic and understandable simply ensured they were consigned to the rubbish heap
do you still celebrate the brave miners led by Scargill or the pointless printer workers riots at Wapping ?
I don't condemn the miners strike I don't celebrate it either. Scargill was a gift to Maggie enabling herto pursue her vendetta against the miners but the out come was to wreak lots of communities.0 -
I don't condemn the miners strike I don't celebrate it either. Scargill was a gift to Maggie enabling herto pursue her vendetta against the miners but the out come was to wreak lots of communities.
threat yourself to a few facts
look up the decline in the numbers of miners from 1950 and post them up and so prove beyond all doubt how Thatcher crushed the totally viable mining industry.
The information is readily available on the internet.0 -
threat yourself to a few facts
look up the decline in the numbers of miners from 1950 and post them up and so prove beyond all doubt how Thatcher crushed the totally viable mining industry.
The information is readily available on the internet.
Did I say mining industry was totally viable but that doesn't mean that the way she went about running it down was right.0 -
Did I say mining industry was totally viable but that doesn't mean that the way she went about running it down was right.
look up the facts and share them with us
how exactly did she go about it?
also look up things like there was no national ballot to strike and the numerous times Scargill called for the overthrow of a democratically elected government?0 -
I have expressed no support whatsoever for communists or their money.
You have continually been an apologist for communism and have told me to get over my 'fretting' about them
You continue to be an apologist for communists and do not accept any of our post war industrial problems were due to the home grown communists.
The continual strikes: dockers, steel, car, miners, three day week, printing union, winter of discontent all stirred up by committed communists wanting to score political points and encourage dissent and revolution.
Instead, you see our expenditure on arming ourselves against the very real USSR threat as the main post war problem.
Certainly a lot of the industrial leadership was poor but introducing new working practices and machinery virtually always led to strikes and refusal to work the new machinery properly.
Your rediculous suggestion that new productive machinery could always avoid job losses by simply increasing sales, just shows your total lack of any commercial knowledge or experience or even common sense.
I have not been an apologist for the communists. I do believe that is was useful to have them as an "enemy" for certain parties.
For the sake of clarity - " The unions played their part "
The majority of the workers, many of whom had served during the war, were far from communists.
I do see the amount of money ploughed into the arms race as a missed investment opportunity. You no doubt see it entirely money well spent spent. No doubt the US defence contractors did.
Antagonism takes two extremes. Many of the latter disputes were deliberately confrontational. UK carper makes the point well, about the miners, in particular.
I never said that jobless could be avoided. I actually said -."doesn't have to result in job reductions".
Engineering and production was often reliant on first world war equipment and machinery. it cried out for the investment that would allow it to compete with quality, tolerances and output achieved by our competitors.
Throwing insults suggests only one thing."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
look up the facts and share them with us
how exactly did she go about it?
You obviously know so why not impart your great wisdom and knowledge instead - it would be so much quicker."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »You obviously know so why not impart your great wisdom and knowledge instead - it would be so much quicker.
I'm sure you know about the miners, the decline in the industry and the history of the various strikes and the leaders too
why not share those - be quicker than me having to check all the details0 -
look up the facts and share them with us
how exactly did she go about it?
also look up things like there was no national ballot to strike and the numerous times Scargill called for the overthrow of a democratically elected government?
A pit might be unprofitable in thestrict sense I.E it costs more to get coal out than it can be sold for but with a nationalised industry it is not as simple as that and the other costs involved were never taken into consideration. The main aim of Maggie was not to make the mining industry profitable but to destroy the trade union movement which to a great extent she succeeded in. You might think that is a good thing and although sometrade unions were to powerful and that power needed to be curtailed we have now gone to far the other way.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards