Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

I think you will find that the breakdown with the Unions started with James Callaghan and the famous 'Winter of discontent". This was preceeded by a weak Edward Heath and don't forget that the Irish problem was at it's height, which was exploited by a number of organisations. Maggie at least had the will to confront the issue rather than continually give in to the Unions who were crippling the british economy.

skinny

The unions in their inception were very much needed, due to unscrupulous practices, employment of children etc etc. But by the 1960's they had become self-serving,bloated and probably more unscrupulous and corrupt than those they were meant to "protect" against.

------------

So had many of the employers. The problem was that the most unscrupulous were more interested in their own advancement that of all.

For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.

From The Law of the Jungle

-----

One of the problems after WW1 was that while in Germany, there was better a better” “relationship” between "workers", "management" and "owners", where was an element of consultation between the parties and a matter of routine and without “class culture” clash, in general, similar relationships were obstructed by management, owners and those in control of industry owners. Many of the latter saw "workers", as disposable units of labour. The latter view being exposed and was exaggerated during the Thatcher period.”

(Many, in the UK, advocated and hoped for the development of such working arrangements to modify in similar ways to that of Germany.)

Another, factor in the economic decline was that "inefficient", "outdated" plant was not replaced after the war because of "economic restraints, or lack of investment" and partially due to "Luddite" union behaviour.

One of the problems with the present downgrading of the present economy, due to the actions by the present government, is the lack of investment in ongoing “capital expenditure”, which will be probably be at a future cost.

The stupidity of the unions was balanced by the arrogance of management and the Thatcher and other governments.

(I know that Heath was decried, but though his approach was more sensible, but blown apart by the “oil crisis”.)

I think I have lived through interesting times, but realise all periods in time are interesting, especially when time seems to be running out.

Ummh, I shall go back to cooking.

The UK will always be a divided nation.

Those that put in more than they take out and those that take out more than they put in.

I have no problem with a benifit system that is there for those that through no fualt of their own need it, it's those who live off the system like leeches that make me angry.

I see that even the cap on benifits for a single family is being critisised by the Labour Party.

The level of the cap will be:
£500 a week = £26,000 per annum for couples (with or without children living with them)
£500 a week for single parents whose children live with them
£350 a week = £18,200 for single adults who don’t have children, or whose children don’t live with them.
Those not effected by the cap are if you qualify for Working Tax Credit, or if you get any of the following benefits:
Disability Living Allowance
Personal Independence Payment (from April 2013)
Attendance Allowance
Industrial Injuries Benefits (and equivalent payments as part of a war disablement pension or the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme)
Employment and Support Allowance, if you get the support component
War Widow’s or War Widower’s Pension.

And remember the amounts received are not taxed, so taking that £500 per week, someone working and receiving no benifits would need to earn around £700 per week to receive the same amount, IE £36,400 per annum.

No wonder we have so many, don't work, won't work in this country!

The Labour lot are also moaning about the 1% limit on increases in benifits whilst many workers especially in the private sector have either received a pay cut or at best not received an increase.

Mind you as most on benifits vote Labour it suits the Labour Party to look after their electrate.

Being synical I wonder if thats the reason Labour are so pro immigration!

maggie - pointless to expect a balanced and wider view from sticky i'm afraid ..... thank goodness hilary (and a few others) engage their full faculties

.

Harry dont forget tho, management were as much to blame for the car industry going to the wall.

My father worked as a pattern maker in that industry and the Unions were always going to management for years before problems came to light that they needed re-tooling. They could see the germans the french and even Swedes had new machinery and they pleaded with greedy management to compete to no avail.

Little wonder the Unions then took them on in the end.

Greekman, i see no mention of colection of taxes in your post?...why?.

I can't remember the details exactly gf, but the main car manufacturer in the UK was British Leyland which was a nationlised Co. run by successive governments, but predominately labour (Harold Wilson + Callaghan). I seem to remember pretty much every union jumping on the 'Less hours for more pay' bandwagon which was unsustainable. I'm sure there were some well run production lines (Vauxhall...er...er....hmmmm...) but there weren't very many which involved the Unions (Maybe Brit Aerosp, shipbuilding, food processing....)

while the german car industry assuredly continues to thrive, that in france is in desperate straights and will only be rescued - a temporary fix for sure - if the french gov't chucks loads and loads and loads of money into it - aka illegal subsidies or even protectionism by any other name ...... unless i am much mistaken, the swedes no longer have a car industry; didn't saab go belly up 6/7 years ago?

Cynic,

I think Maggie probably `has more faculties than those you may have been thinking of and she is dead.

=============

Greek,

When inflation kicks in as a result of this government the figures you quote for "benefits" may be insufficient.

Also, raising the lowest level of earnings for personal taxation when inflation and lower wages are taken into consideration will lead to a reduction in "purchasing" power of take home wages.

Perhaps, police pensions, which are currently being paid to retired policemen and women at the moment can be reduced to help out with "We are All in Tt Together"
government's reducing revenue problems.

Shame on you GF. Have lost any respect for you last couple of days, sure you wont lose any sleep over it. Pity you don't just stick to picking stocks cause you are exceptional in that regard. Thatchers death was always going to be celebrated by the red shite, loony left commi parentless ones. No name no pack drill driver you sick bastard. What is worse this thread is now manna from heaven for 'Gobshite Of The Year' (recurring) to post his incessant garbage cheered on by you. Sad doesn't cover it.

GM blocked an approach for Saab Auto by a chinese consortium, so now owned by National Modern Energy Holdings via National Electric Vehicle Sweden.

Harry - having owned Saabs for 25+ years - I doubt I'd buy another even if they were still made.

Unfortunately the build quality is much like the rest now.

Could never get used to having to put it into reverse before the ignition keys came out! I'm a Peugeot man myself....so far.

and mine is german though it masquerades as frightfully british!

GF,

I agree with many points you have made, but one thing which I would hold Thatcher and governments guilty of is the squandering of the cash from the North Sea bonanza and the flogging off of the "National Silver" at cut down prices, to fund tax rebates for her mates.

This was done at allowing the infrastructure, school buildings, universities, hospitals and public services to become dilapidated and to be repaired and replace by subsequent governments.

The selling off of "social housing"while good for those purchasing the properties, probably stimulated the "housing bubble", like the present governments stimulus may do again.

It showed a lack of moral social responsibility to the less enabled in a modern society.

.

It was brown who flogged off the countries gold at rock bottom prices, hence the name the 'brown bottom' for gold.

Cynic, you mean one of those little hairdresser's cars? ;o)

Chris Carson

good post , wonder how many of our loony left friends on here thought Derek Hatton done a good job running Liverpool.