Labours stop the shirkers policy

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

In my case chatting to a sanctimonious tory I am alright Jack like you is like playing chess with a cxxt

You wouldn't be able to play draughts ffs :hehe:

:hehe: Have some more dope and chill out :hehe:

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

STG innit.

Aye, the Country is going to the dogs.

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

Starmer isn't getting my pip because I am not on it you dull cnut

But for those that are it's people like you who are never going to need it ....good luck with winning the lottery .....that cause just as much hassle as the minority of those swinging it

"Starmer isn't getting my pip because I am not on it you dull cnut"

Yes that's why your crying all day, pull the other one :hehe:

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

But that's just not true is it. It's the kind of thing they people say cos it's polite in certain circles but it'd just not true. For example, Britain is experiencing the same problems as countries that never had Thatcher are experiencing.

Sorry to say, but "Thatcher" is the kind of thing that left wing people who own their own homes in nice places tend to say to cover their own backs and to avoid awkward discussions about the real issues that face us in 2025 not 1985

We probably have a different view of what constitutes the biggest problems faced by the average person in the UK right now, ill give you a hint, I don't think its boats or wokeness in unis but lets go with the cost of living as an example as that seem pretty universal. Primarily the cost of living hit so hard because peoples fixed costs were high, not because sprouts went up by 20p. What do the averages persons fixed costs consist of, shelter, energy, water, food, transport (to work)?

Shelter - clearly in hindsight rtb was a complete mess and disaster for the country)
Energy - the energy market is basically a casino, which the taxpayer props up the losses for
Water - I don't think I even need to say anything
Transport - Public transport is poorly run and expensive

Thatcher wasn't interested in logic when it came to these things, she had a fundamental theory guiding privatisation which was that the state shouldn't involve itself in 'business' and our basic needs were a business apparently. As we know, once the floodgates start to creep open, the flood starts coming in.

- It's now normal to British people that its major airports (and everything else) are owned by the Qatari and Saudi state, giving the average person little incentive to care about Heathrow Expansion beyond getting a min wage job in a luxury store there. CDG and Schiphol are majority owned by the state.

- It's now normal to British people that business operates with a backstop of government support, whilst they are left to fend for themselves when something happens. Once you privatise something that people need, investors as a group can't lose, they have you held to ransom forever.

- It's now normal to British people to see CEO pay ratios in previously nationalised industries move to obscene levels + bonuses for doing a crap job. If water was nationalised, it might be shit, but you would have a handful of people running it probably on 10% of what they earn now, reporting to the government - an incentive system held together by a functioning democracy.

I mean I could probably go on and on and these are probably not even the best examples but Thatcher fundamentally changed the way the British public thinks and their tolerance to complete bullshit.

[JamesWales]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

We probably have a different view of what constitutes the biggest problems faced by the average person in the UK right now, ill give you a hint, I don't think its boats or wokeness in unis but lets go with the cost of living as an example as that seem pretty universal. Primarily the cost of living hit so hard because peoples fixed costs were high, not because sprouts went up by 20p. What do the averages persons fixed costs consist of, shelter, energy, water, food, transport (to work)?

Shelter - clearly in hindsight rtb was a complete mess and disaster for the country)
Energy - the energy market is basically a casino, which the taxpayer props up the losses for
Water - I don't think I even need to say anything
Transport - Public transport is poorly run and expensive

Thatcher wasn't interested in logic when it came to these things, she had a fundamental theory guiding privatisation which was that the state shouldn't involve itself in 'business' and our basic needs were a business apparently. As we know, once the floodgates start to creep open, the flood starts coming in.

- It's now normal to British people that its major airports (and everything else) are owned by the Qatari and Saudi state, giving the average person little incentive to care about Heathrow Expansion beyond getting a min wage job in a luxury store there. CDG and Schiphol are majority owned by the state.

- It's now normal to British people that business operates with a backstop of government support, whilst they are left to fend for themselves when something happens. Once you privatise something that people need, investors as a group can't lose, they have you held to ransom forever.

- It's now normal to British people to see CEO pay ratios in previously nationalised industries move to obscene levels + bonuses for doing a crap job. If water was nationalised, it might be shit, but you would have a handful of people running it probably on 10% of what they earn now, reporting to the government - an incentive system held together by a functioning democracy.

I mean I could probably go on and on and these are probably not even the best examples but Thatcher fundamentally changed the way the British public thinks and their tolerance to complete bullshit.

This is a great reply and I don't disagree with a lot of it. I'm not some great advocate of privatisation at all. I firmly believe that key industries and services should be nationally owned, or at least 51% so. None of us would dispute that includes the military, police, key health and education, power supply, parks, roads and the like. I would extend that to railways and water and no doubt other things.

But people cite the bad. No one wants a nationalised coach industry like National Express and no competition. So too the idea of British Telecom supplying all mobiles seems absurd. It's mad that even Lunn Poly and the like were nationally owned. I don't also object to competition in providing my electricity. The problem in particular with water and rail is there is no damned competition anyway, so the key theoretical benefit of privatisation (competing on price and service delivery)

As for the UK, my general understanding is that we were one of the forerunners in the scale of privatisation and that largely (but far from solely) happened under Thatcher. But essentially every other country followed. Maybe not to the same extent but it still happened. The world changed. Communication changed, communism ended, capital became more international, the EU was formed and pushed a massively pro-free market agenda, and that was coupled with a general decay in the quality of nationalised industries.

So in summary, Thatcher didn't cause it all. It happend everywhere and it would have happened irrespective of her.

More to the point though...I don't doubt Thatchers role in privatisation or her influence on British society. If asked to write an essay on the most influential British prime ministers of the last century she would be second only to Churchill. So I agree with you entirely on her influence and also agree that much -as with all govts let's be honest - wouldn't have been positive.

But...

What frustrates me is that a thousand other things have happend since she left power and the idea that all bad things stem from her is just wrong in my opinion. It bugs me that these massive things are overlooked and jettisoned to think about someone who hasn't been in power for a third of a century.

The world of communication is totally different. How we communicate and interact with eachother is different. The internet exists, how we travel and work is different. Immigration is wholly off the scale compared to Thatchers time. The country is far more diverse than it was, the way we get our news is totally different. The life expectancy, general health, level of family breakdown etc is all so different.

Personally I think our society is far weaker and fragmented, less empathetic and more clinical than in Thatchers time (when I was a young kid so what do I know, you may say..). I definitely think it's far weaker now than anytime in my adult life time. I don't blame her for that, I blame other things and I think the solutions are in identifying them.

Just going on about Thatcher makes a few people feel good but it largely if not wholly misdiagnoses the problem and you can't solve a problem when you do that.

That's why it bugs me, and I appreciate you won't agree with all or perhaps any of this but I hope you can see where I am coming from at least.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

When a Labour Chancellor’s financial statement gets a unanimous thumbs down from a Guardian panel, you know she, and her party, are in trouble. She says the world has changed since July and yet her”fiscal rules” which dictate policy have not. When Labour talk about being on the side of “working people”, do they mean you’re stuffed if you’re not working for any reason? Mind you, they aren’t great for working people, unless you’re in the top one per cent, either? Why is it that what has been announced in the last week is not classed as just more austerity?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/26/panel-chancellor-rachel-reeves-defence-spending-welfare-cuts-growth-forecasts

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

This is a great reply and I don't disagree with a lot of it. I'm not some great advocate of privatisation at all. I firmly believe that key industries and services should be nationally owned, or at least 51% so. None of us would dispute that includes the military, police, key health and education, power supply, parks, roads and the like. I would extend that to railways and water and no doubt other things.

But people cite the bad. No one wants a nationalised coach industry like National Express and no competition. So too the idea of British Telecom supplying all mobiles seems absurd. It's mad that even Lunn Poly and the like were nationally owned. I don't also object to competition in providing my electricity. The problem in particular with water and rail is there is no damned competition anyway, so the key theoretical benefit of privatisation (competing on price and service delivery)

As for the UK, my general understanding is that we were one of the forerunners in the scale of privatisation and that largely (but far from solely) happened under Thatcher. But essentially every other country followed. Maybe not to the same extent but it still happened. The world changed. Communication changed, communism ended, capital became more international, the EU was formed and pushed a massively pro-free market agenda, and that was coupled with a general decay in the quality of nationalised industries.

So in summary, Thatcher didn't cause it all. It happend everywhere and it would have happened irrespective of her.

More to the point though...I don't doubt Thatchers role in privatisation or her influence on British society. If asked to write an essay on the most influential British prime ministers of the last century she would be second only to Churchill. So I agree with you entirely on her influence and also agree that much -as with all govts let's be honest - wouldn't have been positive.

But...

What frustrates me is that a thousand other things have happend since she left power and the idea that all bad things stem from her is just wrong in my opinion. It bugs me that these massive things are overlooked and jettisoned to think about someone who hasn't been in power for a third of a century.

The world of communication is totally different. How we communicate and interact with eachother is different. The internet exists, how we travel and work is different. Immigration is wholly off the scale compared to Thatchers time. The country is far more diverse than it was, the way we get our news is totally different. The life expectancy, general health, level of family breakdown etc is all so different.

Personally I think our society is far weaker and fragmented, less empathetic and more clinical than in Thatchers time (when I was a young kid so what do I know, you may say..). I definitely think it's far weaker now than anytime in my adult life time. I don't blame her for that, I blame other things and I think the solutions are in identifying them.

Just going on about Thatcher makes a few people feel good but it largely if not wholly misdiagnoses the problem and you can't solve a problem when you do that.

That's why it bugs me, and I appreciate you won't agree with all or perhaps any of this but I hope you can see where I am coming from at least.

You're coming from. your usual place, so none of what you say comes as a surprise. I was twenty three when Thatcher won in 1979, so I have an advantage over you in that I was an adult throughout her time in charge.

I could go on for ages about what happened in the eighties, but Eric has already done a very good job on that front so I'll not say much except that in the late 70s , I think it's generally accepted that there was a desire for change in the UK becsause of the perception od the majority that the balance of power between bosses and workers had swung too much to the latter with the result that un ion militancy was in need of being curbed.

Labour in 1979 were in a comparable situation with the Tories in 1997 and 2024 - they may not have been in power for so long, but they had spent eleven. of the previous fifteen years in Government and there was the feeling around that the intervening heath Government had been brought down by the unions.

What often. happens under those sort of circumstances is that the opposition party offers "change" and gets in only to, as Labour are doing now, just carry on in much the same manner as the last lot did, but Thatcher was a true believer in the new way and, if anything, grew more convicend she was right the longer she stayed in power. Where Thatcher was lucky was that, across the Atlantic, she had a kindred spirit in Ronald Reagan - I used to think of him as a bumbling old man in the Joe Biden mould, but there was clearly more to him that that.

If there had been no Thatcher and Reagan, there probably would have been something like Reagonomics and the Thatchjer "economic miracle" in the 80s because the western world seemed ready for something like that at the time. However, it would have not have been followed so devoutly as it was by the Thatcher and Reagan Governments and it's the nature of politics and economics that, for all that is good in a particular approach there is also bad things as a consequence and I suppose that when such policies are followed so relentlessly, their bad consequences are felt more strongly.

I don't think I'm being particularly political when. I say that there eighties were a time where it was all about the individual as opposed to the collective - Thatcher herself proclaimed that society was dead and, although there have been times when her words have rung less true down the years, in essence, they still hold true, as Rachel Reeves proved yesterday (this lot have done things Thatcher would not have tried forty years ago)

I'll go to the grave hating Thatcher, but I have to accept that she is probably the most significant UK politician of my lifetime - it's a bit of a running joke that people go into politics to "change things" only to become ground down by the "system", but Thatcher did change things far more than most manage and I would contend that the consequences, gooad and bad, of what she started in the 80s are still being felt todau, especially the bad ones.

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

"Starmer isn't getting my pip because I am not on it you dull cnut"

Yes that's why your crying all day, pull the other one :hehe:

I am financially warm as toast

But unlike you I think these reforms are shocking 😲


And hopefully you will one day be looking at needing them and if you get feck all I will be laughing my arse off

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

I am financially warm as toast

But unlike you I think these reforms are shocking ��


And hopefully you will one day be looking at needing them and if you get feck all I will be laughing my arse off

And I'll be laughing my arse off when Starmer drags you back to work, the irony years of saying Tory this and Tory that then Starmer gets you in the first year of office :hehe:

[Dorcus]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

Couldn't all this puerile nonsense be played out through personal messages? Children's tantrums are not always entertaining for the rest of us

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

Couldn't all this puerile nonsense be played out through personal messages? Children's tantrums are not always entertaining for the rest of us

It can end here he has his view, (let shirkers carry on if they don't feel they want to work) and I have mine we can't afford to pay people to stay at home just because it's nicer than working, and that genuinely disabled people should get more help. I'll leave it go from here and ignore his nonsense. :thumbup:

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

And I'll be laughing my arse off when Starmer drags you back to work, the irony years of saying Tory this and Tory that then Starmer gets you in the first year of office :hehe:

I am sitting on plenty of cash I don't require benefits

But unlike you , I am not a cnnt

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

It can end here he has his view, (let shirkers carry on if they don't feel they want to work) and I have mine we can't afford to pay people to stay at home just because it's nicer than working, and that genuinely disabled people should get more help. I'll leave it go from here and ignore his nonsense. :thumbup:

Feck off you cancerous twat

[JamesWales]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

Feck off you cancerous twat

Please someone ban Sludge again. The guy is appalling

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Labours stop the shirkers policy

Please someone ban Sludge again. The guy is appalling

He's a cancerous twat , he knows exactly what he's doing so bollocks to him