In respect of the miner’s, I think the Union Mentality was the nail in the coffin for them, the pits that were scheduled to close were on the hit list because they were unprofitable, nepotism and the job for life ways of the unions turned it into a fight, sure it was a bad deal for the miners, but unprofitable is unprofitable, so they had to go one way or the other, constant subsidies from the taxpayer to ensure that a few (in comparison to the rest of the population) did not suffer were not fair on the taxpayer, the fact that the miner’s strike and the subsequent closure of the pits still hits a raw nerve many years later is due to the nepotism, whole families worked in the pits so the suffering their closure caused was devestating to entire communities, but that’s the way of the world, why should a miner be any different to, say a bloke that worked in a vinyl record factory, they all lost their jobs when CDs came out and record manufacturing became unprofitable, did they strike 
And what was with secondary picketing
Mike C, you answered Slippery’s post by saying that Liverpool Docks now handle more tonnage than ever, but surely that’s due to mechanisation and larger vessels rather than more hard work by the dockers themselves? Even with twice the tea-breaks a docker will move more tonnage when he’s handling 30ton sea containers than when they were craning single crates from ship’s holds like they did in day’s gone by 
The London and Liverpool docks were notorious for restrictive work practices, any driver that visited them will have tales to tell of hours spent waiting in line, efficient they were not 
I think it was Bestbooties who posted on here about the dockers from Liverpool who wanted to accompany each of the then new containers on its journey so they weren’t left out of the loading/unloading process
There was also quite a lot of outright thieving going on, all protected by the union and their job for life BS 
Then there’s the destruction of the British Car manufacturing Industry by the unions, nobody gave a toss because they all had jobs for life, seems they got that a bit wrong
So, as far as I’m concerned, unions, shove em up your arse, they aren’t worth a cup of cold ■■■■
newmercman:
In respect of the miner’s, I think the Union Mentality was the nail in the coffin for them, the pits that were scheduled to close were on the hit list because they were unprofitable, nepotism and the job for life ways of the unions turned it into a fight, sure it was a bad deal for the miners, but unprofitable is unprofitable, so they had to go one way or the other, constant subsidies from the taxpayer to ensure that a few (in comparison to the rest of the population) did not suffer were not fair on the taxpayer, the fact that the miner’s strike and the subsequent closure of the pits still hits a raw nerve many years later is due to the nepotism, whole families worked in the pits so the suffering their closure caused was devestating to entire communities, but that’s the way of the world, why should a miner be any different to, say a bloke that worked in a vinyl record factory, they all lost their jobs when CDs came out and record manufacturing became unprofitable, did they strikeAnd what was with secondary picketing
Mike C, you answered Slippery’s post by saying that Liverpool Docks now handle more tonnage than ever, but surely that’s due to mechanisation and larger vessels rather than more hard work by the dockers themselves? Even with twice the tea-breaks a docker will move more tonnage when he’s handling 30ton sea containers than when they were craning single crates from ship’s holds like they did in day’s gone by
The London and Liverpool docks were notorious for restrictive work practices, any driver that visited them will have tales to tell of hours spent waiting in line, efficient they were not
There was also quite a lot of outright thieving going on, all protected by the union and their job for life BS
Then there’s the destruction of the British Car manufacturing Industry by the unions, nobody gave a toss because they all had jobs for life, seems they got that a bit wrong
So, as far as I’m concerned, unions, shove em up your arse, they aren’t worth a cup of cold ■■■■
Said by someone who’s decided to zb off out of the great Thatcherite zb up of toothless union Britain that her and the so called Labour governments have created,to the dying embers of an economy built on the backs and sacrifices of American industry and it’s,mostly,unionised workers,before,just like the British miners,their jobs were given to cheap rate foreign workers creating a trade deficit which just like here will eventually bring that economy to it’s knees as well.
But it seems to me that most of the bs is coming from Thatcher’s generation like BTD and spacemonkey who are’nt old enough to have worked in a pre Thatcherite economy.
sure it was a bad deal for the miners, but unprofitable is unprofitable, so they had to go one way or the other, constant subsidies from the taxpayer to ensure that a few (in comparison to the rest of the population) did not suffer were not fair on the taxpayer,
So, it made ecoonomic sense to close the unprofitable pits, by removing subsidies and the subsidise imported coal?
Along with paying the unemployment benefits and investing a fortune in subsidised new works to provide subsidised jobs for the created unemployed.
The economics of a lunatic asylum.
And now we are paying the real price for energy, competing in the open market with no available self suffiencey of reserves.
It seems that the most vociferous opponents of unions are spouting only what they were told as a child and have no genuine knowledge of the times, merely what Daddy told them.
Two things to consider here.
Carryfast has already claimed he is opposed in general to unions so has no real axe to grind in this discussion by supporting the union side of the argument
I too, have admitted that unions were in the main responsible for the demise of sections of various industries although I am a firm supporter of the union principle and as such I have tried to be objective and impartial in my comments.
Any belief I have expressed re Thatcherism is backed by experience and insight into the era having lived and worked through it and having the common sense to read between the lines of the Express, Mail Sun etc.(the owners of which incidentally had a vested interest in destroying the unions)
Carryfast, with you as a man who was unable to land a good job in a market where the jobs were there for the taking, I don’t see as you qualify to say we are wrong. My work ethic is such that I do the job to the best of my abilities, and I have always got the jobs I wanted.
As for running away from the thatcher era… well no. Actually, I left because of more and more restrictive practices being imposed by labour, and more and more taxation imposed by labour. It was a vicious circle which made me feel like I was getting ■■■■■■ on by people…
What, incidentally, does America have to do with this?
Del, I am not against the principle of unions. I am against militancy and exxcessive demands. If they were true to principle then there would never have been any issue.
bobthedog:
Carryfast, with you as a man who was unable to land a good job in a market where the jobs were there for the taking, I don’t see as you qualify to say we are wrong. My work ethic is such that I do the job to the best of my abilities, and I have always got the jobs I wanted.
As for running away from the thatcher era… well no. Actually, I left because of more and more restrictive practices being imposed by labour, and more and more taxation imposed by labour. It was a vicious circle which made me feel like I was getting ■■■■■■ on by people…What, incidentally, does America have to do with this?
Del, I am not against the principle of unions. I am against militancy and exxcessive demands. If they were true to principle then there would never have been any issue.
How the zb would you know what jobs were there for the taking driving trucks during most of the 1980’s,considering that you were’nt even old enough to hold an HGV,and you could’nt possibly know what it’s like trying to get a job in that climate of 3 million unemployed, and how could you have left because of any of the type of ‘practices’ (freedom) available to the unions pre Thatcher when Blair’s lot did’nt re introduce the powers which the unions held at that time.
However the fact that is it’s often the case that some drivers do get stuck on zb uk work because of the experience bs issue and that old face fits,luck,and/or being able to bs the way into a better job (see some of newmercman’s previous posts),and/or some drivers just leap frog the career progression that (should be the case in the industry but is’nt) by starting out 10 years later but ending up on better work while those who started out earlier get lumbered with,and stuck on,the zb.That’s more of a reflection on the industry than on me.
What America has to do with this is that like ours it’s economy was built on American (unionised) industry,mostly made up of union members who also fought in two World Wars and if (when) the American economy goes down the tubes,as it’s doing right now,because those jobs which should have been given to their descendents for a decent wage,have been shipped out to cheap labour countries instead,it will take both the Canadian and European economies with it and the Chinese will be having a good laugh about that.
However it’s not surprising to see those who shouted loudest for the Chinese being the first to jump ship from the ship that’s going down first.
Carryfast:
newmercman:
In respect of the miner’s, I think the Union Mentality was the nail in the coffin for them, the pits that were scheduled to close were on the hit list because they were unprofitable, nepotism and the job for life ways of the unions turned it into a fight, sure it was a bad deal for the miners, but unprofitable is unprofitable, so they had to go one way or the other, constant subsidies from the taxpayer to ensure that a few (in comparison to the rest of the population) did not suffer were not fair on the taxpayer, the fact that the miner’s strike and the subsequent closure of the pits still hits a raw nerve many years later is due to the nepotism, whole families worked in the pits so the suffering their closure caused was devestating to entire communities, but that’s the way of the world, why should a miner be any different to, say a bloke that worked in a vinyl record factory, they all lost their jobs when CDs came out and record manufacturing became unprofitable, did they strikeAnd what was with secondary picketing
Mike C, you answered Slippery’s post by saying that Liverpool Docks now handle more tonnage than ever, but surely that’s due to mechanisation and larger vessels rather than more hard work by the dockers themselves? Even with twice the tea-breaks a docker will move more tonnage when he’s handling 30ton sea containers than when they were craning single crates from ship’s holds like they did in day’s gone by
The London and Liverpool docks were notorious for restrictive work practices, any driver that visited them will have tales to tell of hours spent waiting in line, efficient they were not
There was also quite a lot of outright thieving going on, all protected by the union and their job for life BS
Then there’s the destruction of the British Car manufacturing Industry by the unions, nobody gave a toss because they all had jobs for life, seems they got that a bit wrong
So, as far as I’m concerned, unions, shove em up your arse, they aren’t worth a cup of cold ■■■■
Said by someone who’s decided to zb off out of the great Thatcherite zb up of toothless union Britain that her and the so called Labour governments have created,to the dying embers of an economy built on the backs and sacrifices of American industry and it’s,mostly,unionised workers,before,just like the British miners,their jobs were given to cheap rate foreign workers creating a trade deficit which just like here will eventually bring that economy to it’s knees as well.
But it seems to me that most of the bs is coming from Thatcher’s generation like BTD and spacemonkey who are’nt old enough to have worked in a pre Thatcherite economy.
Are seriously that thick headed that you don’t understand the mere concept of someone not having a political preference??
I have stated numerous amounts of times to you that i am not a follower of any type of political party. Your comments are ludicrous in there nature let me also reiterate that your claims of me being a Thatcher’s generation are pure stupidity. 79-95 CONSERVATIVE 96-2010 LABOUR that covers the year of my birth 79 to the current year. This covers an equal amount of both Labour and conservative governments, and your suggestion that i am a Thatcherite are blown out of all proportion when explained like this. Thatcher 1979-1980 that takes me up to the grand age of 11 years old, unless i am a one off i would suggest that politics and government policies are not at the forefront of any preteens concern. Whack on another 5 years of John Major taking me to 16, at which point i would once again say that the majority of people could not give two logs about politics at that age. I was more interested in chasing skirt. Then we reach the labour years of Tony Blair and the rest is current history.
So if you think i am a Thatcherite and i am talking BS then that is your free opinion. In the same turn i consider you to be a complete bone head!
Spacemonkeypg:
Carryfast:
newmercman:
In respect of the miner’s, I think the Union Mentality was the nail in the coffin for them, the pits that were scheduled to close were on the hit list because they were unprofitable, nepotism and the job for life ways of the unions turned it into a fight, sure it was a bad deal for the miners, but unprofitable is unprofitable, so they had to go one way or the other, constant subsidies from the taxpayer to ensure that a few (in comparison to the rest of the population) did not suffer were not fair on the taxpayer, the fact that the miner’s strike and the subsequent closure of the pits still hits a raw nerve many years later is due to the nepotism, whole families worked in the pits so the suffering their closure caused was devestating to entire communities, but that’s the way of the world, why should a miner be any different to, say a bloke that worked in a vinyl record factory, they all lost their jobs when CDs came out and record manufacturing became unprofitable, did they strikeAnd what was with secondary picketing
Mike C, you answered Slippery’s post by saying that Liverpool Docks now handle more tonnage than ever, but surely that’s due to mechanisation and larger vessels rather than more hard work by the dockers themselves? Even with twice the tea-breaks a docker will move more tonnage when he’s handling 30ton sea containers than when they were craning single crates from ship’s holds like they did in day’s gone by
The London and Liverpool docks were notorious for restrictive work practices, any driver that visited them will have tales to tell of hours spent waiting in line, efficient they were not
There was also quite a lot of outright thieving going on, all protected by the union and their job for life BS
Then there’s the destruction of the British Car manufacturing Industry by the unions, nobody gave a toss because they all had jobs for life, seems they got that a bit wrong
So, as far as I’m concerned, unions, shove em up your arse, they aren’t worth a cup of cold ■■■■
Said by someone who’s decided to zb off out of the great Thatcherite zb up of toothless union Britain that her and the so called Labour governments have created,to the dying embers of an economy built on the backs and sacrifices of American industry and it’s,mostly,unionised workers,before,just like the British miners,their jobs were given to cheap rate foreign workers creating a trade deficit which just like here will eventually bring that economy to it’s knees as well.
But it seems to me that most of the bs is coming from Thatcher’s generation like BTD and spacemonkey who are’nt old enough to have worked in a pre Thatcherite economy.
Are seriously that thick headed that you don’t understand the mere concept of someone not having a political preference??
I have stated numerous amounts of times to you that i am not a follower of any type of political party. Your comments are ludicrous in there nature let me also reiterate that your claims of me being a Thatcher’s generation are pure stupidity. 79-95 CONSERVATIVE 96-2010 LABOUR that covers the year of my birth 79 to the current year. This covers an equal amount of both Labour and conservative governments, and your suggestion that i am a Thatcherite are blown out of all proportion when explained like this. Thatcher 1979-1980 that takes me up to the grand age of 11 years old, unless i am a one off i would suggest that politics and government policies are not at the forefront of any preteens concern. Whack on another 5 years of John Major taking me to 16, at which point i would once again say that the majority of people could not give two logs about politics at that age. I was more interested in chasing skirt. Then we reach the labour years of Tony Blair and the rest is current history.
So if you think i am a Thatcherite and i am talking BS then that is your free opinion. In the same turn i consider you to be a complete bone head!
You’ve never lived under a pre Thatcherite Britain and New Labour is’nt the same party as Labour in it’s ideology which,like Major’s lot,is effectively Thatcherite in the context of industrial relations policy.You made a reference to the miners strike of 1973 and the 3 day week which took place 6 years before you were even born.The question is how was it that you reached your decision concerning that dispute .But so far your abilities to debate something intelligently seems about as good as those of the Tory press.
please link where you asked that question
Thatcher 1979-1980 that takes me up to the grand age of 11 years old, unless i am a one off i would suggest that politics and government policies are not at the forefront of any preteens concern
but you still managed to have a firm opinion on the major issues of the first few Maggie years (although I assume you meant to put 1979-1990 
) even though you would have been a babe in arms for the first few !
The miners were plain greedy and thought the government would topple. They knew the mines would flood but didn’t care. They knew coal would be shipped in and thought they could stop it. They couldn’t, but still maintained they were right. They lost, and they damned well deserved to lose
Maybe, perhaps just what you were brought up to believe rather than what you actually know?
To be fair, Del there is plenty of old footage, and the miners strike would probably have been mentioned in schools during social studies or whatever because it was a major turning point in modern political history. It is also one of the major domestic news events during the original video age, so is easily accessible online.
If Spacemonkey had ever been shaped by political sway, then his biggest influence would have been when the Major govt really lost their way, but also with Thatcher because people were still smarting after the poll tax debacle. Then he would have seen Bliar turn up and would have been steered further by that lot. So I believe him when he says he has no affiliation.
In truth, neither do I have any.
Now Curry, although I wasn’t, indeed, old enough to hold a licence in 1980, my father was, and he was in an area where work was often seasonal but still never went withut working. The 70s was a golden era for our industry. Jobs were plentiful and loads of others on this forum were able to get the jobs they wanted, and they are from all over the nation. The problem was clearly your own, but you are always right so it couldn’t possibly have had anything to do with you…
bobthedog:
To be fair, Del there is plenty of old footage, and the miners strike would probably have been mentioned in schools during social studies or whatever because it was a major turning point in modern political history. It is also one of the major domestic news events during the original video age, so is easily accessible online.If Spacemonkey had ever been shaped by political sway, then his biggest influence would have been when the Major govt really lost their way, but also with Thatcher because people were still smarting after the poll tax debacle. Then he would have seen Bliar turn up and would have been steered further by that lot. So I believe him when he says he has no affiliation.
In truth, neither do I have any.
Now Curry, although I wasn’t, indeed, old enough to hold a licence in 1980, my father was, and he was in an area where work was often seasonal but still never went withut working. The 70s was a golden era for our industry. Jobs were plentiful and loads of others on this forum were able to get the jobs they wanted, and they are from all over the nation. The problem was clearly your own, but you are always right so it couldn’t possibly have had anything to do with you…
Bob I had no ‘problem’ whatsoever during the 1970’s or the 1980’s or the 1990’s.Unlike a lot of others I was employed through all of those years from the time I left school in 1975 at 16.If you’ve read my previous posts you’ll notice that I went into the manufacturing sector of the economy from school and there’s no way that I could drive heavy trucks commercially for any firm before I got my licence in 1980 at 21.
However whatever your ‘dad’ might have told you I can assure you that I can consider myself zb lucky to find a job,any job,when I got made redundant from that factory job a few months after getting my licence of which I’d showed myself to have been good enough to be put on the type of work (testing),at the type of pay rate,that most people would have been more than happy with at the time.I also had a good enough record to have kept myself in employment through the worst recessions (caused by Thatcher’s policies not the unions) here since the 1920’s/1930’s.However whatever your dad might say the fact is there were’nt many,if any,employers who’d put someone on international work without that type of previous experience just like now and from experience I can assure you that a record of factory work,testing fire trucks,driving council wagons and uk night trunking does’nt cut it at an interview for international work.‘Unless’ that is you’re very lucky and/or you bs the way through the interview (not a good idea if the guvnor finds out and you get sacked with a zb reference).
Yeah you’re right and you’re learning because the (early) 1970’s were,like the 1960’s,a golden era in the context that unemployment rates were relatively low and the unions kept wages more or less in line with prices.Which kept the economy moving contrary to the propaganda that they probably taught in schools since Thatcher came to power.The break point was the 1973 OPEC oil price increases and the mistake that the NUM made in bringing down Heath’s Tory government to be replaced by the worse ones of Wilson,Callaghan,and then zb Thatcher.The ironic thing is that if the NUM had settled for the Heath deal they would have got more than Wilson ended up giving them and one of Heath’s biggest mistakes was bringing Thatcher into his government cabinet.The rest is history.By the way as far as I know even Tebbit and many of the police who fought with the miners in the 1984 dispute have re thought and now regret the policies and actions which they were a part of.But maybe the schools should be teaching how the group UB 40 got it’s name in 1978 which obviously even your dad has forgotten.
del949:
sure it was a bad deal for the miners, but unprofitable is unprofitable, so they had to go one way or the other, constant subsidies from the taxpayer to ensure that a few (in comparison to the rest of the population) did not suffer were not fair on the taxpayer,
So, it made ecoonomic sense to close the unprofitable pits, by removing subsidies and the subsidise imported coal?
Along with paying the unemployment benefits and investing a fortune in subsidised new works to provide subsidised jobs for the created unemployed.
The economics of a lunatic asylum.
And now we are paying the real price for energy, competing in the open market with no available self suffiencey of reserves.
I should have quantified my statement by saying that in the eyes of a government, unprofitable is unprofitable, every government we have only thinks short term, everything they do is reactive, as long as the books look good while they’re in power they couldn’t give a toss about the long term effects
My own view of unions are that they are the same as any government, they couldn’t care less about the fee paying members, the union leaders/politicians are self serving meglomaniacs, career union men and career politicians should be banned, any union leader or politician should be in it because they have a passion for it, not just to pick up a big fat cheque every week
newmercman:
del949:
sure it was a bad deal for the miners, but unprofitable is unprofitable, so they had to go one way or the other, constant subsidies from the taxpayer to ensure that a few (in comparison to the rest of the population) did not suffer were not fair on the taxpayer,
So, it made ecoonomic sense to close the unprofitable pits, by removing subsidies and the subsidise imported coal?
Along with paying the unemployment benefits and investing a fortune in subsidised new works to provide subsidised jobs for the created unemployed.
The economics of a lunatic asylum.
And now we are paying the real price for energy, competing in the open market with no available self suffiencey of reserves.My own view of unions are that they are the same as any government, they couldn’t care less about the fee paying members, the union leaders/politicians are self serving meglomaniacs, career union men and career politicians should be banned, any union leader or politician should be in it because they have a passion for it, not just to pick up a big fat cheque every week
That’s something I’d agree with.
The Labour party should only have MP’s who are employed in industry at shop floor level not universities and management type zb’s like Blair and they should only have been allowed by the party’s constitution to be paid at the same rate that they were getting as employees.They do an unproductive job so why should they earn more than anyone who is actually contributing to the nation’s balance sheet.Running a country is’nt much different to running the household budget.No one would give away the household’s money and interests to make the neighbours richer and that’s how we should be dealing with zb China. 
OK, so let me see if I have got this straight.
According to you, Curry, the whole reason that the UK ever had unions is because the UK modelled their industry on the US industry standard? Regardless of the fact that the US were still riding around on horses shooting each other while the UK was busy sending small children up chimneys and destitute families to workhouses?
And now, as a new idea, the reason the world is struggling is because of China, because we all buy goods made in China despite there being perfectly good products made in our own countries?
Of course, the unions helped the US economy in every way possible, didn’t they. I mean, look at the auto industry again. While the whole world was looking at building more fuel efficient vehicles, the US were working out how to build V8s which only ran on 4 cylinders until you needed a bit more power. And when things got tight, thanks to people buying imports (which you consider junk but which are getting more popular the world over showing that all of us are wrong), the unions struck out… So rather than protect the workers, they got more factories shut down…
This, of course, came 20 or more years after the UK unions managed to destroy the British motor industry…
But now you are blaming China, and you are blaming them for all of us buying goods from there, and we are buying them because every one of the manufacturers in the UK have either gone bust or have shipped their plants out of the country, and the reason they have done that is, as best I can tell, because labour costs in the UK are too high for them to survive…
As for my Dad, he was a driver. He was a good driver. He was able to find work because, experienced in specifics or not, he was known to be capable in general. You, clearly, were not.
bobthedog:
OK, so let me see if I have got this straight.According to you, Curry, the whole reason that the UK ever had unions is because the UK modelled their industry on the US industry standard? Regardless of the fact that the US were still riding around on horses shooting each other while the UK was busy sending small children up chimneys and destitute families to workhouses?
And now, as a new idea, the reason the world is struggling is because of China, because we all buy goods made in China despite there being perfectly good products made in our own countries?
Of course, the unions helped the US economy in every way possible, didn’t they. I mean, look at the auto industry again. While the whole world was looking at building more fuel efficient vehicles, the US were working out how to build V8s which only ran on 4 cylinders until you needed a bit more power. And when things got tight, thanks to people buying imports (which you consider junk but which are getting more popular the world over showing that all of us are wrong), the unions struck out… So rather than protect the workers, they got more factories shut down…
This, of course, came 20 or more years after the UK unions managed to destroy the British motor industry…
But now you are blaming China, and you are blaming them for all of us buying goods from there, and we are buying them because every one of the manufacturers in the UK have either gone bust or have shipped their plants out of the country, and the reason they have done that is, as best I can tell, because labour costs in the UK are too high for them to survive…
As for my Dad, he was a driver. He was a good driver. He was able to find work because, experienced in specifics or not, he was known to be capable in general. You, clearly, were not.
Seems like your reading and understanding of British and American industrial history is as bad as your reading of my work history.Which part of had a good enough record to keep me employed as a driver for 20 years don’t you understand.I was obviously capable in general too but capable is’nt the same thing as the experience in the specifics of the industry needed to get on international work and it’s that experience,bs,or luck or a combination of all three that is needed to get ‘that’ type of work but I was honest enough not to bs my way into international work even if that would have worked and that just leaves experience and/or luck.But if I clearly was’nt capable I’d be a lot poorer now than I actually am because I would have been sacked not employed as a driver for those 20 years with a safe record.
As for your industrial history ideas the wild west was long over by the time of America’s industrialisation and we’d been an industrial power for a lot longer than that.I’ve given you a reasonable clue as to why the American car industry preferred to turn out decent V8 motors as opposed to zb Jap mickey mouse motors.Check out the sales figures for the 1960’s V8 models like the Mustang versus heaps like the later Taurus and building big V8’s or V12’s has’nt done BMW or Mercedes any harm.The issue is that to make good home produced products you need good home produced wages to buy them with.But yeah get the Japs and Chinese to make stuff for peanuts and then import it ‘if’ you want to wreck the domestic economy and lose your own job in the end.
I have no argument about the V8s of the 60s… Hells bells, that was still 50 years ago!! Next you will be saying that we should still be using DC3s instead of these silly, new fangled jet engined airliners… You are suggesting that we go about in Mustangs. I think you are trying to justify excesses. I am actually beginning to think of you as something of an anachronism… Well no, I’m not, but you seem to want to be.
My “knowledge” of industry has nothing to do with the fact that you said the UK was modelled on the US industry. I didn’t say it, you did. And you raised China into this whole thing, not me. I can just see your beloved unions doing really well in China. They are really tolerant of protests- they just send in the tanks.
Look, you keep trying to turn threads into poker games. The only raising you seem to do, though, is raise points which are off topic, pointless and generally innaccurate. After all, the point about not being able to get a job working internationally is irrelevent, yet you spout on about international work as if you know. Personally, I never had to lie about my lack of experience when I started on international work. I told the truth but said I was willing to learn. That was accepted by the person who became my next boss, and I shipped out a couple of weeks later. You clearly were unable to do the same, and your attitude about life in general, if it is anything like your cyber warrior persona on here, explains why you were unable to convince anyone you were reliable.
del949:
Thatcher 1979-1980 that takes me up to the grand age of 11 years old, unless i am a one off i would suggest that politics and government policies are not at the forefront of any preteens concern
but you still managed to have a firm opinion on the major issues of the first few Maggie years (although I assume you meant to put 1979-1990
The miners were plain greedy and thought the government would topple. They knew the mines would flood but didn’t care. They knew coal would be shipped in and thought they could stop it. They couldn’t, but still maintained they were right. They lost, and they damned well deserved to lose
Maybe, perhaps just what you were brought up to believe rather than what you actually know?
Incorrect - I didnt and dont hold a firm opinion of “Maggies” years at all i simply stated this
While i am only 31 and of no political direction my knowledge of the unions and there movement are not of the positive side at all.
10 people died in the miners strike causing the three day week, where unions and their members attempted to bring down the society of the UK and failed. There are positive and negative points and reasons over the miners and their strike i am sure. But for example the taxi driver who was killed taking a miner to work and the teenagers attempting to get coal.
So i would welcome how this shows a strong opinion on the early Thatcher years ?
And to clarify
The miners were plain greedy and thought the government would topple. They knew the mines would flood but didn’t care. They knew coal would be shipped in and thought they could stop it. They couldn’t, but still maintained they were right. They lost, and they damned well deserved to lose
This was not my post.
Maybe you should consider the facts over what you think you know?
No, that was my post… Plagiarism or what??
I suppose its an issue when you become blinded by your own bu11■■■■