BIGDINNERS Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 But not all rented for life. They used social housing at the time they needed it and then moved into home buying. Allowing that stepping stone stock to be sold off prevented many more from "bettering" them selves and removed the safety net for many many more. Right time -right place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pottedplant Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 says it all really:gag: At the moment it says that I can string a sentence together but you appear to be so "over excited" that you have become incoherent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDINNERS Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 She would be proud of you - that "me,me,me" take on things. Oh, so you'd rather I'd say 'you you you' ---------- Post added 09-04-2013 at 09:56 ---------- At the moment it says that I can string a sentence together but you appear to be so "over excited" that you have become incoherent. sorry, I dont understand . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T 42 Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 For those who say Thatcher destroyed the mining communities. Neil Kinnock the leader of the Labour party at the time said it himself, that if Arthur Scargill had met her half way, there would not have been the catastrophe there was. When the Labour leader defends her against Scargill, that says more than anything else. But many cannot see anything other than hate for Thatcher as admitting to anything else would be admitting they where wrong and they don't have that level of maturity. Thatcher divided the country. 95% of folks were better off. Just mining communities who followed Scargill lost out. Under Brown it was more equal. Everyone lost out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 For those who say Thatcher destroyed the mining communities. Neil Kinnock the leader of the Labour party at the time said it himself, that if Arthur Scargill had met her half way, there would not have been the catastrophe there was. When the Labour leader defends her against Scargill, that says more than anything else. But many cannot see anything other than hate for Thatcher as admitting to anything else would be admitting they where wrong and they don't have that level of maturity. And this is an excellent piece from the New Scientist in 1984 about the sulphurous content of UK coal, which was a key factor: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vABtGA6t9-IC&lpg=PA10&ots=uF5qS7FTyF&dq=british%20coal%20sulphur&pg=PA10#v=onepage&q=british%20coal%20sulphur&f=false Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 Ye,thats what I'm saying,right to buy is a good thing:help: ---------- Post added 09-04-2013 at 09:51 ---------- Right!!! so your saying if you lived in a council house and was given the opportunity ,and had the funds in place,to purchase it at a value price,your saying you would'nt buy it, Absolute garbage or your an idiot:loopy: We are talking about POLICIES. This policy was wrong in the first place. Time has proved it to be a disaster. It was used as a vote catcher only, which is why New Labour continued it and The Coalition. The only difference now is you can no longer have a council property for life under the new council tenancies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evildrneil Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 She came into power when Britain was a basket case and did some things that needed to be done. However she tried to apply a simple market ideology to most things (despite popular opinion there were things she wasn't in favour of privatising) and complex problems are rarely made any better by trying to apply a simple one size fits all solution. She did do a fair amount to drag the UK into the modern age but went far to far in many cases and was undeniably blinkered by ideology. I think her legacy is one of an important but flawed leader who made enormous changes in the UK for both good and ill the repercussions of which will be felt for may decades to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 But not all rented for life. They used social housing at the time they needed it and then moved into home buying. Allowing that stepping stone stock to be sold off prevented many more from "bettering" them selves and removed the safety net for many many more. But the Conservatives are currently trying to make social housing available in line with your needs (i.e. the 'Bedroom 'tax'') and people complain about that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pottedplant Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 But the Conservatives are currently trying to make social housing available in line with your needs (i.e. the 'Bedroom 'tax'') and people complain about that too. So two unpopular Conservative housing policies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airking Posted April 9, 2013 Share Posted April 9, 2013 Thatcher divided the country. 95% of folks were better off. Just mining communities who followed Scargill lost out. Under Brown it was more equal. Everyone lost out. I think a few steel industry workers wold challenge you on that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now