I find it ironic that some of thatchers main defenders on here....

That was 30 years ago. I don't think he would find it the same now. This is one of the most culturally and racially-diverse cities (and the surrounding area) in the world following massive, and welcome immigration from all over the world, but mainly China, former Yugoslavia, the UK, South America and parts of Africa (in that order, I think). We still have a shortage of both skilled and unskilled workers and will have a severe shortage in the next 5 to 10 years, according to economic forecasts.

For anyone fed up with life in the UK and prefer skiing to surfing, give Alberta a try. Seriously.

 

thing is she did,or rather her government did,its not pie in the sky,her government shifted people onto incapacity benefit,it just happened to be more widespread amongst miners and other ex heavy industry workers.being on incapacity benefit kept the unemeployment figures down.
nobody is making this up calagary.it happened,its not just bitter sentiment toward the scumbag tories.

 

By charging £9,000 a year just for tuition.

Plus £3,000 for accomadation.

And £3,000 for living.

Aye, people are really encouraged to go to Uni now.

 

The culture you talk about was started by tHatcher and continued by Labour. As has been posted elsewhere, no government, blue or pinbk now aim for full employment as unemployment keeps a lid on inflation and interest rates. Furtermore, the "dog eat dog", "me, me, me" mentality encouraged by her and her ilk has led to the expecationtion culture that you righly deride. Dare I also say is that the extreme cases of this i.e. Philpott are are direct result of this policy....

 

It might not have directly encouraged the benefit culture but one "negative" of a dog eat dog society (which there is no such thing as) is that you will get people feeling it is acceptable to milk as much as they can from a system designed to help when it is needed, not as a lifestyle choice. It is, for me, the other side of the same coin of greed is good, lets short sell soem shares to ruin a solid firm and make a few quid.

Labour, as anothe rposter ssaid, did nothing about it. But that is because they continued Thatcher's policies with perhaps a softer side and more focus on the NHS/Education.

 

CT. I think the key point people are making is that Thatcher created an economy where you will never have full employment. There will never be enough jobs for people. Ever. And none of our political parties want to create an economy where there is enough jobs. There is a whole section of society who are seen as surplus to requirements. That's what people mean when they say Thatcher created the problem.

Now the level of poverty those people are expected to live in may vary from government to government but not the fact that there aren't enough jobs.

 

Excellent post CT and sums up how I feel about this once great country.

 

Great post. And Redstar's too.

Neoliberalism requires unemployment, because it drives wages down. It requires a lot of it, and the nature of things are that this unemployment won't happen in a perfect right wing world, where everybody sells their labour for ten years, gets marked as surplus to requirements, and moves on to take another job for less money because that's all that's there. You get long-term unemployment, benefit cultures and people who have never and will never work. The issue that New Labour had was that they tried to meld this type of economics with a false mask of caring. They're impossible to bring together, because you end up with the kinds of problems that people are saying caused them to leave the country.

It's laughable to describe Blair or Brown as socialists, or as 'Labour' in any real sense. We're deep in the middle of a Thatcherite consensus politics. Society and politics today is built on her vision, because nobody after her has had the guts to change it. It may not have turned out exactly how Thatcher thought it would, but it's hardly surprising when you look at the economics and politics of it. The problem now is that we have a horrific combination of an economy which requires a huge number of people to be unemployed and three parties who are happy to demonise the people who find themselves in that situation. It's intellectually bankrupt and really quite chilling - almost dystopian.

 

Do you concur with CT's sentiment that it is all New Labour's fault too?

 

I don't live in Yorkshire, I live in South Derbyshire - yes the home of the UDM - one of my mates was an NUM official and was given dog's abuse by many of the local scab miners despite having known them and counted them as friends for years. My dad worked down the Pit for 40-odd years (Hickleton and Highgate) but fortunately had retired before the strike in 1984, and I spent a year on the dole despite having a degree in Chemistry mainly due to her policies.

I don't understand how any working person can possibly defend the woman. The only ones who benefited from her are the bankers and fat-cat directors who are still playing havoc with ordinary people's lives.

May she rot.

 

'It's intellectually bankrupt'

I'd add morally bankrupt too Sestren. I'd love it if a politician actually owned up to it

 

Wasn't it Brown and Blaire's policy to "take all children out of poverty", a worthy cause I'm sure you'll admit? Unfortunately a lot of the money (benefits) allocated for this went to the feckless scroungers who use children simply as a source of income.

 

'Got off my arse'

The toriest of tory comments.

 

And the debate should end with that excellent post from WOTS. The politics of self began under that monster and has never gone away.