Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
12 Sep 15
13:51
Joined:
Date Joined:
25 Jun 06
1. 1945, year he was born Britain, everything was getting better because of Labour
2. Thatcher came in and things became "pretty grim".
Has he not missed out an important bit, that period of history before Thatcher came in, where Labour and the unions almost destroyed the country and there were power cuts, 3 day week, and we were getting Greek style bail outs from the IMF?
Maybe the teenagers loving up Corbyn should be given a book on the subject.
2. Thatcher came in and things became "pretty grim".
Has he not missed out an important bit, that period of history before Thatcher came in, where Labour and the unions almost destroyed the country and there were power cuts, 3 day week, and we were getting Greek style bail outs from the IMF?
Maybe the teenagers loving up Corbyn should be given a book on the subject.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 17
|
By:
Has he not missed out an important bit, that period of history before Thatcher came in, where Labour and the unions almost destroyed the country and there were power cuts, 3 day week, and we were getting Greek style bail outs from the IMF?
We did not get bailouts from the IMF -- although we did ask, but then the stats boffins had another look at the figures and found we weren't skint after all. And power cuts and the 3-day week were under Ted Heath's Conservative government. |
|
By:
So they weren't to do with the labour unions stking or trying to bring the government down then?
And the "Winter of Discontent" was under Labour. All pre Thatcher, regardless. The "it was rosy in the 70s when socialism was real socialism then Thatcher spoiled it all" is the rewriting of history lefties like to tell, and it's complete and utter sh*te no matter how you cut it. |
|
By:
I thought Callaghan did draw on the IMF bailout, just not the full amount granted?
|
|
By:
@Ramruma
The unions were destroying the UK and I'm sure anyone who was of an age to remember that time wouldn't want to see it repeated. It was strike after strike. Inflation reached 27% and interest rates were 15%. Streets lined with rubbish and the mortuaries overflowing because we couldn't bury our dead. Not forgetting the statement "We've taken down one government and we'll take down another" from a union chief. Commies were trying to ruin the UK. |
|
By:
I also remember the pound being devalued 2/3 times a year. Yes the good old days right enough.
|
|
By:
For about 35 years the media has pummelled home the "Unions were destroying the country" myth.
They weren't and to be honest they couldn't have. Now it's like a byword for many who refuse to believe that rampant Capitalism is responsible for huge misery and the biggest disparity between rich and poor most of the world has ever seen. The fact is that those with the most money, just s few people, have kept all the wealth and a vast majority of us have to scrabble about for what's left. While just enough folk are persuaded that what's going on is "the right thing to do" to keep it going. The Conservatives and more importantly the media are a bit worried right now because the various hatchet jobs on Corbyn have done no good to this point. The message about Labour's demise under this new leader is going to wear thin over the coming months, so the next task will be to apply some sort of nickname and create manifest unpopularity. Maybe for once, it won't work. |
|
By:
So the constant strikes, despite double digit increases in some case, were a myth?
|
|
By:
Nope, the 'Destroying the country" bit was.
It suited certain political agendas to make it as bad and to seem as bad as possible. I remember it. |
|
By:
I lived through it and remember the stupidity of some of the reasons for striking.
Industry was falling behind the rest of the world and no matter why if management wanted to make changes it provoked the threat of a strike. |
|
By:
Yes, it was ridiculous, but it wasn't destroying the country.
and there was no real need to "crush the unions". Industry is comparatively non-existent now compared with 40 years ago. So I'd say we're more destroyed now than we were then! |
|
By:
James Callaghan was getting inflation down in 78, whatever you say, it was the brothers who brought him down...
The unions rejected the Bullock report, which would have forced firms to take representation from the workers onto the board, German Style... but wanted to play the old "Class War" game |
|
By:
Wasn't very bright then for the "Labour unions" to bring down a Labour government was it?
No matter how it's dressed up in hindsight, the last thing they'd have wanted was a Tory government. |
|
By:
There was (and still is), SO much more going on.
|
|
By:
Makes me smile when the likes of corbyn propose renationalising the railways,do they not remember the shambles the service was when it was under govt ownership before.Staff couldnt give a **** & were constantly on strike,stock was decrepit because investment was a political football,travelling was a dreadful experience.If you want a sneak preview of what it would be like refer to events on the london underground over the last 6 months.
|
|
By:
At least if you bunged the ticket collector two bob he'd bin it and say nowt
 Many brothers at the time wanted their vested interests as well..like you say "turkeys voting for xmas"there are still people who'd rather have no responsibility and just carp from the sidelines whilst picking a wage up... |
|
By:
To many Daily Mail reading dupes on this forum. "The unions are running the country".
IF that was the case, why were there so many strikes? Studyform is correct, spot on. |
|
By:
"The unions are ruIning the country"
Corrected for you Alias. Strikes, poor management and poor strategic government decisions hollowed out our industrial base post war. To refuse to look at the mess unions helped create is lunacy. |