>While in 1983 Britain had 174 working mines, by 2009, the number had decreased to six. Poverty increased in former coal mining areas, and an EU study on deprivation in 1994 found that Grimethorpe in South Yorkshire was the poorest settlement in the country.
>In 2013, the UK consumed 60 million tons of coal, of which 50 million tons were imported.
Was the Thatcher government the biggest blunder in UK history?
>>972852
>mines that didn't make profit
Thatcher did what had to be done, if she didn't, the economy would have gotten fucked up even more.
>>972859
How did they not make a profit if there was such a demand for coal?
>>972871
Because they didn't contain an infinite amount of coal?
>>972900
But they're not empty.
>>972909
Mining resources isn't necessarily more profitable than importing them; Chinese stuff is much cheaper than thing that could be/is produced in your country
>>972923
The mines' biggest problem was inefficiency, surely they could have solved those problems somehow?
>>972942
Not with trashy trade unions demanding higher pay and "higher standards of safety" which just meant more union jobs for the boys to sit around and "supervise".
In short, it had to be done and your job is not a right.
>>972946
The problem is the government didn't even try any other avenues, instead they kept shutting down more and more mines without compromise
The unions aren't blameless though, yeah
>>972923
No but it is better to pump money into your own economy than China's and end up paying benefits for unemployed miners who now hate you. Miners aren't going to be stashing money in offshore funds and with proper oversight neither will the mine owners.
>>972852
>Mining for coal and using it for energy at a two digit proportion
>Being a first world country
Chose one, and only one.
>>972953
It was also tied in with neo-liberal economic ideology. At the same time it was just way too costly to keep them open with the wages they demanded relative to the pathetic output they produced. Any kind of "efficiency" method would have been with resistance from both the unions and the workers because "that's how me father did it, n that's how I'll do it"
>>972942
>The mines' biggest problem was inefficiency, surely they could have solved those problems somehow?
One man had a solution to a problem of both inefficiency and cheap foreign imports back in 1931
>>972953
This desu. The white working class has been screwed in the US/UK, they are committing suicide at higher rates then the rest of the population, their children are high on meth and heroin. And no one cares.
They don't get any special benefits to get into schools, their small towns are defunct, and everyone is obese (at least in the US). It is a fucking disgrace what has happened to these people.
>>972979
>waaaah my romanticised view of the golden age of the noble working class hero is dead
Their jobs no longer become useful and they refuse to retrain or move for work. You want to be stuck on the same house forever because your grand pappy was born in it? Enjoy whatever problems arise.
>importing cheaper coal is a bad thing
Didn't you guys learn anything from the Corn Laws?
>>972988
How in the hell could a coal miner in the 80s afford to retrain or move (and where would he even move?)
The biggest problem I feel is Thatcher not giving any support for new jobs in the north, after shutting down the mines
>>973011
By starting from the bottom again. The plan was for the long term betterment of the nations economic stability. Not for the comfort for some idiot scousers.
>>973017
Could you explain what you mean by starting from the bottom?
>>973020
Nobody is born with a job, right? They started once. They can start again.
>>972961
That's call subsidy and goes against the very core values neoliberal champions like Thatcher standed for. She could have transitioned the whole thing over a decade or so instead of closing the mines down from one day though to the next but she also wanted to make a point about the fortitude of her neoliberal values and the size of her vagina.
Also, most offshore banking places exist because western governments and elites want them to exist, starting by the neoliberal champions politicians as many of them are notorious british overseas territories like Virgin Islands, Cayman, Jersey, Gibraltar, Cayman Islands, etc that make a living out of promoting and harboring fiscal fraud and international money laundering.
>>972979
Oh yes, because people used to get a lot more benefits in the US.
>>972859
>Thatcher did what had to be done,
How. She just made the rich richer and the poor poorer. She just allowed the rich to import stuff, while killing the ordinary person's job.
>>973031
>have to move
>to move you have to have money
>to make money you have to have a job
I'm not the anon you're responding to, btw.
>>973031
>They can start again.
You obviously know nothing about labour markets.
>>973060
>You obviously know nothing about labour markets.
Of course. If a job is gone, and is sent to China, the rich won't bring that job back. The Thatcher government made sure of that.
>>973044
>neoliberal champions like Thatcher standed for.
That is one of the main reasons why she was terrible. She was part of the government that just killed jobs, saving companies thousands of dollars to earn more money.
>>972852
Nah, she was just the instrument of the prevailing economic mindset. Why keep open expensive, unionized coal mines when you can purchase it for less from the krauts or the Chinese?
>>973070
>that's what leftists actually believe
No wonder no one takes you seriously on this site.
>>972979
The white working class are responsible for their own problems. You don't have to be stupid, uneducated and lazy. It's a choice, get better at life.
>>973079
>No wonder no one takes you seriously on this site.
Well, how did she make the economy better for the British, then?
>>973082
>It's a choice, get better at life.
If that were true then no one would be poor
>>973088
Right to buy
>>973060
>You obviously know nothing about labour markets
no u
>>972988
>>973017
>>973031
You have a retarded understanding of human nature. This is literally "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" tier bullshit, except you are directing it at fundamentally conservative population that wants to work hard but doesn't have any opportunities.
You are probably one of the neo-con dorks with your head so far up your ass you can't understand why American are turning to Trump in droves.
>>973092
>Right to buy
What do you mean? I am being serious here, I do not understand what you mean. (No offense)
>>973059
So how did they get a home and a job in the first place?
ITT: buggy whip manufacturers
>>973105
>So how did they get a home and a job in the first place?
Thanks to governments that forced companies to use labor in their own country. And many people don't even get a job after college.
>>973098
> American are turning to Trump in droves.
Perfect example of people without jobs turning to Trump to get them one due to his policies.
>>973088
The state was too big, the welfare system was unsustainable, unions controlled the country, inflation was soaring, people couldn't own their own homes, public companies were disgracefully inneficient and private ones were stuck in a quagmire of high taxes and excessive bureaucracy. Thatcher came in and changed all that. Sure, lots of people lost their jobs, but that was only natural considering how dependent the whole economy was on the government. People got richer, the economy grew and the state didn't go bankrupt.
Nowadays, who thinks about undoing her reforms? Not even the labour government that came after her wanted that.
It sucks to be laid off. But paying people to be useless doesn't help anyone in the long term.
>>973115
>The state was too big, the welfare system was unsustainable, unions controlled the country, inflation was soaring, people couldn't own their own homes, public companies were disgracefully inneficient
Sounds a lot like the 2008/9 crash. What does Obama do? He doesn't kill jobs, he manages to decrease the unemployment rate to below 5% below a decade later. And he introduces another welfare system.
Did I mention he also decreased the deficit?
>>973124
>But paying people to be useless
Are you saying we should remove the welfare system? I don't mind the welfare system being removed, just want to know what you mean by that.
>>973100
The right to buy state owned housing.
>>973129
Paying someone to do nothing is preferable to paying them to useless work. In the former case they at least have the opportunity to improve themselves and become useful.
Are you familiar with the "broken window fallacy?"
>>973129
no he means the state shouldn't prop up failing industries. At least when someone is on welfare they're (ideally) looking for new job.
>>973126
It had nothing to do with the crash. No similarities at all. One was caused by the excessive size of the British government, driving their welfare system to the point if near collapse.
The other was caused by the business cycle, which didn't result in inflation, inneficiency, increase in union power and government building house projects.
Honestly mate, I want some of that stuff, because you must tripping balls to see any kind of similarity between 1970s/1980s Britain and the 2008 crash.
>>973132
>The right to buy state owned housing.
So privatization? That is a blessing and a curse, each have their ups and down. I can understand why she would want to sell those off, but after visiting London in 2013, things are a little too privatized. I mean, even your Tube is owned by different companies.
What I will say is that privatization can be bad because she can award contracts to her rich friends, which in turn can give her big bucks. So corruption is an issue.
>>973142
>"broken window fallacy?"
No, I am not. But I want to know what it is, now.
>>973152
Use wikipedia.
>>973143
>state shouldn't prop up failing industries.
Agree with that. Failing industries usually have a chance of failing again, which can damage the economy.
> welfare they're (ideally) looking for new job.
Well, I would prefer if the government started offering jobs, instead of welfare, even if it's junk, as was mentioned previously, because then they are working to accomplish something.
>>973145
it is privatization but that's a very broad way to look at it. it allowed the poor working class families to buy the state owned housing that they lived in their whole lives.
>>973144
> inflation
That is the Fed. I consider the Fed part of the government.
> increase in union power
In the US, where I am from, the government has the right to keep them in check.
> government building house projects.
And government.
As you can see, three of your four reasons are government related. Both problems were causes by the government.
> I want some of that stuff
I currently live in the UAE, so I probably won't ever see any stuff in my life. (Good or Bad, depends on how you look at it)
>>973145
Privatisation is the best way to prevent corruption, tripfag.
>>973166
>it allowed the poor working class families
And that is great. But what stops rich people from buying those state projects by the masses?
>>973186
>Privatisation is the best way to prevent corruption
Um... Look at Denmark. A government that controls nearly all public services, but is not very corrupt. It honestly has too many different factors to compare the two.
Sorry for bringing it up.
>>973188
Those that lived in the houses all their lives got a massive discount, that's a very important part I forgot to mention, sorry.
>>973184
>That is the Fed
First of all, the Fed is a private institution. Second, "inflation" was caused by QE after the crash and used as a solution.
>the government has the right to keep them in check
I don't know what you mean and why that is relevant to why the 2008 Credit Crisis is similar to 1970s Britain
>Government building house projects
Last I've heard, the US has always allowed people to own their own homes.
>Both problems were caused by governments
Yes, they were. As such, I honestly don't know what point you are trying to make here.
>>973195
Yes, there are exceptions. Specially in a small and ethical country such as Denmark. Still, that doesn't change the fact that the best way to reduce corruption is by reducing government power and involvment in the economy.
Not even right-wing toadies like Peter Hitchens defend Thatcher anymore:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3520932/PETER-HITCHENS-Privatisation-Free-trade-Shares-great-ruined-Britain.html
The woman turned the UK into the low-production, mass-consumption, overpriced shithole that it is today.
The great Thatcherite successes being touted in this thread are the destruction of manufacturing (creating an enormous class of permanently indigent welfare queens, particularly in the north of the country) and the expansion of the property market (which is so hyperinflated at this point that most middle-income earners are locked out of the housing market, particularly in London).
Right to buy in particular just ended up massively shrinking the pool of social housing, forcing the state to pay private landlords inordinate sums of money to house the jobless poor created by a bankrupt manufacturing policy. Toryboys love to wank over Thatcher's reticence to subsidise big industry but conveniently ignore the massive subsidisation and inflation of the rental market that the state still engages in as a result of right to buy. Not to mention the huge tax discounts that the biggest corporations and superrich have been allowed to finesse their way into under successive Tory governments.
The British economy is built on a mountain of consumer debt and property debt. The current account deficit is obscene and public services are being utterly decimated. Manufacturing is dead and all we have to rely on is a bloated service economy. Thatcher inherited a shitty situation and Labour didn't have the right answers back then but she still made huge mistakes while enacting sweeping structural changes to the UK economy. The UK still feels the effects of those mistakes today.
>>972977
Every thread. Every FUCKING thread.
>>972852
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62kxPyNZF3Q
>>972909
>I know nothing about mining
Deep mining (i.e the vast majority of the UK coal industry as was) is economically viable in the age of steam-steam engines in industry and on ships and trains need high-purity coal. Now we are not in the age of steam, there is much lower demand for deep-mined coal, and what demand there is cannot be served by the relatively high-cost environment that exists in the UK. Coal power stations are much better served by opencasting, which is mostly done in the much shallower coal fields in central and eastern Europe.
It's shit but that's the economic reality of it, and this is without going into how inefficient the Coal Board was.
>>973100
>doesn't know what the right to buy was
>thinks they are in a position to argue about 1980s Britain
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, fuck off
>>973201
>Those that lived in the houses all their lives got a massive discount
Oh. Thanks for mentioning it. I guess that is a good thing for everyone.
>>973263
Hitchens has never been economically liberal though, he's never agreed with Thatcherism (for the record nor do I)
>>973335
>I guess that is a good thing for everyone.
It wasn't all good. It's caused a lot of problems down the line because the councils weren't allowed to use the money to build new housing stock. As a lot of ex-council houses were snapped up by private landlords who began renting at much higher prices, there is now something of a housing crisis. This isn't helped by the housing benefit, which is effectively a landlord subsidy
>>973206
>As such, I honestly don't know what point you are trying to make here.
> caused by the excessive size of the British government
> caused by the business cycle
My point is that both were caused by the governments. The business cycle was impacted by the government's choices.
>>973289
>In 2013, the UK consumed 60 million tons of coal, of which 50 million tons were imported.
>>973206
>First of all, the Fed is a private institution.
Well, yes. But the chairman is appointed by the President. And it is overseen by the government. The main reason it is independent is because of politics. It should not come under influence of any political party. Yes there are other reasons, but that is the main one.
>>972852
Margaret Thatcher just wanted to fix the economy, coal imports are cheaper, it helped.
>>973343
So I guess that was other blunder by the Thatcher government?
>>973165
>Well, I would prefer if the government started offering jobs
The victorians tried that and we ended up with the workhouses.
>>973363
It wasn't so much a blunder as something that seemed a good idea at the time, and it had widespread support. In the context of the 80s it would have been difficult to predict the long-term implications
>>973092
you mean enabling lots of mortgages to be taken out by lots of people which creates lots of imaginary money that might one day be paid off?
>>973089
Never underestimate how dumb people are, and how lazy dumb people can be. Plenty of people choose to be poor.
If you live in the West, and you're white, and you can't feed and clothe your kids, that's on you, not society. You have it laid out for you on a platter. Nobody is forcing you to smoke meth and get a face tattoo
>>972852
No, because extracting the remaining UK coal is incredibly expensive and would have incurred losses of millions per day.
>>972852
>Was the Thatcher government the biggest blunder in UK history?
No, that'd be the Labour Government that systematically dismantled the British Defense industry and military.
>>972852
DESU we shouldn't be using as much coal anyway. Shit is incredibly polluting
>>973057
Human nature is a bitch.
Anyone given the chance to better themselves and their group at the cost of another group suffering would take that opportunity.
Socialism doesn't work, and Thatcher and Reagen realised this. Even commies have realised this, like when Deng Xiaoping decided that in order for China to catch up after Mao opened them to the West, they'd have to abandon some Socialist policies and replace them with capitalist ones, all the while disguising it as "Confucian characteristics".
>>972852
>implying most mines weren't shut down under the Labour government
>>973057
>there are people who actually believe that
>>972988
Of course you have that view, because you are in your fucking twenties and for you all of this is just some anecdote you read about on the internet or magazines. In real life, go tell a 40-50 something family father barely scraping by, who has only ever known a blue collar trade, to retrain for the information age, or worse, go into a pointless service economy McJob, as the economy was and still is deindustrializing before his eyes within the span of barely one or two decades.
>>975094
People that age retrain all the time. Universities are full of mature students, night schools are overflowing.
There are people coming from African warzones to the west, learning to speak English, then retraining for something useful. Your denim clad Pops can do the same
It isn't hard, the trick is to stop feeling sorry for yourself.
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
>>975147
>People that age retrain all the time.
People who can afford to pay college fees and
>There are people coming from African warzones to the west, learning to speak English, then retraining for something useful.
They operate under a completely different system. There is an entire economy for those people that is separate from the mainstream. An unemployed father from Yorshire can't feasibly live with mathembe and Ahmed under a bridge while working black market jobs for Yuri.
>>975147
>It isn't hard, the trick is to stop feeling sorry for yourself.
>I am the master of my fate,
>I am the captain of my soul.
Absolute muh feels bootstraps nonsense.
Different perspective here. The unfortunate fact was that the British mining industry was an unsustainable clusterfuck that would only get worse as time goes on. Killing it off was inevitable, and waiting longer only meant that more people would end up getting hurt even more by its inevitable destruction.
The real problem was that the unions were too belligerent, making any sort of progressive dismantling impossible. There was no guarantee that a sufficiently slow program would last should another party take over, and the unions were sure to be fighting tooth and nail at every step of a slower process.
In that light, of course the right course of action was to somewhat brutally destroy the system. Yes, quite a few people got fucked, but thanks to the belligerence of the unions the options were effectively to perpetuate a broken system or cut their losses now and prevent the problem from growing.
>>972852
it was the start of the end of the industrial age. Nobody wants to actually work in industry. Heavy industry is dangerous. You are exposed to long term health problems as well as more risk of serious accidents.
Factory work used to be much more dangerous too, and of course it is very monotonous.
We are currently replacing human workers with machines.
This happened with the end of the agricultural age.
Basically, each stage of human evolution is that we replace jobs with machines. People hate working, and employers hate employees. Think about it, you go and plow the fields, its so tiring and you get muddy every day and your friend got kicked by a horse and cut his hand on the plow too. You go down the coal mine, theres rock falls, you get dust in your lungs which you also bring home to your family, theres gas leaks etc.You clock in for your 29 hour shift filling amazon boxes in a giant warehouse with no windows, your expected to work with one half hour break every 6 hours and some heavy item falls on your foot.
Your wife cant go to her job because shes had a babby, your cousin regulary takes months off work for his depression, you have a reccuring back injury that stops you from doing your work. And dont forget, your poor, you never get payed enough no matter how many times your company gives a pay rise.
But machines have no sentience, so they dont care if they work non stop, without pay, at dangerous, dirty, boring jobs. The machine can do the work of 50 men and at a consistently better level.
Thatcher could have gone about it better, but this problem is not going away. China is starting to hit this problem, the more affluent a country, the more the wages increase, and so you can no longer throw away human lives in shit work like they currently are doing.
Same with India, this will happen to them too.
But this will keep happening with other jobs too. Drones and shit replacing delivery men etc.
>>977048
>tfw the future will be a robotic technocracy ruled only by the most autistic AI engineers and the most insane artists.
>normies get BTFO
feels good man
>>977048
Just like Marx predicted!
>>975215
Jesus have you ever been to London? People don't live under bridges worming in the back economy. It's easily possible to move from Yorkshire. I managed to move from Lancashire. Do you really believe people are helpless to influence thier own lives? Do you have no ability to change where you are going?
>>973076
Wait, so just to be clear, she closed down private mines? Or were they run by the government/ nationalized?
>>972852
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wYT5rLifEE
ITT
>>975215
> he thinks that all or even most migrants live under bridges working in the black and grey markets
>>973186
Lol no depends on how you do it.
Do it badly and it's fucking hell.
>>974082
Can't do that when you are living paycheck to paycheck with kids
>>974478
Is this fucking satire?
>>973263
>hitchens
>right wing toadie
miscreant detected
>>977684
why do you have kids if you're living paycheck to paycheck
>>974478
>Human nature
You're a fucking retard m8
>>977812
Because society wants you to have kids
>>975147
That sort of thinking fucking destroyed me. That shit only works if human nature actually gave a fraction of a fuck about other people and not fucking yelling about how completely useless you are because of who you are.
"WELL THEN PULL HARDER." You might say. I've been fucking trying for at least a decade. All I got was that the only job I was good for is managing a fucking fastfood restaurant for the rest of my life because that's all I was good for.
"BUT HEY, AT LEAST YOU HA-" Just fucking shut up. Working in fastfood is one of the most mentally and emotionally draining jobs in the world and it does not even pay well.
I've pulled myself with my fucking bootatraps until I fucking bled. All I got was several suicide attempts and committed into a mental institution for a few weeks. That's what your "pulling yourself by your bootstraps" got me. It has destroyed all of my self-worth to the point I still think I should kill myself.
>>977881
You sound like a whiner. Whose responsibility is it to give you a job you deign suitable? The government?
And please, if you think fast food is hard try just about any other job out there. It pays bad because it's easy.
>>977881
>All I got was that the only job I was good for is managing a fucking fastfood restaurant for the rest of my life because that's all I was good for
If it's the only job you're good for, nothing wrong with that then, ifs where you're suited
>Just fucking shut up. Working in fastfood is one of the most mentally and emotionally draining jobs in the world and it does not even pay well.
It is a job you know, be grateful you can at least bet one, and at least there's a decent amount of human interaction with a fastfood job, consider an Amazon box packer, or even an office cubicle worker glued to a computer all day
Mentioning a suicide attempt doesn't justify your argument either, plenty of people have attempted suicide, and many more have killed themselves too, be they in better or worse for conditions that yourself, and plenty of people in your position haven't tried to kill yourself. As unfortunate as it may seem to you, situations change and jobs don't always last forever, it's not as if before the mines were shutdown factories remained open forever and jobs always existed, unemployment had been far worse than before the decline of blue collar work.
>>977881
Nobody cares about your sob story you whiny bitch
>>977905
That's because I have tried every damn way to pull my ass up and all I get is a society that says "be grateful for what you have and don't desire to get better." My other options all involve criminal activity. Are you trying to say I should be a hitman for the mob or something?
And yes, I know. I've done it. It pays 2 fucking bucks in Singapore. USD. Per hour. Because ot's so fucking easy.
>>977908
It isn't because of suitability. It's only because fastfood will literally hire anyone because no one wants to take it. If you're trying to say that I'm literally unhireable to any company but the desperate...
Also, how the fuck do you live on 2 bucks an hour, even living with parents?
And just fyi, I don't live in Britbongia. I live in that first-class fascist shithole known as Singapore. "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is literally government policy.
>>977980
Move somewhere else. Life isnt fair
>>977980
Stop feeling sorry for yourself. What job do you think is commensurate with your talents? What are you offering employers?
ITT: poortherners
>>977980
Your payment is shit because the market considers your job to be worth shit. Anyone could do it, there are lots of people willing to do it and, if there weren't, they could automate the whole thing.
Get experience, an education, useful skills and connections and you are guranteed to be worth more.
>>972852
Ex-coal mining town resident here
The Thatcher governments policies obviously had some massively negative effects, but it's nothing compared to the irreversible changes caused by Labours multiculturalism and mass immigration policies. I'd rather live in a 97% white town full of unemployment and smackheads than some pozzed hellhole like Bradford or Tower Hamlets
>>978120
t. Britain First
>>978123
Epic, simply epic
Reminder Labour closed more mines than Thatcher ever did, they even admitted they weren't that profitable and it was better to import.
>>973098
>fundamentally conservative population that wants to work hard but doesn't have any opportunities.
There are ALWAYS opportunities.
>>972852
Thatcher predicted the direction the European Union would take, including the Greek bailouts (not specifically the Greeks, but basically that some countries would essentially start stealing money from Berlin to run themselves). She fought tooth and nail to keep Britain as independent from the EU economy as possible, and as a result Britain largely missed the financial crisis.
Thatcher was the hero that Britain needed but didn't deserve.
>>978169
>Britain largely missed the financial crisis
>>978120
> I'm going on a march. Cause i want Britain to be about British
>>972852
>Newcastle would be like Dubai by now if it weren't for Thatcher creatin' all this wealth
>This is actually what northerners believe
>>978183
At least he managed to report the muslim rape gangs before the ((mainstream media))
>>977812
Because you were in a good financial position a decade ago and thought you'd be safe to have kids, and then the industry changed and the economy crashed and you got laid off and now you're stuck in limbo where you have to take a job at Walmart or something just to put food on the table, but because of this there's no time for you to go back to college or retrain, and now unless you get very lucky you're likely doomed to a life of near poverty.
I think you're greatly simplifying the difficulties faced by working class people. Yeah, if you're pumping out babies despite being unemployed, or you're 20 years old and insisting on entering a dying industry because that's what your dad did, then I don't have much sympathy for you. But in a world with an unstable economy where many formerly solid jobs and industries are being lost to automation and globalization, you have plenty of people who did everything "right" (trained for a well-paying job, waited until they were financially secure to have kids, etc etc) getting thrust into shit situations because of circumstance. I'm not saying that the answer is to prop up useless industries indefinitely, but this is an issue that has to be handled properly, for the good of society. If you just tell these people to fuck off and pull themselves up by their bootstraps, not only is that a misrepresentation of their situation, but it will hurt the economy and society as a whole in the long run.
>>978186
No, more like
>Newcastle wouldn't be a shithole if Thatcher had helped us with an alternative to coal mining
>>977980
Why don't you save for a year and go to a trade school where you can learn to be an electrician or something? It's a skilled job that pays well and will probably be in demand for at least the next 20 years, and while I'm not familiar with trade school costs in Singapore in the west generally trade schools are much cheaper than universities, and may be more likely to actually get you a job.
It sounds like you live with your parents and don't have any dependants, so even making a shit wage it should be doable if you're super tight with your money. If there's some kind of student loan framework in Singapore, you may even be able to get started right away - again, trade schools generally don't cost that much, so it's not like you'll be taking out a 200k loan or something.
>>978711
>expecting balanced arguments from socialists
>>977881
You fucking shit why aren't you learning a trade or trying for uni? Fucking hell, even working retail is better than fast food, there are SO many goddamn opportunities in the US it's not even funny
>b-but it's not p-possible
If you're in the Midwest, work at hhgregg, they hire literally anyone and are commission based. I've worked there long enough to get enough work experience to work for AppleCare from my home for $15/hr in Ohio. You just got content you fuckwit don't give me no sob story either
>>977980
I know for a fact many Indian immigrants work construction in Singapore, why aren't you involved?
>>977405
>Jesus have you ever been to London? People don't live under bridges worming in the back economy.
I've literally lived with people sleeping under bridges and working the black economy. It's rampant, until they get on their feet at least, which usually involves sharing a house with 12 other people and working for a friends cousin in a corner shop.
>It's easily possible to move from Yorkshire.
Of course it's possible. It's not always feasible, especially for families.
> Do you really believe people are helpless to influence thier own lives?
To a certain extent. To a much larger extent they are parts of a whole system and subject to forces outside of their control. The idea that the north is poor because it's people are lazy is nonsense. Just because many people move to London doesn't mean the entire jobless population of the North can. It's not as simple as you describe. Individual success stories are anecdotal and do little to describe the situation as it is.
>>972852
it was probably cheaper to have coal imported from some third world shithole than have it produced domestically by british workers that require 10 times bigger salaries
>>978983
Do me a favour. Start a business. Take on some lads as apprentices. Take one British white working class kid. Take one immigrant kid, Polish, Nigeria, Bangladeshi whatever. Tell me who you want to employ full time after one month.
>>979082
> tfw working for Deloitte, with a lawyer girlfriend, living in the flat we bought together in West London
>>978188
I work in Alberta and lost my job due to the drop in oil Prices working as a white collar worker.
Shits fucked man
>>978208
Trades are flooded with flips and other non Singaporean labour who work no very little.
Fuckton of Singapores workforce are expats.
>>979073
>Do me a favour. Start a business. Take on some lads as apprentices
My brother's business and 2 of my friends businesses employ only Irish people. I know Maggie didn't have much effect on Ireland but I doubt there's a huge difference in work ethic between Ireland and Britain. I've worked manual labour jobs with Poles, Slovaks, Brazilians, etc. They're not more hard working than Irish people, they're just being payed a lot better. The Brazilians in my town would go home after 5/6 years with enough money for a huge house in Brazil. Poles can do the same after 10. Irish people working with that kind of money can expect absolutely nothing, so they go to Australia and Canada to work, where Australians and Canadians have the exact same spiel about how spoiled their kids are and how they should be more like the Irish kids. It's bollocks.
The problem was never about work ethic.
>>972852
>Was the Thatcher government the biggest blunder in UK history?
The biggest example of short-sighted PM in UK history.
Like everything she did bit Kwanbongistan in the ass, once even during her term and she didn't take it as a warning.
>>979046
>it was probably cheaper to have coal imported from some third world shithole than have it produced domestically by british workers that require 10 times bigger salaries
Sure. The issue is that now some of that money that was being used to prop up working miners is being sent to China or Germany or Italy, some of it being used to prop up unemployed ex-miners and their families, some of it is being used to prop up the people made redundant by businesses that failed when the miners could no longer afford to eat at restaurants or go to the pub or buy clothes brand new, etc. the North was completely devastated and I'm sceptical as to whether or not the cost of subsidising the mines is cheaper than subsidisng the entire north
>>979787
There is a big difference in attitude. Irish people I've employed have a far more can do attitude, using initiative, less complaining.
It's a myth non white British are going to go home. They live in Britain, brought up here. They aren't about to go to some country they've never lived in.
The 'indigenous British' white working class completely lack work ethic compared to other groups who live in Britain. A basic lack of punctuality, respect and conscientiousness.
Why do you think white working class kids perform worse at school than other groups. It's because they are stupid and lazy. Any working class people with brains and gumption stopped being working class in the eighties. Mainly thanks to based Maggie
>>972852
What this back and forth about Thatcher proves is there will never be a neo-liberal looking inwards towards the inherent problems in their cobbled together philosophy. Its that Thatcher decided to import and focus on commerce, not that the miners in British mines wanted to shut down every month to get new wages while Belgian, German, Soviet and African miners would do it for a fraction of the cost and/or without constant renegotiation.
She refused to talk bullshit, thats it
>>979034
That aside, counter the other bit I mentioned.
ITT: Idiots on both sides purposefully avoiding the substance of the other's argument
>>978913
Because I DO NOT live in the US. And I AM in a University, for fuck's sake.
And I literally can't go i to a tradeschool. Trust me, I'd LOVE if the only tradeschool institution in DINGAPORE accepted anyone regardless of "highest educational standard" attained because Learning to make a sick weld actually seems interesting.
>>978927
Zero government oversight means the construction industry mistreats construction workers. Oh sure, there are "government" policies regarding this, but are rarely enforced, if ever. Mistreatment of construction workers make it to the local news almost daily.
And expats work cheaper for less pay and employers don' have to deal with the bullshit the government imposes on local workers. And every employer looks at me funny when I say I'll work for even less than their lowest-paid employee in the job I am applying for. Not even kidding.
>>981094
>That aside, counter the other bit I mentioned.
No need, as I said I'm not a socialist. I more or less agree with you on that bit. I just haven't drawn the same conclusions.
>>972852
>muh mines
>>972852
>the hole digging industry got BTFO
I see nothing wrong here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp5_Ul-qG0w
>>973068
>If a job is gone, and is sent to China, the rich won't bring that job back.
Actually this has actually already happened and it might even increase in the future. Basically some companies were in China 10-15 years, noticed shit wasn't that good and came back.
>>974082
So only white people are responsible for their own misfortune? Are afro-americans forced to join the crips and speak ebonics?
>>982330
No.
Whats your point.
>>972953
>shutting down
That's a little misleading. They didn't shut them down, they just stopped subsidising them.
>Britain practices keynesian policies for years, driving governmnet spending and size to unsustainable levels
>Friedman and his gang come up with a solution to the problem
>Thatcher puts their ideas into practice, generating stability and growth in the long run at the expense of short-term instability
>People still believe she wanted the poor to suffer and the evil rich people to dominate society
She did what was necessary. Not even the labour governments that came after her wanted to undo her reforms.
>>982796
it's easier to just say she hated poor people than to try and understand the context of economic policies. Seriously though, the way people talk about any kind of monetarist politician would make you think they're super villains with no goal other than to upset poor people. I read something the other day (unfortunately I can't remember who said it) but the politician said that everyone who goes into politics goes into it because they have other peoples best interests at heart; they believe their ideas are better for people. Whatever Thatcher did, whether or not you agree or disagree with it working, she did because she thought it was the best thing to do, not because she wanted to upset a pub owner in Grimsby.
>>982346
So you unironically believe that black thugs are good boys who didn't do nothing while white thugs had the option of using their white privilege to get into Yale but decided upon a life of crime because they are bad people.
>>983016
You seem to be having your own conversation here.
>>983010
Nah, she was surely a puppet to the Rothchilds / Trilateral Comission / Illuminati / Reptilians who want nothing less than to fuck with coal miners.
>>982796
>>Britain practices keynesian policies for years, driving governmnet spending and size to unsustainable levels
>>Thatcher puts their ideas into practice, generating stability and growth in the long run at the expense of short-term instability
I hate those excuses because of how wrong they are. Spendings were perfectly substainable before Thatcher, and they only got worse after she took office (though that wasn't directly her fault). Thatcher didn't save the UK or its budget. She just ensured that lots of people are now paid to do nothing through welfare instead of paid to mine stuff, and that the money which would have gone to them now goes to other countries instead since resources need to be imported.
>>972852
>Was the Thatcher government the biggest blunder in UK history?
She successfully removed the power of the working class in the UK, so she succeeded with her personal goals
So how did Germany manage to keep its manufacturing industry whilst Britain failed? There is a lot to compare, with the industrial northern cities and the eternally sparring regions. One of the commonly cited reasons is that unionism is protected in law by the German constitution, and so instead of wasting a decade trying to destroy each other the unions and the Government actually collaborated. Is there any truth in this?
In the 70s the unions ran the country in to the ground, we were Greece tier. Had the IMF at our backs during Wilson years. Mines had been closing for years prior to Thatcher, overall post-war Labour governments closed more than the Tories did. Thatcher maybe wasn't fair to British industry in letting the final blade fall, and didn't try to soften the blow but this was after a decade of them choking the life out of UK and they remained militant and unready to negotiate.
It would be nice to see some industry re-open in UK but EU rules prevent the subsidy that would make it worth doing for anyone.
>>983871
She lifted more working class out of poverty than she put out of work in the mines.
>>985911
>So how did Germany manage to keep its manufacturing industry whilst Britain failed?
They regulated competitions out, that's what EU is for.
