cambridgefox Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 As nobody is using intellectual language or archaic phrasing to make themselves sound more intelligent than they actually are, or talking about how wonderful the dictators in Syria and Iran are, I'm going with none. my mistake George.I lived in rural Cambs ,a Conservative stronghold in a family which was comfortable lets say.Parents were split politically (usually ,)but they did float,as do I regarding policies that are relevant to me.Perhaps saying all that I do not understand the hatred others feel for her,I also think this bandwagon everyone is climbing aboard is in danger of overloading . What confuses me,then and now is in every party there are points that you agree with,within all parties and likewise policies you don't.if you think not you are a liar,Im not a pro Thatcher or anti,as I said good and bad,but the hatred from well educated people has made them look very uneducated.This isn't necessarily aimed at you my friend,but standing back from the mobs(on both sides)
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 And a deliberate escalation with the the sinking of the Belgrano Diana Gould puts Maggie in the rack
yorkie1999 Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I can't remember being given a share , and if I was I must still have it somewhere because I definitely haven't sold it . You're right, but i thought we got shares in something for nothing.
Deucalion Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 And a deliberate escalation with the the sinking of the Belgrano For the record, I don't disagree with the sinking of the Belgrano. Once we were in an armed conflict, regardless of not liking Thatcher, I wanted us to win it. I also think justice was with the British. Therefore, I would choose a British win and lots of Argentine teenagers drowning, rather than lots of Argentine teenagers tucked up in their bunks and the British task force defeated. (Does this make sense? Not my slickest sentence ever I don't think) My point yesterday evening was, Thatcher is considered the military hero for retaking the Falklands, while the truth is closer to her diplomatic blunders and defence cuts made the conflict necessary. Callaghan, her Labour predecessor, faced a remarkably similar situation in 1977 and by listening to intelligence, using good diplomacy and an appropriate show of force, managed to stop an invasion happening in the first place. As Callaghan's response to Argentine aggression did not kill around 1000 people, did not destroy any expensive Cold War military equipment and did not force the UK to build a fortress on the Falklands, nobody remembers it. Grossly unfair if you ask me. Maybe one thing that does my bonce in about Thatcher is the bullcrap myths which surround her.
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 You're right, but i thought we got shares in something for nothing. I seem to remember we were given shares when the building societies changed to banks . That one worked well in the long run.
Babylon Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I seem to remember we were given shares when the building societies changed to banks . Missed out on some Alliance and Leicester ones by one day... the bastards! I can't remember being given a share , and if I was I must still have it somewhere because I definitely haven't sold it . You're probably a billionaire and you don't know it.
Babylon Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 This forum continues to mine stupid as if there's no end. Perhaps if you had organised yourselves a bit better she wouldn't have sat another two terms in No.10. Or did you do nothing but sit around on your fat arse moaning about it?
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Missed out on some Alliance and Leicester ones by one day... the bastards! You're probably a billionaire and you don't know it. That must have been tough ! I can't remember now exactly how many payouts i got from various building society accounts . I think it 3 , maybe 4 . Woolwich was a big un if I remember right . I've been rummaging through all my drawers looking for it . No luck yet but I've found a premium bond for £4 that I must have bought in about 1960 . I think you have to buy them in £100 bundles now
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Thatcher managed to stay in power by appealing to our short term greed . ( myself included) All the sell offs ( utilities council houses etc) were very appealing at the time . it really is no mystery as to how she stayed in power The younger generations are paying for it now I'm sorry to say.
Babylon Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I think you have to buy them in £100 bundles now Yeah bought some the other week, I've decided that if I'm going to gamble I might as well be able to get my money back at the end of it!! I think someone won £1m off only £750 worth recently. Would love to have seen their face when the letter popped through the door!! Thatcher managed to stay in power by appealing to our short term greed . ( myself included) All the sell offs ( utilities council houses etc) were very appealing at the time . it really is no mystery as to how she stayed in power The younger generations are paying for it now I'm sorry to say. I hope you are ashamed you greedy bastard!
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Yeah bought some the other week, I've decided that if I'm going to gamble I might as well be able to get my money back at the end of it!! I think someone won £1m off only £750 worth recently. Would love to have seen their face when the letter popped through the door!! I hope you are ashamed you greedy bastard! I am both a little ashamed and annoyed really at how I took advantage of the sell offs and I even bought a relatives council house for them that we sold for a tidy profit a few years later. But we a mere mortals and if I hadn't have someone else would , and we will act in this fashion given the opportunity , I didn't realise what the long term effects would be , but they must have done . I don't think we should have been given the chance to make future generations lives so much worse.
Manwell Pablo Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I think this thread is a foxes talk all time low, for many reasons. I don't think the death of Thatcher has shown the country in a very good light in general to be honest, it aint exclusive to this place.
Jon the Hat Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I am both a little ashamed and annoyed really at how I took advantage of the sell offs and I even bought a relatives council house for them that we sold for a tidy profit a few years later. But we a mere mortals and if I hadn't have someone else would , and we will act in this fashion given the opportunity , I didn't realise the what the long term effects would be , but they must have done . I don't think we should have been given the chance to make future generations lives so much worse. Which future generations are so much worse? Certainly not the families who own their own homes.
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Which future generations are so much worse? Certainly not the families who own their own homes. No quite , my concern is for the ones who are living in cramped over crowded conditions because of lack of investment in social housing .
Jon the Hat Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 No quite , my concern is for the ones who are living in cramped over crowded conditions because of lack of investment in social housing . Which has what to do with the right to buy? Seperate issue.
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Which has what to do with the right to buy? Seperate issue. We were led to believe that the right to buy would free up large sums of cash to invest in future easily affordable social housing , I'm not too sure , but i can't see any evidence that has happened . They aren't really seperate issues in my mind at least .
leicsmac Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Which future generations are so much worse? Certainly not the families who own their own homes. Perhaps the newer couples/families that now can't afford to get on the housing ladder now due to grossly overinflated house prices? Caused in part by the lack of investment in social housing triggered by Thatcher? Not saying she's entirely to blame for it, but there's almost an entire generation not being able to afford to buy their own home now because the one before them bought all the old social housing for investment and are now rich on the proceeds.
Jon the Hat Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I'm not sure you could have predicted the overall increase in house prices, or could blame it on the right to buy scheme. If it was sold as freeing up cash for reinvestment then I can see that could now be seen as not what happened. I wonder though if the critics include housing association investment in their stats. A lot of factors have led to the increase in house prices, not least rise in cheaper mortgages, two income households and increased demand from immigration.
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Deucalion's I don't think we are far apart on this but I felt at the time and still do that the sinking was a questionable act but did take us past a point of no return. I don't think this is the time or place to debate the threat that the Belgrano posed or if it was a polictal or military decesion.
Zingari Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I'm not sure you could have predicted the overall increase in house prices, or could blame it on the right to buy scheme. If it was sold as freeing up cash for reinvestment then I can see that could now be seen as not what happened. I wonder though if the critics include housing association investment in their stats. A lot of factors have led to the increase in house prices, not least rise in cheaper mortgages, two income households and increased demand from immigration. You could be right Jon, many factors were and are involved . I just “feel†that the ones who for whatever reason need properly planned social housing have been poorly served in the last 30 years by all the various governments . I just feel like she flicked the switch .
leicsmac Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 I'm not sure you could have predicted the overall increase in house prices, or could blame it on the right to buy scheme. If it was sold as freeing up cash for reinvestment then I can see that could now be seen as not what happened. I wonder though if the critics include housing association investment in their stats. A lot of factors have led to the increase in house prices, not least rise in cheaper mortgages, two income households and increased demand from immigration. Fair enough. Could you explain to me how those factors would push up house prices though? Surely cheaper mortgages will keep prices stable, and most immigrant jobs will not be well-paid enough to force prices up? I'm honestly curious about this (and we're veering off topic here) because I'm worried and annoyed about not being able to get on the housing ladder later this year despite (hopefully) being in a job that will start out at a bit above average UK salary. If I don't have a chance, then what chance is there for everyone earning less than average?
Babylon Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Perhaps the newer couples/families that now can't afford to get on the housing ladder now due to grossly overinflated house prices? Their own life decisions and poor money management and easy credit culture are as much to blame for many. My mrs is on minimum wage, I'm certainly not particularly well paid but we both managed to save a deposit and will be mortgage free by the time we're 40 at the latest. Clearly some other issues dictate whether people can do that or not, but I know people earning almost double what I do who are up to their necks in debt, have barely paid a penny off their house. I listen to them whinge about having no money and find it baffling, earning what they did I'd probably already be mortgage free and certainly not in huge amounts of debt.
Babylon Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Is the Leicester forum still alive? I've sought refuge in here and can't bring myself to go back.
MooseBreath Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Fair enough. Could you explain to me how those factors would push up house prices though? Surely cheaper mortgages will keep prices stable, and most immigrant jobs will not be well-paid enough to force prices up? I'm honestly curious about this (and we're veering off topic here) because I'm worried and annoyed about not being able to get on the housing ladder later this year despite (hopefully) being in a job that will start out at a bit above average UK salary. If I don't have a chance, then what chance is there for everyone earning less than average? If you're earning more than average you shouldn't have a problem. Government is introducing new measures to bring required deposits down as well.
Jon the Hat Posted 10 April 2013 Posted 10 April 2013 Fair enough. Could you explain to me how those factors would push up house prices though? Surely cheaper mortgages will keep prices stable, and most immigrant jobs will not be well-paid enough to force prices up? I'm honestly curious about this (and we're veering off topic here) because I'm worried and annoyed about not being able to get on the housing ladder later this year despite (hopefully) being in a job that will start out at a bit above average UK salary. If I don't have a chance, then what chance is there for everyone earning less than average? The three I mentioned increase demand. Cheaper borrowing means you can spend more so pushes prices up, likewise two incomes. Immigration means more demand as well. If supply is constrained by planning rules/ shortage of land and lack of investment then prices will go up.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.