Brain Dead

[Noels Beard]

Yes. Thatcher doing a very fine job of belittling the points made against her, easy when you are always going to have the last word. These arguments haven't really moved on in the last 20 years.

Interesting to hear her thoughts on socialist policies, and of the gap between rich and poor. Such a shame that her health has deteriorated to such an extent she is probably unaware of how her policies are only recently coming home to roost. One of the signatures of unbridled capitalism is an extension of the gap between rich and poor. I for one do not think this is socially progressive, and I think by the comments we have heard about ghettoes and run down social housing areas, I do not think I'm alone.

Everyone loves Capitalism while things are going well, especially if they are not forced to see how their relative fortune is being counter-balanced in another part of the world. And relativism is really what we are talking about here. Thatcher was basically saying: "well...they have shoes on their feet...enough money to buy bread...they aren't going to die, so that's fine." By her logic the gap between rich and poor could extend to any level, and individuals would still be born into a life of privilege or of poverty.

I would argue that it is not stupid to put forward arguments in favour of socialism. It's only because we have seen so little alternative to it within our lifestyle that we consider it so unappealing. Socialism, portrayed with superb hyperbole by the right wing press, means giving up everything and living like animals again. Socialism means living in a totalitarian state and being ruled over like the Chinese. These may be the consequences of a Socialist agenda gone wrong, but this is not Socialism itself. Just as Capitalism is not using the public purse to bail out businesses that have gone beyond their mandate.

I wonder if Thatcher would have let the banks fail? Because what we have ended up with is a society where you gamble on a business idea and if you win you pocket the cash, and if you lose... well somewhere down the line we all end up paying for your bad ideas. It's bullshit. We should harvest your organs to pay for your debt. Live by the Capitalist sword, die by it.

[jeffvickers]

Thatcher was a puppet as ROTW would agree

[Been-Grant-Mitchell'd!]

Thatcher was our best Prime Minister.

Yes Churchill led us through the war, but I'm sure she would have fine the job just as well.

[Oddfeet63]

Tell that to the miners

[pokerpete]

and teachers, and nurses, or people paying 15% on their mortgage, or kids leaving school and joining the highest unemployment queue in history.
yeah, great days they were

[Been-Grant-Mitchell'd!]

Yeah, great days before Thatcher aswell.
Just used to love the water strikes and the blackouts of the seventies.

Unions were holding the whole country to ransom.

[Roll_With_It_Russ]

and teachers, and nurses, or people paying 15% on their mortgage, or kids leaving school and joining the highest unemployment queue in history.
yeah, great days they were

the interest rate then was not so significant, since simular was to be had on savings and wage inflation was just as rampant, whats key is the difference between the base rate, consumer prices and wage inflation.

[mr lugsy]

bollocks russ, people's mortgages were going up by horrendous amounts , even 1% rise on the base rate adds a significent sum to your monthly payment, the crank kept turning on mortgages , up and up they went, it used to be top of the bill on the nightly news because things were in such a state. there is no way you can plausibly say that interest earned on savings covered this for people, or yearly wage rises either, absolute total and utter nonsense.

[Noels Beard]

Thatcher was our best Prime Minister.

Yes Churchill led us through the war, but I'm sure she would have fine the job just as well.

What are you basing this on? You do realise the financial situation the country is now in can be largely traced to her social housing policies?

[Roll_With_It_Russ]

bollocks russ, people's mortgages were going up by horrendous amounts , even 1% rise on the base rate adds a significent sum to your monthly payment, the crank kept turning on mortgages , up and up they went, it used to be top of the bill on the nightly news because things were in such a state. there is no way you can plausibly say that interest earned on savings covered this for people, or yearly wage rises either, absolute total and utter nonsense.

well considering interest rates that hit near 15% only lasted a short period, you would have to average it over the year, interest rates averaged a lot lower.

Inflation was double figures the entire of the 70s

Average inflation rates(a)
Per cent
1900 to 1913 1.3
1914 to 1918 15.3
1919 to 1939 -1.2
1940 to 1945 4.3
1946 to 1949 2.6
1950 to 1959 4.3
1960 to 1969 3.5
1970 to 1979 12.5
1980 to 1989 7.4
1990 to 1993 5.1

Wages in the 70s

1969 1,607.16
1970 1,801.30
1971 2,003.88
1972 2,262.18
1973 2,567.74
1974 3,023.55
1975 3,825.44
1976 4,419.69
1977 4,815.42
1978 5,440.25
1979 6,281.70
1980 7,585.53

quadrupled in the same period.

There for if interest rates averaged the same as wages increases no one was hurt in real terms.

At the moment its far far worse for non asset holder and those with savings, wages stagnant if not in real terms being lowered and interest rates as low... means negative growth.

It the very reason that people don't understand interest and inflation with the nominal values given to money that the system works so well for the top end.

[mr lugsy]

whilst i do truely appreciate the immense effort you must have gone to to back up your previous post ,those figures don't mean shit.

the average rise in earnings doesn't mean that the average man had a yearly raise that size ,or was even on anywhere near your quoted figures. top end earners have always skewed these figures and advertised average earnings are, and always have been, alot different to actual wages and it's the same for average savings too.

now,let's not worry too much about the bottom end earners who would have pulled the average back the other way because they wouldn't have been in a position to get on the property ladder or benefit from interest on non existent savings.



when mortgage interest rates were highest,the regularity and size of the increases had people struggling bigtime, it didn't just affect the average homeowner either,higher earnings goes hand in hand with bigger houses afterall ...so every fucker was feeling it! mortgage payments were going up by more than wage increases aswell...it was all over the bleeding 10 o'clock news every other day with a complete breakdown of how it would affect the average joe aswell, i had to sit there countless times listening to my parents bitching about it so i remember it all too well.

[Roll_With_It_Russ]

Yeah for HOME OWNERS, your average low paid worker in the 70s did not have a mortages.... if you believe what they put on the national news then you must also not understand the concept of value and what nominal values are in real terms.

Why do you think a new currency was introduced in 1970/1, why do you think new pence has now come to an end, fiat currencies always have a limited life span.

Half the bullshitters that got homes with liar loans over the last 10+years should of lost them by now and the market rigging exposed by a big reset.

[Noels Beard]

Yes. House prices still massively over what they should be, realistically. When an average couple in their twenties, combined income say £30k, can't afford a mortgage, there is something wrong. I remember reading a report in about 2007 saying they didn't expect a rise in house prices again until 2013, they were maybe being generous even with that. When you count 6 years of stagnation against inflation of 6% (????), anyone who bought in the mid 2000's would have been better off holding on to the cash. That is, of course, not counting the cost of rent, etc... However as I said before, this can be traced back 25 years. Thatchers social housing policies set a time-bomb ticking, and whilst everyone loved it at the time, it's their children that now pay the price.

[Noels Beard]

I'm unsure of Russ' politics, but his economics are spot on. Credit where it is due.

And social housing is on the decrease, there were nowhere near as many home "owners" in the 70's and 80's, and the state provided for them. After all these homes were sold...well they're all living with their parents now.

[mr lugsy]

maybe you're the one listening to the news too much,there's hundreds of fiat currency systems still around today russ, you are forgetting to also mention the fact that all commodity based monetary systems have also failed.


most of the the 'bullshitter's' who got their 'liar' loans were actually goaded into it by rogue mortgage brokers and directly through the scurge that is the british banking establishment, too greedy to walk away from a potential sale, who fixed peoples income and expenditure exercises to make it look affordable for them,and even set up interest only mortgages for people knowing full well that that they had no contingency plan in place to pay back the capital at the end of the mortgage term. thus putting them into nothing more than a long term rental agreement with the bank.