Margaret Thatcher

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Margaret Thatcher

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 42 of 126 < 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 >

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 9.35pm
Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.31pm Some facts which people may want to dispute re coal mining industry. "346,000 miners left the industry between 1963 and 1968, in 1967 there were 12,900 forced redundancies. Under the prime minister during that period, Harold Wilson, one pit closed every week yet there are few people planning trips to his grave with their tap shoes. "In 1981 an attempt was made to impose cash limits on subsidies to industry. The NUM called for strike action and the Conservatives gave in. £50 million was given to industries which switched from cheap oil to expensive coal, early retirement payments were upped to £36,000 and £200 million was injected into the industry. "Companies who had gone abroad to buy coal, such as the Central Electricity Generating Board, were banned from bringing it in and 3 million tonnes of coal piled up at Rotterdam at a cost to the British taxpayer of £30 million per year. "The industry was, by now, losing £1.2 million per day. Its interest payments amounted to £467 million for the year and the NCB needed a grant of £875 million from the taxpayer. "The Monopolies and Mergers Commission found that 75% of British pits were losing money. The reason wasn’t hard to find. By 1984 it cost £44 to mine a metric ton of British coal. America, Australia and South Africa were selling it on the world market for £32 a metric ton. Productivity increases had come in at 20% below the level set in 1974 Plan for Coal. "We were subsidising the mining industry to the tune of £1.3 billion a year. This figure doesn’t include the vast cost to taxpayer funded industries such as steel and electricity which were obliged to buy British coal. When Arthur Scargill was called before a Parliamentary committee and asked at what level of loss it was acceptable to close a pit he answered “As far as I can see, the loss is without limits”. "So the industry had been in decline for decades and was haemorraging cash." Source?
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 9.35pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.31pm

Some facts which people may want to dispute re coal mining industry.

"346,000 miners left the industry between 1963 and 1968, in 1967 there were 12,900 forced redundancies. Under the prime minister during that period, Harold Wilson, one pit closed every week yet there are few people planning trips to his grave with their tap shoes.

"In 1981 an attempt was made to impose cash limits on subsidies to industry. The NUM called for strike action and the Conservatives gave in. £50 million was given to industries which switched from cheap oil to expensive coal, early retirement payments were upped to £36,000 and £200 million was injected into the industry.

"Companies who had gone abroad to buy coal, such as the Central Electricity Generating Board, were banned from bringing it in and 3 million tonnes of coal piled up at Rotterdam at a cost to the British taxpayer of £30 million per year.

"The industry was, by now, losing £1.2 million per day. Its interest payments amounted to £467 million for the year and the NCB needed a grant of £875 million from the taxpayer.

"The Monopolies and Mergers Commission found that 75% of British pits were losing money. The reason wasn’t hard to find. By 1984 it cost £44 to mine a metric ton of British coal. America, Australia and South Africa were selling it on the world market for £32 a metric ton. Productivity increases had come in at 20% below the level set in 1974 Plan for Coal.

"We were subsidising the mining industry to the tune of £1.3 billion a year. This figure doesn’t include the vast cost to taxpayer funded industries such as steel and electricity which were obliged to buy British coal. When Arthur Scargill was called before a Parliamentary committee and asked at what level of loss it was acceptable to close a pit he answered “As far as I can see, the loss is without limits”.

"So the industry had been in decline for decades and was haemorraging cash."

Source?

Alert a moderator to this post

Penge Eagle Beckenham 09 Apr 13 9.47pm
Is here: [Link] Get White Horse to cross check the stats for you Edited by Penge Eagle (09 Apr 2013 9.47pm)
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

Penge Eagle

Beckenham 09 Apr 13 9.47pm

Is here: [Link]

Get White Horse to cross check the stats for you

Edited by Penge Eagle (09 Apr 2013 9.47pm)

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

suicideatselhurst crawley 09 Apr 13 9.51pm
Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.35pm Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.31pm Some facts which people may want to dispute re coal mining industry. "346,000 miners left the industry between 1963 and 1968, in 1967 there were 12,900 forced redundancies. Under the prime minister during that period, Harold Wilson, one pit closed every week yet there are few people planning trips to his grave with their tap shoes. "In 1981 an attempt was made to impose cash limits on subsidies to industry. The NUM called for strike action and the Conservatives gave in. £50 million was given to industries which switched from cheap oil to expensive coal, early retirement payments were upped to £36,000 and £200 million was injected into the industry. "Companies who had gone abroad to buy coal, such as the Central Electricity Generating Board, were banned from bringing it in and 3 million tonnes of coal piled up at Rotterdam at a cost to the British taxpayer of £30 million per year. "The industry was, by now, losing £1.2 million per day. Its interest payments amounted to £467 million for the year and the NCB needed a grant of £875 million from the taxpayer. "The Monopolies and Mergers Commission found that 75% of British pits were losing money. The reason wasn’t hard to find. By 1984 it cost £44 to mine a metric ton of British coal. America, Australia and South Africa were selling it on the world market for £32 a metric ton. Productivity increases had come in at 20% below the level set in 1974 Plan for Coal. "We were subsidising the mining industry to the tune of £1.3 billion a year. This figure doesn’t include the vast cost to taxpayer funded industries such as steel and electricity which were obliged to buy British coal. When Arthur Scargill was called before a Parliamentary committee and asked at what level of loss it was acceptable to close a pit he answered “As far as I can see, the loss is without limits”. "So the industry had been in decline for decades and was haemorraging cash." Source? Maggie was waiting for the fight to come, but wasn't having it then, she needed the Police on her side and had to stockpile coal and ensure the transport system was ready for the challenge ahead, her first move was to put McGregor in charge of the NCB, knowing Scargill hated him and would raise to the bait. Theres someone in my head ... But its not me X/Box game Tag bazcpfc1961, clan (HMS)
Alert a moderator to this post

suicideatselhurst

crawley 09 Apr 13 9.51pm

Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.35pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.31pm

Some facts which people may want to dispute re coal mining industry.

"In 1981 an attempt was made to impose cash limits on subsidies to industry. The NUM called for strike action and the Conservatives gave in. £50 million was given to industries which switched from cheap oil to expensive coal, early retirement payments were upped to £36,000 and £200 million was injected into the industry.

"The industry was, by now, losing £1.2 million per day. Its interest payments amounted to £467 million for the year and the NCB needed a grant of £875 million from the taxpayer.

"So the industry had been in decline for decades and was haemorraging cash."

Source?

Maggie was waiting for the fight to come, but wasn't having it then, she needed the Police on her side and had to stockpile coal and ensure the transport system was ready for the challenge ahead, her first move was to put McGregor in charge of the NCB, knowing Scargill hated him and would raise to the bait.

Theres someone in my head ... But its not me

X/Box game Tag bazcpfc1961, clan (HMS)

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 9.53pm
Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.47pm Is here: [Link] Get White Horse to cross check the stats for you Edited by Penge Eagle (09 Apr 2013 9.47pm) Thanks. Now back to the child poverty stats. Not exactly something to be proud of is it?
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 9.53pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.47pm

Is here: [Link]

Get White Horse to cross check the stats for you

Edited by Penge Eagle (09 Apr 2013 9.47pm)

Thanks.

Now back to the child poverty stats. Not exactly something to be proud of is it?

Alert a moderator to this post

Penge Eagle Beckenham 09 Apr 13 9.56pm
Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain? 50% Good 34% Bad 16% Neither/Don't know [Link] Is it really a divided Britain?
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

Penge Eagle

Beckenham 09 Apr 13 9.56pm

Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain?

50% Good
34% Bad
16% Neither/Don't know

[Link]

Is it really a divided Britain?

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 9.59pm
Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain? 50% Good 34% Bad 16% Neither/Don't know [Link] Is it really a divided Britain? Only a sample of 965 people asked though. Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 9.59pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm

Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain?

50% Good
34% Bad
16% Neither/Don't know

[Link]

Is it really a divided Britain?

Only a sample of 965 people asked though.

Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Penge Eagle Beckenham 09 Apr 13 10.02pm
Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain? 50% Good 34% Bad 16% Neither/Don't know [Link] Is it really a divided Britain? Only a sample of 965 people asked though. Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm) You can't really argue against the the Guardian!
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

Penge Eagle

Beckenham 09 Apr 13 10.02pm

Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm

Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain?

50% Good
34% Bad
16% Neither/Don't know

[Link]

Is it really a divided Britain?

Only a sample of 965 people asked though.

Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm)

You can't really argue against the the Guardian!

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 10.04pm
Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 10.02pm Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain? 50% Good 34% Bad 16% Neither/Don't know [Link] Is it really a divided Britain? Only a sample of 965 people asked though. Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm) You can't really argue against the the Guardian! It's a bit right wing for me.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 09 Apr 13 10.04pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 10.02pm

Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm

Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain?

50% Good
34% Bad
16% Neither/Don't know

[Link]

Is it really a divided Britain?

Only a sample of 965 people asked though.

Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm)

You can't really argue against the the Guardian!

It's a bit right wing for me.

Alert a moderator to this post

Penge Eagle Beckenham 09 Apr 13 10.06pm
Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 10.04pm Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 10.02pm Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain? 50% Good 34% Bad 16% Neither/Don't know [Link] Is it really a divided Britain? Only a sample of 965 people asked though. Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm) You can't really argue against the the Guardian! It's a bit right wing for me.
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

Penge Eagle

Beckenham 09 Apr 13 10.06pm

Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 10.04pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 10.02pm

Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 09 Apr 2013 9.56pm

Guardian poll: Thatcher's rule good for Britain?

50% Good
34% Bad
16% Neither/Don't know

[Link]

Is it really a divided Britain?

Only a sample of 965 people asked though.

Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm)

You can't really argue against the the Guardian!

It's a bit right wing for me.

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

crystal balls The Garden of Earthly Delights 09 Apr 13 10.11pm
Quote chris123 at 09 Apr 2013 8.07pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Apr 2013 6.26pm Quote Willo at 09 Apr 2013 6.23pm Quote If you didnt know who she was but saw the list of 'anti's' getting their two penneth in over her corpse then you would have a natural instinct to be on her side purely because of the odious collection lining up I ask - Where does it come from, this vitriloic loathing? Anti-Thatcherites tell you that it’s because she closed down the old industries. (She didn’t, of course, she simply stopped obliging everyone else to support them.) Yet it must surely be patently obvious by now that nothing would have kept the dockyards and coalmines and steel mills open. A similar process of de-industrialisation has unfolded in every other Western European country, and the only parties that still talk of “reviving our manufacturing base” are Respect, the Scottish Socialists and the BNP !!!! RIP Willo Its not so much the closing down, its the manner in which they were closed down, and the population, few of whom voted conservative, were just left to deal with the fact that employment was ripped out almost overnight, leaving hundreds chasing single jobs. Uneconomic pits have routinely closed since the war, why should uneconomic mining be subsidised when no other industry was, and when from the 1960's we had the benefit ofNorth Sea oil and gas? Simply untrue! Although some exploration of oil and gas fields went on from 60s, the Brent field in UK waters wasn't even discovered until 1971, and the first oil wasn't pumped (at a relatively modest level initially) from the Argyl field until 1975. Revenue from the taxation of oil commenced in a significant way from 1980 onwards. The revenue from oil and the proceeds of privatisations could have been used b Hesletine to regenerate the country, but were instead used to fund income tax cuts for the higher paid instead. Edited by Moose (09 Apr 2013 10.24pm) I used to be immortal
Alert a moderator to this post

crystal balls

The Garden of Earthly Delights 09 Apr 13 10.11pm

Quote chris123 at 09 Apr 2013 8.07pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 09 Apr 2013 6.26pm

Quote Willo at 09 Apr 2013 6.23pm

Quote

If you didnt know who she was but saw the list of 'anti's' getting their two penneth in over her corpse then you would have a natural instinct to be on her side purely because of the odious collection lining up

I ask - Where does it come from, this vitriloic loathing? Anti-Thatcherites tell you that it’s because she closed down the old industries. (She didn’t, of course, she simply stopped obliging everyone else to support them.)

Yet it must surely be patently obvious by now that nothing would have kept the dockyards and coalmines and steel mills open. A similar process of de-industrialisation has unfolded in every other Western European country, and the only parties that still talk of “reviving our manufacturing base” are Respect, the Scottish Socialists and the BNP !!!!

RIP

Willo

Its not so much the closing down, its the manner in which they were closed down, and the population, few of whom voted conservative, were just left to deal with the fact that employment was ripped out almost overnight, leaving hundreds chasing single jobs.

Uneconomic pits have routinely closed since the war, why should uneconomic mining be subsidised when no other industry was, and when from the 1960's we had the benefit ofNorth Sea oil and gas?

Simply untrue! Although some exploration of oil and gas fields went on from 60s, the Brent field in UK waters wasn't even discovered until 1971, and the first oil wasn't pumped (at a relatively modest level initially) from the Argyl field until 1975. Revenue from the taxation of oil commenced in a significant way from 1980 onwards.

The revenue from oil and the proceeds of privatisations could have been used b Hesletine to regenerate the country, but were instead used to fund income tax cuts for the higher paid instead.

Edited by Moose (09 Apr 2013 10.24pm)

I used to be immortal

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 09 Apr 13 10.12pm
Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm Only a sample of 965 people asked though. Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm) They asked a lot more during her elections. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

09 Apr 13 10.12pm

Quote nickgusset at 09 Apr 2013 9.59pm

Only a sample of 965 people asked though.

Edited by nickgusset (09 Apr 2013 9.59pm)

They asked a lot more during her elections.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Johnny Eagles berlin 09 Apr 13 10.13pm
Quote npn at 09 Apr 2013 7.56pm Her legacy is undoubtedly good and bad, but, quite frankly, I genuinely dread to think what the nation would have been like had she not come along when they did. This. I don't have any illusions about Thatcher. Did some good things, did some very bad things. But *thank fck** we had her instead of some lefty in charge. Edited by Johnny Eagles (09 Apr 2013 10.14pm) ...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread...
Alert a moderator to this post

Johnny Eagles

berlin 09 Apr 13 10.13pm

Quote npn at 09 Apr 2013 7.56pm

Her legacy is undoubtedly good and bad, but, quite frankly, I genuinely dread to think what the nation would have been like had she not come along when they did.

This.

I don't have any illusions about Thatcher. Did some good things, did some very bad things. But thank f*ck we had her instead of some lefty in charge.

Edited by Johnny Eagles (09 Apr 2013 10.14pm)

...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread...

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 42 of 126 < 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Margaret Thatcher

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors