The Conservative Party

[halfmist]

That’s about right for Thatcher unemployment was the cause it began in London then Toxteth and Moss Side, heavy industry, the docks had been decimated by her. The only people that mattered to her was the money men it’s still the same the North gets nothing

The steel industry was already in a bad way
I remember on some of my first jobs going over to Sheffield to do audits, these were at private companies which just couldn’t compete on quality and price against overseas companies.
They were losing massive amounts of money and closed shortly after. If no one buys what you’re making no matter who is in power there is a problem.
If my memory serves me correctly wasn’t there a major problem with the Liverpool dockers not accepting containerisation of its port. They were insisting every single washing machine etc had to be unloaded individually and theft was rife.
We demand cheap goods and with a lot of products they now have to be produced overseas.

 

[Vic]

Re. that first point it's adjacent to another feature of recent governments, privatise the profit but socialise the risk, leave a small rump of the state to deal with the shit you don't want to deal with. Letting 'the market' deal with everything doesn't include being accountable for and cleaning up it's own mess. Back to schools, I have never found anyone who has been able to give me a sound educational rationale for those reforms, because there isn't one it has nothing to do with educating our children. The matra around 'choice' is utterly laughable.

Correct. And the "freedom" to pay teachers what you like was supposed to mean academies were paying for the best. Round our way, the "elite" academy is paying less for younger teachers.

 

[threespires]

Her and Reagan have a lot to answer for.

Their economic and social policies still hurt everyone who isn't rich.

Trickle down economic policies of the Reaganomics type are pretty much discredited I think, with literally no examples of it having worked and plenty to show it has the opposite of the claimed effects. Doesn't seem to stop politicians trying to implement them to this day which suggests their intent has very little to do with growing or improving the economy.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Ahh right, it must be down to my poor education. Personally I think it’s quite an affectionate term, it has more of a ring to it than Tory scum.

You don’t fool me.

Money talks, wealth whispers.

 

[halfmist]

You don’t fool me.

Money talks, wealth whispers.

Well I like to learn something every day and that’s a new saying.. Not quite sure how it works in practice, it’s sometimes hard to hide.

 

[halfmist]

Trickle down economic policies of the Reaganomics type are pretty much discredited I think, with literally no examples of it having worked and plenty to show it has the opposite of the claimed effects Doesn't seem to stop politicians trying to implement them to this day which suggests their intent has very little to do with growing or improving the economy.

Would you say perhaps the 10 richest people in the US have followed Reagonomics in the creation of wealth for themselves and indirectly for their country.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Well I like to learn something every day and that’s a new saying.. Not quite sure how it works in practice, it’s sometimes hard to hide.

It’s not a new saying, it’s an old saying. There are plenty of people on this forum with high incomes and assets. Some on this thread. But they have more class than to boast about it because that would be shallow, needy and crass.

That’s the meaning of the saying. If you really had wealth you would have heard it.

I see you.

 

[threespires]

Would you say perhaps the 10 richest people in the US have followed Reagonomics in the creation of wealth for themselves and indirectly for their country.

Well I can't speak for those individuals and the effect they've each had but I think the most comprehensive studies including one that covered pretty much everywhere that has tried it, including the US, over a 20 year period concluded that it didn't have the intended effect, the expectations about reinvestment and growth and job creation just don't materialise and what you actually get is increased wealth disparity. I can't remember which state is the poster child for trying aggressive corporate and HNWI etc tax cuts and it screwing themselves over completely, might be Kansas, I'll look it up. I think the conclusions of most of the studies are that if you raise the income of the lower and middle classes this has the most beneficial effect/stimulus in terms of economic growth.

I think one of the issues with the Laffer Curve which is often thrown into this conversation is that it's taken as an article of faith when in reality it was something literally written on a napkin and it's use is so time and place context sensitive as to render it almost meaningless. I do think one of the reasons Reagonomics wasn't dismissed out of hand was because it did actually help him control the inflationary pressures the US economy was under so it seemed to have some value, in reality I think there was a lot of other things in play and a lot of smoke and mirrors - for instance he tripled federal debt in the process which certainly wasn't one of the intended outcomes of his policies.

 

[halfmist]

It’s not a new saying, it’s an old saying. There are plenty of people on this forum with high incomes and assets. Some on this thread. But they have more class than to boast about it because that would be shallow, needy and crass.

That’s the meaning of the saying. If you really had wealth you would have heard it.

I see you.

I am afraid you’re now talking in riddles. If they are wealthy why would they be needy.? “If you really had wealth you would have heard it”. You have no idea of anyone’s income or wealth so why say it. I think we had best leave it there. No need for you to answer.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I am afraid you’re now talking in riddles. If they are wealthy why would they be needy.? “If you really had wealth you would have heard it”. You have no idea of anyone’s income or wealth so why say it. I think we had best leave it there. No need for you to answer.

Money talks. Wealth whispers.