Meet Swingers

Site Stats

Members:
1,389,800
Online Now:
1,999
Msgs Sent:
157,443,049
Photo Ads:
745,626
User Pics:
579,536
Video Chat:
170

 

30th Aug 2010 - 9:19pm
Staggerlee_BB's AvatarStaggerlee_BBGodlike
Joined:
14 Jun 2007
Posts:
2849
Location:
Cahoots
ProfilePM
Bluefish2009 wrote:

s3xyl3xy wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:



Only at the start

*QUOTE* Public opinion during the strike was divided and varied greatly in different regions. When asked in a Gallup poll in July 1984 whether their sympathies lay mainly with the employers or the miners, 40% said employers; 33% were for the miners; 19% were for neither and 8% did not know. When asked the same question during 5--10 December 1984, 51% had most sympathy for the employers; 26% for the miners; 18% for neither and 5% did not know.[27] When asked in July 1984 whether they approved or disapproved of the methods used by the miners, 15% approved; 79% disapproved and 6% did not know. When asked the same question during 5--10 December 1984, 7% approved; 88% disapproved and 5% did not know.[27] In July 1984, when asked whether they thought the miners were using responsible or irresponsible methods, 12% said responsible; 78% said irresponsible and 10% did not know. When asked the same question in August 1984, 9% said responsible; 84% said irresponsible and 7% did not know.

A taxi driver, David Wilkie, was killed on 30 November 1984. He had been taking a non-striking miner to work in the Merthyr Vale Colliery, South Wales when two striking miners dropped a concrete post onto his car from a road bridge above. He died at the scene. The two miners served a prison sentence for manslaughter.
From here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_miners%27_strike_%281984%E2%80%931985%29

And as I said earlier, due the these and other reasons the country lost sympathy's with the strikers.


I think the key words here are "varied greatly in different regions" Take a poll one day in one place and you will get one lot of responses, do the same thing again the next day somewhere else and get something different altogether.

The incident with the taxi driver was horrendous and those two men deserved to go to jail, but that was just two men out of all the striking miners and what do the media do, they milk it for all it's worth. If anything swayed public opinion it was the planting of the false stories about Scargill apparently being funded Colonel Gadafi! The story was planted in the Mirror and it was well known that Maxwell hated Scargill with a vengeance. It was decided by MI5 that planting the story in a "Labour" sympathetic paper would without doubt add to its credibility.

Dame Stella Rimington (Director-General of MI5, 1992 -- 1996) published an autobiography in 2001 in which she revealed MI5 'counter-subversion' exercises against the NUM and the striking miners.


I do not think either side can hold the morral high ground, I can only tell you the stickers lost the support of much of the country with the under hand tack ticks that they employed.

What makes me chuckle is the fact that one side of the story is is whiter than white and the other is all made up by the media and some conspiracy theory. By the end of the strike, the miners had virtually no media support, and that was plain and simple down to them and their miss-guided tack ticks, not a conspiracy.


I don't think anyone has made any such claim....other than those against the strike..I've said it was badly managed and the violence from both sides was wrong..awayman has made similar comments..as has s3xy...the only ones claiming any kind of moral high ground it would appear are you and Ken....

 

30th Aug 2010 - 9:24pm
s3xyl3xy's Avatars3xyl3xyBoy, can I type!
Joined:
2 Apr 2005
Posts:
104
Location:
-
ProfilePM
@Bluefish - Noone is saying that the miners and the unions were whiter than white but it all certainly did not go down in the way the media portrayed it. No conspiracy theories either, just facts especially in terms of what MI5 had a hand in and in terms of the provocation and heavyhandedness from the police.

@Kentswingers - I don't quite get how this friend of yours can laugh his head off so much at some of the opinions you have relayed to him today The contents of his books are clearly not as "impartial" as you make them out to be. And btw my opinions have nothing to do with Thatcher and the Tories, why do people always assume that, I have my own mind and am not influenced by any political bias.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 9:57pm
Too Hot's AvatarToo HotSuper human rambling
Joined:
7 Oct 2005
Posts:
788
Location:
North West
ProfilePM
Well I have not written any books but as a 24 year old at the time I watched fascinated as the Miners fought to keep unprofitable pits open, to keep outdated working processes and massive inefficies in the workplace. They lost big time and our country was better because of that.

This forum seems to be full of hyped up lefties with no concept of moving on in life and natural evolution. I find it incomprehensible that some people just can't accept that things in life change and shit happens all the time. Moaning and bleating about it 25 years later is just bollocks. Why on earth should dirty, filthy, stinking mines that could not turn a profit be kept open just to keep people in a job? That is why we have no industrial capacity anymore in this country - the Unions forced uneconomic practices in the motor indudtry, steel, mining and shipping - and now its all gone to countries with a more progressive attitide to industrial evolution.

Shit happens unfortunately but you can't do what the Miners did especially with a Prime Minister like we had at the time.

Embrace change, rejoice in the challenge.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:13pm
flower411's Avatarflower411Godlike
Joined:
18 Dec 2005
Posts:
6839
Location:
here and there
ProfilePM
Too Hot wrote:

Well I have not written any books but as a 24 year old at the time I watched fascinated as the Miners fought to keep unprofitable pits open, to keep outdated working processes and massive inefficies in the workplace. They lost big time and our country was better because of that.

This forum seems to be full of hyped up lefties with no concept of moving on in life and natural evolution. I find it incomprehensible that some people just can't accept that things in life change and shit happens all the time. Moaning and bleating about it 25 years later is just bollocks. Why on earth should dirty, filthy, stinking mines that could not turn a profit be kept open just to keep people in a job? That is why we have no industrial capacity anymore in this country - the Unions forced uneconomic practices in the motor indudtry, steel, mining and shipping - and now its all gone to countries with a more progressive attitide to industrial evolution.

Shit happens unfortunately but you can't do what the Miners did especially with a Prime Minister like we had at the time.

Embrace change, rejoice in the challenge.


I was always under the impression that other European mining was being subsidised which was why our mining industry was struggling ... and subsidising essential services was deemed a good idea by other European economies because it was cheaper than paying unemployment ....But then that might be why other european countries are now buying up our essential services ....electricity.....gas ... and stuff ...

But then .. I may be wrong .

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:16pm
kentswingers777's Avatarkentswingers777Godlike
Joined:
14 Dec 2005
Posts:
8462
Location:
-
ProfilePM
Staggerlee_BB wrote:

Really you need to be more specific ...which views ?? what aspect of them ??...I wont ask for the titles of the books...we don't want you indirectly naming someone



Been done to death Staggs, as you well know.

I would not have named the books.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:26pm
s3xyl3xy's Avatars3xyl3xyBoy, can I type!
Joined:
2 Apr 2005
Posts:
104
Location:
-
ProfilePM
Too Hot wrote:

Well I have not written any books but as a 24 year old at the time I watched fascinated as the Miners fought to keep unprofitable pits open, to keep outdated working processes and massive inefficies in the workplace. They lost big time and our country was better because of that.

This forum seems to be full of hyped up lefties with no concept of moving on in life and natural evolution. I find it incomprehensible that some people just can't accept that things in life change and shit happens all the time. Moaning and bleating about it 25 years later is just bollocks. Why on earth should dirty, filthy, stinking mines that could not turn a profit be kept open just to keep people in a job? That is why we have no industrial capacity anymore in this country - the Unions forced uneconomic practices in the motor indudtry, steel, mining and shipping - and now its all gone to countries with a more progressive attitide to industrial evolution.

Shit happens unfortunately but you can't do what the Miners did especially with a Prime Minister like we had at the time.

Embrace change, rejoice in the challenge.


Some may have been unprofitable but pits do not always remain as such. This article makes interesting reading.

http://www.bygonederbyshire.co.uk/stories/8203-Miners-Strike-1984-85-Dennis-Skinner/article-1798014-detail/article.html

He made the point in the Commons on the 25th anniversary of the start of the miners’ strike in March. He told MPs that Britain would have been better off if the Tories had not closed the pits and, instead, used UK coal supplies.

'The legacy is we’re now relying on countries we don’t trust to supply our energy,” Dennis said. “Privatisation means energy companies are often not even owned by people in Britain. We should have used the energy underneath our feet and saved our North Sea oil for a rainy day.'

Dennis feels common sense was pushed aside in the frenetic push to crush the unions.

'In mining you are battling against Mother Nature. Sometimes you come across a white face caused by a collapse in the strata and a pit would become uneconomic. But that can change. A pit may have a bad year, then find a new seam and have 30 more good years. Also, when the closures began, we had already developed and opened a clean coal plant. But when you are involved in revenge, when you are determined to do better than Ted Heath and tame the miners, rationalisation and reason go out of the window.'


Besides which closing the pits has scored the UK an almighty own goal. As I posted earlier in the thread as a result of the impending energy crisis we are now at risk of being held to ransom by Poland and other countries who are supplying us.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:35pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
4359
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
s3xyl3xy wrote:

@Bluefish - Noone is saying that the miners and the unions were whiter than white but it all certainly did not go down in the way the media portrayed it. No conspiracy theories either, just facts especially in terms of what MI5 had a hand in and in terms of the provocation and heavyhandedness from the police.

@Kentswingers - I don't quite get how this friend of yours can laugh his head off so much at some of the opinions you have relayed to him today The contents of his books are clearly not as "impartial" as you make them out to be. And btw my opinions have nothing to do with Thatcher and the Tories, why do people always assume that, I have my own mind and am not influenced by any political bias.


Yes and I, have stuck to the facts also dunno.gif

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:38pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
4359
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
s3xyl3xy wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

Well I have not written any books but as a 24 year old at the time I watched fascinated as the Miners fought to keep unprofitable pits open, to keep outdated working processes and massive inefficies in the workplace. They lost big time and our country was better because of that.

This forum seems to be full of hyped up lefties with no concept of moving on in life and natural evolution. I find it incomprehensible that some people just can't accept that things in life change and shit happens all the time. Moaning and bleating about it 25 years later is just bollocks. Why on earth should dirty, filthy, stinking mines that could not turn a profit be kept open just to keep people in a job? That is why we have no industrial capacity anymore in this country - the Unions forced uneconomic practices in the motor indudtry, steel, mining and shipping - and now its all gone to countries with a more progressive attitide to industrial evolution.

Shit happens unfortunately but you can't do what the Miners did especially with a Prime Minister like we had at the time.

Embrace change, rejoice in the challenge.


Some may have been unprofitable but pits do not always remain as such. This article makes interesting reading.

http://www.bygonederbyshire.co.uk/stories/8203-Miners-Strike-1984-85-Dennis-Skinner/article-1798014-detail/article.html

He made the point in the Commons on the 25th anniversary of the start of the miners’ strike in March. He told MPs that Britain would have been better off if the Tories had not closed the pits and, instead, used UK coal supplies.

'The legacy is we’re now relying on countries we don’t trust to supply our energy,” Dennis said. “Privatisation means energy companies are often not even owned by people in Britain. We should have used the energy underneath our feet and saved our North Sea oil for a rainy day.'

Dennis feels common sense was pushed aside in the frenetic push to crush the unions.

'In mining you are battling against Mother Nature. Sometimes you come across a white face caused by a collapse in the strata and a pit would become uneconomic. But that can change. A pit may have a bad year, then find a new seam and have 30 more good years. Also, when the closures began, we had already developed and opened a clean coal plant. But when you are involved in revenge, when you are determined to do better than Ted Heath and tame the miners, rationalisation and reason go out of the window.'


Besides which closing the pits has scored the UK an almighty own goal. As I posted earlier in the thread as a result of the impending energy crisis we are now at risk of being held to ransom by Poland and other countries who are supplying us.


Time to look to the future and greener methods of electricity production, rather than carbon based fuels, for the sake of the planet

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:41pm
Too Hot's AvatarToo HotSuper human rambling
Joined:
7 Oct 2005
Posts:
788
Location:
North West
ProfilePM
OK - If you can buy coal - for the sake of argument:

1) For £15 / tonne from Australia
2) For £12 / tonne from Poland
3) For £20 / tonne from UK

Where would you get your coal from?

Fact is coal could (and still can) be mined and shipped half way around the world cheaper than it could have been taken out of the UK mines because of outdated and uneconomic working practices.

So ---- Why keep an outdated and filthy industry that pollutes and contributes massively to Global Warming?

The UK was unprepared for the arrival of the global economy. The Unions fought to keep and enhance protectionist working practices whilst Japanese factories churned out motor vehicles with barely a human interaction and ships manned with "cheap" crews took all of the UK freight and inexpensive coal from overseas made our mines uneconomical to keep open.

Industrial evolution and global economics - not appreciating these issues is common amongst the socialist working class because of long standing beliefs that Britain is truly great. It was, not anymore though.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:41pm
Staggerlee_BB's AvatarStaggerlee_BBGodlike
Joined:
14 Jun 2007
Posts:
2849
Location:
Cahoots
ProfilePM
kentswingers777 wrote:

Staggerlee_BB wrote:

Really you need to be more specific ...which views ?? what aspect of them ??...I wont ask for the titles of the books...we don't want you indirectly naming someone



Been done to death Staggs, as you well know.

I would not have named the books.


So do you know which opinions and the specifics of his objections or not?

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:48pm
flower411's Avatarflower411Godlike
Joined:
18 Dec 2005
Posts:
6839
Location:
here and there
ProfilePM
Too Hot wrote:

OK - If you can buy coal - for the sake of argument:

1) For £15 / tonne from Australia
2) For £12 / tonne from Poland
3) For £20 / tonne from UK

Where would you get your coal from?

Fact is coal could (and still can) be mined and shipped half way around the world cheaper than it could have been taken out of the UK mines because of outdated and uneconomic working practices.

So ---- Why keep an outdated and filthy industry that pollutes and contributes massively to Global Warming?

The UK was unprepared for the arrival of the global economy. The Unions fought to keep and enhance protectionist working practices whilst Japanese factories churned out motor vehicles with barely a human interaction and ships manned with "cheap" crews took all of the UK freight and inexpensive coal from overseas made our mines uneconomical to keep open.

Industrial evolution and global economics - not appreciating these issues is common amongst the socialist working class because of long standing beliefs that Britain is truly great. It was, not anymore though.


Same answer from me I`m afraid .......

It was my understanding that all of the competion was from countries that subsidised their mining industries because it made economic sense to support them rather than paying unemployment ..

As I stated ....I may be wrong but the fact that you`ve completely ignored any of the answers given after your last post, kinda suggests that you have no argument ..

Of course coal is cheaper from countries that support their essential industries through subsidies ....Dur !!

It`s the idiots who fail to see that subsidy is better than unemployment who lose out in the end .

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:49pm
Staggerlee_BB's AvatarStaggerlee_BBGodlike
Joined:
14 Jun 2007
Posts:
2849
Location:
Cahoots
ProfilePM
Bluefish2009 wrote:

s3xyl3xy wrote:

@Bluefish - Noone is saying that the miners and the unions were whiter than white but it all certainly did not go down in the way the media portrayed it. No conspiracy theories either, just facts especially in terms of what MI5 had a hand in and in terms of the provocation and heavyhandedness from the police.

@Kentswingers - I don't quite get how this friend of yours can laugh his head off so much at some of the opinions you have relayed to him today The contents of his books are clearly not as "impartial" as you make them out to be. And btw my opinions have nothing to do with Thatcher and the Tories, why do people always assume that, I have my own mind and am not influenced by any political bias.


Yes and I, have stuck to the facts also dunno.gif


Thing is blue no-one as far as I can recall has questioned your facts...you only seem to accept that there was one side to the story as does Ken...Those of us who supported the miners have had to be more critical of our view because of the failure of the strike ,it still looks as if those of you who opposed them have made no attempt to re-evaluate your view or to accept that both sides made 'mistakes' (for want of a better word)

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:50pm
s3xyl3xy's Avatars3xyl3xyBoy, can I type!
Joined:
2 Apr 2005
Posts:
104
Location:
-
ProfilePM
Bluefish2009 wrote:

s3xyl3xy wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

Well I have not written any books but as a 24 year old at the time I watched fascinated as the Miners fought to keep unprofitable pits open, to keep outdated working processes and massive inefficies in the workplace. They lost big time and our country was better because of that.

This forum seems to be full of hyped up lefties with no concept of moving on in life and natural evolution. I find it incomprehensible that some people just can't accept that things in life change and shit happens all the time. Moaning and bleating about it 25 years later is just bollocks. Why on earth should dirty, filthy, stinking mines that could not turn a profit be kept open just to keep people in a job? That is why we have no industrial capacity anymore in this country - the Unions forced uneconomic practices in the motor indudtry, steel, mining and shipping - and now its all gone to countries with a more progressive attitide to industrial evolution.

Shit happens unfortunately but you can't do what the Miners did especially with a Prime Minister like we had at the time.

Embrace change, rejoice in the challenge.


Some may have been unprofitable but pits do not always remain as such. This article makes interesting reading.

http://www.bygonederbyshire.co.uk/stories/8203-Miners-Strike-1984-85-Dennis-Skinner/article-1798014-detail/article.html

He made the point in the Commons on the 25th anniversary of the start of the miners’ strike in March. He told MPs that Britain would have been better off if the Tories had not closed the pits and, instead, used UK coal supplies.

'The legacy is we’re now relying on countries we don’t trust to supply our energy,” Dennis said. “Privatisation means energy companies are often not even owned by people in Britain. We should have used the energy underneath our feet and saved our North Sea oil for a rainy day.'

Dennis feels common sense was pushed aside in the frenetic push to crush the unions.

'In mining you are battling against Mother Nature. Sometimes you come across a white face caused by a collapse in the strata and a pit would become uneconomic. But that can change. A pit may have a bad year, then find a new seam and have 30 more good years. Also, when the closures began, we had already developed and opened a clean coal plant. But when you are involved in revenge, when you are determined to do better than Ted Heath and tame the miners, rationalisation and reason go out of the window.'


Besides which closing the pits has scored the UK an almighty own goal. As I posted earlier in the thread as a result of the impending energy crisis we are now at risk of being held to ransom by Poland and other countries who are supplying us.


Time to look to the future and greener methods of electricity production, rather than carbon based fuels, for the sake of the planet


I totally agree. Heard of clean coal technology? If costs for carbon storage and sequestration can be brought down it's an ideal solution.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 10:58pm
Too Hot's AvatarToo HotSuper human rambling
Joined:
7 Oct 2005
Posts:
788
Location:
North West
ProfilePM
flower411 wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

OK - If you can buy coal - for the sake of argument:

1) For £15 / tonne from Australia
2) For £12 / tonne from Poland
3) For £20 / tonne from UK

Where would you get your coal from?

Fact is coal could (and still can) be mined and shipped half way around the world cheaper than it could have been taken out of the UK mines because of outdated and uneconomic working practices.

So ---- Why keep an outdated and filthy industry that pollutes and contributes massively to Global Warming?

The UK was unprepared for the arrival of the global economy. The Unions fought to keep and enhance protectionist working practices whilst Japanese factories churned out motor vehicles with barely a human interaction and ships manned with "cheap" crews took all of the UK freight and inexpensive coal from overseas made our mines uneconomical to keep open.

Industrial evolution and global economics - not appreciating these issues is common amongst the socialist working class because of long standing beliefs that Britain is truly great. It was, not anymore though.


Same answer from me I`m afraid .......

It was my understanding that all of the competion was from countries that subsidised their mining industries because it made economic sense to support them rather than paying unemployment ..

As I stated ....I may be wrong but the fact that you`ve completely ignored any of the answers given after your last post, kinda suggests that you have no argument ..

Of course coal is cheaper from countries that support their essential industries through subsidies ....Dur !!

It`s the idiots who fail to see that subsidy is better than unemployment who lose out in the end .


I think you will find that we have all lost out.

We have no motor industry, no shipping industry and virtually all heavy industry (steel, shipbuilding etc) has gone.

I think you will find that Australia and Poland could (and still can) extract coal and ship it to the UK cheaper than it could be dug from our ground because of a number of facts including shallow seams and efficient working methods.

You are just deluded to think that the Unions have done any good at all for this country. They should have been smashed in the 1970's and we could have had a chance to maintain some industrial dignity instead of losing everything to countries who were eager to work and di9d not demand the same outdated conditions that were being demanded at the time here in the UK.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 11:04pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
4359
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
Staggerlee_BB wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

s3xyl3xy wrote:

@Bluefish - Noone is saying that the miners and the unions were whiter than white but it all certainly did not go down in the way the media portrayed it. No conspiracy theories either, just facts especially in terms of what MI5 had a hand in and in terms of the provocation and heavyhandedness from the police.

@Kentswingers - I don't quite get how this friend of yours can laugh his head off so much at some of the opinions you have relayed to him today The contents of his books are clearly not as "impartial" as you make them out to be. And btw my opinions have nothing to do with Thatcher and the Tories, why do people always assume that, I have my own mind and am not influenced by any political bias.


Yes and I, have stuck to the facts also dunno.gif


Thing is blue no-one as far as I can recall has questioned your facts...you only seem to accept that there was one side to the story as does Ken...Those of us who supported the miners have had to be more critical of our view because of the failure of the strike ,it still looks as if those of you who opposed them have made no attempt to re-evaluate your view or to accept that both sides made 'mistakes' (for want of a better word)


I am a human, with all the same compassion's you have, I also have many sympathies with the individuals and families involved. I also fully understand that mistakes were made by both sides. But that still does not change how I view what I see, just as you view things from your angle

 

30th Aug 2010 - 11:07pm
kentswingers777's Avatarkentswingers777Godlike
Joined:
14 Dec 2005
Posts:
8462
Location:
-
ProfilePM
Staggerlee_BB wrote:

kentswingers777 wrote:

Staggerlee_BB wrote:

Really you need to be more specific ...which views ?? what aspect of them ??...I wont ask for the titles of the books...we don't want you indirectly naming someone



Been done to death Staggs, as you well know.

I would not have named the books.


So do you know which opinions and the specifics of his objections or not?


No.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 11:08pm
flower411's Avatarflower411Godlike
Joined:
18 Dec 2005
Posts:
6839
Location:
here and there
ProfilePM
Too Hot wrote:

flower411 wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

OK - If you can buy coal - for the sake of argument:

1) For £15 / tonne from Australia
2) For £12 / tonne from Poland
3) For £20 / tonne from UK

Where would you get your coal from?

Fact is coal could (and still can) be mined and shipped half way around the world cheaper than it could have been taken out of the UK mines because of outdated and uneconomic working practices.

So ---- Why keep an outdated and filthy industry that pollutes and contributes massively to Global Warming?

The UK was unprepared for the arrival of the global economy. The Unions fought to keep and enhance protectionist working practices whilst Japanese factories churned out motor vehicles with barely a human interaction and ships manned with "cheap" crews took all of the UK freight and inexpensive coal from overseas made our mines uneconomical to keep open.

Industrial evolution and global economics - not appreciating these issues is common amongst the socialist working class because of long standing beliefs that Britain is truly great. It was, not anymore though.


Same answer from me I`m afraid .......

It was my understanding that all of the competion was from countries that subsidised their mining industries because it made economic sense to support them rather than paying unemployment ..

As I stated ....I may be wrong but the fact that you`ve completely ignored any of the answers given after your last post, kinda suggests that you have no argument ..

Of course coal is cheaper from countries that support their essential industries through subsidies ....Dur !!

It`s the idiots who fail to see that subsidy is better than unemployment who lose out in the end .


I think you will find that we have all lost out.

We have no motor industry, no shipping industry and virtually all heavy industry (steel, shipbuilding etc) has gone.

I think you will find that Australia and Poland could (and still can) extract coal and ship it to the UK cheaper than it could be dug from our ground because of a number of facts including shallow seams and efficient working methods.

You are just deluded to think that the Unions have done any good at all for this country. They should have been smashed in the 1970's and we could have had a chance to maintain some industrial dignity instead of losing everything to countries who were eager to work and di9d not demand the same outdated conditions that were being demanded at the time here in the UK.



When the fuck did I say that the unions had done any good for this country ????

I`m interested that you seem to think that Australia and Poland were and are exporting coal without subsidy from their governments ....

You may be right ....I`m winging it here .... but I`m sure that I`ve heard different.

 

30th Aug 2010 - 11:09pm
Staggerlee_BB's AvatarStaggerlee_BBGodlike
Joined:
14 Jun 2007
Posts:
2849
Location:
Cahoots
ProfilePM
Too Hot wrote:

flower411 wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

OK - If you can buy coal - for the sake of argument:

1) For £15 / tonne from Australia
2) For £12 / tonne from Poland
3) For £20 / tonne from UK

Where would you get your coal from?

Fact is coal could (and still can) be mined and shipped half way around the world cheaper than it could have been taken out of the UK mines because of outdated and uneconomic working practices.

So ---- Why keep an outdated and filthy industry that pollutes and contributes massively to Global Warming?

The UK was unprepared for the arrival of the global economy. The Unions fought to keep and enhance protectionist working practices whilst Japanese factories churned out motor vehicles with barely a human interaction and ships manned with "cheap" crews took all of the UK freight and inexpensive coal from overseas made our mines uneconomical to keep open.

Industrial evolution and global economics - not appreciating these issues is common amongst the socialist working class because of long standing beliefs that Britain is truly great. It was, not anymore though.


Same answer from me I`m afraid .......

It was my understanding that all of the competion was from countries that subsidised their mining industries because it made economic sense to support them rather than paying unemployment ..

As I stated ....I may be wrong but the fact that you`ve completely ignored any of the answers given after your last post, kinda suggests that you have no argument ..

Of course coal is cheaper from countries that support their essential industries through subsidies ....Dur !!

It`s the idiots who fail to see that subsidy is better than unemployment who lose out in the end .


I think you will find that we have all lost out.

We have no motor industry, no shipping industry and virtually all heavy industry (steel, shipbuilding etc) has gone.

I think you will find that Australia and Poland could (and still can) extract coal and ship it to the UK cheaper than it could be dug from our ground because of a number of facts including shallow seams and efficient working methods.

You are just deluded to think that the Unions have done any good at all for this country. They should have been smashed in the 1970's and we could have had a chance to maintain some industrial dignity instead of losing everything to countries who were eager to work and di9d not demand the same outdated conditions that were being demanded at the time here in the UK.


Who decimated the steel industry ?? the unions didn't close one single foundry forge or rolling mill
Who decimated the mining industry??the unions didn't close one single pit
Who closed the car factories?the cotton mills?name me one single factory that has been closed by a union ??
Where is the dignity of working as slave labour for a pittance...if the unions fought for decent wages and conditions well done to them,it's a damn shame that the third world countries who sell us cheap goods made by children for penny a day wages don't have similar organisations...If we can't compete perhaps we should try to raise their working classes to our level rather than insisting our working classes are lowered to theirs

Last edited by on 30th Aug 2010 - 11:14pm; edited 1 time in total

 

30th Aug 2010 - 11:13pm
s3xyl3xy's Avatars3xyl3xyBoy, can I type!
Joined:
2 Apr 2005
Posts:
104
Location:
-
ProfilePM
Too Hot wrote:

flower411 wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

OK - If you can buy coal - for the sake of argument:

1) For £15 / tonne from Australia
2) For £12 / tonne from Poland
3) For £20 / tonne from UK

Where would you get your coal from?

Fact is coal could (and still can) be mined and shipped half way around the world cheaper than it could have been taken out of the UK mines because of outdated and uneconomic working practices.

So ---- Why keep an outdated and filthy industry that pollutes and contributes massively to Global Warming?

The UK was unprepared for the arrival of the global economy. The Unions fought to keep and enhance protectionist working practices whilst Japanese factories churned out motor vehicles with barely a human interaction and ships manned with "cheap" crews took all of the UK freight and inexpensive coal from overseas made our mines uneconomical to keep open.

Industrial evolution and global economics - not appreciating these issues is common amongst the socialist working class because of long standing beliefs that Britain is truly great. It was, not anymore though.


Same answer from me I`m afraid .......

It was my understanding that all of the competion was from countries that subsidised their mining industries because it made economic sense to support them rather than paying unemployment ..

As I stated ....I may be wrong but the fact that you`ve completely ignored any of the answers given after your last post, kinda suggests that you have no argument ..

Of course coal is cheaper from countries that support their essential industries through subsidies ....Dur !!

It`s the idiots who fail to see that subsidy is better than unemployment who lose out in the end .


I think you will find that we have all lost out.

We have no motor industry, no shipping industry and virtually all heavy industry (steel, shipbuilding etc) has gone.

I think you will find that Australia and Poland could (and still can) extract coal and ship it to the UK cheaper than it could be dug from our ground because of a number of facts including shallow seams and efficient working methods.

You are just deluded to think that the Unions have done any good at all for this country. They should have been smashed in the 1970's and we could have had a chance to maintain some industrial dignity instead of losing everything to countries who were eager to work and di9d not demand the same outdated conditions that were being demanded at the time here in the UK.


Jeezus H Christ if you really think that then there is not a hope that we would have a minimum wage in this country, there would be no such thing as the Working Time Directive etc. We'd be back to sending our kids up chimneys, cleaning the soot from our imported coal!

 

30th Aug 2010 - 11:15pm
s3xyl3xy's Avatars3xyl3xyBoy, can I type!
Joined:
2 Apr 2005
Posts:
104
Location:
-
ProfilePM
Staggerlee_BB wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

flower411 wrote:

Too Hot wrote:

OK - If you can buy coal - for the sake of argument:

1) For £15 / tonne from Australia
2) For £12 / tonne from Poland
3) For £20 / tonne from UK

Where would you get your coal from?

Fact is coal could (and still can) be mined and shipped half way around the world cheaper than it could have been taken out of the UK mines because of outdated and uneconomic working practices.

So ---- Why keep an outdated and filthy industry that pollutes and contributes massively to Global Warming?

The UK was unprepared for the arrival of the global economy. The Unions fought to keep and enhance protectionist working practices whilst Japanese factories churned out motor vehicles with barely a human interaction and ships manned with "cheap" crews took all of the UK freight and inexpensive coal from overseas made our mines uneconomical to keep open.

Industrial evolution and global economics - not appreciating these issues is common amongst the socialist working class because of long standing beliefs that Britain is truly great. It was, not anymore though.


Same answer from me I`m afraid .......

It was my understanding that all of the competion was from countries that subsidised their mining industries because it made economic sense to support them rather than paying unemployment ..

As I stated ....I may be wrong but the fact that you`ve completely ignored any of the answers given after your last post, kinda suggests that you have no argument ..

Of course coal is cheaper from countries that support their essential industries through subsidies ....Dur !!

It`s the idiots who fail to see that subsidy is better than unemployment who lose out in the end .


I think you will find that we have all lost out.

We have no motor industry, no shipping industry and virtually all heavy industry (steel, shipbuilding etc) has gone.

I think you will find that Australia and Poland could (and still can) extract coal and ship it to the UK cheaper than it could be dug from our ground because of a number of facts including shallow seams and efficient working methods.

You are just deluded to think that the Unions have done any good at all for this country. They should have been smashed in the 1970's and we could have had a chance to maintain some industrial dignity instead of losing everything to countries who were eager to work and di9d not demand the same outdated conditions that were being demanded at the time here in the UK.


Who decimated the steel industry ?? the unions didn't close one single foundry forge or rolling mill
Who decimated the mining industry??the unions didn't close one single pit
Who closed the car factories?the cotton mills?name me one single factory that has been closed by a union ??
Where is the dignity of working as slave labour for a pittance...if the unions fought for decent wages and conditions well done to them,it's a damn shame that the third world countries who sell us cheap goods made by children for penny a day wages don't similar organisations...If we can't compete perhaps we should try to raise their working classes to our level rather than insisting our working classes are lowered to theirs


thumbup.gif