UK Prime Minister May calls for snap election.

[Paul Weaver]

We recall the Winter of discontent, and British Rail was not that great a service, the Post Office was in charge of the telephone exchange, public services were not efficient with the state running things. The state does not know how to operate a business efficiently in the UK. Competition raised the standards for the former public monopolies, they needed an economic kick up the backside.

Most of us don't. To 'recall' I'm assuming you'll be say 12 in 1978, so born in 1966. That means you'll be over 50 now. There's about 27 million people between 18 and 50. 21 million over 50.

I certainly agree with your point, but there's a lot of young idealistic downtrodden people who have the vote. I don't think there's enough to top the balance to socialism, especially given the tendency for youth not to vote, but another decade and it really will have passed into history.

 

[MacLeod]

I don't remember the winter of discontent, I only know about it from what little I've seen and read about it.

 

[DimesDan]

I was born several years after the Winter of Discontent.

 

[Jim Gamma]

^At least you'd heard of it. (Born 1982, never heard the phrase outside of Shakespeare.)

 

[Nyotarules]

^At least you'd heard of it. (Born 1982, never heard the phrase outside of Shakespeare.)

Proof our education system went pear shaped in the 1990's.

 

[Nyotarules]

I don't remember the winter of discontent, I only know about it from what little I've seen and read about it.

Let's just say there was a reason the Tories curbed union power....

 

[Relayer1]

It was a global crisis linked to the US subprime housing market, all politicians left the financial industry to be unchecked, it happened on Labour's watch would still have happened if the Tories were in charge in 2008 since they really believe in 'the market'.

Exactly.

But Labour got the blame.

Let's just say there was a reason the Tories curbed union power....

Yes. The reason was, they hate unions, consider them disruptive, restrictive, anti business freedom, expensive and uncompetitive. Tories don't like anyone protecting workers rights.

Fortunately for them, the unions HAD got too powerful and carried away with their own importance. This played right into the Tories hands and instead of reigning in the unions, they cut them off at the knees.

It also provided a smokescreen for the staggeringly poor management that plagued British business, whose almost comical ineptness was at least as much of a problem for industry as the unions were.

Sadly, having spent 20 years in a FT Top 100 company, I can report that that hasn't changed much.

 

[Nyotarules]

Most of us don't. To 'recall' I'm assuming you'll be say 12 in 1978, so born in 1966. That means you'll be over 50 now. There's about 27 million people between 18 and 50. 21 million over 50.

I certainly agree with your point, but there's a lot of young idealistic downtrodden people who have the vote. I don't think there's enough to top the balance to socialism, especially given the tendency for youth not to vote, but another decade and it really will have passed into history.

Generally youth tend to be idealistic, since they don't need to consider the costs of things, when they start to earn their own money and deal with real life aka paying bills and taxes then some idealistic things fall by the wayside. (Of course I am generalising about youth and idealism).
Also yes, young people don't vote as much as old people hence tuition fees go up, university grants get cut, but woe betide the politicians who advocates cutting state pensions. The fact is as long as youth do not vote in great rates like old people then politicians will ignore them. The irony is lots of old people have grand children, the way things are the generations are being set against each other.

 

[DimesDan]

^At least you'd heard of it. (Born 1982, never heard the phrase outside of Shakespeare.)

I actually Googled it, I had heard of it, but not in any substantial way and when it actually occurred.

Fortunately for them, the unions HAD got too powerful and carried away with their own importance. This played right into the Tories hands and instead of reigning in the unions, they cut them off at the knees.

Given the way the Unions are like here in Ireland, I wouldn't be surprised if a future Government here curtailed some of their powers.

 

[MacLeod]

Exactly.

But Labour got the blame.



Yes. The reason was, they hate unions, consider them disruptive, restrictive, anti business freedom, expensive and uncompetitive. Tories don't like anyone protecting workers rights.

Fortunately for them, the unions HAD got too powerful and carried away with their own importance. This played right into the Tories hands and instead of reigning in the unions, they cut them off at the knees.

It also provided a smokescreen for the staggeringly poor management that plagued British business, whose almost comical ineptness was at least as much of a problem for industry as the unions were.

Sadly, having spent 20 years in a FT Top 100 company, I can report that that hasn't changed much.

There is plenty of blame to go around between both side s, management be it in the private or public sector and the unions.

 

[Nyotarules]

Fortunately for them, the unions HAD got too powerful and carried away with their own importance. This played right into the Tories hands and instead of reigning in the unions, they cut them off at the knees.

It also provided a smokescreen for the staggeringly poor management that plagued British business, whose almost comical ineptness was at least as much of a problem for industry as the unions were.

Sadly, having spent 20 years in a FT Top 100 company, I can report that that hasn't changed much.

Sadly both sides were as bad as each other. (Remember British Leyland and when the U.K had a national car industry?)) Its probably why the right hate public sector industries since the union are fairly strong there and the left gives the impression they hate businesses. Its only last week I heard Corbyn say something positive about protecting the small business sector. Traditionally, left wing dogma sees all businesses as exploiters of the proletariat, some of them are stuck in a 19th century Marxist view of the world.
And the right wing anti Bretxiteers are salivating at the mouth to get rid of EU legislation that protects workers' rights.

 

[Nyotarules]

Sigh Mr Corbyn,

You want to ban present day trade union legislation? I can understand you have their support and need their money to keep Labour going. But be realistic, it is not 1977 anymore, the world has drastically changed. Having an economy where people can go on strike at the drop of a hat, helps who exactly? Yes curb the excess of exploitation of workers with zero hours contract (btw some employees like em and want them) but don't exchange one excess with another.
This is one reason why, unless the Tory party and SNP are assimilated by the Borg, you will not be Prime Minister June 9th.
Like it or not Mr Corbyn you need private businesses, they make the money to fund a nations economy. Only a developing nation keeps people employed with almost everyone working for the state and producing nothing but high inflation.

 

[Paul Weaver]

The great thing about the EU protections is even if we get an anti-worker party in power, it really limits the damage they can do.

I can see why Gove and Hunt are against the EU, I don't understand why those allegedly on the left like Corbyn are against it.

 

[MacLeod]

I think you'll find a wide spread of view points on the EU. It's likely some eurosceptics vote to remain despite reservations they might have about the direction of the EU.

 

[Relayer1]

You want to ban present day trade union legislation? I can understand you have their support and need their money to keep Labour going. But be realistic, it is not 1977 anymore, the world has drastically changed. Having an economy where people can go on strike at the drop of a hat, helps who exactly?

Why does it have to be like that ?

The current legislation makes it near impossible to have an official strike. At best you get to strike once you've had a secret ballot with a greater degree of rigour than the average general election, with a higher success threshold too. You have to give so much notice the company can pretty much plan around the strike which negates it's effectiveness anyway.

This has directly led to the current low wage, low job security, zero hours, gig economy free for all we are currently enjoying.

No one is seriously calling for instant walkouts on a disputed show of hands, nor thousands of flying pickets or pitch battles with mounted police. Just loosening of the regulation so that unions CAN protect victimised or abused workers against harassment, mandate fair contracts, ensure reasonable levels of pay and help enforce safety at work.

At the moment unions (where they are recognised) pretty much have to work in an advisory capacity. They need to have the right to say 'No' when warranted.

 

[MacLeod]

More working days are lost due to strike action in the public sector than in the private sector. Despite having a smilliar number of stopages.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan.../latest#disputes-by-public-and-private-sector

Everyone wants higher wages but in order for higher wages we have to pay for it somewhere along the lines, higher wages in the public sector either have to come from borrowing, higher taxes, staff cuts or cutting something elsewhere in the public (i.e. government finances). Higher wages in the private sector come through either smaller profits, staff cuts or increasing the price of goods/services to cover them.

 

[Relayer1]

Well, in a truly growing economy, increased consumer demand leads in the private sector to increased production, increased profits and wages leading to increased tax revenue to pay for public sector increases.

It's kind of circular, and it's why austerity doesn't work.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Well, in a truly growing economy, increased consumer demand leads in the private sector to increased production, increased profits and wages leading to increased tax revenue to pay for public sector increases.

It's kind of circular, and it's why austerity doesn't work.

Exactly, but the word "austerity" appeals to sociopathic, sadistic Daily Mail readers and the "beat me on the bottom, nanny, because I've been a naughty boy and deserve punishing" traditional Tory brigade -- only the latter aren't the people who end up getting the thrashing.

 

[Spot261]

Exactly, but the word "austerity" appeals to sociopathic, sadistic Daily Mail readers and the "beat me on the bottom, nanny, because I've been a naughty boy and deserve punishing" traditional Tory brigade -- only the latter aren't the people who end up getting the thrashing.

No, they just pay single mothers to deliver it

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

No, they just pay single mothers to deliver it

Ah, so their new economic model delivers jobs as promised?