O/T The Royal Wedding

[Airborn Pie]

Stupid conclusion re Thatcher, you really have comprehension issues if that's what you believe. Re Carillion - absolutely that is not what big business should be about (nor what Mrs T would have wanted) and I hope we will see a major shift in the governance, including auditing, of large organisations and the charging of directors who in so many instances get off lightly/scot free only to then set up a similarly named business in the same market.

'70's Britain was all about the worker getting something for nothing, I'm sure not something the Labour government at the time really intended. When Mrs T wanted people do take some responsibilty for themselves instead of looking for handouts from the state she did not intend private business to shaft everyone, it just suited some folks agenda to do just that.

And will somebody please point me to the money tree that will pay for all the ails of the country without producing wealth. Oh yes, Gordon Brown stripped it bare and didn't plant any replacements.

A couple of pennies on income tax would go a very long way but tax rises are anathema to any ruling party it seems.

[Elite_Pie]

Re Carillion - absolutely that is not what big business should be about (nor what Mrs T would have wanted).

You are half right. I agree with the first bit, but there is a balance where big business can make profits but fairly reward the employees (all of them, not just directors and above) who are contributing to making those profits. I disagree with you on Thatcher - her doctrine was reward them if they're on your side, treat them like dirt if they're not. Can you honestly claim that Thatcher had any sort of social conscience or any concern for those unlikely to vote for her whatever their circumstances?

[Old_pie]

You are half right. I agree with the first bit, but there is a balance where big business can make profits but fairly reward the employees (all of them, not just directors and above) who are contributing to making those profits. I disagree with you on Thatcher - her doctrine was reward them if they're on your side, treat them like dirt if they're not. Can you honestly claim that Thatcher had any sort of social conscience or any concern for those unlikely to vote for her whatever their circumstances?

That she made mistakes is undoubtable - so much change was needed, but I'll quote an extract from:

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-vision-legacy

The left rejoiced when she remarked "there is no such thing as society". It seemed to sum up all that her enemies believed of her, and provided a stick with which to beat her. Her meaning was the opposite of what the left claimed. She was objecting to people who used society as an excuse for ignoring their own responsibilities, as when they complain that society shouldn't allow a particular misfortune, while doing nothing to make things better. But, she argued, we are society. It is our responsibility to change it for the better. We are all role models for someone, in our families or communities. Thatcherism emphasised the role of the citizen rather than the role of government in making society better. But it was not a creed of individualism, because she emphasised every person's obligations to neighbours and the wider community.

Google is your friend - Thatcher Social Conscience or similar.

If you want to read about a great leader and the mistakes made then read a biography of Churchill.

People who thought as you choose to were part of the problem not part of the solution.

And Scargill for president - give us a break. Talk about corruption. Without knowing the inside story I'd reckon on Thatcher being one of the least corruptable of leaders, unlike Bliar. I fear we are a big bridge too far apart. But I'd reckon Branson was the sort of entrepeneur that Thatcher would have been hoping would arise out of the depths of despair of the broken '70's Britain and he understood what she was trying to do:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...he-better.html

[Elite_Pie]

People who thought as you choose to were part of the problem not part of the solution.

I don't think you have a clue about my thought process, you appear to be basing it on left wing stereotypes. I agree about personal responsibility. I hate benefit scroungers who want something for nothing, always have and always will. Saying that, any civilised society should have a system in place to help those dealt a sh!t hand by life. A Prime Minister has a personal responsibility to govern for the whole nation, not just the ones who voted them in. If you honestly think Thatcher did that, we'll just have to agree to differ.

[CmonUSexyStylishPies]

Whats clear from this is that Mick Hucknall's lovechild is punching well and truly above his weight.

[lunaspie]

Seems his attendance is in doubt, possibly meaning that neither of the happy couple will have their father present.

Hewitt the nail on the head with that comment.

[MagicBoots]

Anyone else sick and tired of this by now? From programme after programme about it to numerous nauseating articles and interviews of someone who once smelt Markles guff, it's getting ridiculous. It's ok though the royal family (through their back breaking hard work) will pay two million of the wedding and we only have to cover the 30 million security bill. We have people using foodbanks and health services being cut especially mental health (when it's the biggest growing problem because believe it or not modern life is too much for alot of people, we're not computers and you're constantly under pressure with little rest it's too much. I have stage four kidney disease and severe mental health problems and work full time as there's no help and it's getting to much) and yet we have this going on. Plus don't the members of the public invited have to bring their own food?

This country is a disgrace in terms of the haves and have nots. If you grafted and made your money then brilliant, honestly well done, it's the aristocracy and royals get me mad. Like the honeymoon is costing 120,000 and it's a present from Markle to Harry, fine but look at the money 120,000??? How about go on a twenty grand honeymoon and give the other 100,000 to good causes?

What I'm really bothered about is will her Dad attend? I won't be able to sleep till I know for sure.

But are you not pouring petrol on the fire and adding to the debate. If you are sick of hearing about it then don't listen or don't buy the papers that go on about it. I am in the habit now of switching radio stations whenever adverts or royalty crops up. its just filler info we do not need to function. Personally all I want to know is if I get a Bank Holiday out of it !

[i961pie]

I like it, over some heads me thinks

You can't beat the old conspiracy theory, are you million dollar pie in disguise?

[i961pie]

Anyone else sick and tired of this by now? From programme after programme about it to numerous nauseating articles and interviews of someone who once smelt Markles guff, it's getting ridiculous. It's ok though the royal family (through their back breaking hard work) will pay two million of the wedding and we only have to cover the 30 million security bill. We have people using foodbanks and health services being cut especially mental health (when it's the biggest growing problem because believe it or not modern life is too much for alot of people, we're not computers and you're constantly under pressure with little rest it's too much. I have stage four kidney disease and severe mental health problems and work full time as there's no help and it's getting to much) and yet we have this going on. Plus don't the members of the public invited have to bring their own food?

This country is a disgrace in terms of the haves and have nots. If you grafted and made your money then brilliant, honestly well done, it's the aristocracy and royals get me mad. Like the honeymoon is costing 120,000 and it's a present from Markle to Harry, fine but look at the money 120,000??? How about go on a twenty grand honeymoon and give the other 100,000 to good causes?

What I'm really bothered about is will her Dad attend? I won't be able to sleep till I know for sure.

On the other side of the coin everyone is not a republican and the royal family bring joy to millions,( I'm not one of them by the way).
Look how many reporters and film crew from around the world will be there and millions of people from all over the world will be glued to their TVs for hours.
Regarding the cost, just look how much cash will go into the economy, selling souvenirs, memorabilia and all the tourism. Try and book an hotel or guest house in London, plenty of people being employed in catering, pubs will be packed. I won't watch it apart from the news headlines and there is an off button on the TV.

[Trickytreesreds]

[QUOTE=i961pie;38892830]

Anyone else sick and tired of this by now? From programme after programme about it to numerous nauseating articles and interviews of someone who once smelt Markles guff, it's getting ridiculous. It's ok though the royal family (through their back breaking hard work) will pay two million of the wedding and we only have to cover the 30 million security bill. We have people using foodbanks and health services being cut especially mental health (when it's the biggest growing problem because believe it or not modern life is too much for alot of people, we're not computers and you're constantly under pressure with little rest it's too much. I have stage four kidney disease and severe mental health problems and work full time as there's no help and it's getting to much) and yet we have this going on. Plus don't the members of the public invited have to bring their own food?

This country is a disgrace in terms of the haves and have nots. If you grafted and made your money then brilliant, honestly well done, it's the aristocracy and royals get me mad. Like the honeymoon is costing 120,000 and it's a present from Markle to Harry, fine but look at the money 120,000??? How about go on a twenty grand honeymoon and give the other 100,000 to good causes?

What I'm really bothered about is will her Dad attend? I won't be able to sleep till I know for sure.[/QUOTE

On the other side of the coin everyone is not a republican and the royal family bring joy to millions,( I'm not one of them by the way).
Look how many reporters and film crew from around the world will be there and millions of people from all over the world will be glued to their TVs for hours.
Regarding the cost, just look how much cash will go into the economy, selling souvenirs, memorabilia and all the tourism. Try and book an hotel or guest house in London, plenty of people being employed in catering, pubs will be packed. I won't watch it apart from the news headlines and there is an off button on the TV.

I concur.
Yes the family enjoys the rich trappings. But your life isn't yours anymore and it becomes a poison chalice for those not bred into it.
Ask Diana/Fergie/Phillips. This one will bolt at some point.
Used to fame, but not when someone is interested in what your **** smells like, or who tongued you at 9 years old.
Keep it for me.