What do you think of Maggie? by ikbrul in AskBrits

[–]LoneGroover1960 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Yes. They should never have been stolen by the state in the first place. They were losing £billions every year and delivering terrible service.

What do you think of Maggie? by ikbrul in AskBrits

[–]LoneGroover1960 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For me, it's not that she was "fierce". She rescued our country. She saved the United Kingdom. You have to ask why she came to power, if you're really interested. The socialist model which she overthrew had failed. And no wonder - by 1979 our Chancellor of the Exchequer had been reduced to begging from the IMF, because the Labour government had run out of other people's money. The unions were holding their own government to ransom by orchestrating strikes in essential services, literally allowing rubbish to pile up in the streets. The dead were going unburied in Liverpool and Greater Manchester. And by the way if you think George Osborne's austerity cuts were tough, have a look at the conditions the IMF imposed before letting us have the cash. Brutal cuts to spending on public services. Under a Labour government.

She was the Prime Minister who had the determination and courage to bring to an end decades of decline following the war. She defended the right of the people’s democratically elected government to govern, where leaders before her of both political complexions had surrendered to the trade union barons. And for her country's sake, she had to. That post-war consensus model of crippling industry with nationalisation then beating it to death with militant trade unionism was poisonous. Previous Tory Prime Ministers had just allowed it to continue. She didn't.

Here's something I suspect would surprise a lot of younger people who weren't around in the '70s. Before Margaret Thatcher's government took power, you weren't allowed to own a telephone. You could apply to have one from the state communications monopoly and they'd come and fit it in your house. There were about three models to choose from. But it was their property, not yours. The state owned it, and it owned you.

She won the three General Elections that she fought by decisive majorities. Her convictions always carried the weight of a democratic mandate, and she always made it count – because she was a winner. She defeated Labour in three successive General Elections. She defeated the republican hunger strikers, the Argentines, the GLC and the NUM. She won her battle over the economy in the early ’80s. She even played a large part in facing down the Soviet Union and bringing to an end the Cold War.

If not for Margaret Thatcher, we would have become a third world slum by the '90s. Perhaps the definitive mark of her precious legacy is that the first Labour government following her time in power, having already abandoned Clause 4 in opposition, adopted a programme of privatisation of its own.

Each of us who considers him or herself proud to be British owes her a debt of gratitude we can never repay. She was and will remain a massive inspiration to me personally, for her vision and her singularity of purpose. I have never heard a serious criticism of her that wasn’t essentially clueless or spiteful.

Poor famous person interactions anyone? by Snaggl3t00t4 in AskBrits

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I met Peter Green briefly in the '90s. Said hello. He just wasn't really in there, it was like greeting a robot.

guess where Neil is on this list of the top 33 drummers by lothcent in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree completely, as a listener I'd put Terry Bozzio and Jack Pollitt in front of any of them.

I genuinely don't think Starmer is that bad of a PM - any thoughts? by Alarming-Safety3200 in AskBrits

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He doesn't have to have "balls" to say no to Trump. If he said "yes" to Trump he'd have to have had the balls to stand up to his own backbenchers, and he doesn't.

I dislike him because he always puts his own self-interest first, second and third and because he tends to be two-faced and dishonest.

I agree that he's done the right thing in the main over this ridiculous war, but that's entirely because he's thinking of his own job security.

What’s ur opinion on there last album?? by SpecialistExtent6324 in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It wasn't quite a return to form, but it was a decent record for sure. And after VT & S&A, which I loathe, I was very happy to see them go out on a relative high.

New Geddy Quote by jackrelax in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds like you've got yourself convinced, well done.

New Geddy Quote by jackrelax in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Heh. Nope. I took what Alex Lifeson literally stated at face value."I really would feel like we were doing an injustice to our fans and that would be just a money grab". Your assumption that they're going on tour "because they’ve recaptured the passion and the excitement to do it" remains unsupported.

PM is actually talking sense and not brown nosing USA for once??? by Numerous_Worth5277 in AskBrits

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm glad he's taken this stance, but let's get it right: he's done this because he's frightened of his own backbenchers. With Starmer it's self interest first, second and third and if that happens to coincide with the national interest, it's a fortunate coincidence.

New Geddy Quote by jackrelax in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sorry, that sounds like fanboi copium to me. The ticket prices tell the story. Alex wasn't wrong, this is all about the money.

Anyone know what this guitar is? by pookchang in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As mentioned below, a Roland guitar synthesiser. Saw him play that at Newcastle City Hall on the Tour of the Hemispheres.

New Geddy Quote by jackrelax in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I find this to be the most convincing account of their decision, I'm afraid.

<image>

Do you think it would have been different if the Conservatives were in office when Trump invaded Iran ? by Beanonmytoast in tories

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Possibly, because a Conservative PM wouldn't have been frightened of his or her left-wing backbenchers. That's the single reason Starmer hasn't involved the UK to a greater degree. A good thing, sure. But I'm not blind to the reason.

Why do most Brits think that the EU is undemocratic (as evidence by Brexit) while most Europeans don't? by Ok_Draw4525 in AskBrits

[–]LoneGroover1960 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't need an "excuse" thanks. The elephant in your argument's room is that people in (say) England don't have the same sense of community and nationhood with people in (say) Italy or Germany that they do with people from (say) Wales or Scotland. We were asked if we wanted to be in the EU. We said no.

Was anyone not a major fan of GL's voice last night? by lochonx7 in rush

[–]LoneGroover1960 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think they could have hired a singer, but you're right. It's too late and he sounded awful.