Micheal Foot down
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Biker Guinea Pigs wanted!
Next: =A320 fine for leaving your engine=3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?running=3D3F?=3D
From: 'Hog on 5 Mar 2010 10:43 M J Carley wrote: > In the referenced article, "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)CHIPShotmail.co.uk> > writes: > >> Nonsense. Uneconomic pits would have been mothballed. Better pits >> would have carried on working, but in such a way that the miners >> union could not hold the country to ransom. > > So why were pits closed down long after the miners' strike was over > and the NUM was broken? See other comments in thread. -- Hog
From: M J Carley on 5 Mar 2010 11:01 In the referenced article, Charlie <nospam(a)all.ta> writes: >Many of the pits were ancient, underinvested and uneconomic. Nobody >in their right mind, not EVEN the Tories, would close a profitable, >modern and efficient resource. FIVE OF the 10 pits under threat of imminent closure were sufficiently profitable to be privatised, according to British Coal's own advisers. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/coal-mines-named-for-closure-were-profitable-1559633.html >The truly barking way in which Scargill gave away his massive >advantage, by not having that vote, merely proved that he was >dangerously stupid. If he had really had his membership's interest >as his first concern, rather than his own self-aggrandizement [1], he >could have won. We might well have had John Smith as Prime Minister >within a couple of years, and wouldn't that have been a good thing >for everyone. How would we have managed that? -- Si deve tornare alle basi: Marx ed i Clash. Michael Carley: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ensmjc/
From: Champ on 5 Mar 2010 11:08 On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:21:57 +0000, Charlie <nospam(a)all.ta> wrote: >>>>> We wouldn't be in so much hock to the Ruskies for natural gas. >>>> >>>> Yes we would: mining would still have been shut down. >>> >>> Nonsense. Uneconomic pits would have been mothballed. Better pits would have >>> carried on working, but in such a way that the miners union could not hold >>> the country to ransom. >> >> You and Charlie seem to both believe this. I don't know if it's >> because it supports your world view. > >Many of the pits were ancient, underinvested and uneconomic. Nobody in >their right mind, not EVEN the Tories, would close a profitable, modern >and efficient resource. It's like suggesting that we might close the >entire North Sea oil production on a stupid point of political principle. I'm not arguing this point. You have argued elsewhere that, if it hadn't been for Scargill, there might now be deep pits still working. I don't think that's the case. >You speculate about my world view. I was and am a pragmatist. You'd >have been a <scratches head> teenage idealist at the time of the strike, >wouldn't you; possibly anti-authoritarian. I was 21 when the strike started. And I'm probably more anti-authoritarian now than was then :-) -- Champ We declare that the splendour of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo neal at champ dot org dot uk
From: Champ on 5 Mar 2010 11:15 On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:41:50 +0100, Ace <b.rogers(a)ifrance.com> wrote: >You have to admit, in the whole history of trades unions, this was the >single most successful 'establishment' victory. That I must concede. >Remember how much the country loved her for it? Christ no - my recollection is of how dislike of Thatcher hardened into real hatred. >Remember how much we'd suffered in the >preceeding decade, much of it at the hands of the miner's unions? I'm not sure I, or you, suffered that much, to be honest. >It was a glorious day for democracy and freedom. Hog, is that you? -- Champ We declare that the splendour of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo neal at champ dot org dot uk
From: wessie on 5 Mar 2010 11:35
ensmjc(a)bath.ac.uk (M J Carley) wrote in news:KytGII.IKx.B.birch(a)bath.ac.uk: > In the referenced article, Charlie <nospam(a)all.ta> writes: > >>Many of the pits were ancient, underinvested and uneconomic. Nobody >>in their right mind, not EVEN the Tories, would close a profitable, >>modern and efficient resource. > > FIVE OF the 10 pits under threat of imminent closure were > sufficiently profitable to be privatised, according to British > Coal's own advisers. > > http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/coal-mines-named-for-closure-were- > profitable-1559633.html > Tower Colliery is a good example: declared uneconomic by BC in 1994. Operated by Tyrone O'Sullivan & 238 colleagues for 13 further years as a deep mine, making each of them a substantial profit on their initial �8000 investment. There is potential for them to make even more money as they have the option of open cast mining the coal nearer to the surface. This one case shows that a policitcal decision to end mining was taken, ignoring any other option. Thatcher's economic ethos was to privatise energy production but she could not apply such rationalisation to mining because of her deep seated desire to eliminate any power held by miners. -- wessie at tesco dot net BMW R1150GS |