Baroness Thatcher has died.
- Thread starter psd99
- Start date
- Status
Just the Ding Ding song from Wizard of Oz.
Ah.
Not according to the historical record however, many mines closed due to being too expensive to reopen. I have corroborated my statements in the main, if you do not want or cannot corroborate yours then I will treat them as unsubstantiated opinion.
Sophistry.
When you make a whole range of counter claims is it then not also incumbent on you to field similar evidence....you have offered absolutely none, in fact you state that you are not required to substantiate your opinion...why then is it incumbent upon me, even considering I have substantiated mine or conceded where I cannot, (perhaps you should read the thread?) if you were to follow the same standards then you would conceivably have to concede your entire argument.
Even if we take 1974 then it is not inconceivable that in Stoke that may well have been the case...how is your unsubstantiated opinion any more valid than Dimple's?
You are holding others to standards that you refuse to uphold or cannot uphold yourself.
(Incidently The basic wage for a face worker in 1974 was £45 per week, this rose by 35% in 1975 with rises ranging from 35% to 9% in subsequent years....in 1977 a whole range of profit and production related bonuses came into affect, overtime at double and triple basic day rates, and set production bonuses as well as in some years the NUM negotiated through strike action or threat of strike action one off bonuses of up to £700...not to mention the increase in redundancy and early retirement payoffs to £36,000...a huge amount of money in the 1970s/80s. It is not hard to see why Dimple has such an opinion, it is no different to yours in validity.)
I think that is ironic as the only person here expounding an entrenched position is yourself, you refute anything that doesn't agree with your position, resort to ad hominem instead of addressing the points, or simply offer counter opinion without abiding by the same standard you demand of others, if anything your criticism is a reelection of your own contribution rather than any valid observation of my own...I have also both given evidence for and conceded points..you have so far refused to substantiate or concede anything.....
As for context, you offered nothing substansive, you also are not required to trust my diligence as I gave the sources and the reference material therefore it would be the diligence of the authors to which I referred you to whose diligence and honesty you should criticise.....
You are not simply critical of my posting style, you are by association impugning my character by what you have stated. I do not think it is appropiate or relevant, you complain about others and even ask me to judge them, yet you feel you can the same unchallenged and it is acceptable...is that not a double standard, similarly your refusal to corrobative yet demanding others do, again is a double standard?
I have been, you simply cannot accept anything that disagrees or doesn't support your particular point of view....I have given you referenced and supported evidence, you have simply given unsubstantiated opinion.
You do not have to agree with me, but don't claim the superior position when you have offered far less in the form of objectivity than I.
Then do not expect me to make judgements that you are unwilling to make yourself.
If the truth is theatrical, then so be it, it remains the truth nonetheless.
I gave my opinion, just because you do not like it doesn't mean it is not fair-minded, a term you misuse throughout this thread to imply that your opinion is somehow greater than everyone else, yet you offer nothing to support that self perception.
Last edited:
I dont see why they shouldn't. The song does not mention Thatcher at all. That people are making that association isn't the songs fault or the fault of the people that wrote/performed it.
Yes, I had it confirmed again last night.
Here in STOKE ON TRENT a COAL MINING APPRENTICE could earn £60 (maybe more) by working after their 8 to 5 Mon to Fri apprenticeship which other apprentices here in STOKE ON TRENT didn't have the luxury to do.
Mrs Dimple reminded me of a story from 1983 when we went out and bought a top of the range Grundig stereo TV for £500. We had won £300 on the Pools, we'd got £100 saved and we had £100 on the knock. My mate came round and he is the type who still to this day will see what gadget I've bought and then have one himself. He asked how much it was, there was a debate with his wife and she said "Have it with your next weeks wages"When I clarified the point he said he could buy it with one weeks wages, now that wasn't £800 that Castiel mentioned but sounded more than £500.
Or the story could be untrue and I made it up.
To be clear, you MASSIVELY misrepresented the actuality, now please for the last time.......You initially made this huge claim that mining apprentices made £60 a week in 1974, understand that any fair minded person assumes this is their WEEKLY wage when you state this , not with this belated addition that it was with overtime and you gripe because you couldnt get overtime, good god man what is wrong with you, some people are lucky enough etc to earn more.WHY would anyone misrepresent in ths manner?, I can accept that you made a mistake but you continue to attempt to justify this, there is no gripe of worth here, it turns out its just envy.
I have no idea why you and others want to portray miners as earning huge sums, this was most definetely NOT true, there may have been localised aberrations but no way were miners average salaries outrageously high, FACT.
Again I see no reason why anyone wants to attempt to portray miners in this tabloid-esque manner but wants to be taken seriously. Stating wild innacurate figures with no substantiation can only dilute the credibility of anything you say. It is clear that in your initial post you had an unfair perspective on miners, as I highlighted in post 1269 which has not been refuted adequately.
Is it odd that these figures that have been bandied about have turned out to be false and that subsequently attempts have been made to tone down the claims?, no, because the allegations are borne out of a negative bias towards the miners.
Yes, I had it confirmed again last night.
Here in STOKE ON TRENT a COAL MINING APPRENTICE could earn £60 (maybe more) by working after their 8 to 5 Mon to Fri apprenticeship which other apprentices here in STOKE ON TRENT didn't have the luxury to do.
Mrs Dimple reminded me of a story from 1983 when we went out and bought a top of the range Grundig stereo TV for £500. We had won £300 on the Pools, we'd got £100 saved and we had £100 on the knock. My mate came round and he is the type who still to this day will see what gadget I've bought and then have one himself. He asked how much it was, there was a debate with his wife and she said "Have it with your next weeks wages"
Or the story could be untrue and I made it up.
I had a reply from my wife's Uncle, he worked at several pits including Ollerton in Nottinghamshire. He states that his basic wage just before the strike was £137 a week after deductions, he got another £100 a week in productivity bonuses, £12 a week bonus for working on the face, plus he could earn double time for a single man shift or triple time for double shifting, he said he got large Christmas bonuses and one year received £500 as a Christmas bonus, tax free. He also said that apprentices could earn full time rates for overtime, so could make up their stipend to a living wage.
Whether people want to believe this or not is up to them, but it is what he said nonetheless, if I could give you links to NCB archives then I would, perhaps if it means that much to peope then they can issue an FoI request to the National Archive to find out.
Actually some points have been conceded only because they are anecdotal and you demanded substantive quotable evidence which is currently unavailable, not because of any negative bias or because the are inherently untrue, only unsubstantiated, therefore it was objective to point out that the statements were not authoritative and should not be taken as such...that seems to be your consistent criticism, one which is subjective and is only your opinion.
Perhaps you could substantiate your refutations, particularly when you disagree but offer no supported reasoning other than your opinion, which holds no more weight then any one else's opinion.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Ding Dong (The Witch Is Dead) by Judy Garland.
Little to the idiots buying it know it is actually a Pro-Thatcher song. The 'wicked witch' the song refers to was the Wicked Witch Of The East, so is analogous to Thatcher bringing down the Iron Curtain.
OMG scrapping the barrel now as with your BLACK Obama he is 100% biracial. Ask his white mum
Just prior to the 1984 strike. He did also say, and I should mention for clarity, that other pit workers like underground miners not on the face, and surface workers were paid quite a bit less, and so were some other pits...he worked in one (he didn't mention which) that paid half the basic wage that he was getting in Nottinghamshire.
This is the point I think is important with the dispute between Dimple and Jim....one mans opinion will be influenced by their own experience, it doesn't make either invalid..it simply means where Dimple lived in Stoke the position was different than where Jim lived, I presume in Scotland...my Uncle-in-laws experiences illustrate this to some degree.
Miners deserve to paid substantive wages, it is a hard and dangerous job, more so back in the day than now....I don't think stating that miners earned good money comparatively is negative bias or judging whether it is deserved or not....they still do earn very good money, not quite as much comparatively as perhaps at the height of the NUM power, but still substantially above the average wage in the UK.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
OMG scrapping the barrel now as with your BLACK Obama he is 100% biracial. Ask his white mum
Biracial? Do you mean mixed race?
I thought it was simply a musical number from 1936?
I haven't paid much attention to the song, or who it is sung by, or what it refers to..I just assumed it was the Wizard of Oz number...is it not?
I disagree, you paste figures from different sources which can be countered by figures from other sources, ultimately none of us can really prove any of these figures/facts are indeed valid. Obfuscation doesnt help.
lol if ever anyone was culpable of this its you. (imho of course)
I`m sure in your mind you think that is true, there are so many holes in that it is way too tiresome to counter.
No no not 'even if' that was what Dimple mentioned and you got wrong, yes YOU got WRONG
.No I`m not, my reasons for entering this thread were to challenge wild accusations about miners. I asked for proof both from you and Dimple, you both made wild claims which you have both failed to back up adequately. Again it is fair that the onus is on the person who makes the claim to substantiate it.
But but you said it was impossible to have details of miners wages?, and its not affect, its effect, a nuance which some struggle with, this indicates to me that despite your apparent verbosity you are prone to very basic errors
, thats quite a failing though, throughout your whole life you have been getting that wrong? Again, more meaningless figures........ for the benefit of the silent majority reading this..........this is MY truth, my father like I said was Assistant Chief Engineer at Highouse Colliery,Auchinleck he got redundancy just before the strike and got NOWHERE near that amount after working in the pits all his life, (over fifty years) this is MY direct experience, I realise you can dispute this but ultimately it is provable.
I dont think I do, I conceded you made a fair point about opinions via posts being unsolicited. What have you conceded?
I criticise your wide and liberal use of these sources/figures for reasons I have explained above. Odd that all the figures and sources support only one viewpoint.
You are criticising me in a similar vein to which you are criticising me for
You are obviously biased, in fact in an earlier post I opened with 'you seem reasonable' or similar, so actually I have been courteous to you.
I dispute the logic you derive this conclusion from.
It is my opinion you are not fair minded, if you were you would countenance the possibility that the other arguments just may well have some worth. Not to mention when asked to opine on soemthing politely you instead of being helpful, embark on a hugely convoluted charade not only to avoid doing so but to emerge like you are reasonable.
It's also worth mentioning that many miners had a coal allowance. Now I'm not sure but seem to recall a neighbour mentioning 4-8 tons of coal a year, depending on the quality and type of coal. I think coal is £300+ in todays money.
Thank you, Ive been trying to be reasonable in the face of these ludicrous claims. You have to question the motives of those who attempt to paint this picture.
False, points have been conceded due to overwhelming evidence to teh contrary, DESPITE you and Dimple's best efforts to shore up totally un-tenable arguments,
[/QUOTE]
Vague, elucidate.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 15 Sep 2010
- Posts
- 2,691
Just hope Police in London are not prepared to incite a riot over Baroness Thatcher.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...epared-for-a-riot-over-Baroness-Thatcher.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...epared-for-a-riot-over-Baroness-Thatcher.html
- Status