The Great Theresa May. By FAR the Worst Prime Minister that the UK has Ever had.

coljones

Well-Known Member
Here are our last Two Leaders. . .

View attachment 3644

Theresa May was Home Secretary for 7 years. . .she never stemmed Unlimited Immigration, in fact she allowed it to increase exponentially. NO very small country can absorb so many people of a Totally Different mindset in such a short time and expect them to even Partially Integrate. . .It just Isn't feasible.

You say that you feel Sorry for her ? ? ? I don't. She is most obviously out of her depth and I can only deduce that she is working to a completely different agenda, to which the British people voted, With Vastly different values and instructions. In complete opposition to what she promised to deliver.

Watch the media in the next few days to see if her Total Surrender to the Lunatics in the EU will get past the Parliamentary vote.

I for one will feel a little sorry for her of she succeeds in making the UK a Vassal State. . .for if she does, she is Finished, along with her Conservative ( sic ) Party for a generation, And will herald a Labour Government, which will put us all bak to the Commuinst days

How this once sensible country has fallen is amazing to me. .. . .I wonder what the WW1 dead would have thought. . . .
"Lunatics in the EU", The EU holding all the cards, that wouldn't make them lunatics in my books! Farage and the Lunatics from Brexit have slunk off and are unable to offer anything other than occasional claquing.
 
Last edited:

coljones

Well-Known Member
I was told "all prices have to be in euro's"
Never saw ONE petrol pump with "pounds & gallons", including Wales, over the tree months I was having a look-a-round !. (lots with bank-card slots)
Never got a pound-note out of my bank account while there, and don't know any-one still there getting paid in P, S, & new pence.
Still they (bureaucrats) can have all the fuel pumps thrown out as quick as London can get every-one into Electric cars.
spacesailor
WOT? petrol is in liters and pounds/New Pence. all currency is in Pounds/New Pence. All the holes in the wall are in Pounds. Are you sure that you were in the same UK that I was (and 80 million brits)
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
Spacey, the Marshal plan was 70 years ago and Germany had to absorb the East back again which was extremely costly.. The export figures are a fact. What does Britain actually "make" these days?. It's a world Commercial Centre (London) and the place where most of the Russian Oligarchs put their dough. Arabs also. That's the claimed reason London is so expensive to live.. Nev
 
Just catching up on the above:
  • Although Yes Minister highlighted some of the eccentricities of British (and indeed all western based) politics, I would not say it is the mother of bureaucracy. Italy, Spain and France are behemoths on comparison to the UK - have a read of one of Peter Mayles' books; try to fly through Italy or trade in Spain. Yes, the UK has gold plated sone EU regulations, but compared to most of our European cousins, it is a hell of a lot less bureaucratic. And, one of the good things to be initiated (that had some success) was the government's red tape challenge.. Government going further to cut red tape by £10 billion. Unfortunately, thanks to Brexit, it has lost a lot of steam and there are some sacred cows that are almost impossible to budge (without violence or conquering) with an established regime, but to call it the mother of bureaucracy is a little harsh.. There was no doubt a time where it was more than now, but I would wager it was something that was brought in by the Roman empire and adopted.
  • I understand the temptation to tar Germany with it's WW2 brush and there is a movement there that still actively supports its WW2 government ideals, but as a nation it is one of the most progressive, transparent, fair and democratic nations out there. Its WW2 past is still firmly remembered and although there is an internal call for Germany to stop being so apologetic for past atrocities, the lessons learned have yet to wane. As an example, it is forbidden to record telephone conversations and the lengths the authorities have to go to electronically monitor people is, well, quite bureaucratic. Merkel learned the lesson the hard way of mass immigration on a humanitarian basis without an integration plan and investment to manage it, but I didn't see too many other nations offering the hope and lifeline to people fleeing terror.
  • Contrary to popular belief, Britain is actually doing well as a manufacturer, although services still account for the majority of GDP: UK Manufacturing Statistics. Apart from cars, food & pharmaceuticals, Britain's manufacturing is based on industrial and tech items, rather than consumer items. Britain does suffer from competition with low-cost consumer manufacturing centres; Dyson has just moved all of its manufacturing to India and I know of a bloke who makes after market seats for Landrovers who has all of his manufacturing in India as well. German companies, to a lesser extent are also moving manufacture to lower-cost countries. But high-tech and higher-unit value manufacturing is alive and well in Britain. Obviously, these will be affected with Brexit, but given the nature of the manufacturing, I would say not as much as people think as it powers the wheels of industry to get consumers they goods they need - so the value/cost is amortised over longer lifetimes. Note, I have assumed these manufacturers have robust Brexit plans in place.
  • Britain has the resources to keep its population well fed and watered. We import a lot of food that we don't typically grow here, so if suddenly Britain was cut off from the world, it would be a meat + 3 veg diet again (well that is oversimplifying things a bit as technology allows us to grown things not typically able to grow here and, ironically, with climate change, we are starting to be able to grow things that we previously couldn't - decent wines being one of the things that is a recent phenomena). Prices would inevitably go up in the short term, but with the ability to oversupply itself, it would eventually settle down. It is nigh-on impossible to get planning permission to build on greenbelt land, and when it is granted as part of a town/urban development plan, the housing is very dense by Aussie standards to preserve as much of the greenbelt as possible Of course, it it were shut off from the rest of the world (hardly likely as it already deals with the rest of the world), then getting avocados, bananas, mangoes and coffee would be a bit tough..
  • I take the point that when Britain joined the EU, it dropped some of Australia's exports like a hot potato - something that was in some ways not easily forgiven. However, according to Office for National Statistics, in 2016, Britain imported a total of around £437.5bn worth of stuff of which almost 61% (£266.3bn) came from EEA (EU + non EU countries admitted to the single market). Of the £171bn left, the UK imports a touch over £2bn (currently around $3.55bn Aussie) from Australia - about 1.2% of its non-EEA imports. I am not sure what comprises those imports, but wine is at least one of them, and I have seen tim tams in Harrods and Harvey Nichols (a long time ago). If Australia can do a free trade deal with the UK, I will be looking to increase imports from Australia..But we have ti remember one thing; despite the currency difference, Australia is not a cheap country to import from anyway so I imagine the items will be similar to UK exports - high value/low volume. As an example Penguins (closest thing here to Tim Tams but obviously inferior) retail at £1 per packet (say £1.80) and can be had for 50p on sale (90c). Tim Tams retail for around $3.95 in Australia (£2.19) and we would have to get them down to £1.50 to make it competitive (BTW - how can a duty free shop at Sydney airport charge $6.99 per packet of Tim Tams...!!! Blooming supermarket I went to had run out of them and when I went to buy the duty free "deal" of 4 packs for $20, they asked me for my boarding pass as it was duty free. When I asked why they needed it as they were obviously loaded with loads more "duty" than normal retail, I got an embarrassed look back with an "I know - it's the foreign tourist tax"
 
Last edited:

Old Koreelah

Well-Known Member
Spacey, the Marshal plan was 70 years ago...
...but that doesn't stop people blaming their economic ills on someone else.
The British had a tough time during and after WWII but the Germans had it far worse and were deliberately starved by the victors. They and the defeated Japanese dug deep, reinvented themselves and rebuilt their shattered countries until they have a global reputation for excellence.
Meanwhile, the Brits mostly went back to the old way of going things, and spent a generation congratulating themselves for winning the war while their industries became so uneconomic their former enemies and colonies bought them out.
 
OK - you are pretty spot on the money - at least from a governmental view on life; lots of Brits ended up in the US to take their ideas to production - mainly in engineering. When I was in San Francisco in the early naughties, there were still many Brits pouring in for bio-engineering, software engineering robotics, etc. The government were at the time putting all sorts of silly rules together for inviting in R&D that required an accountant, actuary and lawyer to work out - as best they could. The US was a lot simpler and promoted risk taking Even early AI was being developed with a lot of British innovation and design - though they partnered with US firms as they had the money to take it to production.

I read an article in either Flyer or Pilot (UK mags) that chronicled the incompetent interference of the development of the aviation industry in the UK; (and I can say, the electricity generation industry was also meddled with poorly). The government basically reduced an advanced and thriving nation of aeronautical engineering and development to a wasteland - how can a country that evolved the Manchester into the Lancaster in a very short period of time - grow to be the main subcontractor rather than the leader in European aviation innovation. If the pollies didn't meddle and rather encouraged inward investment, there is no reason the UK couldn't have its own aviation and space industry that could well have been world leaders..
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
Brits are too stubborn to agree with anyone else or each other. That was a PLUS during the war when it looked hopeless. The services always argued amongst themselves and rivalry , jealousy and bitterness was rife in the upper echelons of the fighting forces.. Churchill was the only thing that kept it working.. He was white anted by many of his own . The poor bastard even had to put up with De Gaulle. Nev
 

Yenn

Well-Known Member
Britain seems to be in a sad state, but the really sad thing is that Australia is not far behind. Britain was the leader in civil aviation, with the first jet passenger plane, but dropped the ball. Australia used to build aircraft, and they used to build motor vehicles. Now the booming industry in Australia is health. Not that Australians are healthy nowadays.
Both Australia and Britain are heading for third world status.
 

nomadpete

Well-Known Member
"Great" Britain seems stuffed.
Australia is no longer the "Lucky country".
It's time to move to Willie's Russia. Get in quick, before all those refugees start heading there.
 

octave

Well-Known Member
Australia is no longer the "Lucky country".
The thing I like about this forum is that so often I look things up that I realize I don't fully understand. It occurred to me that I did not know exactly when the term "the lucky country' was coined and what it actually means.

"The lucky country" is the title of historian Donald Horn's book written in 1964. Although it is often used favourably now it the original context was negative The title of the book came from the last chapter: " Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second-rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise.[2] "

Later in his life, " Horne became critical of the "lucky country" phrase being used as a term of endearment for Australia. He commented, "I have had to sit through the most appalling rubbish as successive generations misapplied this phrase."

The Lucky Country - Wikipedia

Just for the record, personally, I believe that the present is far better than the past in most respects and there is no time in the past I would rather live in.
 
I think Horne's assessment is right for many countries - not just Australia. Although Australian leaders have a penchant for not hiding the fact as well as others. Messrs Abbot (not a leader now, but was) et al come to mind.

And, I don't think Britain is stuffed in the long run - as mentioned either above or int he Condell thread, Britain is the 8th largest manufacturer in the world and its manufacturing output t is growing at a t time when others is declining. Britain should be better than what it is - but thanks to the lucky country mentality of British leaders, it isn't. But I have to admit, if it weren't for me, I would be far better off, too.

Of course, like every other country, we are all stuffed thanks to climate control.
 
Well, I guess it's official - Theresa May IS the worst PM Britain has ever had - she has certainly suffered the biggest defeat of all time in the Commons (well, all time that matters, anyway).

Looks like its time to fust dfown the Aussie passport...
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
Er.. "Trooble aht Mill." Gerry. ? Success has many parents but disaster is an orphan. It's not all her work.. Britain herself has "made" the problem in the handling of it. and your 50% plus one (as I've said before) set up, means Very close to 1/2 won't be happy and they really DIDN'T Understand the ramifications of their VOTE. as they are still finding out.. You wouldn't have to be Einstein to think "THIS won't end well".
Our esteemed ex PM who advised you to "Seize the Moment" should have alerted you. HE likes to" keep the wreck" after the destruction.. Boris seems similar. Nev
 

Old Koreelah

Well-Known Member
Much as a I prefer democracy to the other options, a simple majority of voters is often dead wrong.
The age-old argument: do we elect our politicians do carry out our every wish, or to lead us?
In the 70's Sweden had a plebiscite about changing over to driving in the right. Three quarters voted against it, but the government went ahead and did it anyway. I doubt many are sorry they did.
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
And the road toll Went Down,?.
O k.
" but the government went ahead and did it anyway. I doubt many are sorry they did."
The Brit's government did it their way, WHEN a REPUBLIC. well until the unwashed turned their plows into Weapons.
THEN had their REVOLUTION.
spacesailor
 
Politicians are not there to carry out every wish - they are there to lead and govern according to the general wishes of the community. One thing we are forgetting is that the government made it clear that the referendum - non-binding by definition - would be binding in this case. i.e. they undertook to respect the wishes of the majority of the people - however close. Therfore, it would, as Theresa May points out, be a breach of trust and democracy if the government were not to deliver on that. That much, the plebs understand. It shows how polarised the electorate are; but the argument for requiring a bigger majority would not solve that and just leave, in this case, the majority of people unhappy and disillusioned - at least this way it is a minority - although vast - disillusioned.

I also reject the notions that people didn't know what Brexit they were voting for and thus the vote is really null and void. There were no conditions on the ballot so the assumption had to be worst - crashing out without a deal - after all - at no stage did the Brexit campaign say anything other.. Politicans and ideoligists are hanging onto the most thinly veiled arguments to try and rebuke the validity of the vote. In other words, people of so-called higher intelligence telling others they have no f-ing idea and they should just fall into line as it does not fit the intelligentia's view of the world and their comfortable environment.

People may not be clever but that does not mean they are dumb, either. This was, no doubt a protest vote - but what a protest vote. They may not have known the detail, but they certainly were aware of the potential ramifications - and they were mainly in the boat to say, "stuff it.. we are stuffed anyway, so let those who disproprotionately benefit have some of the medicine we are dished out".. If you look at the rise of the right, it is the dissatisifed and disadvantaged - an increasing proportion of the population - that are subscribing to the maglamaniacs.. They know what they are doing and they know the ramifications - Brexit is, in this sense, comparable (not saying it is the far right - it is a protest and a desire for change). The other difference is no one actually knows in the mid to long term what will happen... And at the moment.. no one knows what the gubbins is going to happen.

Also, the inteilligentia afre focusing on the hip pocket - those who voted Brexit (in general) don't have that much of one to worry about... And the point they are missing is that people often vote on principle - something that seems lost in the conversation here.

Yep - they knew what they were voting for - in general terms.. Theresa is trying to lessen the blow.. Those in favour of remaining it see it as a weak deal; those against see it as a capitualtion. Labour (JC) stated in parliament the only deal is a permanent membership of the customs union - which basically means you get everything else of membership (except a say in what is happening in Europe) for free - a vassal state of Europe so to speak - that is repugnant to the people who voted his party in to represent them - and that too, is a travesty of democracy should he get in.
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
I agree with the second part but not the first.
" (not saying it is the far right - it is a protest and a desire for change) ".
Defiantly a desire for change,
When the last lady prime minister, said She didn't care what happens in the north of England, (Drilling for gas under peoples homes, fracturing ).
Then the Northerner's danced in the streets after her demise.
(oil/gas companies will have better luck drilling under those huge palaces down south, (of the invisible boarder )
spacesailor
 
Another extremely hypocritical gambit from a Brexit booster,
Dyson to move company HQ to Singapore
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/22/dyson-to-move-company-hq-to-singapore
Never trust anyone from the 1%ers' club. More evidence that the British Conservative Party are as treacherous, hidebound and as little interested in the common good as are our current crop of Lieberals. That is to say that I believe that the Brexit notion was a "pig in a poke", sold to largely uninformed voters on the strength of an emotional appeal. Once the omelet is cooked it is impossible to reserrect the egg. Ask Humpty Dumpty.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom