What was this dispute really about?

[Tman]

Sorry friend but "New Labour" are in this up to their necks, Thats why the set up another unelected quango to oversee us, why they installed the two sh*ts to boss us, and have allowed all those rich private firms to proffit from our hard work! They want the cash that will come from a euro liberalised market! They are so desperate for cash to bail out the shabby way they have run this country that sh*tting on Labour members, Unions, and the country have become a way of life. This goverments main acheivments so far are to give us a NMW so low you will starve on it unless you have kids and a husband / wife, more privatisation than even the tories dreamed of including vast tracts of the NHS, Post Office, Royal Mail, Army, Navy, and Airforce ect ect ect. So far from getting a review that will do any good what we have is a "Socialist" Ha Ha goverment hell bent on forcing all workers to do more for less whilst allowing workers to get themselves in so much debt they will never go on strike again and so keep feeding the machine with little disruption to the gravy train.

You have a strange view of the world. This isn't, and never was, a "Socialist" government, and how did it "allow" workers to get themselves into debt?
Can't us workers be trusted to manage our financial affairs without incurring debts, or do we a"allow" the government to tell us how to run them?
Funny how us union members welcome EU laws when it suits us, but accuse the government of wanting the cash from a " liberalised euromarket". Bizarre logic really, as changes such as these happen anyway, with or without Euro/government interference.
Still, keep trotting it out, it seems to please some.....

[tenpole tudorsack]

this dispute was about the working man standing up for their rights after being forced into a corner by the most right wing labour goverment in recent histoty

I think what you meant to say was MOST RIGHT WING GOVERNMENT IN HISTORY.

Vote SPANNER!!!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=bOrW7z6rtfY

[andy2007]

Sorry friend but "New Labour" are in this up to their necks, Thats why the set up another unelected quango to oversee us, why they installed the two sh*ts to boss us, and have allowed all those rich private firms to proffit from our hard work! They want the cash that will come from a euro liberalised market! They are so desperate for cash to bail out the shabby way they have run this country that sh*tting on Labour members, Unions, and the country have become a way of life. This goverments main acheivments so far are to give us a NMW so low you will starve on it unless you have kids and a husband / wife, more privatisation than even the tories dreamed of including vast tracts of the NHS, Post Office, Royal Mail, Army, Navy, and Airforce ect ect ect. So far from getting a review that will do any good what we have is a "Socialist" Ha Ha goverment hell bent on forcing all workers to do more for less whilst allowing workers to get themselves in so much debt they will never go on strike again and so keep feeding the machine with little disruption to the gravy train.

You have a strange view of the world. This isn't, and never was, a "Socialist" government, and how did it "allow" workers to get themselves into debt?
Can't us workers be trusted to manage our financial affairs without incurring debts, or do we a"allow" the government to tell us how to run them?
Funny how us union members welcome EU laws when it suits us, but accuse the government of wanting the cash from a " liberalised euromarket". Bizarre logic really, as changes such as these happen anyway, with or without Euro/government interference.
Still, keep trotting it out, it seems to please some.....

Please read Linkinpark's post PROPERLY before you criticise!

The Government is trying to force us to loose so much money that we will END UP in too much debt, to continue Striking.

Labour was untill all this "new labour" rubbish started, always a Socialist Party. Now of course, you are right: they have abandoned all their principles, and become new labour (aka tory mk II).

As far as European Government interference is concerned, it's a mixed blessing. One which I would rather we didn't have. But unfortunately, it is something we have to live with, unless we pull out of the EU. And I can't see that happening any time soon.

[Tman]

[However I do believe that the Government has actively encouraged us to get into debt. Where is the housing that should be provided by Government / councils? Bet you will not find any unless you have a load of kids. A sure way to get you into debt in itself even without housing taken into the equation. So allowing for the fact that you want to get married and have kids and a house then you have to have a mortgage. Now I am not sure but I think that putting young people in debt to the tune of 150- 200 thousand pounds is bad and is a massive debt that is not their fault but governments who continue to sell off OUR housing that our parents and grandparents have already paid for taking that money for their own dubious ends.

We KNOW where all the council houses went; look no further than the Thatcher-bitch, but that battle was lost many years ago. There aren't the level of council houses left, and they aren't going to build more either, as there's neither the will, money or necessity that there was when most were built ie pre or post-war. Forget that, it's gone.
My view would be to tax all the second-third-fourth home owners sucked in by the Buy-to-Let grab it now schemes, and encourage them to sell off thier little nest-eggs to first time buyers. All these little buyers do is distort the market; they don't earn enough from it to be considered a business.

With the government encouraging us to gamble with the likes of Lotto and the new casinos do you not think that some people will get into debt? Look at online gambling and TV gambling shows and before you say about freedom of choice blah blah blah gambling is an illness that wrecks tens of thousands of people’s lives causing untold misery to hundreds and thousands of lives and causes massive debt to working people. Do the government try to help or just throw petrol on the fire?

I have argued the point as a life-long Socialist that we ARE still individuals and of free will. It's a jibe the Tories like to throw, that we are all sheep to be told what to do, therefore to agree with your point would be to validate that argument. We ARE all individuals and so have to take personal responsibilty for our actions. To some gambling/booze/ etc are an affliction, but please don't try and make out that the pub on the corner made me an alcoholic, or the casino down the road forced me in, because that implies a lack of character and a need for constant guidance in life, and that ain't for me.

We are swamped with offers of free credit at shops and with credit cards have the government tried to stop this or even to strongly educate the people? I don’t think so! No they have actively encouraged it; they get far too much tax from it and this country is now run on credit that I think is a ticking time bomb

The credit is far from "free", but again, see above. No-one is forced into buying consumer-durables. In reality, a country high on credit and debt isn't a desirable situation for any government, and equally any financial benefit the tax man may get is more than off-set by the true costs of high personal debt.

your sarcastic “You have a strange view of the world or keep trotting it out it seems to please someâ€

[dvbuk55]

one of the outcomes of this dispute is that their will be a goverment review of liberalisation in the uk postal market
i doubt that this would come about without the political pressure of the dispute

Well it had been promised in the 2005 manifesto according to Billy and 2 years down the road we have Hutton promising it again to a Commons Select Committee - bit like the wife really - I promised her a night to remember when we married 36 years ago - she's still waiting.

[Tman]

[

So i guess with my strange way of thinking i feel education lies at the bottom of much of our problems and allowing for the fact that many people were not as lucky as i was with my parents, it is society or rather the goverment (the same thing?) that have to step up and help! Will this not help to empower and free us all?

Society and government are far removed, although I don't see why either should step up and help any more than they already do.
It's never been easier for working-class kids to get an extremely good education, and/or go to university; far easier than it was 20/40/60 years ago. The desire to get on comes from within, and that's my point.
The tuition fees debate is a red-herring too, as kids world-wide have had to/still do achieve more with less financial help. They may not be the ideal answer, but short of going back to the "eternal students" of the 1960s, I couldn't suggest anything better.
As for social housing, those days are gone. Apart from the impossibility of building large estates due to environmental issues, there's the perception (real or imagined) that these estates breed "all of society's ills" and are to be avoided, and it's a view that is impossible to ignore.
Even Socialism acknowleges that some cannot or will not be aided through financial help or education.

[andy2007]

[

So i guess with my strange way of thinking i feel education lies at the bottom of much of our problems and allowing for the fact that many people were not as lucky as i was with my parents, it is society or rather the goverment (the same thing?) that have to step up and help! Will this not help to empower and free us all?

Society and government are far removed, although I don't see why either should step up and help any more than they already do.
It's never been easier for working-class kids to get an extremely good education, and/or go to university; far easier than it was 20/40/60 years ago. The desire to get on comes from within, and that's my point.
The tuition fees debate is a red-herring too, as kids world-wide have had to/still do achieve more with less financial help. They may not be the ideal answer, but short of going back to the "eternal students" of the 1960s, I couldn't suggest anything better.
As for social housing, those days are gone. Apart from the impossibility of building large estates due to environmental issues, there's the perception (real or imagined) that these estates breed "all of society's ills" and are to be avoided, and it's a view that is impossible to ignore.
Even Socialism acknowleges that some cannot or will not be aided through financial help or education.

You're missing the point with tuition fees. I went on to Higher Education after School, but I certainly wouldn't have done if it would have landed me in the amount of debt that Students face nowadays. It's all well and good, telling us that they won't have to pay it back till they reach a certain Salary Threshold. But what if they start off below it, then get a promotion which takes them slightly over it?
Suddenly they are landed with the bills for paying it back, which could mean that they would end up worse off than before the promotion. That's hardly an incentive to do well in the future, is it?

As for the estates which become "no go" areas. Please spare a thought for the original members of that Community. I know of cases, where "problem families" have been moved in, because they weren't wanted elsewhere. The original Tennants, then have to deal with all the problems from them. Word gets round about how bad things are, and people stop wanting to move onto that estate. That leads to empty houses, more problem families moving in, because there are houses available, and people moving out.

Eventually, you end up with a few people (usually home owners), who can't move out of the area, being terrorised. Hardly a good policy, is it?

How do we solve this problem?
I wish I knew!