Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

£10 MILLION publically funded funeral for Thatcher?!?!!??! Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well, because she was worth it & a whole lot more.

    RIP Britain's Fighting Lady
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddyman4)
    I assume you also think it's inappropriate that Clement Attlee attended Churchill's funeral? After all, he fought against and beat Churchill to become PM. He clearly had hugely contrasting political views. Is it impossible that despite his differing political views, he respected Churchill for his character and for the achievements that he agreed with?

    The same applies to Thatcher.
    I disagree with Churchill's entitlement to a state funeral on principle, but even then I believe his achievements were on a different scale to Thatcher's.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArtGoblin)
    Why not? Tax makes up 80% of a packet of cigarettes' retail price, so someone who smokes 20 a day is contributing quite a lot in tax. They pay tax on them, therefore they are a taxpayer.
    Unless you are one of the thousands of benefit scroungers who also all seem to smoke on taxpayers money?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    I disagree with Churchill's entitlement to a state funeral on principle, but even then I believe his achievements were on a different scale to Thatcher's.
    He wasn't 'entitled' to a state funeral. In that he had no automatic right to it.

    He was given a state funeral because parliament voted to give him one. It was as democratic as you can get - the public overwhelmingly supported such a gesture, their representatives supported the gesture, he was given the gesture. On what principle can you object to it? What's wrong with paying proper respect to someone so important to the country?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MattKneale)
    Unless you are one of the thousands of benefit scroungers who also all seem to smoke on taxpayers money?
    Ahh, but if you do that you are actually giving the taxpayer 80% of their contribution back!

    Most of these 'scroungers' are only on JSA temporarily so they'll give money back in time. Sometimes it takes a little state support to get into a position where contributing is possible.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bellissima)
    WTF!!!! I wouldn't care if it was like a normal couple grand funeral but 10 ****ing million???? what are they doing, having her stuffed with diamonds and sticking her in a solid gold show case for the british museum?!?!?!


    why are we spending so much on this???? or have i got totally the wrong end of the stick? it's bloody ridiculous if it's true!
    Most of it's going on security I heard the bbc say.

    The hypocritical thing about it is that Thatcher opposed state handouts. So what could be used for 322 nurses wages is going on a state handout to her funeral.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    It's clear why the crowd were mostly supporters. Because a) the BBC won't be putting the limelight on the minority protesting, and b) Thatcher criminalised her adversaries; fitting to her legacy, protesters at her funeral will have been met with riot police, upscaling the cost. Her enemies will have done well to stay away on principle.

    My summarised point on active politicians attending is the following: it's all very well if you're apolitical or a supporter. But if you, an active politician, claiming to represent those that Margaret Thatcher persecuted and their descendants, you cannot disassociate yourself and say 'I'm coming to pay my respects to Thatcher the human and not the politician', because you're attending as a fellow politician; you would not be there if you were not in your current capacity. Plus, the whole issue of not only her supporters but her 'adversaries' claiming public money to be there..
    Quite the cynic, aren't you? I suppose that would explain why she won 3 elections - because her enemies simply weren't available!

    Fair point in the second paragraph, although again I don't see why it's not possible for a politician to pay respects to a fellow politician (unless they knew her more personally, in which case their presence at the funeral is more personal anyway). Simply because you disagree with someone's politics doesn't mean you can't respect them and - heaven forbid - even like or admire them.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddyman4)
    He wasn't 'entitled' to a state funeral. In that he had no automatic right to it.

    He was given a state funeral because parliament voted to give him one. It was as democratic as you can get - the public overwhelmingly supported such a gesture, their representatives supported the gesture, he was given the gesture. On what principle can you object to it? What's wrong with paying proper respect to someone so important to the country?
    Parliament voted to raise tuition fees in 2011 and enact Section 28 in 1988. I don't dispute that these moves were democratic. Yet I retain my right to disagree, and say that politicans should not be given state funerals. Whether or not an alternative would have constituted paying 'proper respect' is another matter.

    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Quite the cynic, aren't you? I suppose that would explain why she won 3 elections - because her enemies simply weren't available!

    Fair point in the second paragraph, although again I don't see why it's not possible for a politician to pay respects to a fellow politician (unless they knew her more personally, in which case their presence at the funeral is more personal anyway). Simply because you disagree with someone's politics doesn't mean you can't respect them and - heaven forbid - even like or admire them.
    I'm just miffed that I pay subs to a party that once fought tooth and nail against her damning policies, only to come round thirty years later and all reconcile as 'one nation'. It's not just Labour figures attending her funeral, but the party becoming 'New' and alienating its former adherents. Thatcher was talking in earnest when she mentioned her greatest creation. I'm not surprised Miliband's there and Kinnock and Livingstone aren't.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArtGoblin)
    Ahh, but if you do that you are actually giving the taxpayer 80% of their contribution back!
    Or you are draining them of 20%? I don't care how much I get back, it's a net drain if it's anything less than 100% return.

    Most of these 'scroungers' are only on JSA temporarily so they'll give money back in time. Sometimes it takes a little state support to get into a position where contributing is possible.
    I think you're being very generous with your assessment there. I'm not suggesting it's a majority or anything like that, but there are a lot of 'scroungers' who take JSA and other benefits in the long term with little resolve to fix themselves and get into jobs.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I don't get why people are so against this yet didn't bat an eyelid at the far more expensive Jubilee and Royal Wedding costs.

    Thatcher is much more deserving of the public funds then those cretins.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    This country owed Churchill a state funeral, it was the least we could do to thank him for his extraordinary service. I admit a state funeral would be too far for Thatcher and even she agreed, I think today was a fitting farewell to the peacetime saviour of the UK.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by S1L3NTPR3Y)
    She believed privatisation and a small state. Surely its only fitting that her funeral be financed without using public money, its what she advocated in life?
    Hahaha so true.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MattKneale)
    Public sector workers might spend their salary they've earned but the effect is limited to them. Spending £10m on a funeral attracts thousands of people who will each spend more money. How can that not make sense?
    How is it limited to them , they will be spending it in the economy . So no it does not make sense and defeats your very argument . It will attract thousands of people and what , will that account for the 10 million ?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    The fact that everybody has forgotten about the Olympics show how much of a waste money it was. I don't see any thread complaining about that. Do people even care that the taxpayers are subsiding West Ham's move to the useless arena. We had the 4 weeks of fun and then we went back to our normal lives, What did the Olympics contribute to us as a nation? IMO Thatcher was deserves a decent send off. she was the First Female PM who overcame adversity to save Britain from feeling sorry for herself.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RtGOAT)
    I don't get why people are so against this yet didn't bat an eyelid at the far more expensive Jubilee and Royal Wedding costs.

    Thatcher is much more deserving of the public funds then those cretins.
    What makes you think we're not? I too think those things are stupid. People get married every day, just because your parents have some antiquated title doesn't make it different to everyone else's.

    I quite like Thatcher, I disagree with a lot of her politics but I admire her. Even so do we really need to spend 10m? Do we have 10m?! Funny, I thought everyone's benefit was being slashed because we have "no money"
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loversh)
    How is it limited to them , they will be spending it in the economy . So no it does not make sense and defeats your very argument . It will attract thousands of people and what , will that account for the 10 million ?
    Do the maths. How many people on £25,000 a year does it take to make £10m? How many people lined the streets of London for this funeral? Not to mention many of them will be wealthy, given who the funeral is actually for. Add up train fares, add up food and drink for a day, possibly even hotels. Add on souvenir purchases etc.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    The fact that everybody has forgotten about the Olympics show how much of a waste money it was. I don't see any thread complaining about that. Do people even care that the taxpayers are subsiding West Ham's move to the useless arena. We had the 4 weeks of fun and then we went back to our normal lives, What did the Olympics contribute to us as a nation? IMO Thatcher was deserves a decent send off. she was the First Female PM who overcame adversity to save Britain from feeling sorry for herself.
    The Olympics were a massive drain on taxpayer resources and, predictably, the 'legacy' is turning out to be a crock - athletics for schools for example is under attack all over the country, athletic facilities are closing, etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MattKneale)
    Do the maths. How many people on £25,000 a year does it take to make £10m? How many people lined the streets of London for this funeral? Not to mention many of them will be wealthy, given who the funeral is actually for. Add up train fares, add up food and drink for a day, possibly even hotels. Add on souvenir purchases etc.
    yea your maths is poor too, someone on 25,000 a year will have 365 days of travel food , drink, plus they will also be paying tax and the government will save on benefits and the fact they will spend the 25,000 back into the economy , compared to 1 day and your jumping to conclusions people will buy these things anyway .
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    The service contained numerous veiled attacks on the Left - even Margaret's choice of Bible readings! She couldn't resist some final jabs.

    One of the main subtexts of the Big Revision underway on Thatcher is that Britain was somehow in a state of collapse, mired in disaster, etc, during the era Before Margaret. Yet living standards rose almost every year from 1945 to 1979, there was great private wealth and yes, there was union activism, much of it devoted to trying to maintain pay against a background of 25% inflation caused by the surge in oil prices in the early 70s.

    The media are portraying dislike for Margaret as being a phenomenon solely located in the former mining towns, but this isn't the case. Most people at the time were divided and there were plenty of people outside the North and Scotland who didn't like her policies. She became hugely unpopular towards the end of her reign and the media who are now lauding her were united against her before she stood down.

    Cameron keeps claiming that "we are all Thatcherites now", but is this true? Thatcher's main goal was to privatise the country - there remains no consensus for that and many people think that elements of the key industries that were privatised, like the utilities, especially water and the railways, should be brought back more firmly under state control.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loversh)
    yea your maths is poor too, someone on 25,000 a year will have 365 days of travel food , drink, plus they will also be paying tax and the government will save on benefits and the fact they will spend the 25,000 back into the economy , compared to 1 day and your jumping to conclusions people will buy these things anyway .
    Face palm. I thought we were talking £10m? If you're going to throw that into the equation, let's just throw in every person at the funeral and all the thousands of them contribute £25,000 on average too?

    The £25,000 a year for those 400 public sector workers = £10m. You're arguing skills are laaaaame.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Are unpaid trial work shifts fair?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.