i don't want to pay for thatchers funeral.

to some people it may be a "bargain"
but to average hardworking people it's like a kick in the nuts.
i thought we were in a recession ?
even if the average funeral cost was around £5000.
still leaves £7,995,000. left over.
could go to better causes than this public farce.
surely it should be privately funded by the fat cats who benefited from maggies legacy.
 
videojetman":1l0gxyi5 said:
to some people it may be a "bargain"
but to average hardworking people it's like a kick in the nuts.
i thought we were in a recession ?
even if the average funeral cost was around £5000.
still leaves £7,995,000. left over.
could go to better causes than this public farce.
surely it should be privately funded by the fat cats who benefited from maggies legacy.

As usual the myths around thatcher are purely for the anti's own entertainment and have very little based in truth

I would suggest the 27 pence figure was closer to the truth and also a large part if this would be on policing because the anti's can't control themselves in a public place

Here's the thing though ... Had some one said to the anti's 6 months ago ... How would you like to see thatcher dead and buried and all you have to pay is 27 pence to see that... They would have rifled through the penny jar quicker than a rat up a drain pipe

Anti's are very fickle creatures aren't they
 
sylus":1n4kto09 said:
As usual the myths around thatcher are purely for the anti's own entertainment and have very little based in truth

The same could be said about the supporters. Unfortunately the voices of reason on both sides are drowned out by received opinion and myths. If you look at any online debate on the subject you'll see the same half dozen arguments, often the exact same phrases, being trotted out by both sides- in fact even the fence-sitters are mostly working from a script.
 
I don't think it's a case of the amount - it's a matter of principle.

It's also being used by a political party to
a) Discredit its opponents.
b) Perpetuate a lie in the interests of a.
c) Distract a gullible populace from the real issues.
 
dbmtb":nd7riy02 said:
c) Distract a gullible populace from the real issues.

Although if you assume that inequality in society is a "real issue", it's not doing a very good job ;)
 
Considering we are all meant to be cutting spending, it could a bad thing to do if the priminister wants to keep people on his side. I thought they would have kept it a bit more low key as to avoid the obvious trouble it will now attract. :facepalm:
 
i'm not here to get into any conflicts with retrobike members.
just making a point, i don't even want to contribute 27p to this farce.
 
videojetman":1lp80qr2 said:
i'm not here to get into any conflicts with retrobike members.
just making a point, i don't even want to contribute 27p to this farce.

Personally, I'm glad you've started this ball rolling. I mean there's literally a shitload of things the government spends money on that I don't agree with, so thanks for that...
 
Back
Top