> The problem is that the unions had decided that, even though the economic > realities, and not the companies themselves, were dictating the required > action, they were not prepared to accept it. That, to me, is moronic. The > most obvious example is Scargill, who would not accept that cheap foreign > coal was making many UK pits, with difficult and relatively expensive > extraction, unviable.
Yep, it's disgusting that some people think that the unstoppable force of globalisation should be slowed when it means that those in hitherto well-supported industries will lose their jobs, livelyhoods and the prospect of supporting themselves. I'm not disagreeing that economic conditions make it difficult, but you do have to call in to question the sense in importing coal across oceans when it is dormant in pits here. It makes no environmental sense, and as has been witnessed, it destroys whole communities and even, in the mining case, regions of the country. I sense in your arguments that you forget we had a socialist government up until the mid 70's (at which time we just had an impotent government), not a pure brand of Thatcherite capitalism. People expected to be cared for, whereas nowadays they're quite certain they're not going to be. Lovely world. Oh, and cheese and chive - you know it's all prawn cocktail on WOS.
