StevieF8

Probably because they expected more back in tax and from share sales than it was costing them.... Do you think she just sat there saying sell this, sell that....or we're forecasts provided by analysts which helped her make the decisions?

From your link.... When asked on a visit to Derby whether the Philpotts were a product of Britain's benefit system, Osborne said: "It's right we ask questions as a government, a society and as taxpayers, why we are subsidising lifestyles like these. It does need to be handled." He said Philpott "was responsible for horrendous crimes, crimes which have shocked the nation". Try to read the whole story, not just the headline....

Yes...I'm not going to sit here and go through the census line by line....I know it can be fun shooting PB down, but come on... Yes, theory. It's your theory that 2nd generation onwards answer the census in a certain way....I never disputed it, there is no proving it one way or another, so it's a theory...didn't say it was wrong though did I?

Made up quote....

Oh so Labour and the unions were in perfect harmony in the 70's were they?

I wasn't wrong at all, it's called interpreting the data.... When did I say I was worried....I was correcting you AGAIN posting census figures from 2001, before all the Poles started flooding in, when you claimed 85% of the UK is white British.

Because if they refused to work and held the country to ransom, something had to be done Labour failed with the unions didn't they all through the 70's Im not even going to attempt to defend that in any way, shape or form....

:laugh: Good one.....

There is no breakdown between the ethic groups, so until there is you can only interpret the data as presented If you apply your theory, it's probably something like 1 in 6/7

You have NEVER proved me wrong....you offered your opinion, I don't have to agree with you That doesn't make you right.

We might all be sitting in our houses with no gas,leccy or water while they were all out on strike over a payrise ifs & buts.....it was the right decision at the time to break the unions....Labour couldn't negotiate with them, so Thatcher would have had no chance.....what options do you think she had?

WTF would you know about facts?

As short-sighted as Brown for giving away the UK's gold....All politicians get it wrong Mark is making a contribution I head today, not heard the amount though...

I'd rather a fat cat got rich and my electricity stayed on....and bills would have gone through the roof with strikers demands????? I said 'similar funeral' I didn't say military funeral did I?

This isn't just money spent on one day, MI5 and SIS will be working now, looking at threats, security issues, potential trouble spots, crowd control, contingencies......the list goes on, no surprise it's costing this much. I think some people are under the impression the £10m is to pay for a solid gold urn and flowers...the bigger the event and the more idiots likely to try and disrupt it, the more it will cost. if it was Blair, I suspect the cost would be similar.

Is 1 in 5 a small minority?

Don't see the big picture do you? She took industries the Government was giving money to, as well as being held to ransom by the workers over pay and conditions and made them pay the Government money through taxes. How many times has you power been out since the 70's because people are out on strike over a pay rise. If Labour agreed with the Unions in the 70's then there wouldn't have been the strikes that there was Thatcher came in and took their power away, if these industries continued to hold the country to ransom then where do you think the money would have come from to prop them up? Thats right, back to 80% income tax. Will Blair get a similar funeral? I expect so, why wouldn't he, unless he specified differently

Most of the money will be spent on security and that would have been the case wherever the funeral was taking place given the security risks, especially with The Queen in attendance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_England look at the White British figure...virtually the same over 10 years....look at the total up about 4m

Fiddling the figures again???? First if all they are not the same, because Scotland did their own census in 2011 so those figures aren't in that England & Wales census figures..... The number of people living in England and Wales only is up 7% on 2001 census figures to 56.1 million I could go on.....but if you think the UK population is the same in 2011 as it was in 2001 then you're delusional.

Should I point out the obvious or wait for the penny to drop?

The 'latest figures' brought to you from PB Industries. From the United Kingdom Census 2001.

So you have no idea....why am I not surprised?

What are they protesting for?

Typical Labor politician, anyone who talks about, or has an opinion on immigration is branded a racist. Didn’t have the balls to say it about her when she was alive though did he…spineless.