Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Glasgow Boards/Forums _ Glasgow News Blog _ Did Tories Kill 25,000 Glaswegians?

Posted by: GG 22nd Jun 2011, 10:47pm

Disturbing new research by some of the city's most eminent social scientists has concluded that the most plausible single explanation for Glasgow's shockingly high mortality rate is the effect of a sustained political attack on the city by the Conservative governments of the eighties and nineties.

Scientists at the Glasgow Centre for Population Health (GCPH) conducted extensive research into a multitude of candidate hypotheses which may account for why thousands more Glaswegians have died than can be explained by the city's endemic poverty and deprivation (a phenomenon widely referred to as the 'http://discuss.glasgowguide.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=18386').

While it has long been known that Glasgow's high death rate from 1980 onwards was largely due to alcohol-related deaths, drug-related deaths, suicides, violent deaths and road-traffic accidents in young adults (in addition to the continuing high rates of mortality for cardiovascular disease, cancer and stroke), the GCPH study looked into the underlying factors which resulted in the unique and deadly set of negative health behaviours prevalent in the city.

While acknowledging that further comparative research is required into a complex and multifarious problem, the report on the study concludes emphatically that:

QUOTE
The political attack hypothesis seems best placed to bring together the most likely behavioural, cultural and structural determinants of health into a coherent narrative which can explain the post-1980 mortality phenomenon. This hypothesis suggests that the neoliberal government policies implemented from 1979 onwards disproportionately affected the [...] Glaswegian population, and that this in turn was causally implicated in changing behavioural patterns leading to negative health outcomes.

In short, the report suggests that punitive and vindictive Tory policies "got under the skin" of the Glaswegian population, resulting in many thousands more premature deaths from drugs, alcohol, suicide, road-traffic accidents, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, stroke and cancer, even when compared to other equally deprived cities such as Manchester and Liverpool.

In explaining why the Tory governments were inclined to implement such damaging policies, the report suggests that:
QUOTE
[I]n the years after Edward Heath’s abandonment of his neo-liberal ‘Selsdon agenda’ in 1972, and particularly after the loss of the 1974 General Elections, elements within the Conservative Party planned a political attack against the organised working class – which had proved such an obstacle for Heath. After 1979 this plan was implemented with a high degree of resolve, and with very significant adverse impacts.

Regarding why the policies were most lethal in Glasgow, the report states:
QUOTE
What seems less clear is why other deindustrialised areas of the UK did not suffer in quite the same way as Scotland and Glasgow during the 1980s. On this question, there is evidence to suggest that Scotland was in some ways particularly targeted in the broader UK attack, and in key respects more vulnerable to its damaging effect than other areas – in light of its pre-existing poverty, high dependence on industrial employment, and very high reliance on council housing. There is also some evidential basis to indicate that Scotland had a distinctive cultural response to the political attack – in terms of a national feeling of disempowerment and loss of control.

Full report here:
http://www.gcph.co.uk/assets/0000/1080/GLA147851_Hypothesis_Report__2_.pdf


GG.

Posted by: Crewsy Fixer 22nd Jun 2011, 10:57pm

I voted No, I have no intellectual input apart from No. Ordinary good respectful people have been down trodden since time began.

Posted by: Macbeast 23rd Jun 2011, 12:04am

"The report suggests " "suggests " " may have " " suggests " " seems " " evidence to suggest " " some evidential basis "

Means nothing.

Lets have some comparative mortality figures for pre-1980 ?

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 23rd Jun 2011, 12:24am

QUOTE
Scientists at the Glasgow Centre for Population Health (GCPH) conducted extensive research into a multitude of candidate hypotheses which may account for why thousands more Glaswegians have died than can be explained by the city's endemic poverty and deprivation

" ... research into a multitude of candidate hypotheses which may account ..."

To charge 25,000 deaths from wide and varied reasons to the account of a political party after extensive research into a multiple of hypothetical candidate causes can only be described as an exercise in research itself.

Theories are all well and good; even when based on a multitude of candidate hypotheses, but they remain theories.

Would it have been a consideration to note how many of the dead among the 25,000 were Catholic or Protestant; or of foreign heritage?

To ask if members might think that a political party's policies might be responsible for the premature deaths of 25,000 Glaswegians over two decades: 2.5 per day approx; and that based on a bunch of hypotheses, has that ring of conspiracy theory about it.
I'd have to read the report itself ... but just out of curiosity.
But my answer is NO.

Posted by: tarheels 23rd Jun 2011, 12:26am

QUOTE
I voted No, I have no intellectual input apart from No. Ordinary good respectful people have been down trodden since time began.

I am from Ojai, Ca. (oh-hi). I do have heritage from Scotland, many years back, I will study this, thanks. Reilly = tarheels

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 23rd Jun 2011, 12:38am

Certainly the social conditions of pre-war Glasgow, condoned by the Establishment, and their contempt for Scots, killed off thousands of Glaswegians.

Posted by: Guest 23rd Jun 2011, 03:34am

I think some serious study into the Glasgow Effect is long overdue, so well done to these scientists for moving on from the assumption that the higher death rates in our city are simply due to the 'Glaswegian mentality'. Lets hope that this leads to further investigation of the real causes.

Let Glasgow Flourish.

Posted by: tamhickey 23rd Jun 2011, 04:03am

I worked in the Licensed trade during the eighties, and saw the effects that Government policies had on people. Skilled tradesmen were being made redundant in mining, shipbuilding, steelworks and in the building of trains. This de-industrialisation left thousands of people who had worked all their lives in the same trade, and with the same friends undergoing a huge change in their lives, where, bereft of their trades, they would meet up in the pub to pass their days. These were guys who were in the main aged around 45 plus who had done nothing else in their lives apart from the work that the Government had quite deliberately killed off. It led to depression, confusion and a real lack of self esteem for many, but also led to others investing their redundancy money into businesses, moving abroad and buying their homes. That, of course would be dependant on the amount of money available upon redundancy, but the above figure of 25,000 seems rather conflated. However, it's also dependent upon the time scale involved and the veracity of these figures have to be examined in light of all of the above.

Posted by: wee davy 23rd Jun 2011, 07:39am

The figures are irrelevant.
Did people die more quickly in Glasgow and the surrounding area, as a result of 'Thatchers' World' - most definitely.

Are the most vulnerable under attack once again, in the 2010's?

You can bet your life.

Do you think Westminster really gives a fig, for mortality rates in Glasgow?
If you believe that - you also believe in 'the BIG SOCIETY' (Cameron Style)

Posted by: Guest 23rd Jun 2011, 07:43am

Next they will be blaming the Tories for the Holocaust.

What a load of crap. wacko.gif

Posted by: Beltona Bill 23rd Jun 2011, 07:49am

What a load of self-pitying driffle that must have been written by neo-Marxists of the deepest red.

Glasgow has been ruled by the Left for many, many years, so they must bear a lot of the blame that is being leveled at the Conservative Party. However, the blame must ultimately lie with the citizens themselves - drink, drugs, smoking, over-eating, unhealthy life styles,etc. are the principal causes of premature death.

It's not compulsory to indulge in self-harm. Stop whingeing and blaming someone else - it's your own fault.

Posted by: Jupiter 23rd Jun 2011, 08:21am

I dont suppose these mortality figures had anything to do with the copious amounts of alcohol poured down throats,the never ending cigarettes and tobacco smoked to the point where lungs couldnt function,the fresh fruits and healthy foods shunned for the alternative of the lard soaked fry-ups,leaving individuals so obese they are unable to tie their laces?
You can pin anything on any government but dont suggest to me that a person is incapable of making his or her own lifestyle choices.
Constant abuse of the body is bound to bring consequences and premature mortality probably ranks the highest.(Although I have no stats,figures or hard evidence to back this up,merely opinion,just like the tosh written in the disturbing new research)

Posted by: GG 23rd Jun 2011, 08:37am

QUOTE
I dont suppose these mortality figures had anything to do with the copious amounts of alcohol poured down throats,the never ending cigarettes and tobacco smoked ...

Jupiter, you are indeed correct that the factors you mention did cause thousands of deaths (direct causality), however, the hypotheses research is tasked with looking at the underlying factors which led to such a phenomenon. Or, as the conclusion to the research states:

QUOTE
It is unlikely that any single cause is responsible for this phenomenon, and there is uncertainty around why Scotland started to diverge from elsewhere in Europe around 1950. It is clearer that the health and social patterns that emerged during the 1980s and 1990s are more closely linked to negative health behaviours (e.g. alcohol consumption), but these behaviours are in turn heavily influenced and shaped by the social, cultural and economic disruption which occurred as the political and economic policies of the UK abruptly changed from the later 1970s onwards.

Any understanding of the Scottish mortality patterning requires, as well as a clear focus on behaviours, an understanding of the most ‘upstream’ determinants of health, including economic, social and political history. Any analysis which only refers to tobacco use or alcohol, or even to early years — massively significant as these factors undoubtedly are — will inevitably fail to identify the overall causality of this profoundly troubling phenomenon, and will be liable to generate at best partial policy interventions, which are in turn most liable to prove disappointing in their outcomes.

This conclusion is the most important part of the whole document, and suggests that current policy (across a number of organisations) in addressing the higher mortality rates are doomed to failure because they do not address the underlying issues. Effectively, huge resources are currently being spent on solving a problem which is not the issue.

GG.

Posted by: bilbo.s 23rd Jun 2011, 08:48am

It seems that even the affluent ones are intent on killing themselves with binge drinking, smoking and McDonald's etc.

Posted by: chas1937 23rd Jun 2011, 08:51am

Alcohol,/cigs and drugs are the problem and the fact that they are means that the high death rate is self inflicted.All the warnings about this fact goes out the window because of the fact folk think it will never happen too me.You just need too look around you and see the amount of young folk still smoking and THEY know that it can kill you.The older generation didn't get that advice.In the last 2 years here there is a family that have lost 4 members through drink and drug taking with 3 still doing it.So don't blame Governments blame ourselves.The government now says that the Methadone programme isnt working and of course it's not because it is only an extra to folk who use drugs and what is really needed is total abstinance and that goes for alcoholics too

Posted by: farci 23rd Jun 2011, 08:52am

'Chinese Whispers' might be the title of this topic - that's the phenomenon where with each retelling a story changes to the point where the original statement is lost. Combine that with the journalese style of the headline:
Did Tories Kill 25,000 Glaswegians?, New research points to lethal political attack and we are well on the way to losing the plot completely.

Like other posters I believe this is a piece of academic introspection which should be treated with the greatest scepticism. It seems to based on an interpretation of the 'Bradford-Hill Criteria' which I believe are recognised as having limitations.

4/10 for the researchers.

Posted by: flashton 23rd Jun 2011, 09:06am

It's a very useful paper and provides an analysis of the direct links between economic and social policies and the health of the nation. The problem is that the time lag between the two is often decades and the politicians have long gone.

There are several policies from the 1980s/90 where this is evident. An obvious one was the introduction of compulsory competitive tendering where contracts often went to the lowest bidder. Privatisation of hospital cleaning and the rise of MRSA and other hospital infections was no coincidence.

School meals was another. I have just been studying an interesting parallel from the early part of the 20th century where army recruits were found to be so malnourished that Britain was felt to be in danger by the troops not being up to scratch. The introduction of school meals was one of the responses to this concern.

Equally interesting is that the 1980s saw this policy reversed (at least here in England) with the result that many school kitchens closed. Fast forward twenty years and the concern is once again malnourished (obesity this time) adults and children in the lowest socio -economic groups.

It seems that the lessons of history are never learned.

Posted by: Dunvegan 23rd Jun 2011, 09:40am

QUOTE (flashton @ 23rd Jun 2011, 07:14pm) *
It's a very useful paper and provides an analysis of the direct links between economic and social policies and the health of the nation. The problem is that the time lag between the two is often decades and the politicians have long gone. ...

The response to malnutrition in the 1900s was indeed based on the need for fit canon fodder. This was hardly addressed up to the second world war where the German Nazis, albeit at the expense of others, put in place health and welfare schemes in order to breed fitter canon fodder than the rest of Europe. The contrast between the allied prisoners at Dunkirk and their fit German captors was a very marked indeed. It was not until the fifties, "The welfare state", that the nutrition of the lower socio economic portion of the country was ever taken into account.

Posted by: *greta* 23rd Jun 2011, 09:46am

The tories have always hit Glasgow hard because it was a Labour stronghold. So well done to these scientists for highlighting this fact. Of course it has to be one of the reasons, poverty and drink going along with it, as well as loss of hope. Thats one reason that you will never (no matter what) find myself as a Glaswegion and Scot, voting Tory.

Posted by: Papadoc 23rd Jun 2011, 09:48am

Nothing whatsoever to do then with the Tamany Hall style of a Socialist Council over all these years.

They have never given a toss for the people who automatically vote for them, so long as they were able to line their own pockets and provide jobs for their friends and relatives.

Posted by: ionnsaigh 23rd Jun 2011, 09:58am

Difficult to believe that the British Tory government, would racially pick on the working class of Scotland, in a malicious manner. Then again we had the Poll Tax exclusively introduced, worth noting that Northern Ireland was left out of the legislation ...... one wonders why.

One thing is for sure, the Tories hated Strathclyde Regional Council, both for it's size and subsequent power, enjoyed and abused by the criminal overlords, of the Labour Party in Scotland....... The Labour Party or rather it's Middle Class timidity, both allowed and sanctioned, without as much as a whisper of meaningful protest, an attack not only on the poor, rather the people of Scotland.......

Poverty kills people, the finger of blame points firmly and ultimately, to the economic system Capitalism, a system that ultimately depends on the exploitation of the many by the few. One that is thankfully doomed to failure, due to it's own inherent antagonistic contradiction, ( wan that pits wan against the other ) a system that's embraced equally, by the Labour and Tory parties ( throw in the SNP ).

Twenty Five Thousand Glaswegians, is a cross underestimate of the disease and premature deaths that Capitalism creates.

Posted by: frankbuntain 23rd Jun 2011, 11:08am

I am not a politically driven person neither labour or tory. I voted NO to this topic and wonder how any reasonably thinking person can be dupted into thinking that the Glasgow Effect was the result of any political party. Glasweigans have the choice to change their own surrundings but many do not have the will to better themselves or their local enviroment. I can't believe that Glasgow alone has been effected and places like Liverpool, Newcastle or Dundee (as examples) and other cities/town have not. Glasgow needs to think why would someone or organisation spread this kind of topic???
Think Glasgow THINK!!

Posted by: Rabbie 23rd Jun 2011, 11:40am

Nope, yet another pile of over simplified, twisted statistical garbage falsely derived by some shower of biased pseudo intellectual twits.

As much as I detest politicians of all persuasions. of all ilks, it is incorrect and illogical to claim the "Glasgow Effect as being due the Tories political agendas in 80's, 90's.

You do not have to look far to find that many, cities home and abroad, run by different regimes suffer the same effects, or WORSE!

Perhaps the "Glasgow Effect" should be labelled "The Urban Effect."

Posted by: wee davy 23rd Jun 2011, 11:55am

GG posts are normally for people to do just that, frank (having been a member since 2006, I'm SURE you will know that already).

Aside from any party political issues, it is a disgrace, that in 2011, there is such a disparity in mortality rates, MERELY ACROSS THE CITY, never mind compared with anywhere else.

To blame it on the population, is I think not only unfair - but doesn't do one positive thing to address the issue. You may as well suggest people who die of malnutrition, starvation and dehydration choose to die this way, because they are foolish enough to 'live' where they reside.

THINK UK - THINK!

Posted by: GG 23rd Jun 2011, 08:05pm

Thanks wee davy, yes, absolutely, the most important thing that can be done in this forum, in its own modest way, is to encourage and facilitate people to think about issues which affect Glaswegians. In this case, everyone knows that far higher numbers of Glaswegians have been dying over the last three decades than anywhere else in the UK, but still – in the 21st Century – this increased mortality rate continues to blight the lives of many thousands of Glaswegian families. And it's not just about premature death, it's also about the quality of the lives lived by Glaswegians.

No matter how unpalatable to some, we need to better understand the reasons for this higher mortality rate in order to address it. It's no use this research being carried out if people are not going to read it and discuss it. This is not a subject for ivory towers, but, I believe, one for ordinary Glaswegians to get involved in.

GG.

Posted by: GG 23rd Jun 2011, 08:20pm

QUOTE (tamhickey @ 23rd Jun 2011, 04:11am) *
I worked in the Licensed trade during the eighties, and saw the effects that Government policies had on people. Skilled tradesmen were being made redundant in mining, shipbuilding, steelworks and in the building of trains. This de-industrialisation left thousands of people who had worked all their lives in the same trade, and with the same friends undergoing a huge change in their lives, where, bereft of their trades, they would meet up in the pub to pass their days. These were guys who were in the main aged around 45 plus who had done nothing else in their lives apart from the work that the Government had quite deliberately killed off. It led to depression, confusion and a real lack of self esteem for many, but also led to others investing their redundancy money into businesses, moving abroad and buying their homes. That, of course would be dependant on the amount of money available upon redundancy, but the above figure of 25,000 seems rather conflated. However, it's also dependent upon the time scale involved and the veracity of these figures have to be examined in light of all of the above.

Tam, here's an extract of what the report says about deindustrialisation:

QUOTE
The West of Scotland may have suffered a more rapid and profound process of deindustrialisation than other areas of the UK and Europe, although the evidence for Glasgow City in comparison to Manchester and Liverpool is less certain. Sharp deindustrialisation was a particular feature of Scotland from the late 1970s onwards and the loss of employment that was associated with it contributed to the inequalities in the UK between the South-East of England and elsewhere. Such a rapid loss of employment and community structure is likely to have had an important influence on the culture of Scotland and Glasgow, and on the health-related behaviours.

There is increasing evidence to suggest that the pace and manner of deindustrialisation was forced in the UK, in comparison to other European countries, and that this was part of a broader ‘political attack’.

Growing up in one of the worst-affected areas of Glasgow during the timescale we are talking about, I watched the life and vitality literally drain from the men whose jobs were taken away. So many of them never recovered; as you say, many sunk into a life of going to the pub and the bookies, withdrawing from their families as they were engulfed in hopelessness. It is tragic to think that such despair and isolation could have been avoided, that pace of deindustrialisation was forced in order to deliberately destabilise and destroy whole communities.

Below is a graphic from the GCPH report which puts the 'political attack' hypothesis into the wider context of the process which leads to higher mortality.


GG.

Posted by: GG 23rd Jun 2011, 08:39pm

QUOTE (farci @ 23rd Jun 2011, 09:00am) *
... Like other posters I believe this is a piece of academic introspection which should be treated with the greatest scepticism. It seems to based on an interpretation of the 'Bradford-Hill Criteria' which I believe are recognised as having limitations.

4/10 for the researchers.

Farci, as far as I understand, the researchers were well aware of the potential limitations of their study – including the use of the Bradford-Hill criteria – and sought to minimise any possible misinterpretations or omissions. In fact, they have already embarked on a further investigation of the possible implications of the limitations of their study.

If you are skeptical of this academic approach to solving an intractable problem, perhaps you can suggest how the problem might be better solved?

GG.

Posted by: Grampar 23rd Jun 2011, 09:32pm

Whether or not your posts from people who live outside Glasgow hold any relevance the simple fact remains that since pre 1707 the "English" Government has always taken from Scotland more than it's fair share and aimed it's guns at Glasgow in particular, and this has been shown time and time again. For those who post from outside Glasgow your views are always welcome but do they reflect this City in any way? I do not think so. My eldest son has lived in Cornwall for 26 of his 43 years and denegrates the City of his birth, fed by the lies he hears from his Tory pals, at any opportunity. He is a clean living Christian but, foul language and inuendo apart, he reminds of that other expat Frankie Boyle as far as his attitude towards our City is concerned. They, as other expats furth of the City are concerned, missed the Glasgow Effect by leaving the Dear Green place. And so it has always been. Some maintain their Scottish-ness but deny their Glaswegian birthright and are only too pleased to knock the City at the least opportunity but they forget those of us who stayed in the City and fell foul of this dreadful " plague". I am one of them. I turned to alcohol and my body is shot to pieces from the liver out but thanks to medical skills and my Christian friends and family, in particular my Minister, I overcame the dreaded booze ( and fags ) and now live a happier and more contended life . But lets not kid oursleves Thatcher's dislike of the Scots can be summed up in two words POLL TAX. So it has been Tory, behind closed doors, policy since the "Parcel o' Rogues in a Nation" sold Scotlands birthright in 1707 and I am sorry to say. will continue to be so. If in doubt just listen to Annabel Goldie and read between the lines how she would return to Westminster only rule ASAP. Just think what that would mean for Glasgow! Hopefully the Glasgow Effect is now history and through our devolved Government will for ever remain so.

Posted by: Macbeast 23rd Jun 2011, 10:51pm

QUOTE
" In fact, they are already embarked on a further investigation of the possible implications of the limitations of their study. "

So the researchers have no confidence in their own published conclusions and fear that they might in fact be a load of horse manure ?

Posted by: GG 23rd Jun 2011, 11:24pm

Macbeast, good point, but the one thing you can always be sure about published scientific research papers is that one of the recommendations will be that further research is required clarify and explore the findings of the research just done. Indeed, this research was a synthesis and classification of pre-existing hypotheses derived from previous research. It's how knowledge is constructed in the scientific community; it's just the nature of the (mac)beast! smile.gif

GG.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 23rd Jun 2011, 11:52pm

QUOTE
... good point, but the one thing you can always be sure about (with) published scientific research papers is that one of the recommendations will be that further research is required clarify and explore the findings of the research just done

QUOTE
Scientists at the Glasgow Centre for Population Health (GCPH) conducted extensive research into a multitude of candidate hypotheses which may account for why thousands more Glaswegians have died than can be explained by the city's endemic poverty and deprivation (a phenomenon widely referred to as the 'Glasgow Effect').

I would have been happier to have read that Scientists at the Glasgow Centre for Population Health had come up with something better than conducting extensive research into a multitude of candidate hypotheses which may (or may not) account for any phenomena.
It all seems too much like my old man's saying, "If we had ham, we could have ham and eggs ... If we had eggs."

Now the trick is to unsucessfully attempt to scientifically disprove (falsifiability) the GCPH findings to; at least, establish a working thesis ... which may or may not become an accepted theory - at least until it is disproved. Jobs for the boys intit?

QUOTE
Scientific hypothesis

People refer to a trial solution to a problem as a hypothesis — often called an "educated guess" — because it provides a suggested solution based on the evidence. Experimenters may test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem.

According to Schick and Vaughn, researchers weighing up alternative hypotheses may take into consideration:

Testability (compare falsifiability as discussed above)
Simplicity (as in the application of "Occam's razor", discouraging the postulation of excessive numbers of entities)
Scope – the apparent application of the hypothesis to multiple cases of phenomena
Fruitfulness – the prospect that a hypothesis may explain further phenomena in the future
Conservatism – the degree of "fit" with existing recognized knowledge-systems.

Evaluating hypotheses

Karl Popper's formulation of hypothetico-deductive method, which he called the method of "conjectures and refutations", demands falsifiable hypotheses, framed in such a manner that the scientific community can prove them false (usually by observation). According to this view, a hypothesis cannot be "confirmed", because there is always the possibility that a future experiment will show that it is false. Hence, failing to falsify a hypothesis does not prove that hypothesis: it remains provisional. However, a hypothesis that has been rigorously tested and not falsified can form a reasonable basis for action, i.e., we can act as if it were true, until such time as it is falsified. Just because we've never observed rain falling upward, doesn't mean that we never will—however improbable, our theory of gravity may be falsified some day.

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 24th Jun 2011, 01:03am

Certainly in 'Auld Glesga' booze' was an escape from misrable lifes. I often heard the English say of auld glesga: 'There's a pub on every corner' - they weren't far wrong.

What was Harry Lauder's old song 'When I get a drink on a Saterday night.............'

And of course it suited the Establishment for the masses to booze away thier money.

Posted by: Melody 24th Jun 2011, 08:37am

Tommy they had to keep them inebriated in order to let them dream off for a wee while from the miserable lives that they afforded the poor workers and that was when they still needed workers. It was only a slightly better existence that being used as cannon fodder when they never needed them.

How's the revolution going? Mind give me a shout when it is time for me to command the troops because The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. laugh.gif

Posted by: *Michael* 24th Jun 2011, 08:59am

The report mentions a political attack by neoliberal politicians - does this not include Messrs Blair and Brown? Or do they get a free pass because it is Glasgow we are talking about?

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 24th Jun 2011, 09:23am

I'm gonna make you responsible for rounding up Jupiter, Melody; he could be an informer/Quisling for the Establishment - and I don't trust that Thee, he hedges his bets, best he be eliminated; auldbutch could take care of him. tongue.gif
Must watch out for 'He' of many identities infiltrating the troops - definatley an informer. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Melody 24th Jun 2011, 09:39am

Great Tommy but it sounds a bit like Mission Impossible to me. I want to be Rosa Luxemburg, she was Jewish and I'm half Jewish and she liked singing as well. laugh.gif

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 24th Jun 2011, 11:44am

The more that social democracy develops, grows, and becomes stronger, the more the enlightened masses of workers will take their own destinies, the leadership of their movement, and the determination of its direction into their own hands. Rosa Luxemburg

She was imprisoned for her opposition to WW1.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 24th Jun 2011, 11:54am

I thought that Blair led a Social Democratic Labour government for 13 years until recently.
The only enlightened masses of workers that he and his government seemed to be interested in; apart from himself and friends, were the masses of imigrants he allowed to enlight onto our shores.
Rosa Luxemburg would turn in her grave at the wasted opportunity afforded the workin' class in great Britain.

Posted by: big tommy 24th Jun 2011, 01:35pm

For sure they killed the hopes and dreams of many many people.

Tommy

Posted by: Kenneth 24th Jun 2011, 03:07pm

Is this typical of Glaswegian attitudes to what the Union has done?

Posted by: Healthy Mac 24th Jun 2011, 03:13pm

Eminent scientists ?? !! Don't make me laugh. More likely that deep fried Mars Bars are to blame together with a high rate of alcoholism and an unhealthy lifestyle.

Robert the Bruce must be turning in his grave at Dunfermline.

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 24th Jun 2011, 03:42pm

Vey true, Big Tommy, but people aren’t as stupid as in yesteryear, they want more than full bellies, they do have aspirations for a better quality of life
Since the post war years there has been 2 steps forward and one back in Social democracy; major step back: the Thatcher years and present government attempting a ‘Leap back’. People still get fooled by words/actions of politicians but again not as much as in yesteryear. Example: Cameron repeating yet again at Brussels news conference to-day: ‘People know we are taking action in Libya to protect the civilians’ – In Tory arrogance they believe people will accept this.

Posted by: wee davy 24th Jun 2011, 04:00pm

In Tory arrogance they believe people will accept this.

At least Libya isn't one they can blame on 'the irresponsible previous Labour government'.

I'm sick & tired of being sick and tired wie THAT wan!

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 24th Jun 2011, 05:23pm

Well they were full of envy a Labour government went along with Bush attacking Iraq, Davy, 'War is our busines' they said to them selves. If they had been in power they would have urged BUsh to take on Iran.
Mind they can blame Labour for putting fancy ideas into Thee's head - ideas above himself tongue.gif

Posted by: *harriet* 24th Jun 2011, 08:11pm

It is a shame that such men had a bad time under the Tories. Is it a fair way to treat proud workers who built so much in their lifetimes and who made Glasgow what it was?

Posted by: benny 24th Jun 2011, 08:35pm

Firstly, I have to say that I consider the poll itself to be badly worded. I certainly believe that Thatcherite policies had a harmful effect on many working class British families, but I can't honestly agree that I consider them to be directly responsible for the deaths of 25,000 Glaswegians.

It seems obvious to me that the deprivation which followed on the mass redundancies of the 80's must have had an effect on the health of those subjected to it, but that is a different matter from saying that it was directly responsible for 25,000 deaths.

In a situation of dire poverty, which many experienced in the 80's, it isn't always a matter of personal choice determining lifestyle. For someone on a very limited income, burgers and chips is a much more attractive option than a healthier type meal, because it is more affordable. In a cheap supermarket like Aldi, even today, you can buy a large bag of frozen chips for 99p - cheaper than a tray of apples, or a bag of oranges. For someone with 2 or 3 kids to feed, the cheaper option is often the only otpion.

Posted by: Ken 24th Jun 2011, 09:20pm

This contribution is to Glasgow Guide, what a slurry tanker is to 'meals on wheels.'

Posted by: GG 24th Jun 2011, 11:10pm

QUOTE (benny @ 24th Jun 2011, 08:28pm) *
... It seems obvious to me that the deprivation which followed on the mass redundancies of the 80's must have had an effect on the health of those subjected to it, but that is a different matter from saying that it was directly responsible for 25,000 deaths. ...

Benny, thanks for your comment, I hope to reply to a couple of aspects of your post over the weekend, unfortunately don't have the time just now. However, what I 'd like to say is that the report is actually about how deprivation is becoming less relevant to the worsening health and increasing mortality equation in Glasgow (during 80s and 90s) ... or as the report introduction says "[it's about] the weakening causal link between deprivation and life expectancy". In fact, some social scientists have been able to remove deprivation from the equation altogether and show that the 'Glasgow' effect can be found in places such as Milngavie and, dare I say it, Bearsden!

GG.

Posted by: Macbeast 25th Jun 2011, 09:18am

It's a bit much to say or imply that the Conservative Government followed a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing. But I've noticed before that GG's headlines betray a tendentious nature where the Tories are concerned.

Posted by: big al 25th Jun 2011, 10:06am

I'd 'hypothesise' that the research makes for an interesting - if certainly controversial - point of view by one group of academics who appear to approach this thorny subject from a certain angle. Does anyone know of any other research into the 'Glasgow Effect' which introduces an alternative explanation to the one put forward here?

Posted by: kentzo 25th Jun 2011, 12:58pm

I always knew London government was robbin' us.

I just didn't realise it was also killing us. mad.gif


Posted by: kentzo 25th Jun 2011, 05:33pm

And, of course, with current government policy, (due to a banking system collapse that is fully attributable to greedy London), targeting the more vulnerable members of our community, and the true impact of the Greek collapse on the UK yet to be revealed, can we expect another 25,000 ‘excess’ deaths in Glasgow?

Posted by: wombat 25th Jun 2011, 11:32pm

if yie keep people down long enough they wont want tae live.ah'm thinkin the deaths rates wid be simlar elsewhere in any city among the underpriveleged, too many regulations/restrictions these day's,too many so called"authorities" wee hitler clones wie badges,some wie guns that yie widny trust wie a blunt knife.

Posted by: Dunvegan 26th Jun 2011, 04:37am

The relative rates of heart malfunctions due to poor diet has been well documented in many countries apart from Scotland. The one factor common to all is the disparity in health in the lower socio economic groupings. As one poster pointed out a bag of chips is cheaper than a bag of apples. It has been documented in the past that 44% of Scottish males do not eat fresh fruit or vegetables. It would appear from this that it is not only a socio economic problem but one of complacency and lack of effort in supplying nutritional meals. There is a problem with obesity from bad diet in Australia, this being attributed to inadequate diets in the lower socio economic groups. Due to the plenitude of fresh fruit and vegetables, cheap meat (we are talking about "budget cuts", stewing beef, pork and chicken) there is only one explanation apparent to me : McDonalds, Kentucky fried, fish and chip shops, and all the easy ways out. Jamie Oliver tried to show the way with quick nutritional school meals and to his own terrible disappointment was rejected by the majority of kids weaned on quick fried garbage.

Posted by: Dunvegan 26th Jun 2011, 04:39am

QUOTE (kentzo @ 25th Jun 2011, 10:51pm) *
I always knew London government was robbin' us.

I just didn't realise it was also killing us. mad.gif

During the 1680/90s one fith of Scotlands poulation died of starvation. This after the Union of the crowns.

Posted by: ionnsaigh 26th Jun 2011, 01:53pm

QUOTE (Melody @ 24th Jun 2011, 08:30am) *
How's the revolution going? Mind give me a shout when it is time for me to command the troops because The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. laugh.gif

The worldwide revolution has begun....... the troops will pick commanders, from their own ranks.
( based loosely on the Spanish Civil War model )
It's being televised, however they all call it protests.
Better tae die oan yer feet,
Than live oan yer knees forever. wink.gif

Posted by: GG 26th Jun 2011, 10:22pm

Hi Benny,

Please see my reply earlier about the deindustrialisation and deprivation aspects of your post.

Regarding:

QUOTE (benny @ 24th Jun 2011, 08:28pm) *
Firstly, I have to say that I consider the poll itself to be badly worded. I certainly believe that Thatcherite policies had a harmful effect on many working class British families, but I can't honestly agree that I consider them to be directly responsible for the deaths of 25,000 Glaswegians.

I'd accept, naturally, that the wording is open to improvement; perhaps I should have included the phrase "political attack" in the question, rather than "unduly harsh"? This would have allowed for a more direct questioning of one of the main conclusions of the report, that:

QUOTE
"From 1980 onwards the mortality pattern changed and this seems most likely to be attributable to the changed political context, produced by neoliberal political attack, and the consequent hopelessness and community disruption experienced in Scotland and Glasgow."

My question was:
QUOTE
Do you think that Tory policies towards Glasgow in the 80s and 90s were unduly harsh, resulting in the premature deaths of thousands of Glaswegians?

In your case, I think you would have voted 'no' to either wording?

GG.

Posted by: GG 26th Jun 2011, 10:42pm

QUOTE (Dunvegan @ 26th Jun 2011, 04:30am) *
... As one poster pointed out a bag of chips is cheaper than a bag of apples. It has been documented in the past that 44% of Scottish males do not eat fresh fruit or vegetables. It would appear from this that it is not only a socio economic problem but one of complacency and lack of effort in supplying nutritional meals. ... Jamie Oliver tried to show the way with quick nutritional school meals and to his own terrible disappointment was rejected by the majority of kids weaned on quick fried garbage.

Hi Dunvegan,

I'd totally agree with you that the diet of Glaswegians is very poor, in general. Glasgow City Council has tried to address the problem in Glasgow via a number of initiatives, e.g. by offering more nutritious school meals and even locking pupils in schools at lunchtime. While earlier attempts by the council have had mixed success, it's still too early to judge the 'locking in' development, as it was only started with first years in a few schools last year. That said, I seem to remember that the kids were ordering in fast food meals and having the delivery man deliver them through the school fence!

Here's what the report had to say about the diet hypothesis:
QUOTE
Evidence – diet

Shelton, using the Scottish Health Survey and the English Health Survey did not find that regional variations in: fruit & vegetable consumption; smoking; obesity; or diabetes were consistently able to explain variations in mortality (with the exception of obesity and mortality in women). Gray analysed the Scottish Health Survey and found that much of the unhealthy diet evident in Glasgow as compared to the rest of Scotland could be accounted for by markers of deprivation (including area-based measures and individual measures) although some aspects of diet related to vegetable intake in men and butter and salt in women were not. A direct comparison of healthy eating (measured as self-reported eating of five or more portions of fruit/vegetables per day) in Greater Glasgow, Liverpool and Manchester shows very similar rates and therefore casts doubt on diet being an important explanatory factor for differences in mortality. A similar pattern is witnessed for adult obesity prevalence.

In terms of poor diet, as you mentioned, this is largely due to deprivation. In terms of the 'Glasgow Effect', poor diet is, therefore, not a significant factor, as Glasgow has similar levels to Liverpool and Manchester.

GG.

Posted by: Anne Bloom 26th Jun 2011, 10:43pm

I agree with several respondents that there is something in the report that rings true with my experiences of what is a very difficult period in my own personal life and also the history of Glasgow. To what extent the outcomes were a deliberate policy propagated by a nasty Conservative government I do not know. Perhaps in 50 years time there will be previously secret papers released which will show that the Heath and Thatcher governments did plan such an outcome? By then it will be too late. I'd say let's not sink into culture of blame, instead let's look forward as best we can and make the most of what we have in Glasgow.

Posted by: Dunvegan 27th Jun 2011, 01:49am

School canteens in NSW. have stopped serving any instances of "fast food" confectionery and sugar intensive beverages. I can only give anecdotal evidence about the high schools in my immediate vicinity. The high school on my street has abolished for years now, the above mentioned foods. The rates of obesity are marked in contrast with the schools I worked in in the lower socio economics groupings in the inner city. They also have an extensive sports program that excludes students who who do not conform to school principals or in class disciplines. I have noticed how ever that after school, some congregate round the take away and confectionery shop before going home for tea. That would appear to be, as far as kids are concerned "the nature of the beast" and is not so widespread an activity as in other inner city environments. Nutritional and physical education is for youth as important as academic achievement. Education is a key factor in the reduction of the "modern self afflicted diseases" and although for some the horse has already bolted, there is less reason to stop trying than there is to keep ingnoring the problem as it will not go away.

Posted by: derick2 27th Jun 2011, 03:52am

If people used the money they spend on smoking and drinking to buy good healthy food and took up exercise then things would improve. The report is all conjecture and political spin.

Posted by: benny 27th Jun 2011, 10:14am

Do you think that Tory policies towards Glasgow in the 80s and 90s were unduly harsh, resulting in the premature deaths of thousands of Glaswegians?

I would have to answer "No", because I don't think there is enough evidence to ascribe the premature deaths to Tory polices of the 80s and 90s. I agree entirely that those polices were unduly harsh, and that they had deleterious effects on the people who suffered under them.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 27th Jun 2011, 11:39am

QUOTE (derick2 @ 27th Jun 2011, 03:45am) *
If people used the money they spend on smoking and drinking to buy good healthy food and took up exercise then things would improve. The report is all conjecture and political spin.

If people used the money they spent on cars to buy horses then at least one improvement would be a balance to the amount of bovine excrement that politicians like to spin. tongue.gif biggrin.gif

Posted by: candy101 27th Jun 2011, 12:44pm

I kind of agree with Benny as I think the scientists go a bit far with their thinking without actually getting down to some real examples by what they have in mind as a political attack on Dear Old Glasgae Toon.

I think I'd need more evidence. Sorry, but that is how I feel.

Posted by: GG 27th Jun 2011, 10:58pm

The GCPH report also mentions Cathy McCormack, a community activist from Easterhouse, and her concept of a 'war without bullets'. Here Cathy talks about her book:


Cathy also talks about the poverty industry and its focus on treating individual symptoms rather than pursuing a holistic approach to cure the causes.

GG.

Posted by: Dunvegan 28th Jun 2011, 02:22am

Generational unemployment has removed the stigma of not earning a living wage and not actively seeking employment. It is a more than a lowering of self esteem, it is a loss of dignity and morale that renders all other considerations such as health, social standing and personal endeavour, nul and void. Third generations brought up on dole money as a right and work ethic as a joke, are not in a position or condition to challenge the conditions that delineate their role in society and their survival in that ethos. Work and the advantages of being financially independent and pride, not only in doing a job well but in the very act of being employed, seems to have over the years been stripped from the hands of Scottish workers and sent on holiday as far south as they will go.

Posted by: Jupiter 28th Jun 2011, 03:22am

I think Not Guilty is a fair verdict.Please file.Next case.

Posted by: weebren3 28th Jun 2011, 05:54am

unsure.gif glasgow was an industry city with smoke in the air from polution,dust you name it and as A fact used asbestas which all are killers,remember the coal fires well add that,but someone needed A job so some one had to do it. as for cig and booze the govt made money on that,no one was told facts on health issues did they.As for cancer no one has come up with A cure have they,if you smoke die,if you drink too much your liver is shot.Think about it wasting money on how many health issues glasgow has,as for drugs its the dealers they should go after,spend money on the cure. just my opinion thats all.

Posted by: GG 29th Jun 2011, 01:15am

QUOTE (Jupiter @ 28th Jun 2011, 03:15am) *
I think Not Guilty is a fair verdict.Please file.Next case.

Would you care to outline the case for the defence? smile.gif

GG.

Posted by: GG 29th Jun 2011, 01:35am

QUOTE (Dunvegan @ 28th Jun 2011, 02:15am) *
... Work and the advantages of being financially independent and pride, not only in doing a job well but in the very act of being employed, seems to have over the years been stripped from the hands of Scottish workers and sent on holiday as far south as they will go.

Dunvegan, I agree completely: so many Glaswegians have lost sight of what it means to be financially independent, finding pride in one's own ability to provide for themselves and their family. Tragic.

I've posted the following video many times on these boards; it's from a reporter who is a staunch supporter of the Conservative Party and traditional conservative policies. He absolutely nails the effects of the problems faced in deprived Glasgow.


GG.

Posted by: GG 29th Jun 2011, 01:43am

QUOTE (weebren3 @ 28th Jun 2011, 05:47am) *
unsure.gif glasgow was an industry city with smoke in the air from polution,dust you name ..

Thanks weebren3, as you say, so many Glaswegians were afflicted by illnesses through ignorance of the facts over many years: asbestos, smoke, tobacco, drink, etc. I'd certainly agree that as much money as possible should be diverted into finding cures for these diseases. Also, hopefully, money could be found to further investigate why it is that Glaswegians are so susceptible to them.

GG.

Posted by: Jupiter 29th Jun 2011, 04:22am

Ive never been a great believer in cases presented entirely on circumstantial evidence without hard facts to substantiate the charge.In this instance I believe there are no hard facts to prove anyone was killed and certainly not 25,000.I ask where the figure came from?

Posted by: Scotsman 29th Jun 2011, 12:44pm

Just as well for you jupiter that the people dont get a say in this - whats new then I can hear you say!!

Last time I looked at the poll more than 2/3 thought the Tories had a case to answer.... and that doesn't take into account the fact that they only have a solitary MSP in the city on the strength of a diminishing vote from the hang-em-high blue rinse brigade.... the people have most definately spoken up for what their verdict would be!!

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 29th Jun 2011, 01:39pm

why it is that Glaswegians are so susceptible to them.


There is a theory that we 'Auld Glaswegians' are carriers of yesteryears diseases and have passed them on to the younger generation

Posted by: Jupiter 29th Jun 2011, 01:45pm

Keep them coming Tommy and do let us know more about this theory.Has it got a name?
Does anyone on the boards know of anyone who died as a result of the Tories being in Government?

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 29th Jun 2011, 01:54pm

QUOTE
Does anyone on the boards know of anyone who died as a result of the Tories being in Government?

Yes, my infant siblings when the Tories had contempt for the Glasgow poor of yesteryear.
Also of course their war mongering years; and on our door step- N.Ireland -condoning the persecution of Catholics

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 29th Jun 2011, 02:08pm

Theory: Something I read some years ago regarding Health conditions of Liverpudlians/Glaswegians -2 cities that suffered most from social conditions of yesteryear.

Posted by: GG 29th Jun 2011, 06:36pm

QUOTE (Jupiter @ 29th Jun 2011, 04:15am) *
Ive never been a great believer in cases presented entirely on circumstantial evidence without hard facts to substantiate the charge.In this instance I believe there are no hard facts to prove anyone was killed and certainly not 25,000.I ask where the figure came from?

Fair enough, Jupiter. I believe that all the candidate hypotheses which were not ruled out in the initial synthesis report (e.g. genetic factors or health service quality) are being investigated further, so we should have more results forthcoming to discuss in the future. I also understand that there is a very detailed survey of three cities (Glasgow, Manchester and Liverpool) ongoing at the moment, which is due to issue a final report towards the end of the year. Bet you can't wait! smile.gif

GG.

Posted by: Dunvegan 30th Jun 2011, 02:23am

QUOTE (weebren3 @ 28th Jun 2011, 03:47pm) *
unsure.gif glasgow was an industry city with smoke in the air from polution,dust you name it and as A fact used asbestas which all are killers,remember the coal fires well add that,but someone needed A job so some one had to do it. as for cig and booze the govt made money on that,no one was told facts on health issues did they.As for cancer no one has come up with A cure have they,if you smoke die,if you drink too much your liver is shot.Think about it wasting money on how many health issues glasgow has,as for drugs its the dealers they should go after,spend money on the cure. just my opinion thats all.

And once all Glasgow water was reticulated through lead piping. At one time the effects of heavy metals on the brain combined with alcohol was given as a possible reason, being responsible for much of the violence.

Posted by: GG 30th Jun 2011, 08:49am

An interesting radio programme here, which precedes the publication of the report from this topic, but includes input from one of the authors:

QUOTE
Journalist talks of 'Glasgow effect'

Glasgow "the sick man of Europe" still isn't feeling so good. Iain Macwhirter explores why Glasgow suffers from mortality rates higher that even expected from the levels of deprivation in the city.

Iain has his own vested interest. Having suffered from heart disease, and having consultants shrug their shoulders and declare it was a result of being Scottish, Iain wants to know whether his health has been impacted by this effect.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12267237

GG.

Posted by: Dunvegan 1st Jul 2011, 03:21am

QUOTE (Tommy Kennedy @ 30th Jun 2011, 12:01am) *
Theory: Something I read some years ago regarding Health conditions of Liverpudlians/Glaswegians -2 cities that suffered most from social conditions of yesteryear.

During the "Thatcher Era" (Maggie the toraidhe avatar) the once proud industrial and shipbuilding port of Liverpool eventualy did not have a company within the boundrys of the city proper employing more than thirty people. Not just Glasgow, all working class Labour strongholds were subject to the imprecations and savage revenge of "La Belle Dame Sans Merci" creator of generational unemployment.

Posted by: Chrissie 1st Jul 2011, 05:40am

Since I started reading this thread I find it a little disturbing that so many people are surprised that the tories do not reward Glasgow much when they are in office in any way that is really meaningful. At the risk of making everyone mad at me I have to point out that they have no reason to. Unless Glasgow has changed drastically the citizens consistently vote labor. This was a good move when unions were powerful and we had a working Clyde, rife with shipyards. What we were slow to pick up on was the decline that was inevitable. Air power and other reasons made not only our shipyards but a lot of others relics. Blaming Thatcher or any other Conservative for that is pointless. They may have delayed the decline in some areas at the expense of others but it was coming anyway. (I know they elected Scottish Nats. this time but unless they're serious about their agenda why not just vote conservative.) By puting all its eggs in one basket and remaining a labour stronghold for so long Glasgow placed itself on the "outs" list. Politicians want to stay in office so they will try to take care of their own voters first.
As for people in Milngavie and Bearsden being as unhealthy as the rest of us that's not surprising either. Scotland's love for red meat, pies made with lard in the crusts, sausage on a roll as a meal, chips being comsumed practically on a daily basis. The whole diet needs an overhaul - and I don't mean give up a lard-laden sausage roll for a fat saturated piece of fried chicken.

Posted by: Jupiter 1st Jul 2011, 06:33am

Chrissie,I like it!

rolleyes.gif

Posted by: ionnsaigh 1st Jul 2011, 10:28am

Diet is only one aspect, the residents of Bearsden don't suffer from the chronic illness associated from damp and overcrowded housing, and for the most part unemployment, the high crime rates, that bring fear..... and all aspects of poor health... I think that it's a disgrace to suggest otherwise.

Posted by: Dave Grieve 1st Jul 2011, 11:11am

I think Chrissie has hit the nail on the head with her observations. This is not the 1920s or 30s its not only Scotland that has suffered as time marched on.
I remember talking to some Polish guys years ago who were confident that now that Poland was free that their shipbuilding industry was going to conquer the world, when i pointed out that they couldent hope to compete with the Koreans they didnt believe me.
they have learned otherwise.
It is time for the average voter in Scotland to take a good look at what side of the bread is buttered.
The labour party has for years allowed millions of unskilled labour to flood the country. taking jobs that could have and should have been filled with Scottish workers. and all i see looking at the SNP is a mini me version of labour.

Posted by: ionnsaigh 1st Jul 2011, 11:32am

The Koreans never had to go to Poland, to build cheap ships.

Posted by: Jupiter 1st Jul 2011, 01:01pm

Ionnsaigh.Nithsdale Crescent is in Bearsden and it contains a number of properties where the tenants are in constant dispute with East Dunbartonshire Council over the issue of dampness.And the area was once described by Sheriff Murphy when sentencing a couple of housebeakers,"The days of Bearsden being treated as an Aladinns Cave are over"His sentiment was good but the area is still blighted by high crime levels.
Just thought you might like to know. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Dunvegan 2nd Jul 2011, 03:56am

QUOTE (Jupiter @ 1st Jul 2011, 04:26pm) *
Chrissie,I like it!

rolleyes.gif

Everyone enjoys having their pet prejudices re enforced, however obliquely, by the superficially like minded, Jupiter but as it is a burden shared it is none the less a burden for all that.

Posted by: Jupiter 2nd Jul 2011, 05:29am

Dunvegan,call me dense but could you oblige and clarify that post for me.
Thanks
Joop
rolleyes.gif

Posted by: tamhickey 2nd Jul 2011, 05:32am

To ascribe the entire populace of Glasgow as living on nothing but fatty foods is to live in the past. I enjoy a healthy diet as do many thousands of others. We don't all live on chips and sausage you know. Lard is a thing of the past, most people using olive oil and enjoying a more mediterranean diet compared to years ago. Yes, there are the McDonalds restaurants but even they are coming up with healthy alternatives though I wouldn't go near one of those franchises.
There is a definite increase in obesity though, but that's a problem for the entire western world and it appears that the poorest people in society are the ones suffering through this. Why? Many are on a very tight budget and have to feed their families on the cheapest food available from the cheapest shops, many of which sell lots of fatty meat. Don't get me wrong, I love the occasional roll and sausage, but I don't live on it. Pasta or pies? Nowadays pasta wins it for me.

Posted by: Dave Grieve 2nd Jul 2011, 09:06am

Just because people have an alternative opinion does not mean that they are prejudiced, bigoted or racialistic.
Is it not possible that they are looking at the problem from a different angle?

Posted by: benny 2nd Jul 2011, 10:28am

QUOTE (tamhickey @ 2nd Jul 2011, 06:25am) *
To ascribe the entire populace of Glasgow as living on nothing but fatty foods is to live in the past. I enjoy a healthy diet as do many thousands of others. We don't all live on chips and sausage you know. Lard is a thing of the past, most people using olive oil and enjoying a more mediterranean diet compared to years ago. . . .

That very much depends on what circles you move (and eat) in, tamhickey. Lard certainly ain't a thing of the past - it's on open sale in Aldis at 29p a block, last time I looked. About a tenth of the price of extra virgin olive oil. A bag of frozen chips costs 99p, so for £1.28 you have about 5 portions of cooked chips. Add frozen burgers, and a couple of tins of cheap beans at 29p a tin, and you have a cheap, filling - albeit no very healthy - meal for 5 people for aboot four quid. If ye've only got a fiver left in yer purse, and a family tae feed, it's a tempting proposition. Especially if yer culinary expertise is confined tae the microwave and the chip pan.

Again, take the popular Greggs, the bakers, who do hot pies, bridies, sausage rolls and lots of other fat filled goodies for worker's lunches. They also do sandwiches - chicken, ham, salad, etc, but that disnae seem tae diminish the number of fatty pies sold. So, there are still lotsa people out there who aren't intae the olive oil and garlic culture.

Posted by: Tommy Kennedy 2nd Jul 2011, 03:52pm

Aye Benny, but gone are the days when for ten bob you could take a lassie for a drink, then the pictures and have enough left over for 2 greasy fish suppers wrapped in newspaper.

All you had to do was find a lassie who had ten bob tongue.gif

Posted by: benny 2nd Jul 2011, 04:40pm

Aye, that wid've cost ten bob when ah wis a teenager, Tommy, but ten bob wid've bought ye the chip shop in your young days. biggrin.gif

Posted by: GG 3rd Jul 2011, 07:07pm

QUOTE (benny @ 2nd Jul 2011, 10:21am) *
... Again, take the popular Greggs, the bakers, who do hot pies, bridies, sausage rolls and lots of other fat filled goodies for worker's lunches. They also do sandwiches - chicken, ham, salad, etc, but that disnae seem tae diminish the number of fatty pies sold. So, there are still lotsa people out there who aren't intae the olive oil and garlic culture.

Benny, I was in Greggs yesterday and, mindful of your post, had a wee look about. As you say, there were some healthier options in the fridge – chicken sandwiches on brown bread, tuna mayonnaise with cucumber, ham salad, etc.. Forgot to get the prices, but generally I think the chilled sandwiches were two or three times the cost of a hot sausage roll, meat pie or stake bake (will try to get prices tomorrow). Greggs really is a booming west of Scotland phenomenon, they seem to be everywhere from shopping centres in the most deprived areas to the plush main streets of the middle class suburbs.

GG.

Posted by: GG 3rd Jul 2011, 07:27pm

Talking about pies, this time the economic ones, biggrin.gif Gerry Hassan, writing in the Scotsman yesterday, raised a few very interesting points on the decline of the 'free' market economy and neo-liberalism, including:

QUOTE
Bringing sanity to a world riven by capitalism
http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Gerry-Hassan-Bringing-sanity-to.6794679.jp

... After 30 years across the West and global economy the results are conclusive. Across the world it has never been a better time to be rich and privileged. Such people have grabbed a bigger slice of the economic pie, while seeing the expansion of the pie slow down, and the rest of us suffer as a consequence. The age of managed capitalism of 1950-73 produced high rates of growth, security and rising living standards. Then came the 1970s, stagflation and the Opec oil price shocks.

As the economist Ha-Joon Chang put forward in 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism, the world economy is increasingly based on false premises. He argues that 30 years of evidence show that "making rich people richer doesn't make the rest of the world richer". Western societies have been shaped by waffle about "the new economy", denigrating manufacturing and not addressing the long-term decline in investment. Instead, we have a fixation on pro-rich, pro-elite apologies, and the incantation that we live in a post-industrial knowledge economy. Tell that to the Germans or South Koreans with their tradition of "making things". ...

As was mentioned in this topic, Glasgow suffered badly because of the rapid decline in heavy industry and manufacturing in the city, but, of course, other countries have been able to develop very strong manufacturing-based economies from a much less advantageous starting point than Scotland. Could Glasgow have benefited from better investment in shipbuilding and locomotive works, developing new technologies or diversifying into niche markets?

Another political commentator had a similar thought to Mr Hassan when he visited Montreal in Quebec last week. Writing in the Herald and on his blog last week, Iain Macwhirter wistfully concluded:

QUOTE
Don't believe what you've been told about Quebec
http://iainmacwhirter2.blogspot.com/2011/06/dont-believe-what-youve-been-told-about.html

... Montreal feels like other great “provincial” cities of the world, like Melbourne, San Francisco, Milan. Quebec has found a way of reconciling Scandinavian levels of social provision with a US-style business ethic. And unlike Scotland, it doesn’t have oil. It’s hard not to look around and wonder why Glasgow isn’t more like Montreal, since it was largely built by expat Scottish entrepreneurs. And we started from such a higher base. When the Clyde was building half the world’s shipping, Montreal was still trapping beaver. Now it is a global city of 2 million, built on finance, pharmaceuticals and technology, while Glasgow languishes in post-industrial decline watching its population die from preventable disease. If this is what you get from constitutional instability and independence referendums then all one can say is: bring it on.

( Mr Macwhirter was, by the way, the voice on the radio programme looking into the Glasgow Effect: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12267237 )

GG.

Posted by: benny 3rd Jul 2011, 11:05pm

Ah prefer cake, Martin, even in economic models. biggrin.gif Ah've never believed that the bigger the cake, the more crumbs fall to the poor from the tables of the rich The rich jist take bigger slices.

Posted by: Dunvegan 4th Jul 2011, 12:48am

QUOTE (benny @ 4th Jul 2011, 08:58am) *
Ah prefer cake, Martin, even in economic models. biggrin.gif Ah've never believed that the bigger the cake, the more crumbs fall to the poor from the tables of the rich The rich jist take bigger slices.

1955 average income of top 400 Americans; $13.3 million. Aveage tax paid proportion of income 51.2%.
2008 income of top 400 $270.5 million; proportion paid in tax 18.1%. Figures Internal Revenue Service department Citizens for Tax Justice. Won't dwell too much on it, but average among the top 400 only 8% of their earnings was from salary. Not much of that has ever trickled down anywhere in America.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 4th Jul 2011, 01:40am

QUOTE
Tell that to the Germans or South Koreans with their tradition of "making things". ...

I contracted to a German firm "WENZLAFF" in the town of Ritterhüde in north Germany; near Bremen, round about '73/'74 where we built those big mobile container-stacking cranes for such ports as Liverpool, Belfast and a several others in the UK including; I'm quite sure, Glasgow.
We were paid far, far, more for our work in Germany at that time than structural steel workers in the UK were getting (Germany still had a great need for skilled labour back then).
The cranes were sold to the various client firms at drastically reduced rates (Germany still had a great need for exports back then).
The German government subsidised WENZLAFF to the hilt (Germany still had a great need to secure it's industrial future back then).
Germany's governments today still make enormous sacrifices to ensure it's industrial future ... far into the future.
It's tax-payer's money being invested in the tax-payer's future ... I think it's called forward thinking by those put in charge of the nation.
Nobody, least of all Germany, is happy with the present bail-outs to the lazy Greeks; as they are recognised here, but a collapsed Greece would lead to a collapsed Germany and that would have a bad effect so the Germans; albeit reluctantly, want to secure their own future by securing Europe's.
I think it's called forward thinking by those put in charge of the nation.
They are not happy about forking out billions for foreign wars (they've had that experience already) and since the Japanese Nuclear disaster only 25 years behind Chernoble, they've decided to pass on nuclear power for a safer future (forward thinking again).
Is there a lesson to be learned?

Posted by: benny 4th Jul 2011, 09:17am

Aye, Scotland should secede frae the UK an apply fur admission tae Germany. Ach, we even speak the same. smile.gif

Posted by: Scotsman 4th Jul 2011, 10:10am

QUOTE (Dunvegan @ 4th Jul 2011, 12:41am) *
1955 average income of top 400 Americans; $13.3 million. Aveage tax paid proportion of income 51.2%.
2008 income of top 400 $270.5 million; proportion paid in tax 18.1%. Figures Internal Revenue Service department Citizens for Tax Justice. Won't dwell too much on it, but average among the top 400 only 8% of their earnings was from salary. Not much of that has ever trickled down anywhere in America.

Not much has trickled down here either Dunvegan.... just ask the poor pensioners who can't even afford to heat their homes and that was last winter before the big power companies hiked up their prices yet again. What kind of world do we live in where many pensioners will die in a country with its own oil supply and huge untapped reserves of wind and wave energy? Just so that rich shareholders can get a bigger payout. Madness.... utter madness!!!!

Posted by: ionnsaigh 4th Jul 2011, 10:46am

QUOTE (Scotsman @ 4th Jul 2011, 10:03am) *
Not much has trickled down here either Dunvegan.... just ask the poor pensioners who can't even afford to heat their homes and that was last winter before the big power companies hiked up their prices yet again. What kind of world do we live in where many pensioners will die in a country with its own oil supply and huge untapped reserves of wind and wave energy? Just so that rich shareholders can get a bigger payout. Madness.... utter madness!!!!

Absolutely Scotsman absolutely.....

Lets start a union....... smile.gif

Posted by: Dunvegan 5th Jul 2011, 03:09am

I am still reluctant to carry the "Scottish chip" around on my shoulder as a badge of honour, I prefer to be proud of my heritage than constantly blaming England, and not the London governments depredations, not just against Scots but workers in the North of England and their Irish colony, who have suffered the same rapacious plunders of their skill base and future prospects.
In a previous post I mentioned the wealth disparity between ultra rich Americans and the nation as a whole. I do not have the figures in front of me but have read recently that the disparity between the two, now opposing camps, in the U.K. is on a vast scale compared to other European and O.E.C.D. countries.

Posted by: Scotsman 5th Jul 2011, 10:40am

I am with you ionnsaigh.... the pensioners united will never be defeated!!

I know what you are saying Mr Dunvegan and I do agree with it.... I wasn't really trying to make a big issue between the poor pensioners of Manchester and the poor pensioners of Motherwell.... both will suffer for sure this winter while greedy shareholders are spending their bonuses on trips to the French Alps.

Posted by: Jupiter 5th Jul 2011, 10:52am

Scotsman, do you think it is wrong to invest money?

Posted by: Scotsman 5th Jul 2011, 11:13am

I know what you are saying and not at all Jupiter. I think it is generally a good thing that can lead to healthy competition.

BUT.... not when the industry is power and people have basically no alternative but to heat their homes or die. The current electricity and gas industry [monopoly] is a sham where powerful companies [shareholders] are raking in huge profits from the misery of us old and poor. They doubled their profits last winter as poor biddies were shivering and dying in frozen homes.

NO.... this is no glam example of people investing their money to take a risk on being able to beat the competition. This is greed and expolitation like what we have not seen in many years. Maggie must be sooo proud!!!!

Posted by: Jupiter 5th Jul 2011, 01:16pm

Scotsman,Gas and Lekky are commodities and are sold on world markets which are prone to all sort of factors and as far as UK is concerned a weak currency.The industries were privatised due to the massive losses they were making and were taken into private ownership by companies who as well as providing a service were there to ensure that the people who invest in the company make a profit.So in essence they are no different from any other company exposed to the vagaries of the markets and economic conditions.
I have every sympathy for people on fixed incomes at this time as prices,especially power and fuel,are going crazy and I dont really see much in the way of relief any time soon.
Ive just watched the news here and there is a REDUCTION in petrol and it has gone down to A$1.24 per litre which is equivalent to 0.82p.I dont know if it is a price war or a genuine reduction in wholesale prices coming down.
Company employees are the people who normally get a bonus,the shareholders get the dividend. rolleyes.gif
In fact youve made me feel that guilty Im selling my shares in the Rangers!

Posted by: ionnsaigh 5th Jul 2011, 03:29pm

The power ( no pun ) lies with the people...

Lets call the union 50 50, in other words only pay half the amount of your bill.
When they threaten to cut us off, I'll come up to your house, and you come to mine.
Together we can half the costs of power, yet still pay a fair rate. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Dunvegan 6th Jul 2011, 01:18am

QUOTE (Jupiter @ 5th Jul 2011, 11:09pm) *
Scotsman,Gas and Lekky are commodities and are sold on world markets which are prone to all sort of factors and as far as UK is concerned a weak currency.The industries were privatised due to the massive losses they were making and were taken into private ownership by companies who as well as providing a service were there to ensure that the people who invest in the company make a profit.So in essence they are no different from any other company exposed to the vagaries of the markets and economic conditions.
I have every sympathy for people on fixed incomes at this time as prices,especially power and fuel,are going crazy and I dont really see much in the way of relief any time soon.
Ive just watched the news here and there is a REDUCTION in petrol and it has gone down to A$1.24 per litre which is equivalent to 0.82p.I dont know if it is a price war or a genuine reduction in wholesale prices coming down.
Company employees are the people who normally get a bonus,the shareholders get the dividend. rolleyes.gif
In fact youve made me feel that guilty Im selling my shares in the Rangers!

I have to sell my shares in Woodside by the first week in October cheap petrol is costing me a fortune!!!!

Posted by: Chrissie 6th Jul 2011, 05:06am

GG

I liked the article you posted on the 3rd of July, 23 things they don't......on Capitalism. It's been tried here so many times I can't believe they got away with it again last year. Trickle down economic theories may sound like a panacea for all that ails the economy but it only works for the people at the top. By the time it reaches the average worker - or doesn't reach - the money's all used up. Joop's right - maybe Germany is the answer. rolleyes.gif
If Glasgow ever is going to pick itself up I think the first thing would have to be a change in attitude. The people have to develop a real "can do" way of thinking. Instead of infighting, forming co-ops within families where everyone adds the same amount to a kitty till they have a deposit for a small business. Then work hard enough at it till they hve enough for a deposit on another. I watched a Greek family (New York Greeks are anything but lazy) open a small restuarant years ago and the brothers, cousins and whoever each eventually ended up with something of their own. Half of their kids went to college. If I'd had that kind of gumption when I lived there I probably would still be there. None of my friends did either; it was always looking for jobs to work for somebody else. mellow.gif



Posted by: GG 6th Jul 2011, 10:56pm

QUOTE (Macbeast @ 22nd Jun 2011, 11:57pm) *
... Lets have some comparative mortality figures for pre-1980 ?

Hi Macbeast, here are a few taken from the report:










One thing which occurred to me when reading about the changes post-1980 was that the report did not mention the possible impact of the Scottish devolution referendum of 1979. It might have had no significant impact according to the research, however, surely worth a mention?

GG.

Posted by: benny 7th Jul 2011, 01:28am

QUOTE (Jupiter @ 5th Jul 2011, 02:09pm) *
Scotsman,Gas and Lekky are commodities and are sold on world markets which are prone to all sort of factors and as far as UK is concerned a weak currency.The industries were privatised due to the massive losses they were making and were taken into private ownership by companies who as well as providing a service were there to ensure that the people who invest in the company make a profit.So in essence they are no different from any other company exposed to the vagaries of the markets and economic conditions. . . .

In essence, the power companies are very different from other companies. If it became necessary, we could live without a great many things but we cannot live , either as individuals or as a nation, without power.
I think it is the greatest folly imaginable for any government to depend on foreign suppliers, as we now do, for any sizeable part of its power needs. In the past, we shut down British mines, then imported coal from Poland. because it was cheaper, but the true cost of such policies isn't only financial. Political and strategic considerations must also be factored in. If being independent of other countries for our power needs means massive government subsidies, then I think that is a price worth paying.

Posted by: Scotsman 7th Jul 2011, 09:39am

Absolutely agree with you Benny. We can cut back on other things in times of need but there is no getting away from the fact that we need power to survive in this life. The power companies know this and that is why they also know that they can raise prices well above costs as much as they want and we will still need to pay as no-one act on behalf of ripped-off customers. Where is the fairness in that?

The Tories promised that they would investigate the huge profits made by power companies.... but once in power they dropped any plans they had sharpish.

And as for the Tory privatisation.... there were 20 companies when that happened and now there are just a half dozen. Soon there might be a real monopoly rather than just a cartel of thuggish companies whose greed is killing many thousands of pensioners in their homes every winter because they are not passing on falls in wholesale prices.

Imagine if the billions in profits handed out to rich shareholders were instead used to lower prices and increase investment in the industry. Not to be though as the greedy shareholders want their ski holidays in the south of France while the rest of us shiver and the poorest old biddies die.

Posted by: Dunvegan 8th Jul 2011, 04:00am

QUOTE (Jupiter @ 5th Jul 2011, 08:45pm) *
Scotsman, do you think it is wrong to invest money?

It is wrong to invest money in gambling, brothels, weapon manufacturing and drug companies who charge $US 22,000 for a weeks worth of cancer therapy drugs. It is wrong to invest money in diamonds? in companies that use monopolistic practices to exploit those less able to pay for essentials. I still hold fast to the great F.D.R. 1936. The speech that heralded the "New Deal"
"Equality of opportunity, Jobs for those who can work, Security for those who need it. Ending of special privileges for the few and the preservation of civil liberties for all."
And the "Four Freedoms"
Freedom of speech; freedom of worship; freedom from fear and freedom from want.
Only my opinion but yes it is wrong to invest outside these guidelines.

Posted by: Jupiter 8th Jul 2011, 04:32am

Is it wrong for me to invest twenty pounds a week on the Lottery or a few pounds on a nag?
I dont see the problem,Dunvegan.Speculate to accumulate is my view.
Is it wrong for me to go into a brothel and pay 100 pounds to a girl a fraction of my age?
I would see this as a big problem and I believe every step should be taken to eradicate the exploitation of women(and males)forced to do this sort of thing.
Is it wrong for me to spend five grand on a Rolex Oyster with a few diamonds in it?
I dont think so.Freedom of choice to do as one pleases with ones wealth.
Regarding investing in drug companies,Ive never done it but if they were a good prospect,why not? Again Freedom of Choice
It would be great to live in an ideal world but unfortunately we never will and it is up to each individual to do as he sees fit.
Im not greatly enamoured by the amounts spent on certain pieces of hardware but as a taxpayer I have no real say in the matter and have to trust that the money is being spent wisely and for the good of the country.

Posted by: Chrissie 9th Jul 2011, 05:04am

GG
It's hard to say why the statistics are so poor for the Glasgow area. In my opinion a number of factors were at work.

The "all the eggs in one basket" voting for so long.

TB would certainly be a factor if I use personal experience. We had 5 members of our family diagnosed with TB between 1946 and 1949. Only 2 survived and were eventually cured. My mother's best friend had 6 members of her family stricken with this. Like us, 2 survived - 4 were lost.

WWII would be in the equasion, especially for males. Ditto Korea, though not anywhere near the same extent.

Then from the seventies on in places like the Eastend of Glasgow drugs played what was probably a huge role, even more so than diet or anything else.

Oddly enough I don't think one can consider the years after WWII without throwing in the effects of affluence:
Working class women would buy either 1/2 or 3/4 lb. of minced beef for an entire family. Into the pot wend the beef, chopped carrot, turnip and onion. Some women would throw some oatmeal into the mince to "stretch" it for big families. This was then poured over potatoes for a meal. Breakfast during the week was porridge or another cereal and Sunday was the big breakfast day where we usually had the fry up. Sometimes instead of mince it was soup, stew or fish or a bit ham with cabbage but the basics were the same. This all changed in the late 1940's when the building boom started and suddenly there seemed to be plenty of jobs for everyone. Unlike my older siblings I had a choice of 3 jobs when I went to the unemployment (the brew?). With everyone working and the end of rationing we had more options than before. Instead of that cheese sandwich for lunch why not pies and peas? And all that chocolate and sugary stuff we couldn't get for so long; and why walk for miles when we had money for car fares. We were not rich by any means but by our standards we thought we were well off. Then Glasgow's mammys were less frequently waiting at home when school got out - they were replaced by Mums who were busy working outside the home. All of these things, in my opinion, played a role.
The one thing the government did to the people in my hometown was waste a lot of money on educational nutrition programs that didn't work at the time. Rather than trying to change our diet in one swoop they should just have concentrated on the root vegetables and meat/fish we love and stressed how to cook and trim them healthier rather than buy them in lard laden pies. Somtimes things have to be done in stages. "Habit dies hard". I'd hate to tell you what I paid in January to have a couple of pounds of Scotch beef links shipped to me frozen from New Jersey when I was laid up with bronchitis. Can't get a decent sliced one over there anymore.

Posted by: Dave Grieve 9th Jul 2011, 07:23am

Hi Chrissie
seems like you've lived my life.
My mother had 5 sisters and 1 brother all born in glasgow, only my mother and her brother lived past the age of 40

Posted by: benny 9th Jul 2011, 10:33am

What you say is no doubt true, Chrissie, but the same circumstances applied in other British industrial cities. It still doesn't explain why Glasgow, specifically, has these health problems to a greater degree than those other cities.

I, also, remember the days when meals were created from the raw ingredients rather than from a packet or a tin, and I've no doubt that diet plays a large part in the problem, but that also holds true for places other than Glagow. So, diet can't be the whole story.

Posted by: Jupiter 9th Jul 2011, 11:38am

And dont forget the steam engines made at St Rollex in Springburn. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: GG 9th Jul 2011, 01:11pm

Yes, please let's stay on topic. I know it is difficult sometines as the discussion flows, but otherwise things can get a bit complicated.

The mention of St Rollox locomotive works reminded me of this story in the news this week:

QUOTE
Public pays price for government's rail contract shame

Government plans to send a prime contract to build carriages abroad "to save money" were torn apart today by a Morning Star probe exposing the multimillion bill they'll dump on Britain.

Nearly 1,500 workers at the Bombardier plant in Derby - the country's last train-building plant - were told they'd lost their jobs following the news that the £6 billion deal for Thameslink trains would go to German firm Siemens.

The Department for Work and Pensions will now have to fork out up to £5 million a year in jobseekers' allowance - even before the knock-on effect on other jobs is factored in.

According to the most recent unemployment figures in May 7,400 dole claimants in Derby were chasing just 1,153 jobcentre vacancies even before the Bombardier announcement.

When housing benefits are factored in the cost of the job losses at Bombardier alone could rise by up to £11.5m, based on Derby Council's maximum benefit of £155 per week for a four-bedroom home. ...

Full story here:
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/106807

Or, from the other end of the political spectrum, and a different enemy:

EU Cheats Us Out Of Jobs
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/257666/EU-cheats-us-out-of-jobs

I've mentioned in another topic about how it was reported (and certainly perceived by Glaswegians) that the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher pursued a policy of re-locating heavy manufacturing from Glasgow to England. One example was: in 1986, St Rollox Locomotive Works closed with the loss of 1600 jobs when most of the British Rail heavy repair work was transferred to England.

What happened in Glasgow is now happening to England 25 years later. My thought is this: if the jobs had stayed where they were – and there had been meaningful investment in training and modernisation – would the workers in Glasgow have been better able to compete with the Germans today than the workers in Derby? Did the Tories' heavy-handed interference in industry – for political reasons – undermine the ability of British industry to compete globally in the long term?

Regardless of what might have been, the fact is that the world-renowned expertise of Glasgow locomotive engineers was simply binned on political expedience.

GG.

 

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 9th Jul 2011, 01:56pm

From the International Business Times

QUOTE
The world’s largest train manufacturer, Bombardier, said it will eliminate 1,400 jobs at its plant in Derby in the north of England.

Based in Canada, the company’s UK subsidiary will cut 446 permanent jobs and 983 temporary contract workers.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/174635/20110705/bombardier-derby-jobs-thameslink-siemens.htm

From Bombardier's web site.
QUOTE
Bombardier Sub-contracted by Siemens to Deliver Trains to Brussels' Regional Express Railway Network

November 17, 2008 — Berlin
Transportation

Bombardier Transportation has signed a contract with Siemens to assemble an important part of Siemens’ “Desiro ML” multiple-unit trains to be used by the Brussels Regional Railway Network “RER” (Réseau Express Régional). The contract contains an initial firm order of 115 trains, with an option of 85 trains.

The initial firm order is valued at approximately 168 million euros ($214 million US) and covers the procurement and manufacturing activities for the painting, end-assembly and testing of the vehicles, as well as the commissioning to the end-customer, Belgian National Railways (SNCB). The work will be carried out at Bombardier Transportation’s site in Bruges (Belgium). Deliveries are scheduled from March 2012 to January 2014; and until April 2015 with the options included.

Maybe there's more to the Bombardier/Siemens/Derby story than meets the eye. I did read a few days ago when this latest news broke that Bombardier (Canada) wasn't too interested in it's far flung Derby branch since it had more important things to consider.
Granted, these reports (including below) are from 2/3 years ago but these things are generally long in the planning-to-drawing-board stage.
The companies Siemens and Bombardier both have locations in the UK and the contract won by Siemens, I read, means that the bulk of the work would be relocated within the UK to the Siemens plant there. Bombardier's main interest is in Aerospace so they wont miss a rolling-stock contract secured by their German business partner.

http://toronto.metblogs.com/2009/04/24/bombardier-vs-siemens-canada-who-won/

Posted by: Jupiter 9th Jul 2011, 02:27pm

One of the great things about the Forums is the manner in which things just flow from lighthearted to serious, from sublime to ridiculous.I mean, to go from the Tories killing 25,000 in Glasgow to a Rolex watch and border security guards and back to the demise of the Scottish and now English loco manufacturing industry via a wee bit banter thrown in to me is just Glasgow.
"Im just sitting on this bank of sand watching the river flow."
Bob said that.
Lets just go with the flow.
Joop said that. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Rabbie 10th Jul 2011, 10:38am

Weel, this place has mair idle gossip than than a WI henhoose, publick waashhoose and can resemble a stiarhied rammy aon a Saturday nicht it's jist a Gleasgea trait. Sur Tomi o' Hackney and The Rt Hon Viscount Kinnidy o' Toonehiede going at it hammer an tongs is no a sicht fur the faint o' heart whilst they engage in the deidly art of verbal origami, who will be the first wan to tie thur tongue in knots and fold?!

Awe's weel that ends weel. as they say.

Whits up in the St Rollox choo choo site these days, let me guess... Yet another Tesco or simliar clone?

Posted by: GG 10th Jul 2011, 10:12pm

Okay ... I've been thinking about the subject of off-topic posts and what to do with them. I do appreciate what has been said here, however, quite a few members finding extended wandering off-topic to be a bit of a nuisance. New members can also find off-topic posting very confusing.

Therefore, I have come up with the solution of moving some off-topic posts into their very own 'off-topic' topic. Please see this topic:

http://discuss.glasgowguide.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=21016

Please use the above topic to share any thoughts on this. It might not be perfect, but I will think further on what to do.

GG.

Posted by: GG 10th Jul 2011, 10:22pm

QUOTE (Rabbie @ 10th Jul 2011, 10:31am) *
... Whits up in the St Rollox choo choo site these days, let me guess... Yet another Tesco or simliar clone?

Well done, Rab! It's a Tesco Extra ... open 24 hours!

The Springburn Tesco hit the headlines last year when it was handed a one month self-service alcohol sales ban after a 16-year-old was able to buy a bottle of cider in a police-organised test purchase. Particularly disappointing as the Tesco self-service attendant was only seventeen, and Sprignburn has some of the worst alcohol-related problems in the country.

http://www.theglaswegian.co.uk/glasgow-news/news/2011/01/05/booze-ban-call-for-self-service-check-outs-after-springburn-test-case-102692-22828290/

GG.

Posted by: wombat 10th Jul 2011, 11:22pm

GG sez:Therefore, I have come up with the solution of moving some off-topic posts into their very own 'off-topic' topic. Please see this topic:

GG dont ferget some of us have recall of interesting events that are on topic and may ferget them if we didny veer off topic . wub.gif( makes sense tae me) rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Dunvegan 11th Jul 2011, 02:39am

QUOTE (wombat @ 11th Jul 2011, 09:15am) *
GG sez:Therefore, I have come up with the solution of moving some off-topic posts into their very own 'off-topic' topic. Please see this topic:

GG dont ferget some of us have recall of interesting events that are on topic and may ferget them if we didny veer off topic . wub.gif( makes sense tae me) rolleyes.gif

Sed it before Wom the "thought police" are out to get ye' and me......am' shootin' through like a Bondi tram... see ya Wom m8

Posted by: tamhickey 11th Jul 2011, 02:54am

I live a short distance from the Tesco store just mentioned, and to be fair, I have seen a lot of people challenged to provide ID. There now seems to be a policy whereby members of staff who are too young to drink alcohol have to gain approval for the sale to go through by asking a supervisor, so maybe Tesco have upped their game since then. You have to give credit where it's due.

Posted by: Jupiter 11th Jul 2011, 03:55am

GG, its all about spontanious,off the cuff, rolleyes.gif but I suppose if someone is bumping their gums you have to take action.If it was ,"ma ba" I would leave well alone because the banter is what makes it a fun place to be.
A case of,"Complaint noted,no further action required."
If it is so bad a wee reminder is all thats needed.

Posted by: zascot 11th Jul 2011, 07:55am

GG guilty like the rest of us. whit has Tesco`s tae dae wi the tories killing Glesga folks? wink.gif

Posted by: Jupiter 11th Jul 2011, 08:06am

Tesco,Morrisons,Asda and the rest of them whilst not physically killing off Glaswegians are certainly doing their best(and Ive no figures stats or other data to substantiate this) to kill off/stifle competition from many of the small traders/shops which formerly made up our thoroughfares.

Posted by: zascot 11th Jul 2011, 12:50pm

Could`nt agree more, unfortunately it`s happening worldwide. We have a new mall on the outskirts of our town which has killed the town centre and we are a small town.

Posted by: Chrissie 14th Jul 2011, 05:08am

Dave G. - People don't realize the mortality rates in Glasgow due to illness. TB was just one cause. Sorry about your folks.

When I was 12 years old and I awoke during the night I used to feel my sister next to me to make sure she was still breathing. I got a few thumps for it and sometimes she'd yell for my other sister to "Do something with this wee pest. She's giving me the creeps." wub.gif


Posted by: wee davy 14th Jul 2011, 03:14pm

hahahaha - nice wee 'switch back' chrissie

this is something which often happens too - after people have maintained a thread (through fair means or foul) it suddenly comes back to 'life' again. its part of the diversity which is GGDB.

I personally think a topic for 'off topic' would tend to over complicate matters
Especially for new members.

I favour the little wrap across the knuckles approach masel - bit am jist a wee hooligan lol

Posted by: GG 28th Aug 2011, 01:22pm

A couple of months on... and the Sunday Herald covered this report:

QUOTE
What can we still blame Margaret Thatcher for? Everything

... The reasons why Scots are now more likely to be driven to an early grave compared to the rest of the UK, even when deprivation is taken into account, are unclear. However, Dr Chik Collins, senior lecturer in politics and sociology at the University of the West of Scotland, believes one potential explanation which has been overlooked until now is a “political attack” against the country’s working class, implemented by the UK Conservative Government from 1979. ...

Full story here:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/news/home-news/what-can-we-still-blame-margaret-thatcher-for-everything-1.1118901

GG.

Posted by: GG 28th Aug 2011, 01:35pm

... and an interesting 'counter-argument' from Mark Swanepoel, which explains why Thatcher (and Reagan) implemented such dramatic neo-liberal policy shifts, but also acknowledges (tacitly) that many premature deaths were thus invetable.

QUOTE
Losing one's job causes depression, & depression makes one vulnerable to ill health. Milton Keynes corrected the false ideas that in a wholly free market real output remains constant, wages float as easily downwards as upwards, and that the propensity of people to spend remains constant regardless of the business cycle, but after WW2 Keynesian economics was implemented with fixed exchange rates, direct control of money supply as opposed to interest rate control, and the habitual overuse of government spending & taxes for economic control. Together with a failure by British industrialists to grasp the full extent of production modernisation & quality control in the Far East, plus the 1973 Oil Shock, these errors fomented the stagflation of the 1970s.

Thatcher & Reagan introduced floating interest rates to control rampant inflation, & greatly reduced government spending & tax manipulation to support ailing industries. These new monetarist policies (championed by Milton Friedman) precipitated a sharp recession that killed many uneconomic British companies using obsolete manufacturing techniques & equipment. This could be done because North Sea oil & gas revenues permitted welfare payments to the newly unemployed - many from ship building, motor vehicle plants, & mining. Subsequently the UK moved very quickly into services, and many unemployed labourers became permanently unemployed. And depressed. And ill. If Thatcher & Reagan had managed this essential transition slowly, they would probably not have remained in power - but if they had, they would not have been reviled. The problem was that their changes administered a very strong dose of medicine in one go.

Could a switch to floating interest rates have been combined with government spending & tax support measures to help industries modernise rather than close? Actually, this was tried with several major companies - notably in shipbuilding & vehicle manufacturing - and it simply postponed the deaths of these companies. I believe that Thatcher, Reagan, & Friedman can be both reviled and revered - they implemented necessary changes, but ultimately went too far. Too fast? Probably not.

GG.

Posted by: bilbo.s 28th Aug 2011, 02:11pm

Milton Keynes . Thought that was a town ! Maybe the love-child of John Maynard Keynes and Milton Friedman. laugh.gif

Posted by: GG 28th Aug 2011, 02:47pm

Ha-ha... well-spotted, Sir! smile.gif

There I go trying to give some coverage of a dispassionate, intellectual rationale of vicious neo-liberal policies and the author can't even tell the difference between a town and an economist ... maybe it was his spell-checker!

GG.

Posted by: bilbo.s 28th Aug 2011, 02:50pm

QUOTE (GG @ 28th Aug 2011, 05:33pm) *
Ha-ha... well-spotted, Sir! smile.gif

There I go trying to give some coverage of a dispassionate, intellectual rationale of vicious neo-liberal policies and the author can't even tell the difference between a town and an economist ... maybe it was his spell-checker!

GG.

Och, ahm jist a frustrated proof reader ! smile.gif

Posted by: GG 20th Oct 2011, 07:45am

Glasgow still at the bottom of national longevity league tables:

QUOTE
Glasgow has lowest life expectancy in UK, 19 October 2011

Glasgow continues to have the lowest life expectancy in the UK, according to the Office for National Statistics.

Figures for 2004-2006 and 2008-2010, show that men in the city live to an average age of 71 and women to 78.

This compares to 85 for men and 87 for women in the highest UK areas - Kensington and Chelsea in London. ...

Full story here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15368400

Bad though these figures are for Glasgow, they mask the local differences which mean some areas have a life expectancy as low as in the mid-50s!

GG.

Posted by: ashfield 20th Oct 2011, 08:35am

And the best bit, they still (according to the BBC's report on the story yesterday) have no idea why life expectancy is lower in deprived parts of Glasgow huh.gif

Posted by: Melody 20th Oct 2011, 09:30am

I'm sad to say that they'll be responsible for a lot more deaths this winter. People should just keep warm and to hell with the bills. I mean what's the option?

Posted by: Scotsman 20th Oct 2011, 10:33am

No idea? As they say in the east end.... even the pooches in the street know what is causing it.... maybe they should ask them!! wink.gif

I would agree with you Melody.... the Tories are back to there wicked ways again making the poorest in society pay the most while the rich lord it over us. When will things ever change?? Why can we not have someone in power with the will to change these horrible statistics for the better.... is that really really too much too ask??

Posted by: *Thomas* 20th Oct 2011, 12:58pm

What is the point of continually blaming this on the Conservatives? Think about it - even within Glasgow there are huge disparities. Indeed, Glasgow is reputed to be one of the most unequal cities in Europe, with some of the most affluent neighbourhoods several miles from some of the most deprived. Are the Tories to be blamed for this? Quite obviously Glaswegians and Glasgow City Council need to look at themselves and accept the blame for this situation.

Posted by: Melody 20th Oct 2011, 03:57pm

When I waken up in the mornings and watch the news on TV I think that I've woken up in the middle of a Tom Brown's Schooldays era with Flashman being the prime minister.


Posted by: GG 25th Oct 2011, 06:10pm

QUOTE (*Thomas* @ 20th Oct 2011, 01:24pm) *
... Glasgow is reputed to be one of the most unequal cities in Europe ...

Thomas, if that is indeed the case then some would argue that it could lead to a whole host of effects in itself. Richard Wilkinson talks – in Edinburgh – about inequality at a national level:


GG.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 25th Oct 2011, 10:38pm

QUOTE (Scotsman @ 20th Oct 2011, 10:59am) *
... Why can we not have someone in power with the will to change these horrible statistics for the better.... is that really really too much too ask??

Like the Labour Party? rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Guest 9th Dec 2011, 01:34am

The Labour party in Glasgow are actively trying to do this to people right now. Every vote for labour in the elections next year will shorten a life.

Posted by: GG 1st Jan 2012, 10:12pm

An interesting commentary article by Alf Young in the Scotsman, in which he postulates that when times get hard politicians lose the ability to be open and honest with the public when it comes to discussing viable solutions. Young mentions revelations which were released this week under the '30 year rule', which showed that highly influential members of Thatcher's cabinet were in favour of the 'managed decline' of northern industrial cities. Liverpool may have escaped this process but could it have been inflicted on Glasgow?

Alf Young: Open and honest in 2012? I doubt it
http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/arts-blog/alf_young_open_and_honest_in_2012_i_doubt_it_1_2031729

GG.

Posted by: dondon 1st Jan 2012, 11:23pm

QUOTE (GG @ 1st Jan 2012, 09:28pm) *
An interesting commentary article by Alf Young in the Scotsman, in which he postulates that when times get hard politicians lose the ability to be open and honest with the public.
GG.

I would say the last three hundred years, must have been extremely hard. I can't dispute the claim as I don't think anyone has lived long enough to recall when times were not hard.
Could I wager a bet and claim politicians lose the ability to be open and honest when they leave the womb and begin to breathe.

Posted by: irrie 2nd Jan 2012, 09:12am

QUOTE (GG @ 1st Jan 2012, 09:28pm) *
An interesting commentary article by Alf Young in the Scotsman, in which he postulates that when times get hard politicians lose the ability to be open and honest with the public when it comes to discussing viable solutions. Young mentions revelations which were released this week under the '30 year rule', which showed that highly influential members of Thatcher's cabinet were in favour of the 'managed decline' of northern industrial cities. Liverpool may have escaped this process but could it have been inflicted on Glasgow?

Alf Young: Open and honest in 2012? I doubt it
http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/arts-blog/alf_young_open_and_honest_in_2012_i_doubt_it_1_2031729

GG.

As soon as i read these revelations my first thought was if they were thinking of doing this to an English city albeit a northern one what on earth were they prepared to do in Glasgow.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 2nd Jan 2012, 05:49pm

QUOTE
... Things are already bad enough. Reading the latest Lloyds TSB Business Monitor of Scotland’s economic prospects, entering 2012 is a bit like reaching for the ice-pack and the Irn-Bru 24 hours before the bells rather than the other way around ...

Wow!
That bad? unsure.gif biggrin.gif

Posted by: tamhickey 3rd Jan 2012, 06:05am

I note that Angela Merkel said that things would get worse this coming year. Either she was being very honest about it or she wants her government to take control of Europe's finance. I believe the Mark has been reprinted as well in a just in case scenario should the Euro collapse. Hardly a defence of the currency and a very dangerous retreat to narrow nationalistic protectionism.

Posted by: Scotsman 23rd Jan 2012, 06:18pm

I read on the BBC website today that poor Glaswegians suffer from poor health before they are even born because it is in our DNA!!

Posted by: dondon 23rd Jan 2012, 07:33pm

Never mind Scotsman, we'll blame the tories for creating DNA and giving us faulty ones.

Posted by: dondon 23rd Jan 2012, 07:38pm

QUOTE (tamhickey @ 3rd Jan 2012, 05:21am) *
I note that Angela Merkel said that things would get worse this coming year. Either she was being very honest about it or she wants her government to take control of Europe's finance. I believe the Mark has been reprinted as well in a just in case scenario should the Euro collapse. Hardly a defence of the currency and a very dangerous retreat to narrow nationalistic protectionism.

Are the tories reprinting them in Glasgow or are we blaming the tories for the germans printing marks in a wee hut doon the back of Buchanan St

This fairytale has been out on the net for ages, have you any proof or are you just taking this fanciful tale as gospel

Maybe THH bought a huge surplus stock of paper and ink from Munich's MARKS and Spencers and he's planning a putsch in a bier keller very soon, THH hiv you grown a moustache and acquired a big barking alsation dug.

Posted by: GG 23rd Jan 2012, 10:25pm

QUOTE (Scotsman @ 23rd Jan 2012, 05:34pm) *
I read on the BBC website today that poor Glaswegians suffer from poor health before they are even born because it is in our DNA!!

Scotsman, I had a quick look at the journal article behind this story, and have to say that the findings are not particularly startling to the non-epigeneticist (most of us). The main conclusion of the research, that there is "an association between epigenetic status and socio-economic status". This has been known for some time; assumed for a long time.

Basically, the factors determining potential ill-health are likely to be heritable, i.e. passed on between generations via 'in-womb programming' of the developing human. This makes sense to the lay person, as poverty and deprivation have detrimental effects on the physical and mental health and well-being of the mother during pregnancy, leading to 'less than perfect' development of the human foetus. In addition, environmental factors associated with low socio-economic status will compound potentially negative development, e.g disturbed sleep patterns, bad housing, anti-social communities, etc.. It's a horrible cycle that is hard to break without sustained, effective intervention.

DNA shows link to ill health in Glasgow
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-16680730

GG.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 24th Jan 2012, 09:31am

QUOTE (dondon @ 23rd Jan 2012, 06:54pm) *
Maybe THH bought a huge surplus stock of paper and ink from Munich's MARKS and Spencers and he's planning a putsch in a bier keller very soon, THH hiv you grown a moustache and acquired a big barking alsation dug.

Shaved the moustache aff when it started to go grey tongue.gif
As for the big alsation dug, I used to have a German Shepherd who's granny was a wolf crossed with a German Shepherd, no' wan o' they nancy alsations frae across the border, but still an aw you know how it is when there's a quarter somethin' else in ye over here. unsure.gif
But I had a Norwegian Forest Cat who chased dugs and he was a pure breed. laugh.gif
As for the D.Mark; and you can check this oot, there are still billions of them out there (probably under old ladies mattresses, piggy banks or Swiss vaults) that were never exchanged for ¤s and are still accepted by the (German) banks (but only by the banks) in exchange even today.

Posted by: dondon 24th Jan 2012, 11:44pm

Ah did reply to you THH but someone has nicked it, ah'm getting worried in case you lot over there are trying to sabotage our free speech.
When you mentioned a wolf ah got a bit wurried thinking aboot some guy wae puir deid mental heid banging ideas in big hidey holes in the mountains but surely your no that rich, you wurnae a traffic warden in Birmingham before Germany.
Come on oot wae it, you hiv got the reichstag marks aw stashed in your loft hivint ye. It's no true about everything coming back into fashion, it don't work that way wae money.
You couldnae even stay on the QT wae it, you just had to tell someone and that Angela Merkel burd, or Angie Mental as ah telt ye she wis, Aye the wan you pulled doon the Bier Keller when ah telt ye it was better to hiv failed than tried, wid ye believe me, anyway she has grassed you up to Tam Hickey.
Hiv you tried ebay, get in quick on the novelty, Marks for sales before the EU collapses and the Germans bring oot the peso.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 25th Jan 2012, 12:03am

Ah still have a Deutschmark coin which I use in the shoppin' trollies (the 1¤ coin is a bit thicker and people report me for wreckin' the trolley tae get it back oot) and a wee while ago I found two 100 Mark notes in Chapter Two of Harry Potter Book Two (put there so I wouldn't forget where ma wee stash was ... and did laugh.gif ) but I'll have to seriously tidy ma Keller oot before I invite Angie doon there.
Tories wid have tae come over here tae learn aboot big dugs ... etc. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: dondon 25th Jan 2012, 12:26am

QUOTE (TeeHeeHee @ 24th Jan 2012, 11:19pm) *
Ah still have a Deutschmark coin which I use in the shoppin' trollies (the 1¤ coin is a bit thicker and people report me for wreckin' the trolley tae get it back oot) and a wee while ago I found two 100 Mark notes in Chapter Two of Harry Potter Book Two (put there so I wouldn't forget where ma wee stash was ... and did laugh.gif ) but I'll have to seriously tidy ma Keller oot before I invite Angie doon there.
Tories wid have tae come over here tae learn aboot big dugs ... etc. rolleyes.gif

Hiv to admit we done aw hamburg wae single shillings, nuddy clubs wur dirt cheap but me and the mate got blootered and our wives got seeing nuddies on the cheap. five pences fitted everything including fruit machines, thery got claened ouit and we were loaded with every fag available and aw the lager. it was a good night

Posted by: wombat 25th Jan 2012, 12:37am

dry.gif they bliddy german shepherds urr a menace?wis painting a hoose and the owners daughters boyfriend ( a cop) turned up wie rin tin tin in his car,they left the dug ootside while they sat inside in front of the air con,watchin me wurkin thru their 2 way windaes, wisny long fore the dug wis hingin aound sniffin(musta smelt grass oan me rolleyes.gif ) so ah told it tae P off while i painted this big concrete watter tank,next thing this bliddy dugs behind me an hes humpin my leg B)while this lot laffed their ass off at rin tin tins antics (i cood hear )so ah moved tae the blind side of the hoose and gave him a wee tap wie a 6inch paintbrush a lovely chatreuse color it wis,cop went mental when he seen his dug.sorry ramblin a bit your fault tee hee.

Posted by: GG 25th Jan 2012, 01:32am

Waaaayyyy off-topic here!

GG.

Posted by: GG 25th Jan 2012, 09:20am

An editorial from the Scotsman regarding the recently-published research which shows that children born in Glasgow's poor areas are more susceptible to illness in later life. Though the editor makes the general point of the research findings, he is quick to point out – as most Conservative (and other) politicians do – that it is the lifestyle choices that poor people make which are important too.

Quite whether the Scotsman editor was actually born in a deprived area of Glasgow is unclear, although he appears to claim this from the start:

QUOTE
Doomed to an impaired life before we are even born? This would seem the depressing conclusion of research by the University of Glasgow’s College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences and the Glasgow Centre for Population Health, after studying blood samples of people across deprived and affluent areas of the city.

The broad conclusions have long been suspected: those born in Glasgow’s most deprived areas are more likely to have an increased chance of developing diabetes and cardiovascular disease later in life as part of their DNA. What the research does is to set out this process in the most stark terms. The researchers believe that the stressful conditions experienced by expectant mothers in areas of deprivation cause “bugs” to develop in the DNA of their offspring, with those children more susceptible to such conditions as coronary heart disease as a result. The work helps explain the persistence of low life-expectancy figures in areas of Glasgow with high deprivation scores. ...

Full editorial here:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/cartoon/leader_dna_plays_a_part_but_lifestyle_counts_too_1_2073374

GG.

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 25th Jan 2012, 09:32am

QUOTE (GG @ 25th Jan 2012, 12:48am) *
Waaaayyyy off-topic here!

GG.

Blame me ... I'm used tae it. wink.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: wombat 25th Jan 2012, 08:51pm

QUOTE (TeeHeeHee @ 25th Jan 2012, 09:48am) *
Blame me ... I'm used tae it. wink.gif

wink.gif already did pal,you and yer pal dondon triggered an auld memory frae forty years ago ramblin oan aboot alsatian dugs laugh.gif did ah tell yie aboot the time ah ________

Posted by: dondon 25th Jan 2012, 10:03pm

QUOTE (TeeHeeHee @ 25th Jan 2012, 08:48am) *
Blame me ... I'm used tae it. wink.gif laugh.gif

Please Naw! don't fall for that trap, last time he was blamed he was in Warsaw a month later. We'll hiv Fuhrer THH roaring doon Argylle St at the heid of a clank of Panzers and before you can say 'I surrender' in Italian you'll hiv two tory MPs in Scotland

Posted by: TeeHeeHee 25th Jan 2012, 11:28pm

Aw ziz (sorry, this) promotion ... and aw a wanted originally was a knighthood. rolleyes.gif
When the last stone is replaced oan the wa' and the last Tory is ceremonially thrown over it in a southerly direction, who's gonnae get the blame of the next 25,000 poor souls who have to line up before either of those gates (2 pennies clutched tighly in the sweatin' hands of those destined for the ferry) long before their alloted time ?
Those dreadful Tories still have their uses, you know, in the blame-game. tongue.gif

Posted by: GG 27th Jan 2012, 09:12am

An interesting article in the Irish Times about Glasgow today, regarding the recent research from the University of Glasgow which found that poor Glaswegians life chances are truncated even before birth:

Odds stacked against Glasgow's poorest - even before birth
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2012/0127/1224310807513.html

QUOTE
... Lower levels of methylation increase the chances that diabetes and cardiovascular disease will develop later in life – illnesses on which Glasgow still has the worst record, according to the 2010 Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation.

Alcohol and cigarettes, along with the mother’s diet during pregnancy, affects the degree of methylation in the embryo in the weeks after conception, the researchers acknowledge, but the single biggest factor is the mother’s stress levels – both psychological and sociological. ...

In the terms of this topic, it would be interesting to find out to what degree the Tories' 'political attack' on Scotland in the eighties affected stress levels in pregnant mothers in deprived areas of Glasgow.

GG.

Posted by: GG 31st May 2012, 06:46pm

In the Sun today:

QUOTE
Scots still ‘dying of Thatcher’ 30 years on

Scots die younger than anyone in Europe — because of Maggie Thatcher, a report said yesterday.

An NHS study said deaths from booze, smoking, drugs and suicide rocketed just after the Iron Lady entered No10 in 1979.

Up until then mortality rates were on a par with the rest of Europe — but now they’re the WORST at 75 for men and 80 for women, with Glasgow men living on average to just 71. But public health expert Dr Gerry McCartney claimed that after Mrs Thatcher came to power there was a "political attack on the organised working class".

Dr McCartney — a member of the Scottish Socialist Party — wrote: "The UK was exposed to a form of neoliberalism after 1979.

"Scotland was more vulnerable than other parts of the UK.

"Higher mortality is often attributed to higher rates of deprivation. Income inequality and unemployment don’t occur by accident but as a product of the government of the day."

GG.

Posted by: GG 14th Jul 2012, 11:37pm

A very good opinion article by Gerry Hassan, Scotsman commentator, in which he postulates that recent (last 30 years) policies are part of a wider phenomenon, with its roots in the underlying origins and objectives of 19th century British capitalism. An interesting read!

QUOTE
Who’s really to blame? Well, it’s a long story…

Thatcherism and New Labour have their roots in the nature of British culture, going back to the start of the Industrial Revolution

As the economic, social and political turmoil mounts across Britain, Europe and the West, some voices of certainty have arisen. One of the most vocal strands of opinion concerns who to blame for the wreckage and debris we see before us, with some wanting to lay the responsibility solely on the shoulders of Thatcherism, “the Big Bang” and 1980s.

It is very simple and easy to understand: the human need to rewrite history as a self-fulfilling prophecy. The 1980s as the epitome of everything that is wrong and has gone wrong is a powerful current in modern Britain. ...

To be fair to Owen Jones, author of the excellent book Chavs, he does briefly talk about the policies of Gladstone and Disraeli, though Jones' focus is firmly post-Thatcher.

Full article here:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/gerry-hassan-who-s-really-to-blame-well-it-s-a-long-story-1-2411223

GG.

Posted by: GG 14th Jul 2012, 11:53pm

... interesting to note that the paper version of the article did not include the very emotive photo of Thatcher entering 10 Downing Street in 1979.

GG.

Posted by: derick2 15th Jul 2012, 02:40am

It's a life style choice,probably motivated by despair at the miserable living conditions. Glasgow also has very poor dental health. People obviously think that smoking and drinking and sucking lollies gives them pleasure. If people felt good about themselves and their environment I feel sure ther health would improve. Do politicians have a responsibility? Of course they do. But intelligent individuals take charge of their own destiny like Andrew Carnegie did.

Posted by: Doug1 15th Jul 2012, 08:04am

I think its a piece of nonsense to blame Mrs Thatcher for Glasgows declining health problems. There may well be some sort of connection but at the end of the day people are responsible for their own health and glasgows drinking and drug problems are well documented. I well remember hearing a doctor whose surgery was in the shettleston district being interviewed on tv about the serious health issues in certain parts of the city and his reply was simple...excess drinking, excess smoking, and very poor diets.... ie fish n chip type meals every other night, i didnt recall him blaming Mrs T.

Posted by: Jupiter 15th Jul 2012, 08:40am

I know Ive referred to it before but I was looking at some of the aerial pictures of Glasgow from the 30s to the 50s and although I have no facts figures or data to support this Im sure the jam packed tenements and the countless chimneys,domestic and industrial spewing out their fumes,coupled with unhealthy and insanitary living conditions have to have been a contributory factor in the deaths of many citizens.

Posted by: Doug1 15th Jul 2012, 02:29pm

Dead right joop especially in the old industrial inner city areas but.... Mrs T didnae create them !!

Posted by: GG 29th Jul 2012, 03:23pm

Modern-day Tories were today blamed for modern-day Scottish poverty:

QUOTE
Report blames Coalition for Scots poverty

A NEW report on poverty in Scotland has blamed the UK Government for worsening the social divide but warned that even under independence Westminster would still “constrain” the way the country is run.

The first report by the newly-formed centre-left Scotland Institute warns that thousands more people both in and out of work in Scotland are facing poverty thanks to the
“deliberately chosen policies” of the Coalition government on low pay and welfare cuts.

Examining the constitutional options, the paper says a more powerful form of 
devolution might give a Scottish Government a greater ability to tweak policies as it sees fit. But it warns that a Scotland which continues to use the pound, and lives within the UK’s framework, would always be “constrained” in what it can do. ...

Full story here:
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/report-blames-coalition-for-scots-poverty-1-2438898

GG.

Posted by: tamhickey 30th Jul 2012, 04:39am

I have to agree. If people vote for Independence we shall still be tied to the pound and this may seem like no difference, however, I believe this would be a transitory measure until we as a nation agreed on which currency would best suit us. It would also act as a brake on foreign companies withdrawing their finances from Scotland until we have a settled currency of our own, which will take some time. Remember decimalisation? Same thing really. I can't see the Euro lasting very long as so many countries are in so much debt, so I doubt if that's the way forward. It's up for discussion what form our currency should take. Adopt the Krona? Who knows, and much depends upon the economic circumstances at the time. Don't forget, realising Independence means that we can then vote for political parties who represent us all, rather than being told to do things from Westminster as is currently the case. It would free up all of the parties to be more honest and local rather than the fraud that is Westminster politics. Remember the 90's when 50 labour MP'S were voted for in Scotland? They had no say as the Tory party won again and again and none of them stood up against warrant sales during the poll tax. In fact, it was the people of Scotland who did so without their representatives ever getting involved.
I don't support the SNP nor a member of any political party, but I believe we have to go our own way and then we can sort out what kind of country we need to be, including currency.

Posted by: Melody 30th Jul 2012, 03:41pm

QUOTE
I don't support the SNP nor a member of any political party, but I believe we have to go our own way and then we can sort out what kind of country we need to be, including currency.

thumbup.gif So do I Tam.

Posted by: Jupiter 30th Jul 2012, 03:44pm

Melody.Im with you on this point.I would like to see nothing more than a stand alone Scotland.

Posted by: JAGZ1876 30th Jul 2012, 05:59pm

No one needs to Support the SNP to achieve independence, just vote yes in 2014.

Posted by: CAMPSIE 8th Apr 2013, 06:01am

What a load of old tosh. More like lazy life styles was the cause. Laziness causes all sorts of health problems not least excess weight gain leading to heart problems, diabetes, and mental illness, anti social behaviour and much much more. I wish people would stop trying to put the blame on a particular political party, we all face hardship of some sort in our lives, but it is our decisions about what we do to make things better that matter. We British seem to have lost our backbones we are all too ready to ass the blame rather than hold our hands up.

Posted by: Scotsman 8th Apr 2013, 02:42pm

This story says it all about Thatcher. She used every part of the rich establishment to put people down and make them lose hope just because they were a different class from her. She made the policies that drove good working class people into the ground by dismantling all our industry and moving it overseas for foreigners to do the jobs that we used to do. The only thing I would disgree with about this story is the 25000 number.... I would say it is much higher than that!!

Posted by: Rab 8th Apr 2013, 08:27pm

Wouldn't it be great if everything in life was perfect? But this is life and it isn't! No politician or even any Leader of any polititical party will ever attain this ultimate goal. Just tell me one which has come even close - ever? Thatcher was no worse than any other - she got things right, she got things wrong - just like they all do. At least she had backbone unlike her 2 successors at No 10! If you are part of the wrong you have a gripe, if not, she was the greatest! Now where does this all get us? Nowhere! Thats where! We all moan, but who of us really truly want the rotten job of running a country today? Not me for one. There are far too many influences in the world that we have no cotrol of - thats how we are in the state we are now! Unless you want a Dictatorship or heaven help us, Communism, just keep your fingers crossed, cos there is nothing else you can do - especially with this lot of tossers! Campsie - you never spoke/wrote a truer word! thumbup.gif

But there again - what do I know?

Like or loath Thatcher, gloating over the death of anyone is despicable.

Posted by: CAMPSIE 8th Apr 2013, 10:45pm

Rab, i have read many of your posts and you strike me as a fair minded man, I like to think I am.....but sometimes people and their actions test me. I am sadden at the state our country is in, and like you I would not like to be the person trying to right all that is wrong with it. However what I find baffling and somewhat hypocritical is people who blame Margaret Thatcher for the dismantling of our industries and the closing of the pits but I would ask those same people how much blame do they lay at the door of the unions........because they have much to answer for. Did you know that they lost lots of money through buying works of art as investments for pension plans only to find themselves in negative equity. I remember Derek Hatton wearing designer suits having union meetings at top London hotels. The problem with this country is everyone wants the wrongs righted, but no one is prepared to work through a bumpy ride to achieve it. Ian Duncan Smith is the next best thing we have to Thatcher but only better, he is an honest man, done military service for this country and takes time to listen to ordinary people. He wasn't ready last time but he sure as hell is now, but those heinous vitriol ignorant people who verbally attacked his wife whilst she was having cancer treatment means he will not run for leadership to become PM, another golden opportunity for this country to regain it's backbone lost.

Posted by: Rab 9th Apr 2013, 09:20pm

Campsie: Was just clearing my chest of a bit of frustration about the state of politics (which I loathe, but tolerate - what else?) and wondered what some people expect of politicians. I honestly wonder about what will happen to my homeland in the coming few years. All the YES folk think it will be life-changing blah, blah, but they will be getting the same self-seeking heid-yins in Holyrood. I admit they are not all out the same mould but most are and they will fare no better than the present lot, wait and see. Mind you, I sincerely hope I am wrong! Now when did you ever hear a Politician say that - and mean it! thumbup.gif

Posted by: wee davy 10th Apr 2013, 03:36pm

I have one thing to say to you, campsie - WHY ARE YOU NOT POSTING ON THE VARIOUS Independence threads?
Your a wee voice in the wilderness, in here, unless your willing to put your dukes up, and expound upon your arguments (which are clearly, in the NO camp for independence.
I think you ARE the person you say you are.
If you really DO care, enter into the fray.
As jagz would say, the board is crying out for alternative views - and although my own do conflict somewhat, we are not averse to your debate.

I'm sure you would agree its vitally important Scotland comes to the right conclusion.

regards, wee davy

Posted by: wee davy 10th Apr 2013, 04:23pm

Oh, and campsie

Your admiration of IDS (son of a Group Captain) is commendable, considering he was an academic underachiever - wasn't averse to 'doctoring' his CV's after a distinctly inglorious 6yr term in the Scots Guards (obviously no leadership skills) and had a tough time getting a job because he had no qualifications.

His name, and background, allied to a shrewd choice of lady partner, it would appear got him into politics, where once again, his leadership skills (or lack of them) was found wanting.

He did not get paid for unemploment benefit, because he found a job in the qualifiying (26 week) period.
He has never known anything like poverty in his life. He says he was in tears after what he saw at Easterhouse, 'on a visit'. Perhaps he should have stayed a wee while.

Posted by: GG 6th Aug 2015, 11:11pm

It's been a while, but as good a place as any to put this story.

The sad and lonely figure of Ruth Davidson, ringleader of the small, dwindling gaggle of Tories that still infest Scotland, has scampered away from Glasgow with her tail between her legs. Apparently, the second-rate list MSP has been told that she stands no chance of staying even a second-rate list MSP in Glasgow at the Holyrood elections next year. Davidson's hasty getaway to Edinburgh means that the Tories will not have a single elected representative in Glasgow, except the irrelevant David Meikle, who is fleetingly a Glasgow Tory city councillor sure to lose his seat at the next local council election.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ruth-davidson-to-swap-glasgow-for-edinburgh-for-next-years-holyrood-msp-elections-10441732.html

GG.

Posted by: Jupiter 7th Aug 2015, 07:22am

Its a wonder the Tories even bother north of the border.

Posted by: Talisman 11th Aug 2015, 02:04pm

QUOTE (Jupiter @ 7th Aug 2015, 07:30am) *
Its a wonder the Tories even bother north of the border.

I remember a time when the S.N.P. were referred to as "The Tartan Tories" and had other similar soubriquets foisted upon them. Now the scare tactic is that they are going too far to the left. Left of what? Scottish Labour? The Tories interest in Scotland is largely confined to the estates of their absentee land lords, estates where their laws of trespass and talking of game still hold sway. North Sea oil was also a concern for them as this made a struggling Britain soluble in the eyes of their trading partners. ( and the "Gnomes of Zurich").

As for the Scottish people....... under Tories "they never had it so good". I seriously think my "Homeland" of Guvin missed out on that one somewhere.

Posted by: *Lesleywak* 28th Oct 2015, 01:01am

I would say the number of 25,000 Glaswegians dead because of the Tories has now increased substantially since this topic was started.

The quicker we are rid of the warped and perverted politics of the Westmonster regimes then the better for Glasgow and the whole of Scotland.

Posted by: GG 15th May 2016, 08:40pm

QUOTE
UK government policies blamed for Glasgow effect on health

Government ‘social engineering’ policies are partly to blame for the so called Glasgow effect academic researchers have argued.

The Glasgow Centre for Population Health has issued a report showing that a focus on promoting new towns and relocating industry and skilled workers out form the city was a factor in leaving the population vulnerable to increasing poverty.

The report states that compared to similar English cities of Manchester and Liverpool, Glasgow has a higher early death rate that can be explained by socio economic problems.

It argues the weak city response also exacerbated the problem and “gentrification” and lack of housing investment left Glasgow in a worse position than comparable cities.

The report states the Scottish Office New Town programme from the 1950s onwards diverted resources from Glasgow

It stated: “These other areas became the key priority in terms of investment, and this policy was extended and expedited over the ensuing decades despite awareness of the negative consequences (both socioeconomic and also ultimately health-related) for Glasgow.”

Glasgow, it stated, differed from Manchester and Liverpool in having a larger slum clearance programme and more poorer quality inner city housing estates with greater emphasis on high rise developments.

It added, Glasgow had: “Crucially, much lower per capita investment in housing repairs and maintenance of the public housing stock.”

It said while Manchester’s response was to slow the changes and Liverpool’s to oppose them Glasgow prioritised “inner-city gentrification” and commercial development potentially exacerbated the damaging impacts of UK policy on what was already a vulnerable population.”

GG.

Posted by: Talisman 18th May 2016, 09:06am

This topic is going from the ridiculous to the hysterical. I am no admirer of Toraigdh their ethic or their outlook, but I draw the line at hysteria, partisan promotion of statistical research posing as objectivity. The post here could nominally be presented in the conspiracy theorists posts. I lived in poverty of a high degree in Scotland, a Labour dominated Scotland, a labour I supported, that at no time except for the "swinging sixties" when there was an overall raise in the standard of living in the U.K. did much to improve the lot of Glasgow and its' people.

Scotland is on record as having the highest heart attack rate in the E.U.; has the worst nutritional outcomes. One of the worst rates of alcoholism and a positive aversion to personal home ownership. There are many factors closer to home than the blame allotted to the English Tolleys. I had felt that, and still do that there will be no improvement until Scotland has control over it's own destiny.

Hanging around begging hand outs from the English Westminster rulers, be they Labour or Tory, is demeaning in the extreme.