rogo727
Posts: 915
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline
|
The same can be said about Reagan. But I can see no other leader, leading America at that time. i suppect this holds true about thatcher and England . Please remember that his first term WW3 was vert much real. I remember air raid drills in 5th and 6th grade about a soviet invasion in the USA . While we are paying for his decisions today we are in far better shape than Russia. I imagine this holds true for you too.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Punk Reaper
quote:
ORIGINAL: rogo727
I've always respected thatcher... I don't understand why so many English people don't like her.
quote:
ORIGINAL: warspite1
quote:
ORIGINAL: Punk Reaper
I couldn't tell that you are English as it isn't on your status. Historically it was incredible to find his bones under the car park and the forensics were really interesting but as for a state funeral for a long dead king I think in this time of austerity money could be better spent. And you know if Richard gets one Thatcher supporters will be clambering to get our uncrowned queen one as well.
warspite1
Yes, lets hope Lady Thatcher receives the state funeral she so obviously deserves when she drops off this mortal coil. A great lady and great Prime Minister. 
When Margaret Thatcher left Downing Street for the last time as prime minister in November 1990, she told the press: "We're very happy that we leave the United Kingdom in a very, very much better state than when we came here 11-and-a-half years ago."
Judged against certain criteria, she had a point. Few enjoy paying tax: her time in No 10 saw the basic rate fall from 33p to 25p and the top rate plunge from 83p to 40p. Everybody enjoys more disposable income: during her premiership, the average salary rose from £5,427 to £15,252. She also oversaw a decline in the annual number of working days lost in strikes from 29.5m to 1.9m.
Dig beneath the surface of these statistics, however, and a different picture emerges. In order to achieve constructive changes, Mrs Thatcher subjected Britain to a sequence of destructive upheavals. Her cure for the UK’s ills was attractive enough for a portion of its population to vote her into office three times, but the medicine was so objectionable she never received majority support.
In short, the apparatus she used to achieve her goals harmed just as many - if not more - than they helped. This was because her policies tended to involve short-term pain for many, but long-term gain for only a few.
Inflation doubled
Rather than stimulating the economy through investment and tax cuts, she tried to control the amount of money in circulation. Mrs Thatcher thought this would reduce inflation from its 1979 level of 10.3%. It didn't. Inflation doubled within a year and only fell to present day levels of 2-3% in 1986.
By this point, the damage had been done. To get to such a low level, indirect taxes had been hiked (VAT rose from 8% to 15%), as had interest rates (topping 17%). Subsidies for industry were reduced. The result was a massive rise in unemployment from 1.4m in 1979 to 3.5m by 1982, or one in eight people out of work. "I knew that when you change from one set of policies to another, the transition is very difficult," Mrs Thatcher later reflected, "but benefits would come in the longer run."
A disunited kingdom
Benefits did come, but not for everyone. Long-term unemployment blighted an entire generation in Northern Ireland (where 20% of people were left out of work), Scotland and the NE and NW of England (16%). Supporters insisted work was there to be found; critics argued it was unreasonable to expect people to leave homes and families to take a job 100 miles away.
A disunited kingdom emerged, as some parts of the country flourished while others faltered. Industry declined in the north; new sectors such as financial services boomed in the south. Mrs Thatcher went further, advocating both economic and moral belligerence. There was "no such thing as society, there are individual men and women and there are families." People should look to their own and not rely on the government for help.
This crystallised into her observation that the only reason the Good Samaritan did any good was "because he had money". Fine: everyone wants money and some made a lot during the Thatcher years, but what if you happened to live in a place where you couldn't earn any?
Selective prosperity
The prosperity Mrs Thatcher brought to Britain was selective, antagonistic and temporary. She did indeed leave Britain "very, very much better", but only for some. She also left it in recession, with unemployment, inflation and interest rates rising.
Above all, not only was she bad for the country during her premiership, she continues to be bad for the country today. The causes of the present slump - unrestricted credit, deregulation and too much financial speculation - all date back to the 1980s. No successive government dared reverse these decisions: a blessing to her legacy, but a curse we must now all share.
By Ian Jones
In short ... The rich got richer, the poor got poorer, the banks got deregulated and the economy got well and truly f@#%$
_____________________________
"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943
|
Printable Version
RE: Feud over where to bury Richard III - 
- but I do react badly to some things and I know I shouldn't. Goodnight to you too PR.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread