Margaret Thatcher dies

[amateur51]

It wasn't inadvertent. Your first post retains your own title. The House Rules also say - since you have yourself quoted them - "please do not start topics or post messages which are designed to be provocative". You must know that some members - albeit a small minority - would find that title provocative.

I know that feelings run very high on this topic, but something more analytical (and critical, it goes without saying) would be welcome.

A fair cop, ff but I claim overwhelming excitement in the heat of the moment as a mitigating factor

You've achieved a worthy compromise

[ahinton]

Nearly 300 posts and yet she's barely been dead for two days. Well, I suppose there was never going to any real opportunity for her to RIP.

Those hereabouts whose enthusiasms for a wide variety of British symphonies may care to recall Robert Simpson's remark about the pleasure (relief?) of emigrating to Ireland in the 1980s that it was lovely to get away from Mrs Thatcher.

Her demise is, I think, unlikely to hold up the career of Meryl Streep.

[amateur51]

Which is the main reason why I started this thread.

Sadly your title is just as provocative to some (me included) as mine was BBM.

That was the nature of the woman - she divided opinion and she revelled in that.

[Beef Oven]

Make no mistake: revenge by the Left, not justice for the victim, is what the Pinochet case is all about. Senator Pinochet is in truth on trial, not for anything contained in Judge Garzon's indictment, but for defeating communism. What the Left can't forgive is that Pinochet undoubtedly saved Chile and helped save South America.

Margaret Thatcher on Pinochet.
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/108383

Make no mistake, the left have never forgiven Thatcher for defeating the socialists and the Robber baron trades unions that were crippling the country. She undoubtably rescued Britain (particularly Scotland) from the effects of the meltdown of industries that had a noble past, but no future.

[rauschwerk]

A glance at some figures suggests that Mrs Thatcher enjoyed a good deal of luck during her premiership.

During the 1970s, the price of oil rose from around 15 US$/barrel to nearly 90, peaking in 1980. No government of that period really knew how to respond. It's easy but, in my view, simplistic to blame solely the trade unions for the resulting mess. Fortunately for Mrs T, North Sea Oil began to flow in the early 1980s and the price of oil fell sharply: by 1985 it was US50$/barrel and a year later only $25 (figures adjusted for US$ inflation).

As for economic growth: between the recessions of 1980 and 1991, it was higher than it had been in the late 70s but on average was no better than it had been in the 60s. So much for a Thatcherite economic miracle. Where did all that oil money actually go?

Further strokes of luck for Mrs T included the Falklands invasion, repelled shortly before a general election, and the leadership of the NUM during the miners' strike by a a man who evidently had no political nous.

Under Mrs T, inequality (the gap between the incomes of the richest and poorest 10%) increased by 40 percent, with thoroughly damaging effects on society. No succeeding administration has even attempted to reduce it.

[amateur51]

And the 'Baroness' , I hope you note . I'm not in favour of titles, me.

[Flosshilde]

They don't know the meaning of compassion. They wring their hands and mumble platitudes....whinge about anything and everything......but compassion doesn't come into it. But you know and I know that you can't reason with bigots like them.

What or who exactly are we supposed to feel compassion for?

[Beef Oven]

A glance at some figures suggests that Mrs Thatcher enjoyed a good deal of luck during her premiership.

During the 1970s, the price of oil rose from around 15 US$/barrel to nearly 90, peaking in 1980. No government of that period really knew how to respond. It's easy but, in my view, simplistic to blame solely the trade unions for the resulting mess. Fortunately for Mrs T, North Sea Oil began to flow in the early 1980s and the price of oil fell sharply: by 1985 it was US50$/barrel and a year later only $25 (figures adjusted for US$ inflation).

As for economic growth: between the recessions of 1980 and 1991, it was higher than it had been in the late 70s but on average was no better than it had been in the 60s. So much for a Thatcherite economic miracle. Where did all that oil money actually go?

Further strokes of luck for Mrs T included the Falklands invasion, repelled shortly before a general election, and the leadership of the NUM during the miners' strike by a a man who evidently had no political nous.

Under Mrs T, inequality (the gap between the incomes of the richest and poorest 10%) increased by 40 percent, with thoroughly damaging effects on society. No succeeding administration has even attempted to reduce it.

Agree with most of this, there was indeed a fair amount of good fortune.

As to inequality, Thatcher was not attempting flatten society out.; that was more for communists, socialists and some of the labour party.

Thatcher was looking to increase the total amount of wealth of the nation so everybody did better. The rest is the politics of envy and tall poppy syndrome.

[Julien Sorel]

Make no mistake, the left have never forgiven Thatcher for defeating the socialists and the Robber baron trades unions that were crippling the country. She undoubtably rescued Britain (particularly Scotland) from the effects of the meltdown of industries that had a noble past, but no future.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a leading economic forum, said that the wealthiest tenth of society now earn 12 times as much as the poorest, up from eight times as much in the 1980s.

In addition the amount of total income taken by the top 1 per cent of earners - including bankers, managers and executives - has doubled to 14 per cent.

By contrast, the top tax rate has fallen while benefits for the poorest have become less generous.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8935943/Gap-between-rich-and-poor-growing-fastest-in-Britain.html

Otherwise, see rauschwerk's #290.

Anyone who remembers the 1980s remembers how little consideration or concern Margaret Thatcher and her supporters showed anyone who was not 'one of them.' They reveled in sneering, jeering and scoffing. As I've repeatedly pointed out, with no response from the terrible lack of compassion / show some respect forum members, Margaret Thatcher went out of her way to endorse Suharto and to express her friendship for General Pinochet. This chap http://politicalscrapbook.net/wp-con...l-pinochet.jpg (same chap as this chap http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...5F7FC1E2C4.jpg).

What is hypocritical and sanctimonious and hand wringing is to demand compassion or respect for someone who couldn't give a fig for such sentiments herself. If you respect her, fine. Others don't and the death of a public figure, not a private individual, makes no difference to that.

[Flosshilde]

Make no mistake, the left have never forgiven Thatcher for defeating the socialists and the Robber baron trades unions that were crippling the country. She undoubtably rescued Britain (particularly Scotland) from the effects of the meltdown of industries that had a noble past, but no future.

This is just ludicrous, especially when you look at the 'robber barons' her policies have saddled us with now, and if you think that death is a suitable rescue from the flu.

[ahinton]

"Baroness", ff? I'd thought that this had been a typo for "barrenness". Ah, well; shows how much I don't know, I guess...

[Beef Oven]

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a leading economic forum, said that the wealthiest tenth of society now earn 12 times as much as the poorest, up from eight times as much in the 1980s.

In addition the amount of total income taken by the top 1 per cent of earners - including bankers, managers and executives - has doubled to 14 per cent.

By contrast, the top tax rate has fallen while benefits for the poorest have become less generous.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8935943/Gap-between-rich-and-poor-growing-fastest-in-Britain.html

Otherwise, see rauschwerk's #290.

Anyone who remembers the 1980s remembers how little consideration or concern Margaret Thatcher and her supporters showed anyone who was not 'one of them.' They reveled in sneering, jeering and scoffing. As I've repeatedly pointed out, with no response from the terrible lack of compassion / show some respect forum members, Margaret Thatcher went out of her way to endorse Suharto and to express her friendship for General Pinochet. This chap http://politicalscrapbook.net/wp-con...l-pinochet.jpg (same chap as this chap http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...5F7FC1E2C4.jpg).

What is hypocritical and sanctimonious and hand wringing is to demand compassion or respect for someone who couldn't give a fig for such sentiments herself. If you respect her, fine. Others don't and the death of a public figure, not a private individual, makes no difference to that.

Then we must be doing very well these days.

Btw, I don't demand anything. You'll find that it is the left that keep making demands of people.

[Richard Barrett]

Thatcher was looking to increase the total amount of wealth of the nation so everybody did better.

That worked well, didn't it.

[Beef Oven]

That worked well, didn't it.

Yes, it did

[rauschwerk]

Between 1979 and 1997 the Government raised, in cash terms, almost £70bn from privatisation, and approximately £80bn from taxation of North Sea oil (a much larger sum in today's money). I ask again: where did all that dosh end up? It does not appear to have gone on long term investment for the country's good.