It's all Thatchers fault.

Snooze

:rotfl::T

19 years on people are still blaming her :rotfl:.

I bet in 50 / 100 years time people will still be blaming her for whatever mess we're in then too. :rolleyes:

Too funny.

Rob

smk77

chewmylegoff wrote: »

and labour's mismanagement of the economy of course.

well at least they were consistent with the governments of all other countries which suggests that any other party in the UK would have also mis-managed!

tomterm8

Chris2685 wrote: »

Winston Churchill?

Hmph, he lost us our empire.

stephen163

Thatcher is a hero. She saved us years of anguish by speeding up the inevitable - the abolishment of excessive trade union power and the forcing of nationalised industries to compete globally.

The harsh fact people need to wake up to is the old fashioned British engineering could not compete globally. So you are left with 2 choices, subsidise them to high heaven and restrict cheap imports, or throw down the challenge to the British economy to adapt and find its own niche in the world. We did the latter and despite what a lot of people might say, we haven't done too badly since.

Generali

The article is a joke.

Firstly you can't look at Thatcher in isolation, as a political figure and as an ideology (along with Keith Joseph in particular) without an examination of British politics and economics of the 1960s and 70s, particularly the capitulation of the Tories in accepting Labour hegmonic policies (such as statism, Trade Unionism and Nationalisation).

Secondly, any article that uses the following line:

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.

is either being disingenuous or has been written by someone without a clue about psephology.

Since 1945 (link) the largest share of the vote acheived by the Tories has been 49.74% in 1955, by Labour it was 47.88% in 1945 and by the Liberals (in their various guises) 25.38% in 1983.

Thatcher has become a bogey figure among people who were too young to realise what was going on at the time and are too lazy to find out for themselves these days.

Thatcher didn't destroy engineering in the UK. The Labour Governments (and Tories being complicit with their policies) in the 1960s and 70s did it. When the bill for propping up the overmanning and the featherbedding demanded by the unions couldn't be paid for by the Labour Exchequor, the Thatcher Governments sorted out the mess.

That's why I hope Labour win the next election - if they do then I suspect they'll never win another election.

ray123

Perhaps her ideologies are beyond the understanding of the dumbed down labour supporters.

I think you're right generali, but there is no chance of labour winning, we know it and they know it. Look at the press: they're filling their pockets more than ever and running down the economy, knowing that Cameron will have to pick up the pieces!

inspector_monkfish

Generali wrote: »

The article is a joke.

Firstly you can't look at Thatcher in isolation, as a political figure and as an ideology (along with Keith Joseph in particular) without an examination of British politics and economics of the 1960s and 70s, particularly the capitulation of the Tories in accepting Labour hegmonic policies (such as statism, Trade Unionism and Nationalisation).

Secondly, any article that uses the following line:



is either being disingenuous or has been written by someone without a clue about psephology.

Since 1945 (link) the largest share of the vote acheived by the Tories has been 49.74% in 1955, by Labour it was 47.88% in 1945 and by the Liberals (in their various guises) 25.38% in 1983.

Thatcher has become a bogey figure among people who were too young to realise what was going on at the time and are too lazy to find out for themselves these days.

Thatcher didn't destroy engineering in the UK. The Labour Governments (and Tories being complicit with their policies) in the 1960s and 70s did it. When the bill for propping up the overmanning and the featherbedding demanded by the unions couldn't be paid for by the Labour Exchequor, the Thatcher Governments sorted out the mess.

That's why I hope Labour win the next election - if they do then I suspect they'll never win another election.

did u see this on the same site....

Why Magaret Thatcher was good for Britain
http://news.uk.msn.com/features/article.aspx?cp-documentid=16615246

Gorgeous_George

tomterm8 wrote: »

Hmph, he lost us our empire.

But now we have a Multiplex.



GG

Generali

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

did u see this on the same site....

Why Magaret Thatcher was good for Britain
http://news.uk.msn.com/features/article.aspx?cp-documentid=16615246

No I hadn't.

TBH, it probably chimes more with my view (unsurprisingly).

It misses one of the things that Thatcher did was that she attacked 'corporatism' in the UK - the professional classes were undermined as much as organised Labour through things like the Big Bang and taking off restrictions on professionals competing.

JayScottGreenspan

Using Thatcher as a scapegoat will undoubtedly help some people ignore the fact that New Labour made a huge mess of the economy, egged on by a fec!less opposition.

Who should we blame for the continuation of some of the poorer Thatcherite ideologies under New Labour?
Should we blame Thatcher, the ideologies themsleves, or New Labour? We can blame all three, but ultimately the government must be held to account for its own policies, regardless of who they were copying.