Thatcher poll: worst or best

Tancred

If there is one thing I despise Thatcher for most of all is that she rammed materialism and the love of money down the throats of the British people. People might have been poorer before she came but at least everyone knew his place and much of what went on in the economy was heavily regulated and controlled. This made society more stable. But as she never believed in society to begin with, she aimed to destroy it by throwing money at working class people in order to create a capitalist version of the Marxist idea of the 'classless society' - an oxymoron if there ever was one.
I remember the private housing estate I grew up in as a child; in the 1970s it was middle class and inhabited by teachers, police inspectors, journalists etc. By 1990 it had become full of chavs and louts with gangs of bored youths hanging around street corners drinking on Saturday evenings. All the decent folk had moved out and the people who replaced them were the 'new' working classes: ignorant, padded with money from council house sales and fully in tune with Thatcher's 'no such thing as society' ideology of not caring about anyone except yourself. To me this exemplified everything that was rotten with Thatcherism and indeed much of modern Toryism. The aim was to make Britain into a 'little America', with all its rampant individualism and obsession with money. This is why she hated Europe so much; Europe represented the old way of doing things, the values of social and Christian democracy she hated so much.

I think Thatcher was a Satanist - despite all her public adherence to the Christian religion her ideas were diametrically opposed to much of what the Christian faith is all about.

Tancred

michael1983l wrote: »

Ironically, I believe the exam system should be taken back to O-Level standards. The GCSE is a coaching driven exam rather than a subject driven exam.

I tend to agree. GCSE is not doing anything for students. Exams should be marked competitively, as they used to be - no more than a set percentage of students should get a given grade, irrespective of the mark. Otherwise teachers will coach the students into the easiest way to get high grades and before long 90% of school pupils will end up with unrealistically high grades. Life is full of competition - school should encourage that and unfortunately that also means making a lot of students fail. This reflects the reality of life - you cannot have everyone in a race as the winner.

Tancred

BobQ wrote: »

I think you are correct that a lot depended on which secondary modern you went to after failing.

I recall getting very stressed for my 11+ as there was a perception that this was a life changing event. I later learned that my teacher had told my parents that they expected me to fail it because of my nervous disposition. I have never thought that an examination at 11 was a fair way of dealing with educational opportunity. I take your point that their were processes to deal with late developers but I never found anyone who did this. As it happened I did not think I would pass either but surprised myself and my teachers by passing it (quite comfortably the teacher said.). But I have always favoured comprehensive education as being fairer as its far easier within one school to transition between ability streams.

The problem with the grammar school system is that a young person's life was decided at 11, which was far too young. In this sense the comprehensive system made a lot more sense, but only with appropriate setting and streaming.

StevieJ

michael1983l wrote: »

This is easy for me to work out. Previous to thatcher under Heath, the UK had just been to the IMF in 1976 for a loan as we were bankrupt much like Greece today. When Maggie took over the Country was in financial ruins in 1979, when Thatcher left the Country had the 3rd Largest economy in the world in 1990 in accordance with GDP. That speaks for itself, hard decisions were made and it affected many people but the end game was all there, it set us up to be the financial power players we were during the 90s and early 2000s. Without Maggie we would be no marks on the world stage now.

There is so much wrong with that, in fact and implication
Poor old Ted gets the blame for everything, even when he wasn't in charge What is that rubbish about Maggie taken us up the GDP table, in 1980 we were 6th and in 1990 we were 7th. I am surprised that Gen thanked this load of crap?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_largest_historical_GDP

Generali

StevieJ wrote: »

There is so much wrong with that, in fact and implication
Poor old Ted gets the blame for everything, even when he wasn't in charge What is that rubbish about Maggie taken us up the GDP table, in 1980 we were 6th and in 1990 we were 7th. I am surprised that Gen thanked this load of crap?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_largest_historical_GDP

In mitigation strong drink had been taken.

FWIW, I think the standard of politics in the UK in the 70s was very poor. The Tory and Labour Governments were appalling. The Tories seemed to have decided to become a sort of soft left party and Labour had decided that the Government should own everything. The best thing that Maggie did for the country IMHO was that she redefined what the centre is.

I'm not sure why I'm held to a higher standard than other posters BTW. I often seem to be, not just by you. I'm not sure whether to be flattered or annoyed!

StevieJ

Generali wrote: »

I'm not sure why I'm held to a higher standard than other posters BTW. I often seem to be, not just by you. I'm not sure whether to be flattered or annoyed!

Could have been worse I could have said 'it doesn't surprise me'

ash28

StevieJ wrote: »

There is so much wrong with that, in fact and implication
Poor old Ted gets the blame for everything, even when he wasn't in charge What is that rubbish about Maggie taken us up the GDP table, in 1980 we were 6th and in 1990 we were 7th. I am surprised that Gen thanked this load of crap?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_largest_historical_GDP

It's ok - over on DT he thinks Ted Heath was Labour.........(not Generali)...

Tancred

Generali wrote: »

In mitigation strong drink had been taken.

FWIW, I think the standard of politics in the UK in the 70s was very poor. The Tory and Labour Governments were appalling. The Tories seemed to have decided to become a sort of soft left party and Labour had decided that the Government should own everything. The best thing that Maggie did for the country IMHO was that she redefined what the centre is.

I'm not sure why I'm held to a higher standard than other posters BTW. I often seem to be, not just by you. I'm not sure whether to be flattered or annoyed!

Not true. The Conservative Party led by Heath was similar to the Christian Democratic parties in most of the western European countries - not really 'soft left', more 'soft right'. Thatcher is the one that tuned the Tories into a political anomaly in the European space and sowed the seeds for future discord with the EU. You are making comparisons with the US Republican Party, which isn't relevant.

Generali

Tancred wrote: »

You are making comparisons with the US Republican Party, which isn't relevant.

No I'm not.

CLAPTON

BobQ wrote: »

My views are heavily influenced by her policies causing my father to be made redundant in his late fifties, family experiences of the degenerating NHS and the callous treatment of a disabled friend during her reign.

But to be fair my attitude has mellowed with time:)

what industry was your father in?

in what way did her policies lead to him losing his job?

were your families experiences of the NHS in the 80s worse that Mid Staffs?