Turn on thread page Beta

Thatcher, good or bad for Britain? watch

  • View Poll Results: Thatcher- good or bad?
    Good
    59.26%
    Bad
    40.74%

    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    All I know was that Margaret Thatcher causes a lot of people a lot of problems, some of which can still be seen today.

    I know my area, like countless others in the country suffered terribly during and after the years she was in power. Most sorts of industry were virtually wiped out, unemployment remained high and increased, towns were left to become run down as no one had any money to spend, services were shut down, communities virtually destroyed. Even today some are only just starting to recover.

    And then there is the all the right to buy council house stuff. This, I feel has directly lead to the stupid increase in house prices since the 80s. I mean, if the idea that everyone should own a house hadn't come along, I doubt there would be as much competition for houses and more available to rent. This would benefit people who both want to buy houses(lower prices) and rent (more places to rent, so more competitive prices in the private sector, and lower prices as there would be more social housing (that which has been sold of has not easily been replaced due to increased house prices making it too costly).

    Anyway, this is just the tip of the ce berg in why she wasn't good for everyone in the time she was in power. She might have helped some, she might have helped the country somewhat in the longer term, but in the short term and possibly medium term, she hurt a lot of people way too much, which is just not right.
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    triple post
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    triple post
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Roger Kirk)
    All I know was that Margaret Thatcher causes a lot of people a lot of problems, some of which can still be seen today.

    I know my area, like countless others in the country suffered terribly during and after the years she was in power. Most sorts of industry were virtually wiped out, unemployemnt remained high and inceased, towns were left to become run down as no one had any money to spend, services were shut down, communities virtually destroyed. Even today some are only just starting to recover.
    The industry in question was mostly wiped out by a rationalisation process. Failing industries were no longer propped up and nationalised industries also rationalised and the data suggests massive productivity improvement in these industries. I would say it is more the fault of the previous Labour administrations for allowing failing industries to continue to be propped up. The politically brave move was to allow closure and she should be commended for that.

    Obviously the misallocation of resources that was allowed by propping up industry left a massive scar after rationalisation. It is a definate down-side to a policy to which there was surely no alternative.

    Unemployment was made worse by the moneterist policies - this cannot be disputed, however it was very much on the ascendency at the time.

    (Original post by Roger Kirk)
    And then there is the all the right to buy council house stuff. This, I feel has directly lead to the stupid increase in house prices since the 80s. I eman, if the idea that everyone should own a house hadn't come along, I doubt there would be as much competition for houses and more available to rent. This would benefit people who both want to buy houses(lowe prices) and rent (more places to rent, so more competative prices in the private sector, and lower prices as there would be more social housing (that which has been sold of has not easily been replaced due to increased house prices making it too costly).
    The money from the sale of council houses should have been re-invested instead of being used for tax cuts or whatever it was used for. This was irresponsible short-termism.

    (Original post by Roger Kirk)
    Anyway, this is just the tip of the ice berg in why she wasn't good for everyone in the time she was in power. She might have helped some, she might have helped the country somewhat in the onger term, but in the short term and possibly meduim term, she hurt a lot of people way too much, which is just not right.
    most of the things mentioned were demonstratably inevitable. our country owes an awful lot to her brave policies. We needed her!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Put it this way: James Callaghan had such a poor reputation that he was the first to be toppled by a vote of no confidence for 55 years... The second time she was elected, the opposition was split into two parties.

    Apart from the obvious problems we've been having with her policies:
    Unemployment; Canary Wharf; Falklands War; butchering relations with Ireland to the delight of the IRA; the privatizations (Airlines, airports and air manufacturers; telecoms and the cable network; freight; ports; oil; gas; Rolls Royce; steel; Rover; water companies; electricity; railways); the cuts to the education and health budgets, etc. the main effect has been to make Britain's economy less stable. There have been plenty of mini-booms and busts since she came to power. In a laissez-faire marketplace, which Thatcher advocated, there was no room for environmental, social or ethical concerns.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah socialist countries have a fantastic history of running the economy well for the benefit of the people and socialist countries have never damaged the "environmental, social or ethical concerns" of the masses.

    Things were better before Thatcher came in.

    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Machiavellian)
    What is a douche bag?
    Part of a device for cleaning the inside of the vagina. Next question.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jangliss)
    Put it this way: James Callaghan had such a poor reputation that he was the first to be toppled by a vote of no confidence for 55 years... The second time she was elected, the opposition was split into two parties.

    Apart from the obvious problems we've been having with her policies:
    Unemployment; Canary Wharf; Falklands War; butchering relations with Ireland to the delight of the IRA; the privatizations (Airlines, airports and air manufacturers; telecoms and the cable network; freight; ports; oil; gas; Rolls Royce; steel; Rover; water companies; electricity; railways); the cuts to the education and health budgets, etc. the main effect has been to make Britain's economy less stable. There have been plenty of mini-booms and busts since she came to power. In a laissez-faire marketplace, which Thatcher advocated, there was no room for environmental, social or ethical concerns.
    Ideology can be blinding sometimes. So lets look at some facts:

    On a negative note:

    The booms and busts were global, but moneterism usually made things worse. So unemployment was high due to this and the general shake-out caused by economic rationalisation. This led to a high 'misery index' of 16.5 for the period 1980-8 compared with a figure of 19.9 for the period 1974-9; which is much higher than the post war period and much higher than those figures seen in the great depression - and the the Gini coefficient of income inequality rose by around 8 percentage points in the later 1980s and early 1990... So far it's not looking good...

    On a positive note:

    Privatisation demonstratably improved productivity. The evidence is clear on this. I could cite about 6 economic papers to back this up since I have explored this issue in a lot of detail.

    Trade Union reform can also be shown to have had a very positive impact on medium-term growth, since it removed the structural weakness of multi-unionism' from the british economy.

    The reforms of taxation and welfare also increased growth performance by making a switch from direct to indirect taxation and moving away from government hand-outs and therefore encouraging work.

    I could make more points, but they are debatable. Every point I have mentioned here is backed up by firm evidence and is irrefutable if you look at the evidence in several economic reports.

    In conclusion, Tories need to be more honest about Thatcher and Socialists need to be less ideologically inclined to blame everything on her.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If that was a jab at me, I don't think I've mentioned her outside of this thread.

    I did forget the plus side though: she did great work in the detergents branch of chemistry before taking up a political career. Although she was a bad solution to Britain's problems, she was a solution, which the Labour Party weren't interested in providing during that time.
    Offline

    13
    I cannot believe that maggie and I share the same birth sign! :eek:

    She is obviously a lowly evolved Libran. The 'dark side' and all that.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by girlgerms)
    She wrote a clause into local government banning media that promoted homosexuality.

    And yes, lets talk about economics. 15% interest was great! Lets bring it back!

    Edit: It was called Section 28... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28
    I don't think the media should promote homosexuality. I think they should be able to talk about it, but not promote as most people understand the term. I'm assuming that's what she meant.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by girlgerms)
    If we want to expand our timeline, then maybe I should also point you in the direction of Black Wednesday. Another excellent decision by the Conservatives.
    Thatcher was notoriously hostile to the ERM and was talked into it by the moron Major. Anyway, black wednesday worked out alright in the long term as it's meant Britain is very unlikely to have the euro for a long time.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jangliss)
    If that was a jab at me, I don't think I've mentioned her outside of this thread.

    I did forget the plus side though: she did great work in the detergents branch of chemistry before taking up a political career. Although she was a bad solution to Britain's problems, she was a solution, which the Labour Party weren't interested in providing during that time.
    So Thatcher was better than far-left socialism?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound02)
    I don't think the media should promote homosexuality. I think they should be able to talk about it, but not promote as most people understand the term. I'm assuming that's what she meant.
    I suppose 'promotion' lacks a degree of clarity in something like this. My assumption was that it was shunned.

    I mean, you can't 'promote' homosexuality or hetrosexuality - you're either one or the other... or both, in some circumstances.

    However, in this sense I assume 'promotion' is taken as 'including homosexuality in our everyday lives' ie. as the natural thing that it is.

    I understand that the 1980s was a very different time, and my experience of those years was largely children's TV, but it doesn't make me any more sympathetic whatsoever.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jangliss)
    If that was a jab at me, I don't think I've mentioned her outside of this thread.

    I did forget the plus side though: she did great work in the detergents branch of chemistry before taking up a political career. Although she was a bad solution to Britain's problems, she was a solution, which the Labour Party weren't interested in providing during that time.
    Debate is not about 'jabs' at people. It is about facts and debate around those facts. So I presented some facts and my conclusion is largely positive about Thatcher. That is all...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's thanks to her the average train is 10 minutes late
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Girlgerms - I think I might swap onto History and Politics at Nottingham - if I can!
    x
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emma)
    It's thanks to her the average train is 10 minutes late
    Is that all you've got?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gideon2000uk)
    Is that all you've got?
    pretty much, I thought it was kind of short and witty.

    "There is no such thing as society"

    This short line also sums up Thatcher.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emma)
    pretty much, I thought it was kind of short and witty.

    "There is no such thing as society"

    This short line also sums up Thatcher.
    "I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation." - Prime minister Margaret Thatcher, talking to Women's Own magazine, October 31 1987

    When you look at the whole thing in context, you will see that it is far more reasonable. It is interesting that a quote in 'Woman's Own' has gone down in history...

    On the whole I agree with Thatcher. People should help themselves rather than falling back on a large state apparatus.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.