Margaret Thatcher: Thirty years on

[Furunculus]

So what did Thatcher give Britain ?
1. Lower social mobility ,
2. lower growth in GDP ,
3. increases in government subsidies to business ,
4. asset stripping to pay for all the crazy policies she introduced ,
5. prolonging the NI conflict and boosting the IRAs recruitment and fundraising which meant more British lives lost and more British taxpayers money wasted ,
6. a credit fueled economic stimulus which is now coming to fruition as the maggot filled rotten apple that it inevitably would be ,
7. the introduction of draconian measures which have turned britain into more of a police state ,
8. the alteration of the official secrets act which really screws the British public interest...
9. oh yeah and supporting crzy murdering dictators for good measure .
10. the Falklands (which were a result of her policies anyway)
11. Oh and of course the Poll Tax , that scrwed both the taxpayers and the local governments big time .
12. Yeah , that speaks volumes about you

1. Was it thatcher that achieved that, or declining educational standards since the fifties?
2. Really, GDP per-capita has for the last 15 years at least been higher than france, and nominal GDP was higher despite have a smaller population which represents a big change from the seventies sick man of europe, so i'd love to see figures for that claim.
3. as opposed to endlessly subsiding state-owned industries....................... if there are less state owned industries are we really surprised that more private business might have got subsidies?
4. its called letting go of failing state owned businesses that the nation had no business owning in the first place.
5. we differ on this, and argued it elsewhere. i believe the firmer stance of earlier gov't brought about a situation where the IRA were prepared to negotiate, rather than keeping the conflict on a slow-burn in perpetuity.
6. most of britains internal problems stem from poor/loose banking regulation, which is not something that can be laid at thatchers door.
7. you might want to specify those, but either way i'm kind of doubtful they compare in magnitude to that accomplished by nu-labour.
8. does it really, and while unfortunate if true if this really among the biggest problems facing britain?
9. crazy murdering dictators who provided vital assistance in a war we might not otherwise have won?
10. how did thatcher cause the falklands, really? by withdrawing the south atlantic patrol ship, or was it more because of 20 years of FCO procrastinating on the issue of talks with argentina regarding the future status of the falklands?
11. no argument there, it was a poor fight to pick with all the enemies she had accumulated by that point.
12. it was a harmless statement made in private, i will cheer her on just to cause politically correct people to cringe, what a worthless non-issue.

[Pannonian]

1. Was it thatcher that achieved that, or declining educational standards since the fifties?

Perhaps I was the exception, but from a generation significantly later than the much-vaunted 50s, for my Maths revision, I practiced on exam papers from the 50s. I got 100%, or as close to it as makes no difference, on every one. And when the real exams came, they weren't much different either.

Maybe it might be different for the Humanities, but in the subject where I could directly compare the educational standards of the 50s and those of my generation, there was no difference.

[Scurvy]

Perhaps I was the exception, but from a generation significantly later than the much-vaunted 50s, for my Maths revision, I practiced on exam papers from the 50s. I got 100%, or as close to it as makes no difference, on every one. And when the real exams came, they weren't much different either.

Maybe it might be different for the Humanities, but in the subject where I could directly compare the educational standards of the 50s and those of my generation, there was no difference.

Difficult area. Educational standards haver been declining for the past 200 years or so, but according to the government, were achieving better in exams than ever before..... clearly a problem
(I did humanities, and looking at old papers, some look identical, and others have stuff I have never even heard of, or stuff that is understandably outdated)

I feel sorry for the government on this one, as if exam marks go down, they would get heavily criticised, but when kids achieve stuff in exams (they could just, y'know, work hard), its the exams getting easier, not improved teaching, cleverer children etc. - although i'm very suspicious of governemnt statistics on education for just that reason

As for Thatcher --> I find it very hard to judge her time in office objectively, and so don't try. Should maybe wait another 10 years before her 'legacy' can be evaluated properly.

[Louis VI the Fat]

2. Really, GDP per-capita has for the last 15 years at least been higher than france, and nominal GDP was higher despite have a smaller population which represents a big change from the seventies sick man of europe, so i'd love to see figures for that claim.

This is incorrect. Onwards from 1960, the UK's GDP has been lower than France's with the exception pf the period 1999-2007.(Blair) Currently, France's GDP is higher again. Italy will overtake the UK this year again as well - this is owing to Britain having remained outside of the Euro.

The UK's GDP per capita has been higher only for the interlude from 1999 to 2008 too.

Maggie had more balls than all the Prime Ministers since, combined.

Aye. One thing seems certain. In ten years time, there will be no spirited debate discussing 30 years of John Major. ('John who?')

A bit ot, but did you recently stumble upon this article in connection with that France is currrently seeming to get a "working poor" class (that hampers social mobility, or certainly not looking to be increasing it), particulary females?

I struggle somewhat with the phrasing of the question. Let me give two answers:
No, I stumbled upon my quoted article after googling 'social mobility Britian'. I knew what I was looking for, I just needed a reliable source.
Yes, France is facing problems of decreasing social mobility (I think, certainly an increase in the difference between the have's and have-not's), sluggish economic sectors, and working poor.
Women face a particular problem. Job mobility is low in France. Childbearing women tend to leave and return to the job market. These gaps in their career are difficult to overcome in a rigid job market. Women end up in low paid jobs or part-time jobs. Working poor indeed. Is this the mechanism that your article described?

[Furunculus]

This is incorrect. Onwards from 1960, the UK's GDP has been lower than France's with the exception pf the period 1999-2007.(Blair) Currently, France's GDP is higher again. Italy will overtake the UK this year again as well - this is owing to Britain having remained outside of the Euro.

The UK's GDP per capita has been higher only for the interlude from 1999 to 2008 too.

you ignore the critical factor about GDP per-capita, which reveals that France has a larger population, and yet still we went from the sick-man of europe to having a greater GDP than france, and you are aware that macro-economic policy takes anywhere between 4-8 years to kick in, so blair received an economy if tip-top health. in short the british economy grew massively in the 25 years after 1979, and that was directly attributable to thatchers reforms.

yes i am aware that the figures for nominal GDP have shifted back in Frances favour as a result of the hit taken by the UK banking sector, but so it should do all other things being equal given that france has the larger population.

[KukriKhan]

As for Thatcher --> I find it very hard to judge her time in office objectively, and so don't try. Should maybe wait another 10 years before her 'legacy' can be evaluated properly.

A couple things are clear

1) Wanna get the Yanks talking? Bring up guns.
2) Wanna get the Brits talking? Bring up Thatcher.

Works, every time.

[LittleGrizzly]

2) Wanna get the Brits talking? Bring up Thatcher.

lol. Vey true, especially in Wales and Scotland Thatcher is very much not liked, i have heard of people in the older generation organising parties for when she dies...

[Ironside]

I struggle somewhat with the phrasing of the question. Let me give two answers:
No, I stumbled upon my quoted article after googling 'social mobility Britian'. I knew what I was looking for, I just needed a reliable source.
Yes, France is facing problems of decreasing social mobility (I think, certainly an increase in the difference between the have's and have-not's), sluggish economic sectors, and working poor.
Women face a particular problem. Job mobility is low in France. Childbearing women tend to leave and return to the job market. These gaps in their career are difficult to overcome in a rigid job market. Women end up in low paid jobs or part-time jobs. Working poor indeed. Is this the mechanism that your article described?

Partially, the main thrust of the article was on the development of a working poor class in Europe, most clearly shown in France and that it gives a reduction of social mobility, showed mainly by that the US got working poor and less social mobility than Scandinavia for example. Thus something you don't want.

Why I asked is because I searched a bit more about the info from the newspaper article and stumbled upon the very same article a few days ago. So I was curious if there was any simular information in French press recently.