Try reading the poverty and inequality figures already posted before commenting on standards of living "how you read them" because if you can just ignore those figures you're just persuing your own agenda without being open to a conflicting view. I'd be interested to know how you explain that away before we move on. As for the GDP figures under thatcher well they're very little different from the general trend upwards from 1955 onwards. My issue as shown with the inequality figures is that even a growing economy isn't necessarily an economy that's growing for everybody. The top few percentage getting massively rich isn't an economy that I consider to be growing in the right way. Another interesting stat for you (bearing in mind the massive success of Labours post-war economic strategy whatever people say about the Labour gov't of the late 70s): In the 31 years before Thatcher came to office the economy grew by about 150%; in the 31 years since, it's grown by little more than 100%. The other thing to consider here with any discussion about GDP under Thatcher is the massive windfall her government had from North Sea Oil which at its peak must have accounted for well over 10% of the countrys GDP figure. Well we don't get that windfall anymore and it bloody shows what a **** up thatcherite economic policy is actually like without it.
Thatcher's biggest legacy was the under class, a generation that we've still not re-covered from. It simply didn't exist pre-Thatcher as social security was viewed with disdain & people were embarrassed to be claiming, it was only ever the safety net it was always designed to be pre-that ****ing woman. Thatcher destroyed great swaths of localised employment by over seeing the demise of British manufacturing & closing mines, thus affecting whole communities etc. We ended up with massive pockets of unemployment & there was little prospect of gaining any work, as there was simply nothing being created in these areas at the time. That was the start of the 'under class', people who lived their lives on benefits & the culture is still with us today. Not one of the legacies that the fawning Tories will add to her list of accomplishments though..... Ding, dong, the witch is dead.
It was her unwavering belief in the hand of the market that meant she didn't believe it was her job to put anything in place of those industries that were declining. A big decline in some of these industries took place right across Europe and the US in that period but what was different in Britain was that she took absolutely no responsibility to minimise the social impact (which was horrendous in its brutalness), she took no responsibility for attempting to modernise at least parts of those industries and she took no reponsibility for creating any new jobs in the areas worst hit.....and look what "the market" did for all those communities eh. Ding Dong indeed
"The other thing to consider here with any discussion about GDP under Thatcher is the massive windfall her government had from North Sea Oil which at its peak must have accounted for well over 10% of the countrys GDP figure." Nearer 20% according to Simon Jenkins in the Guardian today.
Think this article dispels some of the myths about manufacturing http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...er-than-you-think-and-its-likely-to-grow.html As to coal the labour government closed double the mines thatcher did. What she rightly did was take apart the unions. Which she had a clear mandate to do.
Reading that Telegraph article it's easy just at a glance to spot holes in it. The comparison with Frances GDP is true but hardly a signal of strong economic performance from manufacturing as they've suffered terribly as well from decline in recent times. The comparison with the US is also pretty superfluous when you take into account their economy has always had a strong bias towards service/financial industries anyway.
I knew it must have been pretty high So if you took that percentage out of the figures during those windfall years you'd get a more accurate picture.
It's very interesting to look at the performance of the economy during the Thatcher years and then remove the massive windfall of North sea Oil income. What a shipwreck is revealed.
I'd still like one of the pro-Thatcher lobby to explain away the poverty and equality/inequality figures seeing as we've had the decency to discuss their arguments
"Thatcher's biggest legacy was the under class, a generation that we've still not re-covered from. It simply didn't exist pre-Thatcher as social security was viewed with disdain & people were embarrassed to be claiming, it was only ever the safety net it was always designed to be pre-that ****ing woman." And that's a fair point. To link this with the NS oil debate, she used that windfall to force down unit labour costs. In essence, the state was subsidising private sector by forcing down labour price, and the coup de grace, as now, was to then be able to turn to public sector workers and say "How dare you ask for decent pay, pensions and conditions when those in the private sector are becomming unemployed?" It's circular logic, and very, very neat because it appeals to the Thatcherite/Tory delusion that many people want to believe : that they are the ones keeping the country going whilst others are bums.
Made up though with this Ding Dong business. Whether it's played or not now, there's been so much fuss that even people who'd have never dreamed of listening to the chart shows are aware of it. Good. And the icing on the cake is that if the Blue Meanies respond with their own campaign - then that must now be banned/censored too! Fab.
If you can find a copy of her original manfesto then please quote directly what it says about proposed union legislation. Then I will/will not agree that she had a mandate.
I remember Solidarity in poland. She was a big fan of unions, Maggie, when they were in Communist countries.
It is slightly irritating when people claim that a government have a mandate to do things when they have not been identified in the manefesto upon which they fought the election. Interestingly this present government has no mandate as neither party even mentioned adopting policies from the other in their own manefestos.
Double digit inflation, the crazy boom & bust economic idiocy, negative equity, record unemployment, inner city deprivation, Norman Tebbit's bicycle & the collapse of extended family unit that went with it, polarisation of society, the North / South divide, greed, tax evasion, Tories & their clan with their noses in the privitisation trough, yuppies, the underclass & the European football ban. Ding, Dong, the witch is dead. GTF Thatcher & all of your sychophantic, brain dead followers.
One thing has been bugging me, many of the right wing twats that argue back keep saying, "well she was re-elected twice, so most people must have thought she was doing a good job." I kinda remember her changing all the constituency boundaries, so that it favoured the tories, can anyone else remember that?
I think the BBC's stance on 'Ding Dong the Witch is Dead' is a disgrace! They have a policy of playing a bit of each song in the charts in their countdown but are breaking the policy for this song. Surely thats like saying they are not political but then letting one party go on air before refusing another? By not playing it (and going against their own policy) they are favouring the 'in favour of Thatcher' group? If they did play it they would not be favouring either side, they would merely be adhering to their policy. Disgrace!!!
