Margaret Thatcher has died

Page 11 of 13 [ 197 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Utnapishtim
Raven
Raven

Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 124
Location: Liverpool, UK

11 Apr 2013, 10:13 am

puddingmouse wrote:

Nah, haven't seen it. I quite like what Ken Loach I have seen, though.

Its a good film, watch it if you can. Oh by the way a friend of mine is a close friend of Ken Loach.

Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

11 Apr 2013, 10:31 am

pawelk1986 wrote:

Robdemanc wrote:

As the western world wallows in the stagnant depths of recession for the fifth year running let us consider who exactly is to blame.

The bankers? They were greedily selling mortgages in hopes of high bonuses to people who could ill afford it but were seduced by the credit culture that has been around since the 80's.

Now why did the bankers take these risks? Because they could. Because Thatcher and Regan removed regulation from the banking system and basically allowed banks to do what they like. At the same time they nurtured the property market and created more home owners, which of course meant more mortgages. Thatcher also stopped social housing projects to restrict supply in the housing market, which pushed up prices, which made mortgages more profitable for the greedy bankers that she created.

So if anyone is to blame for our economic mess it is Thatcher and Regan for setting it in motion 30 years ago.

I defy anyone to argue with what I have said.

You can have various views on opinion, on the one hand deregulation is bad on the other hand is good. In Poland, where there was socialism inevitably everything was controlled, because we had planned economy, after the political changes introduced free-market economy, many people were unable to adapt.

But deregulation has its good side, so the state has to dictate to me how to run my business.

If your business has such a great effect on global economies then I think regulation is necessary.

Arran
Deinonychus

Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 375

11 Apr 2013, 10:48 am

Tequila wrote:

It's just been on the news.

RIP Maggie.

I don't know why UKIPpers see the need to mourn the demise of Maggie Thatcher. She had 11, yes 11, years to withdraw Britain from the EU but she chose not to and didn't even have the decency to hold a referendum. What a complete waste!

AgentPalpatine
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,881
Location: Near the Delaware River

11 Apr 2013, 11:45 am

Arran wrote:

Tequila wrote:

It's just been on the news.

RIP Maggie.

That would have weakened NATO at a time where it was hard enough to keep it together.

You could argue that supporting the Euro project (to keep a unified Germany in economic union) was a mistake, but it was one that would only become evident over a decade later.

_________________
Our first challenge is to create an entire economic infrastructure, from top to bottom, out of whole cloth.
-CEO Nwabudike Morgan, "The Centauri Monopoly"
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (Firaxis Games)

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

11 Apr 2013, 1:02 pm

AgentPalpatine wrote:

Let's look at what Baronness Thatcher had to work with when she took office.

1. A prior regime that had treated double-digit inflation as acceptable. Posters above can complain all they want about her favoring the rich, but inflation generally strengthens the wealthiest, and destroys those without wealth.

2. Thanks to north sea oil, the pound was over-valued, which hastened the end of manufactured exports.

3. An economy where striking for months at a time was considered an acceptable and routine tactic. How can you run anything when your employees feel it is acceptable to walk off the job for months at a time, and commit violence against anyone else who wants to work? I know he's dispised on PPR, but look at the measures Murdoch needed to take just to protect his printing presses.

4. The legacy of a colonial empire that required defending, and the cost of keeping the USSR at bay.

As for 1,2 and 3, I don't think that anyone is denying the reality of the British economy when she assumed power, or the place that it was in 11 years later. I think what her critics are focussed on were her methods, the collateral damage that she was prepared to do along the way, and the sheer, dumb luck that permitted the living standards of enough Britons to improve that she could safely consign the rest to economic oblivion.

Yes, she had to address stagflation. Every head of government in the OECD had to address it. The issue isn't her challenges, but the means by which she addressed them.

As for number 4, let's not forget that Thatcher's first act on the Falklands was to prepare to offer them up to Argentina. Rex Hunt's instructions on his appointment were, effectively, to soften up the islanders for an eventual transfer of sovereignty. Thatcher's love for the dependent territories did not arise until she saw the political opportunity to capitalize on a war with Argentina.

Thatcher not only handed Hongkong back to China (likely an unavoidable decision, given the location of most of the critical infrastructure north of Boundary Street), but she sold the population of Hongkong down the river by amending British nationality law to exclude Hongkong residents from access to full British citizenship.

_________________
--James

AgentPalpatine
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,881
Location: Near the Delaware River

11 Apr 2013, 2:17 pm

visagrunt wrote:

AgentPalpatine wrote:

And what was so bad about her methods? The UK has the structural issue in that it's really a unitary legislature with 100 percent turnover in unscheduled elections. It's a method of government that naturally moves towards bigger government, because it's much easier to increase spending than to cut an existing program, and there's no functioning medium-term portion of the legislature that can buy time until the next scheduled election (ie, the US Senate).

Look at the method that Churchill used to push through the estate tax, including stripping the power of the House of Lords.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Budget

As to foreign policy, I don't think any western head of state could tolerate handing over soverign power to a foreign occupying force. It's one thing to talk about transfering control, it's another to wake up one morning with your territory occupied by a foreign power.

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

11 Apr 2013, 3:04 pm

AgentPalpatine wrote:

What is bad about her methods is that she was politically divisive. Knowing that she could never hold a significant base in Wales, Scotland or the North, she simply ignored them. Knowing that she could rely on cobbling together a majority from the South East and scattered rural boroughs, she could simply ignore the needs of constituents whose support she would never have. She may have been the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, but in truth she was only Prime Minister for the South of England.

Quote:

As to foreign policy, I don't think any western head of state could tolerate handing over soverign power to a foreign occupying force. It's one thing to talk about transfering control, it's another to wake up one morning with your territory occupied by a foreign power.

But you blithely ignore that fact that she was perfectly willing to hand over the Falklands, and sent out a Governor with the instructions to put the groundwork in place. Far from your ridiculous notion of "defending" a colonial empire, Thatcher was busily engaged in its dispersal. Until the Argentinians went and handed her a Waterloo.

The issue isn't her response to the Argentinian invasion (which forced her hand in a way that she was not happy to go); but rather in her foreign policy in the three years preceding that.

_________________
--James

AgentPalpatine
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,881
Location: Near the Delaware River

11 Apr 2013, 3:18 pm

visagrunt wrote:

But you blithely ignore that fact that she was perfectly willing to hand over the Falklands, and sent out a Governor with the instructions to put the groundwork in place. Far from your ridiculous notion of "defending" a colonial empire, Thatcher was busily engaged in its dispersal. Until the Argentinians went and handed her a Waterloo.

Defending sometimes means cutting your losses. Thanks to the colonial eras, the UK was bound by treaty, custom, politics, and trade to defend a massive set of interests, and yet each government from at least 1919 had given up some of those interests (Eastern Thrace, Iraq, Suez Canal, "west of suez", etc etc.). Baronness Thatcher in no way stuck out from what had effectively become policy for decades, that of transitioning to a new model.

Then, as you pointed out, she was given a new situation.

voodoojoey
Hummingbird

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 19

11 Apr 2013, 3:35 pm

Thatcher was utterly disguting, essentially the female version of Reagan. They both had the same policies, and both had major recessions two times in their tenure. The working class declined under her while the rich prospered. Sure, she stuck to her convictions, but plenty of terrible leaders stuck to their convictions.

pluto
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,576
Location: Paisley,Scotland UK

11 Apr 2013, 4:26 pm

visagrunt wrote:

You've hit the nail on the head there. Manufacturing industries may have been in decline anyway but the problem is she showed no concern whatsoever for the people affected,refusing to intervene or offer any kind of support to help rebuild communities.

_________________
I have lost the will to be apathetic

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

11 Apr 2013, 5:14 pm

for those arguing that the local coal industry was already in decline, after the pits were shut down Britain starting importing as much foreign coal as we already had under our own feet.

It was a case of selling the cow to buy the milk.

_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

11 Apr 2013, 5:22 pm

thomas81 wrote:

Importing coal was probably cheaper than mining it yourself.

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

11 Apr 2013, 5:48 pm

Jacoby wrote:

thomas81 wrote:

Importing coal was probably cheaper than mining it yourself.

the fallacy of economic short termism.

Importing keeps your own population out of work. Unemployment is bad for everyone because it harms collective spending power.

_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile

AgentPalpatine
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,881
Location: Near the Delaware River

11 Apr 2013, 6:08 pm

visagrunt wrote:

She was installed as head of government under three seperate parliments, each one of which was duly elected by the voters. What obligation was she under to not be "politicaly divisive"? Considering that everyone knew what she stood for all along, she had the backing of at least a plurality of the commons each time. If someone else would have gotten a plurality of MPs, they would have been kissing hands with the Queen.

This is'nt like Rabin, who basically bribed his way to 61 MKs, or even Churchill, who had to cut a number of deals to get his budgets through.

There's a modern saying over here..."Elections have consequences", and they do. Another saying is "I won", she won, and under the Westminster political system, she could do whatever kept a plurality of the commons in line for each budget.

Last edited by AgentPalpatine on 11 Apr 2013, 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

11 Apr 2013, 6:08 pm

Mark Steel puts it through the keeper's legs as usual.

(for the benefit of Americans that's a European football analogy).

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 68785.html

_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile

AgentPalpatine
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,881
Location: Near the Delaware River

11 Apr 2013, 6:12 pm

Am I correct that when they talk about the steel mill closing, they mean that it's state subsidies were cut off?

Page 11 of 13 [ 197 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

Jump to:

Margaret Thatcher has died Post Reply New Topic

Margaret Thatcher has died