Margaret Thatcher was she really that bad?

Biggins

Fratton Fred wrote: »

...The only people who hold this against Thatcher do so purely because they are looking for something else to hate her for.

Maybe - maybe hot.
Those of more maybe separate views and/or from other countries might hold similar assessments (or not).

Fratton Fred wrote: »

...It wasn't her demanding the Belgrano was sunk, it was the RN asking for permission to attack it.

Indeed and as the saying goes, whom does with "the buck stops" at the end of the day?
How has the final say and gives permission?

On this matter its clear we have different views with no probable hope of resolvability.
While we continue to agree to disagree, as I said, history will continue to be her judge - for the Belgrano and sadly, much, much more.

CiaranC

BOHtox wrote: »

That's not socialism. I don't think you understand socialism well actually it's obvious you don't. I don't want the government to be involved in anything that could be done better in the private sector. I don't think a private police force or army would work! Do you?

:rolleyes:

Forcibly collecting wealth via taxation and using a bureaucracy to redistribute it to branches of central government like a police departments is not socialist. Right.

BOHtox

CiaranC wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Forcibly collecting wealth via taxation and using a bureaucracy to redistribute it to branches of central government like a police departments is not socialist. Right.

Even the great Adam Smith, Milton Friedman and Ron Paul think/thought there is a need for taxation of some sort.

It may be socialistic but not socialism

St.Spodo

Richard Hillman wrote: »

She stood up to terrorists and the blackmailing unions. The finest leader of my time. I'd kill for us to have a Thatcher.

The poster and everyone who thanked this is on my list of enemies.

CiaranC

BOHtox wrote: »

Even the great Adam Smith, Milton Friedman and Ron Paul think/thought there is a need for taxation of some sort

Thanks for the observation there

It may be socialistic but not socialism

lol

BOHtox

CiaranC wrote: »

Thanks for the observation there

lol

You don't see a difference between full socialism and a small socialistic policy? Tax isn't even socialistic. Capitalism believes in Government. A small one at that, one that is funded by tax.

CiaranC

Tax isnt socialistic. Forcibly collecting wealth and redistributing it via central government to benefit wider society most certainly is. You are not talking about voluntarily funding a local militia, a la Sudan. Or maybe you are.

I support a mixture of capitalist and socialist policies on a best fit basis, funded by government run, publically funded departments. We only differ in the number and scope of those policies.

BOHtox

CiaranC wrote: »

Tax isnt socialistic. Forcibly collecting wealth and redistributing it via central government to benefit wider society most certainly is. You are not talking about voluntarily funding a local militia, a la Sudan. Or maybe you are.

I support a mixture of capitalist and socialist policies on a best fit basis, funded by government run, publically funded departments. We only differ in the number and scope of those policies.

I'm on the fence on a lot of issues. I think there is a need for some form of social welfare for the very poor but I think there should be every incentive for them to try leave the very poor bracket. Lower tax would incentivise this.

A limited time on a lower unemployment benefit, Child benefit to the very poor and there's arguements to be made for one or two others but not to the degree we have today. I mean the communion allowance is a joke for instance!

K-9

BOHtox wrote: »

You don't see a difference between full socialism and a small socialistic policy? Tax isn't even socialistic. Capitalism believes in Government. A small one at that, one that is funded by tax.

I'm just puzzled why you'd favour VAT over a direct payment to Government to fund the police eg.

VAT can be a discretionary payment and suffers in periods of recession etc. What's the problem with a direct tax payment?

true

Morricone wrote: »

Yeah she might have pissed off a few of the working class and the IRA and its followers but she did what she felt was best for Britain and she did lead Britain on a prosperous economic upturn with her policies.

An uncle of mine points out that tens of thousands of Irish people emigrated every year to England in the eighties ....and most were glad to get good paying work there, which they could not get atr home in Ireland. She did win 3elections in a row. She was not beaten by the IRA, she was not beaten by the Russians ( she developed the special relationship with the US and won the cold war. It seems whoever she took on and beat...well, history proves she was right. Look at the regime in Argentina / thousands of disappeared there. She and the US took on (and bombed) Gadaffi in Libya - look at Gadaffis record there. So the millions of Irish living and working in the UK were at least on the winning and morally correct side under her leadership....and thats where they chose to be, rather than at home. If only we had a Thatcher who stood up to the unions and had regulated the banks in this country, we would not be in the mess we are in and getting handouts economically from the UK and overseas, just like in Thatchers day. One of the iconic leaders of the western world, and someone who saved Britain from the slippery slope it was on in the seventies ( IMF, massive union strikes, hugely inefficient manufacturing etc )

BOHtox

K-9 wrote: »

I'm just puzzled why you'd favour VAT over a direct payment to Government to fund the police eg.

VAT can be a discretionary payment and suffers in periods of recession etc. What's the problem with a direct tax payment?

I've already told you it disincentives work. Reagan favoured a flat 10% tax rate. I would also favour this if there was a need for it, i.e. we couldn't privatise enough, but that would be unlikely.

nacho libre

I was surprised to find that Margaret, if she had her time over, would not have gotten into politics. I suppose she needed to have a scathach like resolve to survive in a male dominated sphere. i kind of her admire her steel and determination in that regard, but definitely not her mean- spirited and nasty policies.

goodie2shoes

Biggins wrote: »

I lived during her term in power, in some of the communities she utterly devastated.
She set brother against brother, father against son, divided whole families, caused GREAT hardship in money terms and emotionally.
The scars of her actions and decisions run deep still in a lot people, in a lot of areas in England still.

"Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope."
Thatcher quotes from Saint Francis of Assisi.

Biggins

goodie2shoes wrote: »

"Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope."
Thatcher quotes from Saint Francis of Assisi.

I think she was trying to be ironic?
It sure ended up that way!

K-9

BOHtox wrote: »

I've already told you it disincentives work. Reagan favoured a flat 10% tax rate. I would also favour this if there was a need for it, i.e. we couldn't privatise enough, but that would be unlikely.

And VAT discentives spending. I really don't get this opposition, you favour some form of taxation, but somehow a direct contribution is worse than VAT.

With VAT Governments would have to factor in different criteria, recessions, luxury good etc. VAT is much more subject to economic factors.

A simple say 10% deduction from everybody as you said makes far more sense. Less Public servants, less admin, a Capitalists dream.

A local Government charge makes far more sense, but its a tad unpopular now.

BOHtox

K-9 wrote: »

And VAT discentives spending. I really don't get this opposition, you favour some form of taxation, but somehow a direct contribution is worse than VAT.

With VAT Governments would have to factor in different criteria, recessions, luxury good etc. VAT is much more subject to economic factors.

A simple say 10% deduction from everybody as you said makes far more sense. Less Public servants, less admin, a Capitalists dream.

A local Government charge makes far more sense, but its a tad unpopular now.

VAT doesn't disencentive spending. People have to spend and love to spend. What else will they do with the wealth the accumulate?

I'm for a flat tax and I'm for a local government charge, in the form of a property tax, too.

K-9

BOHtox wrote: »

VAT doesn't disencentive spending. People have to spend and love to spend. What else will they do with the wealth the accumulate?

I'm for a flat tax and I'm for a local government charge, in the form of a property tax, too.

This is mad ****e!

I've already told you it disincentives work.

In response to:

What's the problem with a direct tax payment?

Yet you are in favour of it.

So, basically what you said you were against yesterday and proposed VAT instead, you are for now.

You really should be a centrist, sell out pig, come over to the dark side!

john reilly

true wrote: »

An uncle of mine points out that tens of thousands of Irish people emigrated every year to England in the eighties ....and most were glad to get good paying work there, which they could not get atr home in Ireland. She did win 3elections in a row. She was not beaten by the IRA, she was not beaten by the Russians ( she developed the special relationship with the US and won the cold war. It seems whoever she took on and beat...well, history proves she was right. Look at the regime in Argentina / thousands of disappeared there. She and the US took on (and bombed) Gadaffi in Libya - look at Gadaffis record there. So the millions of Irish living and working in the UK were at least on the winning and morally correct side under her leadership....and thats where they chose to be, rather than at home. If only we had a Thatcher who stood up to the unions and had regulated the banks in this country, we would not be in the mess we are in and getting handouts economically from the UK and overseas, just like in Thatchers day. One of the iconic leaders of the western world, and someone who saved Britain from the slippery slope it was on in the seventies ( IMF, massive union strikes, hugely inefficient manufacturing etc )

words fail me

true

john reilly wrote: »

words fail me

thank you. You have to admire her steel and determination. Did you know she was thrifty and used to go around turning off lights in Checquers when she was there? And the swimming pool was only heated once?
To think of our fella Bertie, who paid himself more than the President of the USAm, and who spent 25,000 a year of taxpayers money as an expense on his own make-up. What a joke of a little country this is, no wonder the UK is bailing us out now as it did in Mrs Thatchers time. You should be thankful for that alone.

tony007

true wrote: »

thank you. You have to admire her steel and determination. Did you know she was thrifty and used to go around turning off lights in Checquers when she was there? And the swimming pool was only heated once?
To think of our fella Bertie, who paid himself more than the President of the USAm, and who spent 25,000 a year of taxpayers money as an expense on his own make-up. What a joke of a little country this is, no wonder the UK is bailing us out now as it did in Mrs Thatchers time. You should be thankful for that alone.

No wonder she was prime minister.

ArtSmart

PM David Cameron praised her twice in his first big post election speech. Twice.


worth mentioning, methinks,for those out there who dont know who the Tories really are.

tony007

Manic Moran wrote: »

And frankly, like many, one which could have been avoided had the Junta not decided to distract the population from them by having a short, glorious war.

NTM

Kindalike what the us do.

battle_hardend

not a nice person but how many global leaders are ?

Nodin

true wrote: »

thank you. You have to admire her steel and determination...........

No, you don't. Right wing demagoguery, homo-phobia and a neo-colonialist attitude to racism are rather inexcusable.

battle_hardend

Nodin wrote: »

No, you don't. Right wing demagoguery, homo-phobia and a neo-colonialist attitude to racism are rather inexcusable.

how was she particulary homophobic ?

Galwayguy35

I didn't read past the first post here. I didn't need to. The mildest way you can put it is that she just about kept her obvious contempt for the Irish under wraps when it suited her to meet them.

battle_hardend

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I didn't read past the first post here. I didn't need to. The mildest way you can put it is that she just about kept her obvious contempt for the Irish under wraps when it suited her to meet them.

the main difference between thatcher and many torys is that she didnt try to hide her contempt for the irish , the working class , non WASP,s , she was unappologetically arrogant

Nodin

battle_hardend wrote: »

how was she particulary homophobic ?

This....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28

Teyla Emmagan

I've always thought she was pretty brilliant actually. She really was one of a kind. I find there is a lot to admire about her, regardless of how unpopular she may be.

Spread

A fucking old witch. Should be tried for war crimes (Belgrano), murder (Ulster), fraud (Mark's signature on the Middle Eastern hospital), arrogance (tea with the Queen and irritating her by speaking with a contrived accent), abandoning her children as she climbed the greasy pole (both kids are estranged, rarely see or call her and she has stated publicly that she would not go into Politics again if she had the choice because she had to spend all her time holding on to power instead of giving her children hugs etc).

But of course she could not have done this without being surrounded by a shower of sycophantic, brown nosers, con artists, the Anglican Church and a willing public.

Should have spent some of Denis' money and her own knowledge (Chemist) to try and lower her testosterone levels.

Cerberus will be wagging his tail when she's heading down there.

Spread

Birth Name: Margaret Thatcher (nee Roberts)

Birthplace: Grantham in Lincolnshire, United Kingdom

Date of Birth: born 13 October 1925

Ethnicity: English and Irish

Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990.

Source: http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2009/03/21/story87338.asp

An extract from the above or underneath: British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had an Irish grandmother from Kerry, but she was not apparently proud of it.

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2009/0321/ireland/obama-earns-the-apostrophe-but-green-tie-was-for-chicago-full-stop-87338.html#ixzz1sguTtHSE

Noreen1

Spread wrote: »

Birth Name: Margaret Thatcher (nee Roberts)

Birthplace: Grantham in Lincolnshire, United Kingdom

Date of Birth: born 13 October 1925

Ethnicity: English and Irish

Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990.

Source: http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2009/03/21/story87338.asp

An extract from the above or underneath: British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had an Irish grandmother from Kerry, but she was not apparently proud of it.

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2009/0321/ireland/obama-earns-the-apostrophe-but-green-tie-was-for-chicago-full-stop-87338.html#ixzz1sguTtHSE

Interesting. She had Irish ancestry, yet loathed the Irish.
She came from a working class background, yet she loathed working class people.

Sounds like she didn't like herself, or her identity, any better than most of the rest of us liked her.

Nasty woman!

Spread

Noreen1 wrote: »

Interesting. She had Irish ancestry, yet loathed the Irish.
She came from a working class background, yet she loathed working class people.

Sounds like she didn't like herself, or her identity, any better than most of the rest of us liked her.

Nasty woman!

If you want a good laugh Noreen, read Sue Townsend's The Diary Of Hilda Margaret Roberts. It encapsulates all the little foibles and deluded dreams of an ruthlessly ambitious daddy's girl.

battle_hardend

Spread wrote: »

A fucking old witch. Should be tried for war crimes (Belgrano), murder (Ulster), fraud (Mark's signature on the Middle Eastern hospital), arrogance (tea with the Queen and irritating her by speaking with a contrived accent), abandoning her children as she climbed the greasy pole (both kids are estranged, rarely see or call her and she has stated publicly that she would not go into Politics again if she had the choice because she had to spend all her time holding on to power instead of giving her children hugs etc).

But of course she could not have done this without being surrounded by a shower of sycophantic, brown nosers, con artists, the Anglican Church and a willing public.

Should have spent some of Denis' money and her own knowledge (Chemist) to try and lower her testosterone levels.

Cerberus will be wagging his tail when she's heading down there.

she could be called a female churchill , she would have been perfect for an era when certain people and nations knew thier place and rule britania was the norm and the goal , i think her popularity stemed from her deliberate attempts to resurect the notion of empire

Fratton Fred

Wow, the self pitying on this thread is getting pretty heavy.

Fratton Fred

Spread wrote: »

A fucking old witch. Should be tried for war crimes (Belgrano), murder (Ulster), fraud (Mark's signature on the Middle Eastern hospital), arrogance (tea with the Queen and irritating her by speaking with a contrived accent), abandoning her children as she climbed the greasy pole (both kids are estranged, rarely see or call her and she has stated publicly that she would not go into Politics again if she had the choice because she had to spend all her time holding on to power instead of giving her children hugs etc).

But of course she could not have done this without being surrounded by a shower of sycophantic, brown nosers, con artists, the Anglican Church and a willing public.

Should have spent some of Denis' money and her own knowledge (Chemist) to try and lower her testosterone levels.

Cerberus will be wagging his tail when she's heading down there.

lol, this is really going into fantasy land now.

Hard nosed bitch yeah, war crimes, fraud etc, please, even by AH standards that is going ott.

Spread

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Wow, the self pitying on this thread is getting pretty heavy.

A bit like the denizens of Fratton Park tonight as they savour next year in Div 1to compound their financial/ownership woes:D

ejmaztec

Noreen1 wrote: »

Interesting. She had Irish ancestry, yet loathed the Irish.
She came from a working class background, yet she loathed working class people.

Sounds like she didn't like herself, or her identity, any better than most of the rest of us liked her.

Nasty woman!

I think it was a Kenmare connection, she's probably a relative of the Healy-Rae's.:pac:

Spread

ejmaztec wrote: »

I think it was a Kenmare connection, she's probably a relative of the Healy-Rae's.:pac:

What have Maggie Thatcher, the Healy-Raes and your post got in common?

They're all

beyond the Pale

Just made it up actually. But I can't stick to the day job as I'm retired

K-9

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Wow, the self pitying on this thread is getting pretty heavy.

Typical of the kind of comments from her supporters.

Fratton Fred

K-9 wrote: »

Typical of the kind of comments from her supporters.

Why?

It is as if people want to portray themselves as victims so they can justify their bile.

battle_hardend

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Why?

It is as if people want to portray themselves as victims so they can justify their bile.

you could say that about anyone from hitler to bertie

ArtSmart

no real point getting into the Thatcher thing. Those with eyes see, those who see too clearly, shut their eyes tight and imagine a different reality.


But, it is, worth mentioning, again, that Cameron praised her twice in his first major post election speech. He didn't have to - there was no logical reason to, no tradition or logical timeline, it wasn't politeness, but he did. This is the current leader of the UK govt.

Yes, the current leader. 2012.

K-9

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Why?

It is as if people want to portray themselves as victims so they can justify their bile.

When it's aimed at soooo many I think it loses meaning. Liverpool, miners, the North, Brixton etc.

bwatson

Noreen1 wrote: »

Interesting. She had Irish ancestry, yet loathed the Irish.
She came from a working class background, yet she loathed working class people.

Sounds like she didn't like herself, or her identity, any better than most of the rest of us liked her.

Nasty woman!

In what way did she "loathe" the people of Ireland?

Granted, she didn't fawn over Ireland in the manner that David Cameron does but I've never seen any evidence that she particularly hated the people of Ireland.

If your evidence is to be her government's stance on Northern Ireland then I would very much disagree that it was evidence of a hatred of the general population of Ireland. She got things wrong and did things which ultimately weren't in the British national interest but her actions towards the Republic weren't exactly hostile.

Acacia

An awful auld b1tch of a woman, all the reasons have been said throughout the thread already so I won't repeat it. Suffice to say, yup, she really was that bad. I do hate the way some people venerate her as some sort of icon for women in politics as if that somehow discounts the fact she was a thoroughly nasty piece of work.:rolleyes:

BluesBerry

Here is Maggie Thatcher Throw her up and catch her squish squash squish squash and here is Maggie Thatcher

Was a schoolyard game in which a face was drawn on one hand and on the other just scribbles , even kids hated her and didn't understand why

Fratton Fred

K-9 wrote: »

When it's aimed at soooo many I think it loses meaning. Liverpool, miners, the North, Brixton etc.

Why the north? Why Liverpool?

She had nothing against miners, it was the NUM and Scargill she was fighting.

No one has yet explained how she was anti Irish either, that is just another Republican "if we say it enough times everyone will believe it" type thing.

As I say in every thread about Thatcher, 90% of the people posting bile about her have no idea why.

With the exception of Nodin, who has raised some very valid points worthy of discussion, no one else has said why she should be hated.

Eric Cartman

Her foreign policys were awful (IRA, Falklands) but being very right wing economically she was spot on , and socially in the UK she made a few bad descisions but overall she wasnt that bad.

lividduck

I didnt like her often abrasive attitude but she wasn't the devil incarnate either. As for the North, well she did sign the Anglo-Irish Agreement which gave the Government of the Republic a say in the running of the North.
She made mistakes, but I don't think that she was the malevolent bitch many chose to portray her as.
As for the Falklands, I think she was right to prevent the unelected military Junta from invading them, though I do think she could have avoided sinking the Belgrano.
Issues around politics and individuals are seldom as black and white as many posters would like to paint them.