Thanks Timur, your comments are always welcome.

I agree with your comment re unemployment fasces and thanks for posting link to economist. I think the writer must have missed the bit where the UK had to all but nationalise the banking sector.

http://www.businessinsider.com/margaret-thatcher-helped-invent-soft-serve-ice-cream-2013-4
"As a chemist for food manufacturer J. Lyons and Co. in the 1940s, Thatcher was part of the British research team that made soft-serve ice possible"

Let's look at the summary of facts and figures published today by the BBC, and set these against the claims made by Fasces that Thatcher was a success, economically at least:


1. INFLATION: One of Maggie's goals was to control inflation.

FACT: Inflation was under control throughout most of her period in office, remaining at around 5% for most the 1980s where it had been well over 10% before she took over.

Success or failure? = SUCCESS


2. UNEMPLOYMENT: Thatcher's government is often criticised for its record on unemployment.

FACT: 1.5 million people were unemployed when she took office in 1979. This doubled to over 3 million by 1983 and remained over 3 million for several years. When she left office in 1990 unemployment was still over 2 million, so much higher than when she became Prime Minister.

Success or failure? = FAILURE


3. GDP: Claims regarding Thatcher's economic "success" such as those made by Fasces and others in this thread, often refer to GDP growth.

FACT: Over the course of Thatcher's years in power, GDP first plummeted, with the UK's GDP contracting rather than growing in 1980 and 1981. There was then a rapid boom with GDP growth briefly topping 5%. However, by the time she left office in 1990, that boom had proved unsustainable, and another recession was approaching, with GDP growth rapidly falling again.

Success or failure? = INCONCLUSIVE


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22070491

http://bit.ly/Ye9HvU

"FACT: 1.5 million people were unemployed when she took office in 1979. This doubled to over 3 million by 1983 and remained over 3 million for several years. When she left office in 1990 unemployment was still over 2 million, so much higher than when she became Prime Minister."
I'm not going to mention that the population was larger. Look at percents not people.

200 years ago unemployment was only a few thousand people, I guess every single policy since then has failed.

As for percents: 5.7% when she took office and 6.8% right before the 1991 recession, which thatcher was not responsible for because USA, Germany and France all suffered from it as well. She left during the recession when unemployment was on the rise. A 1% increase isn't the doubled unemployment claim you like to make.

"FACT: Over the course of Thatcher's years in power, GDP first plummeted, with the UK's GDP contracting rather than growing in 1980 and 1981. There was then a rapid boom with GDP growth briefly topping 5%. However, by the time she left office in 1990, that boom had proved unsustainable, and another recession was approaching, with GDP growth rapidly falling again."
Lets look at the facts, GDP adjusted for inflation doubled, and that counting the downturn in 1991. The 1991 recession, which was when she left office, was not a result of her policies, as I explained earlier.

Britain actually fared better then north america in 1991, so maybe her policies helped that recession.

Isn't it funny that when you pursue monetarist policies, you can take all the credit for economic booms, but when there's a recession, well, that's not your fault?

Here is an amusing anecdote about Thatcher, she was urged by an adviser after a by-election defeat to quote the dead parrot sketch. She asked what that was and when the adviser told her it was Monty Python she said "is he one of us".

It's a good job you don't have to be amusing for a living, Nigs.

Whatever people think about Margaret Thatcher it says a lot that she won't simply be remembered as "The UK's first woman Prime Minister", which is the fate of so many significant firsts. I wonder if Obama will be able to do the same...

In her whole time in office she appointed one woman to her cabinet ....... she thought feminism was a poison

@ Nigee

That there were so few women qualified to hold positions in the cabinate in those times is no great surprise, surely? Only a small number of women had the education and/or life skills required to hold such positions. Putting the unready and unable in positions of power for the sake of image is an awful idea. You need but look at most of Blairs Babes to see where that gets you.

As always the only likely candidate for a future female PM can be found in the Conservative Party.

Lady Thatcher was probably the best prime minister Britain ever had. She was the first and probably only one who didn't care if she lost 100 seats in the next election if she thought that it was in Britain's best interest to do something unpopular. The fact is that she was a pioneer for women all over the world. Stalin could build an iron curtain, but only an iron lady could take it down. Ask the half billion men, women, and children from Poland to Siberia who are free today in part by her leadership and willingness to do business with Gorbechev what their opinion of her is.

Thatcher supported the Apartheid Regime in South Africa, she also supported General Pinochet in Chile

I'm disgusted! This is from a left-wing UK national newspaper. I know they (and their readership) hated her, but publicising this is too much.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead-judy-garlands-1819526

"Thatcher supported the Apartheid Regime in South Africa, she also supported General Pinochet in Chile"
I've already talked about both of those in this thread. Stop bringing up old points.

"she thought feminism was a poison"
Feminism is a poison.

"Isn't it funny that when you pursue monetarist policies, you can take all the credit for economic booms, but when there's a recession, well, that's not your fault?"
I never said that, but the 1991 recession was caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union, which yes Thatcher contributed too, but you can't look at the GDP growth and unemployment during that recession to dictate whether or not GDP or Unemployment was good or bad during her term.

At the end of the day, the government has little control over what part of the business cycle we are in (This is not me saying the government can't effect the business cycle or create/destroy economic growth, its just that the private sector dictates what part of the cycle we are in to a greater extent), and comparing how her predecessors policies fared in a boom, to how her policies fared in a bust, isn't very fair.

News
Politics
David Cameron

David Cameron apologises to gay people for section 28

Share 120
inShare0
Email

Nicholas Watt
The Guardian, Thursday 2 July 2009

David Cameron has embarked on another major step in the modernisation of the Conservative party by offering a public apology for section 28, the notorious legislation which banned the "promotion" of homosexuality in schools.

In a gesture hailed by gay rights campaigners as "historic", Cameron condemned section 28 as "offensive to gay people" and predicted that a Conservative would become Britain's first openly gay prime minister.

The Tory leader, who voted against the repeal of section 28 as recently as 2003, reached out to the gay community on Tuesday night at a Tory fundraising event linked to Gay Pride this weekend.

"Yes, we may have sometimes been slow and, yes, we may have made mistakes, including Section 28, but the change has happened," Cameron said of the repeal of the legislation originally passed in 1988 when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister.

In remarks reported by the Pink Paper, he admitted that he did not have a "perfect record" on gay rights, a reference to his decision in 2003 to vote for the retention of section 28. But he added: "It does give me great pride to be standing here to celebrate Gay Pride and all you have achieved.

"I'm disgusted! This is from a left-wing UK national newspaper. I know they (and their readership) hated her, but publicising this is too much."
youtube video is much worse.

Everyone talking about how happy they are to know that she is dead, people saying may she rest in piss, etc.

"David Cameron apologises to gay people for section 28"
Nigee, if I recall correctly your a christian. Your bible thinks that gays should be stoned to death. The people of the past were less tolerant then we are today...

Why is it disgusting to publicise efforts to point out the glee that many feel over Baroness Thatcher's demise? Without it, you get historical revisionism of the sort that leads people to conclude she was beloved, as happened after Mr. Reagan died. To hell with leaving the field only to those who would conduct hagiography, it's important to note that Ms. Thatcher essentially declared war on Scotland, Wales, and northern England, and more or less did so literally with regards to Northern Ireland.

But this doesn't prove that she was unpopular, just unpopular among people who buy songs on iTunes, 90% of whom are under 25, or in otherwords not alive to experience Thatcher.

@fasces - I'm sure that you are entitled to have an opinion on people who were active before you were born particularly on people who for good or bad had an effect on shaping the world you live in. That said it is irrelevant to me and prob mrs T if she is popular or not. What matters is, were her policies right? I would of course contend they weren't and she would insist they were.

@Maniac: I 100% agree, but Timur and others have brought up how unpopular she war, I am merely refuting that claim.

I agree that in the grand scheme of things how popular she was doesn't matter, I am just merely responding to unjustified criticisms against Maggie.

@Pixie

"Lady Thatcher was probably the best prime minister Britain ever had. She was the first and probably only one who didn't care if she lost 100 seats in the next election if she thought that it was in Britain's best interest to do something unpopular. The fact is that she was a pioneer for women all over the world. Stalin could build an iron curtain, but only an iron lady could take it down. Ask the half billion men, women, and children from Poland to Siberia who are free today in part by her leadership and willingness to do business with Gorbechev what their opinion of her is."

Don't fool yourself. Every move she made was politically calculated. She didn't give a shite about the lives of those in England, Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland if it meant she would get an electoral victory.

@Bob Genghiskhan

Thank you for actually being the first to mention Northern Ireland

@Fasces
I apologize for what is to come, but I can not let all of this go unanswered.

“The second point I want to make is that it points out that 10% of families got poorer during the 80s, that means that 90% of families got richer. While this doesn't mean I endorse stealing from the poor to give to the rich, if a policy benefits 90% of those that are effected, and the amount they each benefit is twice as great (saying double because incomes did double) as the amount the 10% loose, then it was probably a successful policy. “

The assertions in this quotation are so mind numbingly incorrect that I have to say something. 10% got poorer, correct. 90% did not get richer- a good percentage stagnated. When you calculate in inflation, it can be estimated that all those who stagnated had a lesser buying power and, subsequently, got poorer. Also, the ones that did get richer did not see their income double. The problem with using average is that outliers, like the many millionaires Thatcher's policies created, are included and diffuse the actual statistics that are useful, the median rather than the mean.

If you look at the facts, Thatcher was absolutely terrible. The mining industry was destroyed in a way that was as painful as possible with the argument being that you can't coddle the people or an industry that is failing, which it was. However, to take jobs and literally make them vanish (and buy the products from communist Poland instead) without offering any alternative is not stepping away from coddling, it's class warfare. The inequality of pay between men and women increased as did the gap between rich and poor. Also, to prove the point that 90% did not get richer, the people living under the poverty level (60% of median income) grew by 10% to 22.2%.

Her friendships with Pinochet and Mugabe aside, there was also the Irish Hunger Strike that no one wants to speak about because you can't defend criminals/terrorists. I, on the other hand, have studied it to the point that I absolutely can defend them and blame Thatcher for needlessly killing 10 men. These 10 men, imprisoned for crimes as menial as possessing a handgun, were sentenced to ridiculous prison sentences in the Maze prisons. Refusing to wear the prison clothes after their POW status was revoked shortly before Thatcher came into office, they began the blanket protest. When they left their cells to go to the bathroom, there were a few viciously beaten to near death by the prison guards which led to the dirty protest in which the prisoners, basically unable to leave their cells for fear of their lives, smeared excrement along the walls of their cells to empty their chamber pots so they could continue to use them. During this time (under Thatcher's reign at this point), priests who visited the prisons commented that there were clear human rights violations occurring. After that, the first hunger strike began which ended before anyone died. In March 1981, the second hunger strike began, this time, with the prisoners beginning at staggered times. Bobby Sands, the first to begin and die, was elected to Parliament during this time. Thatcher let an MP die. 9 other men died between May and August. They went on strike to protest their treatment and the fact that their status as political prisoners/POWs was taken away. You may say that Thatcher was tough on crime, but then explain why by the end of 1981, she granted the prisoners all their rights of POWs except for the name itself. Just like the Falklands War, she did it solely for political purposes. She is a horrible hellish woman who literally killed in the name of her political victories. May the Iron Lady rust in pieces.

Side note, ding dong the witch is dead (1939 song) is 2nd on the British itunes charts.

“Mubarak is way better than Morsi”

Are you high or just incredibly stupid?

“Let the free market correct itself. Unemployment was lower when she left office then when she started.”

5.4% at beginning of 1979

6.9% at beginning of 1990

it hist a peak of 11.9% in mid 1984

Almost immediately began going up after she took office

6.9% was the lowest it reached following August of 1980 when it stood at 6.8%

Didn't reach 5.4% again until 2000

Check your god damn statements before making them.
Your drunk Fasces, go home

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/datablog/2013/apr/08/britain-changed-margaret-thatcher-charts

Again I apologize for the visceral in my above post Fasces, I'm sure you're a fine person and a great diplomacy player that I would enjoy playing with... but I can't hold back if you're going to defend Maggie

'Don't fool yourself. Every move she made was politically calculated. She didn't give a shite about the lives of those in England, Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland if it meant she would get an electoral victory."
Ummm no. Many of her policies were unpopular and here cabinet would suggest backing down or it might cost her an election. She said, "you can leave if you want but the lady is not for turning". She believed what she was doing was right and didn't give a shit about popular oppinion or what others thought.

"0% got poorer, correct. 90% did not get richer- a good percentage stagnated. When you calculate in inflation, it can be estimated that all those who stagnated had a lesser buying power and, subsequently, got poorer."
When the numbers were already adjusted for inflation, then your double counting inflation.

"However, to take jobs and literally make them vanish"
The invention of the tractor literally made farming jobs vanish. Malthus and other famous economics of the 1800s were against many agricultural innovations because it was taking jobs away from people.

The market needs time to correct itself, and so yes you would see high unemployment during the correction, but eventually the numbers would go back down. Sadly they never had a chance to because of the 1991 recession.

'The inequality of pay between men and women increased as did the gap between rich and poor. Also, to prove the point that 90% did not get richer, the people living under the poverty level (60% of median income) grew by 10% to 22.2%."
60% of median income being the key words. Median income rose from $9,000 to 16,000. So 60% of a larger number.

"I, on the other hand, have studied it to the point that I absolutely can defend them and blame Thatcher for needlessly killing 10 men. These 10 men, imprisoned for crimes as menial as possessing a handgun, were sentenced to ridiculous prison sentences in the Maze prisons. Refusing to wear the prison clothes after their POW status was revoked shortly before Thatcher came into office, they began the blanket protest. When they left their cells to go to the bathroom, there were a few viciously beaten to near death by the prison guards which led to the dirty "
Prisons were terrible in every country for most of history. If your claiming that Thatcher was responsible for prison beatings then I would heavily disagree.

The IRA are a bunch of terrorists and I don't consider killing terrorists to be murder.

"Are you high or just incredibly stupid?"
I am neither.

regarding unemployment. My source for that was wrong, and in a later post I admitted that it was around 1% higher in 1990 then it was in 1979.

Regarding your guardian link:
1. Migration: She opened up the border, so of course we saw both more immigration and emigration.
2. Living long: Long run increase to life expectancy, yes this supports Thatcher but I will admit she wasn't responsible for this.
3. Marriage: Again a long run trend, she wasn't responsible for this.
4. Unemployment: Already talked about this a lot.
5. Inflation: Stagflation at the end of the 70s and the start of the 80s was terrible, however it hit the entire western world and started before she came to office, not her fault. It actually peaked in Britain in 1976, according to the guardians chart. So can't really blame her for an event 3 years before she came to office.
6. Manufacturing decline: This is a percentage of GDP, since nominal GDP tripled, then manufacturing increased, even if its share of GDP declined.
7. Public Spending: Increased during the falkland war, decrased for 6 straight years, stagnated and then started rising again in 1989, I don't have the full details as to why. In anycase not really an attack on thatcher.
8. Pay Gap: Pay gap is a myth. But lets assume its not and look at the graph. If you look at how much the pay of both males and females increased then who gives a shit. The Women are still far richer then they were before.
9. Pay gap round 2: Shows that the pay gap actually decreased, which is a constant trend and I wont credit to thatcher.
10. House Prices: Those number aren't adjusted for inflation (can't really complain since neither was the wage gap previously). I wont deny that housing prices did increase, but back then nobody thought it was a problem, most economists thought it was a good thing.
11. Interest Rates: Interest Rates in Canada were higher during the 80s and interest rates in America were just as high. This was the natural monetary response to the high inflation, and it made sense.
12. Decline of unions: I FUCKING HATE UNIONS! This graph is a dream come true.
13. Stikes: You had two really bad years, 1988 and 1983. I would agree with the guardian that strikes are a bad thing, but overall I am a fan of the free market. I would rather the strike remain between the corporation and its workers without government interference.
14. Poverty: We touched on this earlier. Adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity, the median income of the country almost doubled (from 9000 to 16,000). 60% of a significantly higher number. If we looked at the % of people living on less then $6000 a year, I can guarantee you it declined.
15. Inequality: Not entirely a problem, but inequality has been rising in every country for decades. And say the average poor person doubled his income (not saying they did) and the average rich person quadrupled his income, then although everyone is better off, inequality would have risen. I have never regarded inequality to be a bad thing.

"Again I apologize for the visceral in my above post Fasces, I'm sure you're a fine person and a great diplomacy player that I would enjoy playing with... but I can't hold back if you're going to defend Maggie"
I'm totally ok with it. I enjoy political debates, and I want to think you for your response since yours was the most reasoned anti-thatcher post we have had. Most of them have been making assertions and claims without provided the stats. You on the other hand clearly have a well thought out response to my claims.

Glad to see your response. I would point out that the jobs that disappeared in the 1800's because of the tractors are different, if nothing else, because they were in the 1800's. The Great Famine would be considered genocide if allowed to happen today, but it's generally not considered genocide because it happened in the 1800's. On the point of the IRA being terrorists, I won't get into a debate about that specifically. Look at what they were convicted of, though. Some were charged with murder, yes. Bobby Sands was charged with possession of a handgun. I'm not saying the jails themselves were Thatcher's fault, but the hunger strikes became incredibly public and Thatcher dealt with them in a shameful manor imo.

I also think you fail to see her political cunning. Her quote about this lady not turning was in itself a political remark that she knew would get her base out for the election and fired up for a leader with strong convictions. You've asked why she won election 3 times- her political calculations, not her popularity by any means.

Thanks for the compliment about my response. Yours was very well reasoned as well.

"On the point of the IRA being terrorists, I won't get into a debate about that specifically. Look at what they were convicted of, though. Some were charged with murder, yes. Bobby Sands was charged with possession of a handgun. I'm not saying the jails themselves were Thatcher's fault, but the hunger strikes became incredibly public and Thatcher dealt with them in a shameful manor imo."
To be honest I know almost nothing about what happened in Ireland, and I hadn't heard of the name Bobby Sands until someone brought him up on facebook in a debate this morning. From what I know I gather that they are terrorists who want Northern Island to be independent. I know that Thatcher isn't the only one who has had problems/scandals from events in Norther Island, but again I don't know the specifics. For this reason, I can't really say much about what happened. If she handled it poorly that I will totally accept that, she wasn't perfect, but she was still overall pretty good, at least in my opinion.

"I also think you fail to see her political cunning. Her quote about this lady not turning was in itself a political remark that she knew would get her base out for the election and fired up for a leader with strong convictions. You've asked why she won election 3 times- her political calculations, not her popularity by any means."
I didn't she she had some (lots of) cold political cunning in her, but she was much more ideological then you give her credit for.