Thatcher left office in 1990, so you’ve had 17 years to think it over . . . Was Thatcher’s pro-business conservatism (a sharp break with old-school Churchillian conservatism) just what Britain needed at the time, or a reactionary rollback of social progress? Did she go too far? Not far enough? Did she do more good than harm or vice-versa? And what does her legacy mean for the Tories in the future?
My biggest problem with her is the denigration of anything non-financial. I think she started the descent that I see whenever I return home towards crass consumerism of the lowest level. The attacks on the concept of society and communitarian values were a dagger into the heart of what I saw as my country, and the country my parents would talk about to me (I was 10 when the witch was elected).
At the time Thatcher took office Britain was in massive debt, the “sick man” of Europe. She secured a rebate, changed the economic decline into one of growth and curbed union power to promote healthier industry.
She also destroyed manufacturing, promoted greed above duty and resulted in massive unemployment.
In overview I’d say she left the country in a better state than when she took power, but by the end of her terms she had lost focus on her original aims (e.g. the poll tax), and any longer with her in charge could have been a disaster.
Hmm… Labour government, bloated civil service, massive debt and a failing economy. Why does this sound so familiar?
I dunno. What has Blair done to bloat the civil service, run up debt or scuttle the economy? (We don’t hear much about that kind of thing over here, only about what he’s going to do WRT the Iraq War.)
Her goals were worthy. How she went about achieving them wasn’t.
The last one of these was a few months ago. This oughtta be fun. 
There are a lot of issues (selling off the gold reserves, etc), but the main one is the financial mess. Average wage is now lower than average debt per adult, and because of their “tax credit” system it is now possible to be hit for an effective marginal tax rate of 70% or 90% of earnings; but only if you are in the lower earning range - one reason why debt is climbing so fast.
Cites:
Average Wage:
Source: National Statistics (printed). Published on 26 October 2006 at 9:30 am. Quote: “The results of the 2006 ASHE show that median weekly pay for full-time employees in the UK grew by 3.7 per cent in April 2006 to reach £447.”
£447 * 52 weeks = £23,244. (2007 figures not calculated until later this year)
Average Debt: Source: Credit Action Quote: "Average owed by every UK adult is £27,638 (including mortgages). "
Tax Rates: (there are others)
Times Online: Nearly 1.7m low-earners face effective tax rate of 60p a pound
Guardian: Britain ‘beats US for problem borrowing’
From your Times link:
So the problem has been reduced under Labour, no?
I’m not so sure about that.
Section 28
Monetarism
Miner’s Strike
Privatisation
Westland Affair
Al Yamamah
Coventry Four
General Augusto Pinochet
Involvement in 1980’s Afghanistan
Involvement in the bombing of Libya
Abolition of the Greater London Council
The Poll Tax
NHS internal market
She damaged just about everything she touched, some things are only now being fixed (the NHS being a prime example), some things are still biting us in the arse (Afghanistan) and one thing in particular was just plain evil (support for Pinochet).
Major did a great deal of damage too, but his was more down to being a total idiot than the malevolence that Thatcher possessed.
Sorry no. 1998 was when Blair and Brown created the problem by instituting the tax credits system. Prior to that the poverty trap was bad, but didn’t hit people earning anywhere from £5000p.a. to £50,000.
The system effectively adds another 37% tax onto earnings for people who have ever received state help - not exactly helping people to help themselves.
The quoted numbers seem to indicate that B&B didn’t create the problem, and have reduced the number of people caught by extreme marginal tax rates.
Thatcher promoted monetarism, the poll tax, the Falklands War, the miner’s strike and ignoring the rest of the Cabinet.
You can say she was grimly determined, but the above is an appalling legacy.
The Conservative Party imploded after she resigned and has been out of power for a decade.
Most of the country are waitng for her to die so we can dance on her grave.
Just saw your addition.
And the poverty trap currently traps fewer people than it did pre-1998. And now there is a minimum wage. I can’t really see this as a backward step for low-earners. At any rate it seems to be a more equitable system than the pre-tax-credit regime. Not faultless though, I’ll agree.
They created the problem in 1998 by instituting the tax credits system which increased the tax rate for certain groups effectively to 70% or 90%. The previous system before 1998 maxed out at around 55-60% - in my opinion still too high, but better than 90%. They may have reduced the problem since, but as it is a problem they created, that doesn’t say much for them.
If you want to broaden this debate we could go onto Brown selling off Britain’s gold at half price, the raids on pensions, cash for honours, and Blair’s injunctions, but as this thread is about Thatcher, could we take it to another thread rather than continuing a hijack here?
Sorry, this is a sore spot for me. I do some volunteer debt councelling, and have encountered more than one situation where the tax credit system has resulted in negative earnings (e.g.110% tax). Having to tell a client to give up work because they would be better off, when they are earning 5 figures, just strikes me as wrong. Also where they cannot claim childcare vouchers because it would put them in exactly that position.
(By the way, I’m not a Tory - I just dislike all politicians equally.)
Lots of good; lots of bad. She played a key role in the collapse of the Soviet Empire, saved the country on the macro level by causing massive misery on the micro level, exacerbated by the unions, brought in massive prosperity and poverty both. Couldn’t stabilise the economy. Got fixated on the poll tax (wonderful idea, dreadfully executed, politically impossible) and stayed too long. She was the greatest PM since Churchill but also the worst for a very long time. History will judge her well.
Someone after my own heart.
One of your cites directly refutes this! I hestitate to question comprehension, but fucks sake
Painful for many yet necessary and inevitable.
I’ve never really understood the left’s obsession with Pinochet either - I think his obituary in The Economist is a pretty fair summing up. (http://www.economist.com/obituary/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_RQDGJDV but you require a subscription)
Can we take this to its own thread “Britain’s economy” rather than continue this hijack?