Thatcher Dies

[Manwell Pablo]

Good point. I didn't make the thing, just copied it from Facebook.

Other than the mistake, it makes it's point well I feel.

Not really the point is Thatcher not deserving a state funeral, when she's not getting one anyway.

Not saying Atlee wasn't an excellent PM, but it's a bit misleading to compare the two, he was rebuilding a war ravaged country he was also going to create homes and jobs .

[Finnegan]

Not really the point is Thatcher not deserving a state funeral, when she's not getting one anyway.

Not saying Atlee wasn't an excellent PM, but it's a bit misleading to compare the two, he was rebuilding a war ravaged country he was also going to create homes and jobs .

She's getting the next honour down from an official state funeral, which we're still having to pay for. I feel we're quibbling on semantics.

[_Fatboyslow_]

Would be happy if she gets one......day off.

Que riot

[_Fatboyslow_]

Not saying Atlee wasn't an excellent PM, but it's a bit misleading to compare the two, he was rebuilding a war ravaged country he was also going to create homes and jobs .

Oh dear oh dear

[Deucalion]

Not really the point is Thatcher not deserving a state funeral, when she's not getting one anyway.

Not saying Atlee wasn't an excellent PM, but it's a bit misleading to compare the two, he was rebuilding a war ravaged country he was also going to create homes and jobs .

You assume a different leader of a different party would've done the same?

I very much doubt this. Attlee did the things he did because he was leader of the Labour Party.

The Conservatives were dead against the social revolution which followed WWII.

It would've been more of the same if Churchill was re-elected.

[Guest Bilo]

Just realised I wrote Gualtieri instead of Galtieri.

I know he scored against England in 1993, but a San Marino international can hardly be blamed for starting the Falklands War.

It's ironic that the one time Thatcher was less than hardline internationally, the years building up to the Falklands War, she got her fingers burned badly. Sending a nuclear sub as David Owen did might have been seen as provocative, but it certainly did the trick.

It may be that the experience of the Falklands increased her propensity towards the hardline that characterised her time in office thereafter, especially considering that her first term in office excluding the Falklands was pretty disastrous and exacerbated by her lack of authority with much of her cabinet.

[_Fatboyslow_]

If you went to get a mortgage in 1979 as my wife and I did you were told that although the male earned enough they would not take into account the wifes wages as they assumed she would not be working for too long due to having children. As for couples opting for council housing yes I agree it was the easy option. No maintinance and if you were out of work the tax payer would pick up your rent via benifits and no way would you loose the roof over your head.

At least the right to buy broke a lot of people away from that level of thinking and made them less likely to become nanny state dependant. Over night council house buyers took pride in their houses and improved and maintained them better than any council , they had something to show for their work effort and something to pass on to their children. Make no mistake it was a monumental shift in working class attitudes and reverbarates to this day.

Middle class bollocks

[Manwell Pablo]

You assume a different leader of a different party would've done the same?

I very much doubt this. Attlee did the things he did because he was leader of the Labour Party.

The Conservatives were dead against the social revolution which followed WWII.

It would've been more of the same if Churchill was re-elected.

They would of had to rebuild destroyed buildings such as homes and schools yes it's a given you can't not rebuild the country.......

The formation of the NHS and other such establishments and public services granted probably wouldn't have happened under Churchill.

[Manwell Pablo]

She's getting the next honour down from an official state funeral, which we're still having to pay for. I feel we're quibbling on semantics.

You know I am the bestest at quibbling.

[l444ry]

You assume a different leader of a different party would've done the same?

I very much doubt this. Attlee did the things he did because he was leader of the Labour Party.

The Conservatives were dead against the social revolution which followed WWII.

It would've been more of the same if Churchill was re-elected.

It's very interesting that the great war hero Churchill was electorally defeated after the war. The people decided that they weren't having any return to Toryism after going through that experience. Shame that future working class generations would forget that everything they have has been fought for in the face of Conservative and establishment opposition.

[Deucalion]

They would of had to rebuild destroyed buildings such as homes and schools yes it's a given you can't not rebuild the country.......

The formation of the NHS and other such establishments and public services granted probably wouldn't have happened under Churchill.

You can bet the homes rebuilt under a Tory government would've had private landlords and tenants would not have had the rights they enjoyed with the housing being managed by the councils.

Basically, any money spent on reconstruction would've benefited the wealthy few rather than the majority.

[Alf Bentley]

She hasn't got a state funeral....

Would be happy if she gets one......day off.

It is nominally a "ceremonial funeral", but is a state funeral in all but name. For example, the only time that the Queen has previously attended a PM's funeral was for Churchill, a natural exception as a PM during a war that threatened the continued existence of an independent UK. She did not attend Attlee's funeral.

The Telegraph makes the case better than I could: http://www.telegraph...-a-mistake.html

On what basis is the Queen, who is supposed to be above politics, attending Thatcher's funeral when she didn't attend Attlee's? Both were undoubtedly PMs of greater than average significance, whatever we might think of their policies.... Was length of service the key factor? If so, will a monarch also attend Blair's funeral, as he was in power for only 1 year less?

A serious error, made on party political grounds - and also, by the sound of it, not what she wanted herself.

[_Fatboyslow_]

It's very interesting that the great war hero Churchill was electorally defeated after the war. The people decided that they weren't having any return to Toryism after going through that experience. Shame that future working class generations would forget that everything they have has been fought for in the face of Conservative and establishment opposition.

It's a shame that the electoral system wasn't changed as well

[Manwell Pablo]

You can bet the homes rebuilt under a Tory government would've had private landlords and tenants would not have had the rights they enjoyed with the housing being managed by the councils.

Basically, any money spent on reconstruction would've benefited the wealthy few rather than the majority.

Yes maybe so, you seem to confuse me for a tory, that's not the arguement is it, you can't give plus points of building homes and schools and creating jobs when it was absloutle requirement to do so that any Prime Minister would have done.

What I am saying is, whilst it is correct in priniciple (in regards to Atlee anyway, Thatcher I still think you can make look good of bad depending on your agenda) your poster/meme thing is somewhat bias and selective with it's information!

[Deucalion]

Yes maybe so, you seem to confuse me for a tory, that's not the arguement is it, you can't give plus points of building homes and schools and creating jobs when it was absloutle requirement to do so that any Prime Minister would have done.

What I am saying is, whilst it is correct in priniciple (in regards to Atlee anyway, Thatcher I still think you can make look good of bad depending on your agenda) your poster/meme thing is somewhat bias and selective with it's information!

I think the basic information on the poster thing is correct. Some of it is of course subjective. Some might say that deregulating the baking sector was a good thing. I might even say, that to some extent, it was. However, as it was Thatcher's government which did it, it was done in a reckless and irresponsible way, with no thought for future consequences.

Attlee created full employment. Well, this was obviously a good thing that returning soldiers had jobs to come back to. Contrast this to the treatment of returning soldiers from WWI. However, 'jobs for life' went on to mean the British economy was uncompetitive. I would agree it needed changing, but as it was the Thatcher government which did the changing, it was done in a vicious and irresponsible way which damaged the British economy to this day and to a large extent, threw away the baby with the bathwater.

By the way, I didn't assume you were a Tory.

[Manwell Pablo]

I think the basic information on the poster thing is correct. Some of it is of course subjective. Some might say that deregulating the baking sector was a good thing. I might even say, that to some extent, it was. However, as it was Thatcher's government which did it, it was done in a reckless and irresponsible way, with no thought for future consequences.

Attlee created full employment. Well, this was obviously a good thing that returning soldiers had jobs to come back to. Contrast this to the treatment of returning soldiers from WWI. However, 'jobs for life' went on to mean the British economy was uncompetitive. I would agree it needed changing, but as it was the Thatcher government which did the changing, it was done in a vicious and irresponsible way which damaged the British economy to this day and to a large extent, threw away the baby with the bathwater.

By the way, I didn't assume you were a Tory.

I think what you view as Irresponsible,wreckless or vicious others would view as decisive efficient and quite possiblly even a requirement. Hence the difference in opinions on Mrs Thatcher.

Good, I am not a Tory, our MP is a Tory, I dislike him with intensely, good campaigner, terrible MP. (would probably draw the line at celebrating his death though)

[Deucalion]

I think what you view as Irresponsible,wreckless or vicious others would view as decisive efficient and quite possiblly even a requirement. Hence the difference in opinions on Mrs Thatcher.

And that is the problem with democracy as a whole.

People will not accept that they are wrong and I was right all along !!

[_Fatboyslow_]

I think what you view as Irresponsible,wreckless or vicious

And he was being nice with his terms

[Alf Bentley]

Some might say that deregulating the baking sector was a good thing. I might even say, that to some extent, it was.

Did you get a bigger slice of the pie, then, Deucalion? A bit more bread, maybe? Must have been the icing on the cake!

Very useful for those who happened to have a bun in the oven...

[Deucalion]

I think if Thatcher had done the same things to reform the country; but had done them in a reasonable, restrained and thoughtful way, then there would not be the hostility to her that there obviously is.

[Deucalion]

Did you get a bigger slice of the pie, then, Deucalion? A bit more bread, maybe? Must have been the icing on the cake!

Very useful for those who happened to have a bun in the oven...

I was 7 when Thatcher became PM and 19 when she left office.

During this time, I can definitely report that Wagon Wheels got smaller.*

Damn her to Hades !!

* and Curly Wurlys

[flowwolf]

It's through the niavety of Attlee and his post war government that we are now saddled with a welfare state that is the laughing stock of the world. I'm sure he would turn in his grave if he could see what his well meaning but ultimately futile effort to trust in the honesty and goodness of the average man.

Lets face it he could not have got much wrong after coming out of a world war. New housing had to be built which produced plenty of employment and a general air of looking forward to the future. Lucky for him he did not live to see the abject shambles that the present modern welfare is. I'm sure he would brake down in tears at the sight of Philpott and all the rest of the scrounging benifit scum that to this day live off the back of his niavity.

[ADK]

I think if Thatcher had done the same things to reform the country; but had done them in a reasonable, restrained and thoughtful way, then there would not be the hostility to her that there obviously is.

I think this is wrong. All economic case studies suggest changes need to be made quickly not slowly. All that would have happened is a more prolonged turmoil.

[_Fatboyslow_]

I think this is wrong. All economic case studies suggest changes need to be made quickly not slowly. All that would have happened is a more prolonged turmoil.

I do hope you are not going to start quoting Adam Smith

[flowwolf]

Looks like many posters above have made my point regarding RTB for me.

And do you seriously think social mobility and self-sufficiency varies that much under different kinds of Government? These days the political class are all the same - out of touch - and that's why most people hold them in contempt.

Thing is we are not talking about " these days " back in Thatchers time there was a marked difference between tory policy and Labour. Blairs " new Labour " blurred the line and there was not much to separate them.