I’m 44.

I’m trying to work out if you’re trolling or not.

I thought that the ‘unsent letter’ was very revealing – no surprise that they made her tone it down!

toys19 – Member
Read it, and it hardly proves anything does it?

Despite her dishonesty you still think she was honest?

Also telling lies isn’t very honourable is it?

I’m 44.

I’m trying to work out if you’re trolling or not.

Rusty, same ballpark as you.
Trolling posting to gain attention. Its why we all post.
That is my honest opinion about her, like I said I might not like a lot of her policies, but I believe she felt she had the nations interest at heart, not hers.

Lifer your link does not prove she lied in any way, it proves that someone, who is not neutral by any stretch, disagrees with her assertion that she was never a monetarist.

I’m merely pointing out that she had the courage of her convictions, even if those convictions have been wrong.

edit: Whilst we are on analogies think of it like this – back in roman times people were put to death for their belief in god, which was admirable that they would give up their life rather than renounce what they thought was good and right. I admire them for that, despite utterly disagreeing with them, as I am a rabid Dawkins esque atheist.

Can you not disagree with Thatcher yet admire some facet of how she went about things, or does disagreeing for you mean total hatred of everything they do and say because they do not see things your way over such narrow points as economics?

Rusty, same ballpark as you.

Funny how two people of a similar age can seee things so differently.

I don’t believe I’ve ever heard that woman speak a word of truth.

Oh gawd. Here we go again. How can grown men continual to blame how their life turned out on a politician?
As Michelle Obama once said ‘keep getting up and try again’.

If you need someone to blame for your life/your shortcomings. You need introspection.

Funny how two people of a similar age can seee things so differently.

Imagine if we all saw things the same way. It surprises me that this outcome surprises you.

hora – Member

Oh gawd. Here we go again. How can grown men continual to blame how their life turned out on a politician?

You know, this is getting really boring Hora.

No one is blaming her for how their life turned out.
We are all adults who realise the consequences of our actions.

Trotting out this line every time someone dares to criticise her is pathetic and insulting.

Engage in a debate or don’t.
Sitting on the sidelines lobbing insults is childish and a little sad.

toys19 – Member

Funny how two people of a similar age can seee things so differently.

Imagine if we all saw things the same way. It surprises me that this outcome surprises you.

In this particular case, I do find it surprising.
I’ve never heard even the staunchest of my Thatcherite aquaintances express that particular opinion.

No. Every topic on her on here has dance on her grave/is she dead yet shite. **** tiring.

What the fanboys seem to forget was that it was the actions of the UK government that encouraged the Argentine junta to think they could get away with it. Great bit of politics : make a monumental cock up & then claim the credit for clearing up the mess.

Stw must be left leaning. Brown and Blair are responsible for boom and boost then their equity-share in 100, 000-650, 000 Iraqi deaths. Yet not a peep. Amazing.

Im out.

hora – Member

No. Every topic on her on here has dance on her grave/is she dead yet shite. **** tiring.

No it isn’t.

I have never expressed that opinion.
So stop generalising.

Im out.

Well, thanks for that.
You turn up, insult people then flounce off when someone says something you don’t like.

Nice 😀

You only missed out your ‘I’m offended now’ line for the full Stretford Defence. 🙂

I don’t believe I’ve ever heard that woman speak a word of truth.

…my foremost charity has always been the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, because over a century ago when it was started, it was hoped that the need for it would dwindle to nothing and over a hundred years later the need for it is greater, because we now realise that the great problems in life are not those of housing and food and standard of living. When we have got all of those, when we have got reasonable housing when you compare us with other countries, when you have got a reasonable standard of living and you have got no-one who is hungry or need be hungry, when you have got an education system that teaches everyone—not as good as we would wish—you are left with what? You are left with the problems of human nature, and a child who has not had what we and many of your readers would regard as their birthright—a good home—it is those that we have to get out and help, and you know, it is not only a question of money as everyone will tell you; not your background in society. It is a question of human nature and for those children it is difficult to say: “You are responsible for your behaviour!” because they just have not had a chance and so I think that is one of the biggest problems and I think it is the greatest sin.

Good enough for you?

Insult? Maybe I dont like someone beating their fists against my chest whilst crying that the nasty woman took your milk (we had school milk throughout the 70 and 80s. Thanks to Maggie Im 6ft2 😉

However thanks to Gordon and Blair money is a worry. However my son wont hear any of this – he’ll enjoy his childhood regardless. Same in the 70’s when my Mum REALLY struggled.

Good enough for you?

Funnily enough, no. 🙂

Stw must be left leaning. Brown and Blair are responsible for boom and boost

Wow are you a history scholar or a professor of economics? How do the Noible ciomitte get in touch with you?
How terrible of them to export it to the world via a slump that started in the sub prime market in america.
out of interest how did they cause the ones in the 30’s or the 70’s?
Capitlaism caused it not a politician of any hue

Im out….of your depth?

Thanks to Maggie Im 6ft2

I am more worried about what she did to the education system tbh reading your input
We can all have a political opinion or spout nonsense …I hope you can work out which you are doing

OK, so, which part of that was not true then RS?

This isn’t a story. If we had the same media back then as we have now, you would have had rent-a-gob back-benchers trying to make a name for themselves by saying it was all madness, on every rolling 24 news channel.

And all the official Downign Street documents would have been leaked to the Times in advance of the task force being sent

hora – Member

Insult? Maybe I dont like someone beating their fists against my chest whilst crying that the nasty woman took your milk (we had school milk throughout the 70 and 80s. Thanks to Maggie Im 6ft2

I have no idea what this means.

You accused everyone who dislkes that woman of blaming her for how their life turned out and looking forward wih glee to her death.

Both of which statements obviously untrue.
Yet you appear to attempting to retierate them as fact.

toys19 – Member
Lifer your link does not prove she lied in any way, it proves that someone, who is not neutral by any stretch, disagrees with her assertion that she was never a monetarist.

😆

How many links would you like?

What happened was this: in the autumn of 1981 Alan Walters returned to government and told her that the monetarist policy as interpreted so inexpertly by her was wrecking the British economy and her government. He had been working at the World Bank in the previous four years and therefore away from the scene. But he was the only technical economist Margaret Thatcher ever paid any attention to and he had taught her the details of money supply economics when she was opposition leader. The fact that her economic guru, himself a “monetarist”, told her that her kind of blanket “monetarism” was crazily self-destructive meant that she had to listen. Control of the money supply went back to being just one among many policy instruments from 1981 onwards.

“Monetarism” as an overarching doctrine was dead by the end of the year. Walters told her to cut interest rates immediately, which she duly did that autumn and the effect was almost equally immediate. Walters stayed on as her economic adviser for the next three years, a time when the economy started to grow and recover from the trauma of 1979-81.

This was one of the biggest economic policy U-turns post-1945. It doesn’t get the attention it deserves because it suits both Thatcher-worshippers and Thatcher-loathers to present her as steadfast or inflexible (according to taste). It also suits Lady Thatcher herself to ignore the evidence of her own pragmatism in the face of the facts. But the lady really was for turning – when Alan Walters told her she had to.

http://neweconomist.blogs.com/new_economist/2007/06/how_monetarism_.htm

Too many words of truth, clearly. Rusty only needed ONE. Do pay attention… 🙄

Who do some lefties lack the ability to critise their own side?

Scargill and others were soo so kind to their members/miners weren’t they.

I’ve never heard even the staunchest of my Thatcherite aquaintances express that particular opinion.

I would not call myself Thatcherite, I don;t really know enough about politics or economics to understand what it means.

I don’t get involved once threads turn to politics generally.

But I did like this post.

However thanks to Gordon and Blair money is a worry. However my son wont hear any of this – he’ll enjoy his childhood regardless. Same in the 70’s when my Mum REALLY struggled.

How many links would you like?

One that works? I cannot follow that one, did you type it proper like?

Anyway , its a blog post and the opinion of the blogger, just because he stated it does not make it fact. 😆 8)

Yep – it all came out not so long ago. From the early 70’s onwards my Mum (recently) told me about the constant power cuts (we always had big boxes of candles ready), lack of money, shortages etc etc. Mental.

hora – Member

Who do some lefties lack the ability to critise their own side?

Scargill and others were soo so kind to their members/miners weren’t they.

Nice change of subject.

How about admitting that the points you made above were wrong?

rattrap – Member

OK, so, which part of that was not true then RS?
In the context of her actions, her ideology and the policies she implemented – all of it.

Yep – it all came out not so long ago. From the early 70’s onwards my Mum (recently) told me about the constant power cuts (we always had big boxes of candles ready), lack of money, shortages etc etc. Mental.

Phew! Thank Christ people have never had to endure anything as hideous as that under Thatcher!!! Especially in the north! What, with her steadfast determination to eradicate poverty. I do remember the 80’s as a land of milk and honey. A veritable utopia where the streets were literally lined with gold.

Happy days indeed. Brings a tear to my eye just thinking about it

Who do some lefties lack the ability to critise their own side?

is that irony?
you are on here prasing thatcher [ and blaiming blair and brown for boom and bust – I mean that is silly at best- whilst the lefties have had a pop at blair on this thread

As for scargill I wont change the thread to what you want but he does not get my undying and unwavering support so perhaps you will tell us what about the right you dislike?

Nice change of subject.

You seem to think the country magically walked itself into turmoil. It took both sides royally **** up before Thatcher came to power. The Unions weren’t exactly led by whiter than white either.

Yet all people seem to focus on is a strong-willed woman who came into a mans world. Again, Blair and Brown- the ripples haven’t even stopped. A triple-recession now. Our debt mountain is crazy. A **** trillion for **** sake. Labours response? Increase public spending. Jesus wept.

Yep – it all came out not so long ago. From the early 70’s onwards my Mum (recently) told me about the constant power cuts (we always had big boxes of candles ready), lack of money, shortages etc etc. Mental.

Reminds me of the 80s and every decade since but we now seem to have the power cuts sorted.

No not me personally now but their is still a lot of poverty.

You seem to think the country magically walked itself into turmoil. It took both sides royally **** up before Thatcher came to power. The Unions weren’t exactly led by whiter than white either.

Yet all people seem to focus on is a strong-willed woman who came into a mans world. Again, Blair and Brown- the ripples haven’t even stopped. A triple-recession now. Our debt mountain is crazy. A **** trillion for **** sake. Labours response? Increase public spending. Jesus wept.

I haven’t said anything about the above, as you well know.

Once again, I’ll repeat what I posted above:

You accused everyone who dislkes that woman of blaming her for how their life turned out and looking forward with glee to her death.

Both of which statements obviously untrue.
Yet you appear to attempting to retierate them as fact.

Do you accept that these statements are untrue?

What bug?

toys19 – Member

How many links would you like?

One that works? I cannot follow that one, did you type it proper like?

Anyway , its a blog post and the opinion of the blogger, just because he stated it does not make it fact.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/jun/13/theladywasforturning

No not me personally now but their is still a lot of poverty.

Drac – ok, so I know where you work reasonably, and would you not agree that a great deal of that poverty that you no doubt see on a daily basis is down to, as Maggie put it “the problems of human nature” – drugs, alcohol, poor parenting, abuse, education, lack of ambition and the spiral that these things create… I would put it to as a serious argument you that you could pour all the money in the world into some of those estates, and not make a blind bit of difference. (I’m not advocating abandoning them, but I’m saying that just throwing money at problems doesn’t fix things, there are much, much deeper issues that need dealing with to change things)

In Manchester the government are knocking down alot of council houses…..then rebuilding new ones – similar size etc just a newer building FFS. WHY?!!! Giving the feckless brand new homes sends out what message?

A triple-recession now

I am going to go out on a limb and point out that its a double dip recession and that perhaps the policies of the current govt are to blame for this rather than the last one or else it is [ following this approach] still Thatchers fault

TBH though you have seen right through me its not the policies i dislike just the gender though – awesome insight

PS you seem to think the current policy is working despite the recessions and growth figures so you are GO and I claim my £5

Giving the feckless brand new homes sends out what message?

Is it that Manchester council are not as stupid as think that only the feckless live in social housing??

In Manchester the government are knocking down alot of council houses…..then rebuilding new ones – similar size etc just a newer building FFS. WHY?!!! Giving the feckless brand new homes sends out what message?

Don’t you see Hora – this is the Keynsian spending that we keep hearing about, we have to spend money to keep the economy going, otherwise there might be a triple dip recession!

the problems of human nature” – drugs, alcohol, poor parenting, abuse, education, lack of ambition and the spiral that these things create… I would put it to as a serious argument you that you could pour all the money in the world into some of those estates, and not make a blind bit of difference

so we could remove all the wealth from the people like dave and the privately educated drop them into these estates with that level of income and it would not make the blindest bit of difference to their likely outcomes

Its a bit of both clearly.