to think that surely not EVERYONE hates Maggie?

[LadyOfTheManor]

Seriously, unless you're a miner or from a mining family, or Welsh... ok well even if you are, surely not EVERYONE hates Maggie T?

I'm a tad young, I was born in her "reign", but I did my degree in Politics and although I didn't really live under her (it was Major until I was 11) I couldn't see what she did that was SO terrible-let alone the sheer hostility when her name is mentioned here (in Wales!).

The sub prime loans crisis can be planted firmly at the feet of President Clinton, he was very keen that everybody should be in a position to open their own home, leading to the "nod and wink" approval for very shaky mortgage applications.

Wrt the "bankers" a truly capitalist government would have let them fail. Only a socialist with aspirations of micro control would bail a private company from collapse...unless they had invested, too heavily, in the fortunes of said company and stood to fail by their falling?!

Sorry, shit typo's tonight for "open" read "own".

"Loopyloops" Quite what my parents finances have to do with it is laughable but here we are:

Mother, left wing, lecturer. Left wing background.

Father, shopkeeper, hated vat as a concept. Still finds finance rather difficult.

How does that help?

EdgarAleNPie, as I said earlier things went wrong because of bad management not bad policy. The major unions were being run by agenda-driven maegalomaniacs and, unfortunately, we then elected the biggest megalomaniac of all to address the problem. It could have; should have been handled in a more measured, collaborative & less disempowering way. (I mean less disempowering of employees, not the union bosses!)

Edam's posts are all spot on and raise excellent points.

I genuinely feel that people who never knew this country before Thatch are unable to grasp how much has been lost. She achieved her objective to "change the way this country thinks forever." She made us greedier, more selfish, less empowered and more insecure.

I don't see why it is such a daft question, or why it should upset people to answer.

I asked because it is generally felt that the more wealthy sectors of society eg. landowners, business owners were less put upon during Thatcher's rule than those of the working class. Therefore, is it not a pertinent question to ask if those who agree with her policies are/were more wealthy?

I can only assume that it upsets people to answer because they are either ashamed of their political views or of their wealth. Forgive me if I'm wrong.

Apparently (so Mock The Week says) her state funeral will cost £3 million, or we could go with Frankie Boyles suggestion and buy everyone in Scotland a shovel and we'll dig a hole deep enough to hand her over to Satan personally.

Going back to the poll tax, the Thatcher government tried to replace the rates system of a charge on property to a charge per head. The reason she wanted to do this was because the rates system was seen as unfair to the rich living in mansions, they were paying a large amount compared to 6 people squeezed into a small council house!!!!!

Strong leader, well she was defeated on poll tax by the riots. Council tax replaced poll tax by property values and the rich still ended up paying a lot less than rates because the higher band stopped a long way short of mansion values.

We need to protest, and keep protesting, to get this current lot to listen and stop the shit that is about to happen.

i think we should forget thatcher now

when i think of her i get a knot in my stomach

Edgar I wouldn't be surprised if 43% of the voting public were relatively wealthy. Obviously it's all very subjective.

The question is though, how many of the poorer people from that era voted for her, and why (not)?

Not sure it's that straightforward, Loopy. I did really well from the 80s & 90s but still hated what I saw happening around me. I'd have willingly sacrificed a few designer shoes & bags to see the homeless disappear back into subsidised accommodation. I bought a poncy house, but knew I didn't need quite so much poncedom.

Meanwhile, lots of less-well-off people were letting themselves get excited about owning fake shares in industries that had been 'stolen' off them in the first place and being invited to buy council houses. I think it's more about being able to see the big picture and/or being immune to hyperbole.

I haven't read all the thread, but just wanted to add that I hate what she did to this country too.

alouiseg - yeah, right, it's all down to Clinton and nothing to do with one G W Bush at all, no sirree. And certainly nothing to do with the major financial corporations such as Goldman Sachs that were deliberately creating products designed to fail on behalf of one client and then selling them on to others. Nothing dodgy there at all.

LostinTranslation, Hell will spit her out.

And to all the 'Notchers' (think Des Lawson!) out there, I delight in my hatred for her!

Goldman sachs???? Do you mean Government Sachs? I know i do.

Loopy, to answer your Q my parents were not rich at all (used to have ice on the inside of our windows in winter poor) but my father started up his own small business under MT, as she supported small business/get of your arse enterprise. He didn't make a fortune but was comfortable. He now works f/t in a different sphere at 73 as Brown raided the pension funds. He still remains a great admirer of MT, more so as he personally knew Kinnock. Unsurprisingly maybe, he also liked Blair.

Did such a lot of harm in Scotland, introducing the Poll Tax up here as a trial before unleashing on the rest of Britain was the final nail in their coffin. Is it any wonder that since Maggie's day, the Tories have found it difficult to win any seats up here?

Only a guess, but I'd say the Lib-Dems might suffer the same fate, next General Election.

Ummm... Les Dawson obvs! Les is his older brother!

Yup (again), edam. With apologies to those who can do this better (and an invitation to improve), here's how it works:-

1. Make large loans available, at attractive interest rates, to those whose income cannot sustain the repayments long-term.

1. In the UK, take the housing which is owned by public funds (ie, by everybody) and invite your target suckers to take out large loans and buy them. This transfers ownership of the property from Everybody to the Bank - not to the loan customer.

1. Set up a financial product which will gain in value as more of your borrowers default.

1. Wait.

1. Declare that too many borrowers have defaulted and you're now bust. Reposess the properties that used to belong to everybody. Pulling the best trick of all, persuade the governments they will lose their jobs if your loan shortfalls are not compensated by public money.

1. Sit back and watch as Mr & Mrs Everybody pay every penny they've got into your bank's coffers, your bank takes ownership of large swathes of land & property and you collect on the hedge fund you built in step 3.

1. Ring up Maggie and tell her the project is now complete! Ordinary people own little or nothing; banks own most of everything; the weak are going meekly to "the wall" and there's no such thing as society.

seen this?

Alouiseg

My parents were poor and left wing. I was left wing until I was about 20, then I did a bit of research and realised my parents had strange priorities. I am not rich either.

If you have only ever met rich Thatcherites then you might want to think about broadening your social network. And evidently not everyone voting for her to power at three separate general elections was rich.

'Make large loans available, at attractive interest rates, to those whose income cannot sustain the repayments long-term.' Why?? This is asking for the sub prime crisis to be replayed!

1. "In the UK, take the housing which is owned by public funds (ie, by everybody) and invite your target suckers to take out large loans and buy them. This transfers ownership of the property from Everybody to the Bank - not to the loan customer". ...and the incentive for buying state property over private is????

3." Set up a financial product which will gain in value as more of your borrowers default." Any ideas how to do that without re enacting the cds scenario?

. 'Sit back and watch as Mr & Mrs Everybody pay every penny they've got into your bank's coffers, your bank takes ownership of large swathes of land & property and you collect on the hedge fund you built in step'

Grace! are you on drugs??

I think that what has irredeemably fucked up the UK (as opposed to other European countries) is the idea of houses being a money making enterprise, as opposed to somewhere to live.

I guess Maggie did start this with the right to buy thing, but it was totally exacerbated by the Media and all this homes under the hammer/auction watch/how to do up your shit house stuff on TV in the 90s.

All of a sudden property is not just a home - it is MONEY central. So you get a whole generation of buy to let landlords and families living off their equity.

No, not everyone hates Maggie.

There are plenty of Tories who think she was one of the best political leaders this country has ever had.

I am not a Tory though. And I don't hate the woman, because I have never met her.

But I do hate everything she stands for.