On balance, the country was in a better state by 1990 than it had been in 1979. Industry was modernising and our economic base was in a stronger position to see us through the 1990s and millenium as a result of seeing the writing on the wall for industries such as mining, steel and the traditional car industry. We fared better than European countries such as France (heavily unionised) and Germany (dealing with integration of the poorer, underinvested East Germany).
It absolutely was not all flowers and roses. I've worked in a variety of former pit towns in my county and while the pupils could often give a good rant about Margaret Thatcher with many valid points, they'd struggle to name the current Prime Minister. The toll is felt decades later from the loss of the dominant industry and its secondary effects on the local economy and the loss of the community. The less remote and better connected the community, the easier it has found it to diversify. Unfortunately education standards and social mobility tend to remain poor, still influenced by generations of reliable, decent work down the pits.
There was work to regenerate and gentrify obselete industrial areas, the London Docklands being an obvious example. Generally a good thing but again at a cost of fragmenting communities, pricing out local people and ghettoising poorer people into other neighbourhoods. Decentralisation from London occured, many government agencies spread through the country. Not enough to redress the difficulties of places further than 75 miles from the M25, but better than not.
The reality is that the traditional industries were dying a slow death since the post-war era. Margaret Thatcher's government made that hit faster and therefore stronger, but overall the UK became more competitive for a globalised world and in a better long term position.
Right to buy has been abused and for those who could not afford it, they have been left behind, but it did financially empower a significant proportion of the working class. Stronger caps on the ability to profit by selling on, and reinvestment in council housing stock would have had a broader benefit in society.
The fact is that she worked up from relatively modest beginings in a difficult climate for a woman, won 3 general elections and is still influential enough to be regularly, contenciously discussed 40 years after becoming PM and nearly 30 years after being ousted after a very long stint as leader. She was a great leader (NOT necessarily a synonym for good). I can understand people still considering her to be an enemy, but to not have any respect for her achievements is a folly.
It is always worth understanding your enemy and the reasons for their successes, it's a good safeguard from arrogence. That does not mean approval, and I think generally in politics that's a major reason behind our current political mire of the past decade. So many communities have just voiced their dissatisfaction about being overlooked and dismissed for decades with less than intutitive effects as they feel unrepresented by those who tradtionally claim to represent them.
Conservatism and Thatcher's brand of encouraging economic independence has a cross-class appeal. Even Tony Blair understood that to some extent.