ojnab, what do you care about what the Brits spend? I couldn't give 2 hoots, personally and I doubt many here could either, with the exception of a possible few who retain British citizenship while enjoying the largesse of Australians.

Care to comment on the billions being wasted by our own Government in the name of edifice-building?

mhaze

Thatcher will also be remembered for getting clean away with one of the biggest propaganda lies in history - i.e. that there was 'no alternative' to neo-liberalism to save a nation decimated by an inflationary spiral set off by powerful union demands and wasteful welfare spending.

The truth was that, in 1973, the oil producing countries started demanding a fair price for their oil, which sent the economies of the Western world into an inflationary spiral as the cost of living soared and unions fought to keep wages on parity.

In the 1970s, the UK’s political and business class knew that, once the fledgling North Sea oil exploration came into full production by the early 80s, the inefficiencies of the British coal industry would be offset by oil revenues – enough to allow the economy and workforce a smooth transition from coal to oil. Instead, once in power, Thatcher sold off the nation’s oil to private industry, smashed the unions and closed down the coal industry, destroying thousands of lives.

In 1979, UK unemployment was 4%; by 1983, four years into MT’s reign, it was 12%. In 1979, the UK’s debt was 45% of GDP; today, after 30 years of neoliberal Thatcherism (continued by Blair), it’s 138%.

Yet the mainstream narrative still credits Thatcher as being the ‘saviour’ of the British economy, despite the fact that it’s in an infinitely more pitiable state today than it ever was in 1979.

Killarney,

As I said, hyenas snapping at the ankles of a lioness. The attitude is to dig around and find anything that might put her in a bad light, assert that that is the sum total of her contribution to Britain and the west and then proclaim victory. In your case it even involves simply fabricating 'evidence' to make the case, which I'm sure in Killarney-world is fine since its done in the service of a virtuous cause.

You wrote:"In 1979, UK unemployment was 4%; by 1983, four years into MT’s reign, it was 12%. In 1979, the UK’s debt was 45% of GDP; today, after 30 years of neoliberal Thatcherism (continued by Blair), it’s 138%."

Well in truth, unemployment when she took over was closer to 6% and rising and, while it did tip 13%, by the time she left office it was back to the levels of 1979. Just mentioning the highest point without context simply demonstrates irrational bias I'm afraid. As to debt, while it was around 45% in 1979, it isn't even close to 138% now. And when she left office it was below 30% (but we mustn't anything favourable to her, should we?)

Anyone who says that Britain is in a worse spot now than in 1979 simply doesn't understand the dire state of the UK economy in 1979. If you look at per capita GDP it was in free fall when she took over and by the late 80s was bounding along at over 5% pa.

Remember she never lost an election. Perhaps the Britains of the time had a higher appreciation of what she did for their country than the ideological snipers 30yrs hence.

MHaze, the British media as Australian media do today, sold the "Reds under the beds" yarn; against the Britsh Labour party.
I had the misfortune to have lived under the Thather years, and she not only sold off the family silver, but tried to sell off the souls of the British public.
Your support for this woman is admiral, though she made sure she lived and died in comfort, unlike many in the UK.
Interesting that she departed this life, being carried feet first out her luxury suite at the Ritz Hotel!!

hi i am salma mir.
i have a blog today i updated it. visit my blog maybe you like it :0
if you like my work for appreciation like my posts. if any one want to know about my blog and any query you can contact me through my blog :)
http://kmasoftware.blogspot.com/

mhaze

You can be forgiven for not having encountered the 138% (or 137.6% to be exact) debt figure as it’s not bandied about too much. The figure however is published in the 2012-13 UK Office of National Statistics report, but buried away on page 31.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_302960.pdf

The debt level before financial interventions are taken into account stands at £1,161.5bn, or 75% of GDP (page 4). After the effects of financial interventions are added, the debt is £2,174 bn, or 137.6% (page 31).

‘…by the time she left office unemployment was back to the levels of 1979’

Interesting that you are using 1979 as a benchmark for a ‘positive’ Thatcher achievement. Wasn’t 1979 the year those incompetent socialists got thrown out office for ‘wrecking’ the economy that Thatcher was destined to ‘save’? Also, for what it’s worth, unemployment shot back up again the year after Thatcher’s political demise as the effects of the second recession she presided over finally took effect.

Pity she frittered away all that North Sea oil money on benefits for her rich benefactors to ensure that nice things would always be said about her in the msm. Had she put it into a sovereign wealth fund, as did Norway, she wouldn’t have had to resort to desperate measures like a poll tax when her luck ran out, and today’s Tories might not need to be ‘taxing’ the bedrooms of welfare recipients to stay afloat.