Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Gripes and complaints about Chile. What does not kill you, only makes you stronger. Help make Chile a better place, and help other gringos avoid problems and mistakes.
john
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 6130
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Viña del Mar, Chile

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by john » Thu Apr 11, 2013 3:44 pm

Sigma62Delta wrote:Well, are you saying you support Chile's "self determination"???(This is an assumption. Would be hypocritical to not support something then say I am wrong for not doing it too.). Yes, I do...but via the ballot box as Chile is a democracy.

Which means you must have supported Pinochet.. Suddenly it becomes uncool doesn't it.. I certainly did not! I don't support military dictatorships...you seem to have taken the definition of "self-determination" to a whole new level.

There are no new levels to self determination. It always comes down to choices or even the refusal to make choices from everyone involved. Are you not aware that Pinochet overthrew a democratically elected government?


That is the trouble with the double edged sword that is "self determination". It means if you support it; you must support it friend or enemy... Saying that it is good as long as your side wins is an exercise in hypocrisy. I support "self-determination", whatever the outcome.

Which is why I do not use it. Is that because you usually don't like the outcome?

No. The outcome was always the same for me. I survived and I got paid. It would be unprofessional to favor one side over another for politics I do not care about. Such is the life of a mercenary.
One must care about a world one will not see.
--- Bertrand Russell

User avatar
bazzasoft
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:21 pm
Location: Harrow, Middlesex, England
Contact:

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by bazzasoft » Thu Apr 11, 2013 4:27 pm

A lot of very interesting posts from 7,000 miles away from the scene !!
The behaviour of some people here has almost made me be ashamed of being English.
However, to answer some of the Lansings' items:-
1. She supported the retention of capital punishment – so would the majority of UK voters, even now
2. She destroyed the country's manufacturing industry - no, the unions did that
4. She abolished free milk for schoolchildren ("Margaret Thatcher, Milk Snatcher") – it wasn’t abolished
7. She gerrymandered local authorities by forcing through council house sales – and most of the people who benefitted from those sales were the poorer members of society.
10. The poll tax – many still believe that the Poll Tax was fair.
11. She presided over the closure of 150 coal mines – no, cheaper coal from Poland meant our coal was uncompetitive BUT that means we still have huge reserves of high-quality coal which modern, mechanised mining may soon make competitive.
14. She introduced the gradual privatisation of the NHS – if that was so why did the labour government not change things in their 13 years ?
21. She allowed the US to bomb Libya in 1986, against the wishes of more than 2/3 of the population – after Lockerbie, many of the UK people would have bombed Libya themselves if they could !!
26. Her post-PM job? Consultant to Philip Morris tobacco at $250,000 a year, plus $50,000 per speech – have you any idea how much Tony Blair (socialist) earns ?
29. Social unrest under her leadership was higher than at any time since the General Strike – the unrest started under the previous socialist government. I remember the dead unburied and the piles of rubbish in the streets.
31. BSE – you have to be joking !!
32. She presided over 2 million manufacturing job losses in the 79-81 recession – I think you would find that the unions were behind that.
35. Cecil Parkinson, Alan Clark, David Mellor, Jeffrey Archer, Jonathan Aitkin – this list just shows your bias
37. Black Wednesday – Britain withdraws from the ERM and the pound is devalued – whereas a previous labour Prime Minister said “Crisis, what crisis ?”
38. Poverty doubled while she opposed a minimum wage – mostly due to recalculation of poverty by later socialist governments ?
41. In the Thatcher years the top 10% of earners received almost 50% of the tax remissions – as they were paying up to 98%, how was that so dreadful ?
43. Covered up the Hillsborough disaster to protect the police – the police and politicians are blamed for basic human fallibility.
Enjoy your sunshine - we had a few hours today.
Baz

User avatar
El Zorro
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 663
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:30 pm
Location: LA LA land

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by El Zorro » Thu Apr 11, 2013 4:57 pm

I saw some interviews on the tele with people in England who were not too happy with her and seemed to take some pleasure in her death. Regardless, in my opinion the only Brits who ever did anything of value for the rest of the world were Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin and Benny Hill.

User avatar
JHyre
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 1991
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:08 am
Location: Columbus, Ohio

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by JHyre » Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:06 pm

Regardless, in my opinion the only Brits who ever did anything of value for the rest of the world were Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin and Benny Hill.
Oh come on now. Surely John Cleese and the Monty Python crew merit inclusion with ole Benny.

John Hyre

User avatar
Sigma62Delta
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:57 pm
Location: USA- Someday Arica

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by Sigma62Delta » Thu Apr 11, 2013 6:01 pm

john wrote:
Sigma62Delta wrote:Well, are you saying you support Chile's "self determination"???(This is an assumption. Would be hypocritical to not support something then say I am wrong for not doing it too.). Yes, I do...but via the ballot box as Chile is a democracy.

Which means you must have supported Pinochet.. Suddenly it becomes uncool doesn't it.. I certainly did not! I don't support military dictatorships...you seem to have taken the definition of "self-determination" to a whole new level.

There are no new levels to self determination. It always comes down to choices or even the refusal to make choices from everyone involved. Are you not aware that Pinochet overthrew a democratically elected government?

It does not matter what he overthrew. That is the point. He had the backing of the majority of the people whom had chosen a side and were willing to take action. If not he would have failed. No revolution just happens out of the blue. If you pay attention you can see it coming a long way off. No revolution survives without the will of the people to allow it to survive.

Its just like all the people who voted for the National Socialist Workers Party. They knew exactly what kind of people these were and still voted them into power. Do you know why? Because they saw the alternative as being far worse. The exact same views came into play in Chile. That the alternative was worse than the cure.

Its easier to blame one person for being a villain but no one ever wants to blame the people that supported the villain.

Whether you choose by vote or choose by blood its still a choice. A revolution with no popular support will die.

Regardless of what anyone tries to imply the Chile we know and enjoy today would not be the Chile it is without Pinochet and the Communist exterminations.



That is the trouble with the double edged sword that is "self determination". It means if you support it; you must support it friend or enemy... Saying that it is good as long as your side wins is an exercise in hypocrisy. I support "self-determination", whatever the outcome.

Which is why I do not use it. Is that because you usually don't like the outcome?

No. The outcome was always the same for me. I survived and I got paid. It would be unprofessional to favor one side over another for politics I do not care about. Such is the life of a mercenary.
Architect of Aggression

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
R Heinlein..

User avatar
nwdiver
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:45 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC and Chile where ever it's Summer
Contact:

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by nwdiver » Thu Apr 11, 2013 6:34 pm

JHyre wrote:
Regardless, in my opinion the only Brits who ever did anything of value for the rest of the world were Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin and Benny Hill.
Oh come on now. Surely John Cleese and the Monty Python crew merit inclusion with ole Benny.

John Hyre


I’m with John.................
It's all about the wine.

Vicki and Greg Lansen
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2273
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:02 pm

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by Vicki and Greg Lansen » Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:09 pm

Sigma62Delta wrote:Democracy and the Military have quite a bit in common. Both shop for the lowest bidder.
You seem to be very educated in things you make up. :D

User avatar
El Zorro
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 663
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:30 pm
Location: LA LA land

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by El Zorro » Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:14 pm

nwdiver wrote:
JHyre wrote:
Regardless, in my opinion the only Brits who ever did anything of value for the rest of the world were Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin and Benny Hill.
Oh come on now. Surely John Cleese and the Monty Python crew merit inclusion with ole Benny.

John Hyre


I’m with John.................
I have the twelve episodes of Fawlty Towers on DVD, but I don’t have anything by Benny Hill I can readily watch. Still, I consider John Cleese somewhat one-dimensional, whereas Benny Hill was multi-talented and never took himself too seriously. I understand Isaac Newton was pretty funny, too.

User avatar
bazzasoft
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:21 pm
Location: Harrow, Middlesex, England
Contact:

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by bazzasoft » Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:31 pm

The trendy lefties in the UK virtually banished Benny Hill.
Despite the fact that he gave immense pleasure to millions he was branded as sexist.
But aren't we all ?
Baz :P

User avatar
bazzasoft
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:21 pm
Location: Harrow, Middlesex, England
Contact:

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by bazzasoft » Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:33 pm

Back to the subject of Margaret Thatcher, someone on local radio in the last few days equated the state of Britain when Mrs Thatcher came to power to that of Cyprus today but without the sunshine.
Baz

Vicki and Greg Lansen
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2273
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:02 pm

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by Vicki and Greg Lansen » Fri Apr 12, 2013 4:37 pm

bazzasoft wrote:Back to the subject of Margaret Thatcher, someone on local radio in the last few days equated the state of Britain when Mrs Thatcher came to power to that of Cyprus today but without the sunshine.
Baz

http://www.redpepper.org.uk/dispelling- ... her-myths/
(sources are cited below the article in the comment section)
When a political leader dies it becomes compulsory to lie about their record. While much of Britain openly rejoiced at the death of Margaret Thatcher, the media snapped into reverential mode, giving over hours of airtime and several thousand miles of column inches to representatives of the ruling class to solemnly recite myths about her achievements.

This wouldn’t matter so much if, like Thatcher, these myths were dead, and weren’t still shaping our politics. But they are. So here are some of them, debunked.

No ‘economic miracle’

It’s said that Thatcher ‘didn't just lead our country, she saved our country’. She didn’t. David Cameron’s melodramatic claim was a reference to Thatcher’s supposed reversal of Britain’s economic decline, when her policies are said to have brought about an economic miracle. But the performance of Britain’s economy in the 1980s was not miraculous – in fact it was below par, even if the deep recession of 1980-1 is ignored. Economic growth was higher and lasted longer in the 1950s and 1960s. And when the economy did pick up speed in the late 80s, it was because of a credit bubble that promptly burst and threw Britain back into recession.

It’s said that Thatcher was a tax-cutter. She wasn’t. The overall tax burden (all taxes as a percentage of GDP) rose from 39 percent in 1979 to 43 percent in 1989. It’s true that Thatcher cut taxes massively for the rich – the top rate of tax was 83 percent when Thatcher came to power, and it was 40 percent when she left. But VAT, which hits the poor harder than the rich, was just 8 percent before Thatcher, and was put up to 15 percent as soon as she gained power.

It’s said that Thatcher restored law and order. She didn’t. Crime increased by a staggering 79 percent under Thatcher. There were riots in Brixton and Toxteth at the start of her reign, and riots and civil disobedience against the poll tax at the end of it.
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown did more to institutionalise Thatcherism than the woman herself. Before New Labour, in the early 1990s, in the midst of a recession, it was a truism that Thatcherism had been an economic failure. The fact that many of the myths discussed here have been revived is in large part due to New Labour. When even Thatcher’s opponents accept Thatcherism’s success, why should the media challenge the record?





http://www.redpepper.org.uk/dispelling- ... her-myths/

SCL
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:18 pm

Re: Margaret Thatcher, 1925-2013

Post by SCL » Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:12 pm

Driving thru South Carolina and wondering once again about the odd miracle of its survival, NPR again saved the day a couple of evenings ago.

It was St Margaret's day. Many comments about the lady, but the best one came from someone in BBC recalling an event from a satirical show about her life : she had invited her ministers to a formal dinner at a first class London restaurant. She ordered first a wonderful portion of roast beef.

The old waiter leaned over and in a quiet voice asked her: "...And your vegetables, Madam?"

Thatcher's reply: "They'll have what I have."

Post Reply