NationStates Jolt Archive

Pretty self explanatory question really.

Yes or no, and why?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4775101.stm

Terry Thatcher?

Terry Thatcher?
Were they ever the first woman Prime Minister of Britain, war leader and economic saviour?

Damn!! For a minute I thought the old battleaxe had died

ah well.

As for a State Funeral....if she gets one then that means the Rev Smiler will get one.

:barf:

Ah Thatcher. She was an evil old bag. I think I love her.

Good God no. She fucked the country completely, increased employment a gazillion percent and killed British manufacturing with an axe. Fuck her.

Were they ever the first woman Prime Minister of Britain, war leader and economic saviour?

The fact she was the first PM is about the only reason she should be afforded a State Funeral.

But the negitives outwiegh that single positive.

she should have a great big fat public funeral attended by heads of state of other countries and it should be called whatever the fuck y'all want to call it.

She should be given the Cromwell treatment.

I'm not so sure. I wouldn't have said so, but then I realised that we did give Churchill a state funeral, so it wouldn't be unprecedented.

Under a Conservative government, she'll probably get one and I won't complain. Under Blair's government, she'll probably get one and I will complain. Under any other, she probably won't get one.

I believe that there's a solution.

1. Funerals for royals should be bought and paid for by royals - no more state funeral.
2. State funerals for Prime Ministers, no matter how unpopular. For balance, have a state funeral, and at a nearby football stadium, have a "We Hate The Dead Prime Minister" rally, complete with inflammatory speeches, film, etc.

I'm not so sure. I wouldn't have said so, but then I realised that we did give Churchill a state funeral, so it wouldn't be unprecedented.

Under a Conservative government, she'll probably get one and I won't complain. Under Blair's government, she'll probably get one and I will complain. Under any other, she probably won't get one.

At least Churchill was inspirational, Thatcher was just an arse.

No, she wasn't head of state.

Should Thatcher Get a State Funeral?

Yes. This afternoon.

Thatcher is my god.

we had the same conunderum in dublin when that rat bastard haughey finally did something nice and died. the debate centered on the fact he had been caught with his hands in the till and disgraced, so he had his funeral and no fucker showed up. just miles of crash barriers for the crowds who never showed up.

she will get a state funeral because all former pm's get one. either boycott it or riot at it is my advice

are the wombles still planning the street party for the day she dies in trafalgar square?

State funerals for Prime Ministers, no matter how unpopular. For balance, have a state funeral, and at a nearby football stadium, have a "We Hate The Dead Prime Minister" rally, complete with inflammatory speeches, film, etc.
The United Kingdom doesn't buy into bipartitionism.

we had the same conunderum in dublin when that rat bastard haughey finally did something nice and died. the debate centered on the fact he had been caught with his hands in the till and disgraced, so he had his funeral and no fucker showed up. just miles of crash barriers for the crowds who never showed up.

she will get a state funeral because all former pm's get one. either boycott it or riot at it is my advice

are the wombles still planning the street party for the day she dies in trafalgar square?

Incorrect...not all PM's get state funerals...the last one was Chruchill and that was deserved (even though he was a reactionary twat he was also fully aware of the evil brewing in Hitlers little twisted mind)....

Thatcher, while a War PM (Falklands) had manufactured that war to allow her to win the '83 election.

And she also removed the idea of collective responsibility which lead to The Rev Smilers current autocratic government.

Pretty self explanatory question really.

Yes or no, and why?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4775101.stm

Since she was a former Prime Minister, I say that she should get a state funeral.

I think all former heads of state of all nations should be launched out of cannons when they die.

I'm not crazy! Hear me out! Well, okay. I'm crazy. But still, hear me out. There is not a world leader alive or dead that wasn't hated by somebody and loved by somebody else. By launching them out of a cannon you can satisfy both groups at once! Those that revered the leader will bask in the glorious send-off and those that hated the leader will giggle at their flying corpse. Meanwhile the rest of the people, like me, that simply don't give a shit will get an entertaining show.

:)

Incorrect...not all PM's get state funerals...the last one was Chruchill and that was deserved (even though he was a reactionary twat he was also fully aware of the evil brewing in Hitlers little twisted mind)....

Thatcher, while a War PM (Falklands) had manufactured that war to allow her to win the '83 election.

And she also removed the idea of collective responsibility which lead to The Rev Smilers current autocratic government.

well in that case i gleefully retract. but riot anyway.

Damn!! For a minute I thought the old battleaxe had died

quite. i almost got happy for a minute there...



though i think we could give her a state buring.
at the stake.
tomorrow.



.....alive? ;)

Thatcher, while a War PM (Falklands) had manufactured that war to allow her to win the '83 election.

Yea right. Sorry Rubiconic Crossings but Thatcher did not manufacture the Falkland War.

No. The only reason Bliar is willing to make this exception is that he wants one himself, when the time comes. :mad:

Rioting at a funeral? What's wrong with you people. I could see it with Hitler, but Thatcher? THATCHER?

Yea right. Sorry Rubiconic Crossings but Thatcher did not manufacture the Falkland War.
Begone, colonial foreigner.

Rioting at a funeral? What's wrong with you people. I could see it with Hitler, but Thatcher? THATCHER?

Thatcher, of the several million extra unemployed. Thatcher, who fucked the miners and shut down British industry. Thatcher, who heralded the FUCKING EIGHTIES.

DOUBLE POST, WHORES!

Rioting at a funeral? What's wrong with you people. I could see it with Hitler, but Thatcher? THATCHER?
read this (http://www.shaftesburysociety.org/images/Polytoynbee/hard%20work.jpg) book (for a start)

Thatcher, of the several million extra unemployed. Thatcher, who fucked the miners and shut down British industry. Thatcher, who heralded the FUCKING EIGHTIES.

DOUBLE POST, WHORES!

Well they would have arrived anyway eventually you know.

And I repeat: Rioting? At a funeral? For one, what's the point?

Well they would have arrived anyway eventually you know.

And I repeat: Rioting? At a funeral? For one, what's the point?

One final FUCK YOU, let's 'em know (if they're somewhere floaty and ghostly) that people still consider the deceased to be an utter fuck.

Yea right. Sorry Rubiconic Crossings but Thatcher did not manufacture the Falkland War.

History states otherwise I'm afraid.

Both sides used the Falklands as an excuse to bolster flagging popularity and economic woes.

Neither side was willing to stand down hoping the other would. End result...the invasion of South Georia and the Falklands.

Please note...I am using the anglicised name...not the Spanish.

One final FUCK YOU, let's 'em know (if they're somewhere floaty and ghostly) that people still consider the deceased to be an utter fuck.
i like your attitude :D

i like your attitude :D

I don't. It's a side-effect. :mad:
This week only: ANGRY TGB TOURS NS GENERAL.
First three rows will be insulted.

One final FUCK YOU, let's 'em know (if they're somewhere floaty and ghostly) that people still consider the deceased to be an utter fuck.

Then don't show up or tune in! What, are you thinking of firebombing the coffin? Beating mourners up with placards? Maybe just throw youself under the cavalcade. It's just a bit extreeeme to RIOT at a FUNERAL. Chill.

Then don't show up or tune in! What, are you thinking of firebombing the coffin? Beating mourners up with placards? Maybe just throw youself under the cavalcade. It's just a bit extreeeme to RIOT at a FUNERAL. Chill.

NO.
Somebody like Thatcher deserves nothing but the utmost scorn until she's buried in a concrete block 50 feet under non-consecrated ground soon to be used for landfill.

NO.

YES. Eighties are dead, no use, it's no longer just you and the kids against Thatcher and the pigs.

Begone, colonial foreigner.

How about....no.

Not every leader deserves the 2,000 man volleyball treatment that Ayatollah Khomeini got. :p

I say fire the bitch. From a cannon. :)

Say all the crap you will about the I.R.A. having disarmed (yeah right), but I sincerely doubt they'd let such a funeral go off without a hitch. Not, of course, that this should even be considered in making the decision.

Not every leader deserves the 2,000 manvolleyball treatment that Ayatollah Khoomeini got. :p

I say fire the bitch. From a cannon. :)

Into the fucking sun.

Into the fucking sun.

I was thinking maybe arc her over Big Ben and into the river. :)

I was thinking maybe arc her over Big Ben and into the river. :)

She'd just stay there... Microbes wouldn't consume that corpse, it'd give everyone nightmares.

Fuck a state funeral, we shouldn't give that evil bastard a coffin, burial, cremation or embalming. London Tower could do with a good decent pinata.

History states otherwise I'm afraid.

History proves you wrong Rubiconic.

Both sides used the Falklands as an excuse to bolster flagging popularity and economic woes.

Actually, Britain was well off economically. Argentina was not however and hence why Argentina decided to start that war.

Neither side was willing to stand down hoping the other would. End result...the invasion of South Georia and the Falklands.

By Argentina no less which caught the British totally off guard.

Fuck a state funeral, we shouldn't give that evil bastard a coffin, burial, cremation or embalming. London Tower could do with a good decent pinata.

Feed the birds, tuppence a bag.

OF ENTRAILS!

Feed the birds, tuppence a bag.

OF ENTRAILS!

Actually, there are signs everywhere in London expressly forbidding people from feeding the birds. Especially pigeons.

Actually, there are signs everywhere in London expressly forbidding people from feeding the birds. Especially pigeons.

If you can't find the joy in a simple reworked Mary Poppins quote, I pity you.

If you can't find the joy in a simple reworked Mary Poppins quote, I pity you.
I understand the quote.

When I was in London, I kept seeing the signs, and remembering the song, and thought "there's no way that Mary Poppins would have bothered with this place".

quite. i almost got happy for a minute there...



though i think we could give her a state buring.
at the stake.
tomorrow.



.....alive? ;)
then bury the ashes and have a big party and do some dancing on her grave! :D

it's a date! :p

I understand the quote.

When I was in London, I kept seeing the signs, and remembering the song, and thought "there's no way that Mary Poppins would have bothered with this place".

Oh, please. It was set around 1910, right?

They were fucking hardcore back then, they ignored signs like they weren't there.

History proves you wrong Rubiconic.



Actually, Britain was well off economically. Argentina was not however and hence why Argentina decided to start that war.



By Argentina no less which caught the British totally off guard.

Thatcher stood no chance of winning the 83 election. Her ratings were so low that Kinnock had a realistic chance of winning #10.

Agrentina was suffering a severe economic depression.

Nothing like a little action to divert the populace...

Both sides did not back down and the end result was a conflict. If the Argentinians had been serious about taking and holding the Falklands they would not have used conscript troops to garrison Port Stanley.

As an aside I shared a house once many moons ago with a member of 2 Para. He was there at Goose Green when Col H was mown down. My friend used to cry himself to sleep every night because he lost friends for a war that was fought for political reasons.

To allow Thatcher to win the 1983 General Election.

Oh, please. It was set around 1910, right?

They were fucking hardcore back then, they ignored signs like they weren't there.

And now the place is a fucking dump. With a lot of nanny rules.

She'd just stay there... Microbes wouldn't consume that corpse, it'd give everyone nightmares.
:eek: ZOMBIE THATCHER!! ZOMG!!!1!

I daresay that every Prime Minister should get a state funeral.

But I'm just a stupid American, what do I know?

*goes back to picture book*

then bury the ashes and have a big party and do some dancing on her grave! :D

it's a date! :p
damn right! ah i knew there was a reason why i love you so much ;) :D :fluffle: :fluffle:

I disagree with most every one of Thatcher's policies, but she still ought to have a state funeral.

I disagree with most every one of Thatcher's policies, but she still ought to have a state funeral.
Why? It just sends a message to other fucktards that they can get a state funeral by screwing things up.

damn right! ah i knew there was a reason why i love you so much ;) :D :fluffle: :fluffle:
:fluffle: :fluffle:

hehehe, imagine if I'd been a thatcherite..... :p then again, to be that i'd have to be stupid, heartless or insane (in the bad way!) in which case, you wouldn't be with me anyway because i like to think i'm the opposite of those things :p

:fluffle: :fluffle:

hehehe, imagine if I'd been a thatcherite..... :p then again, to be that i'd have to be stupid, heartless or insane (in the bad way!) in which case, you wouldn't be with me anyway because i like to think i'm the opposite of those things :p
I got the impression that although many of her economic policies were unpopular, they were brutally necessary.

Actually, I thought that the UK was teetering on the brink of becoming a third world nation in terms of economy at the end of the 1960s.

I got the impression that although many of her economic policies were unpopular, they were brutally necessary.

Actually, I thought that the UK was teetering on the brink of becoming a third world nation in terms of economy at the end of the 1960s.
...

Necessary for her own personal (and utterly heartless) version of Britain.

I got the impression that although many of her economic policies were unpopular, they were brutally necessary.

Actually, I thought that the UK was teetering on the brink of becoming a third world nation in terms of economy at the end of the 1960s.
Your impression would be wrong.
Nothing she did was for anything other than her own personal gain.

Your impression would be wrong.
Nothing she did was for anything other than her own personal gain.

Now lets be fair...

She just wanted to get some hot Raegan loving, so she went FUCKING CRAZY and decided to run for Chief Fucktard.

Now lets be fair...

She just wanted to get some hot Raegan loving, so she went FUCKING CRAZY and decided to run for Chief Fucktard.
Saying she was crazy or stupid seems to let her off the hook too much...
She was just a heartless bitch who deserves to go through the suffering she's put so many others through.

(I'm not usually a hateful person, as anyone who knows me will vouch for, but I do make exceptions...)

I got the impression that although many of her economic policies were unpopular, they were brutally necessary.

Actually, I thought that the UK was teetering on the brink of becoming a third world nation in terms of economy at the end of the 1960s.

she was elected in '79...

But the fact is that the unions did have far too much power and needed to be dealt with. However what she did was move the economy from a manufacturing to a service based economy. She was able to do that due to the City (one of the three main financial centres of the world) and North Sea gas.

However the aftermath of those decisions are still in effect in the North of England and Scotland.

It was also the political shift from a One Nation tory party to the Thatcherite model via the removal of collective responsibility in the Cabinet.

This is what allows Blair to basically rule like an autocrat.

He is the bastard child of Thatcherism.

Now lets be fair...

She just wanted to get some hot Raegan loving, so she went FUCKING CRAZY and decided to run for Chief Fucktard.
I thought this is why she was so fucking mean:

From a position of considerable and increasing strength in the
1970s, the power of unions was severely eroded during the 1980s. One measure of the
influence of unions is provided by the New Earnings Survey - the proportion of adult male
manual workers covered by some form of collective bargaining agreement.
7
However,
since non-manual workers are less unionized, it is necessary to adjust the proportion of
manual males covered by agreements by the proportion of manual males in the total
workforce. In 1973, 62.3 per cent of all manufacturing workers were covered by such
agreements.
8
By 1989, that proportion had fallen to 45.8 per cent, with most of the fall
occurring in the 1980s. There is a number of reasons to believe that union power will have
a significant influence on the performance of firms, and hence on the economy as a whole.
Grout (1984) and Ulph and Ulph (1994) all provide theoretical arguments that suggest
unions will affect investment, employment, and innovation. Empirical support for these
theories has been provided by Machin and Wadhwani (1991), as well as Bean and Crafts
(1996) who find that unionization has a negative effect on productivity growth. Purcell
(1991) argues that the weakening of union power, especially collective bargaining,
significantly weakened the constraints to management action, while Gregg et al. (1993)
argue that a change in union status acts as a signal to workers of greater assertiveness on
the part of management.

Saying she was crazy or stupid seems to let her off the hook too much...
She was just a heartless bitch.

(I'm not usually a hateful person, as anyone who knows me will vouch for, but I do make exceptions...)

I can't actually believe anyone playing with a full deck could actually think they were doing the country any good whilst crippling it.

But the fact is that the unions did have far too much power and needed to be dealt with.
Not in the way they were.
I mean, did the miners on strike really need to be brutally beaten by the police? Apart from the obvious glaring wrongness of how far she took it with stuff like that, the effect of destroying the trust in the police was awful too.

I personally think that every miner or factory worker put out of work by Thatcher's good wolrk should be allowed to either sue her or spend two minutes alone with her and a tire iron.

I can't actually believe anyone playing with a full deck could actually think they were doing the country any good whilst crippling it.
I don't believe she did think she was doing the country any good. I don't believe she gave a fuck about the country and it's well-being or had any desire whatsoever to do it any good. Maybe in her youth.... But no, I think all she did was for her own power and personal gain.

Not in the way they were.
I mean, did the miners on strike really need to be brutally beaten by the police? Apart from the obvious glaring wrongness of how far she took it with stuff like that, the effect of destroying the trust in the police was awful too.

well as a 16 year old who demonstrated with the striking miners at Orgreave I'll leave that to you to decide where I stand :)

However the unions did have too much power and were killing the economy. Thatcher went after their coleective jugglers and that I could not abide. That and the Public Order Act and the Criminal Justice Act. And Clause 22 and ....all the rest of the draconian anti civil rights laws that mad cow lumbered this country with.

I don't believe she did think she was doing the country any good. I don't believe she gave a fuck about the country and it's well-being or had any desire whatsoever to do it any good. Maybe in her youth.... But no, I think all she did was for her own power and personal gain.

Apparently she was very keen on FA Hayek. So I suppose it depends upon how you feel about Hayek. I wouldn't really ascribe any higher motives.

At least the UK is not the sick old man of europe anymore.

well as a 16 year old who demonstrated with the striking miners at Orgreave I'll leave that to you to decide where I stand :)

However the unions did have too much power and were killing the economy. Thatcher went after their coleective jugglers and that I could not abide. That and the Public Order Act and the Criminal Justice Act. And Clause 22 and ....all the rest of the draconian anti civil rights laws that mad cow lumbered this country with.

Maybe it would have been better if she let them kill the economy then, and the subsequent riots and chaos that would have followed might convince people that excessive union power was simple extortion.

I don't believe she did think she was doing the country any good. I don't believe she gave a fuck about the country and it's well-being or had any desire whatsoever to do it any good. Maybe in her youth.... But no, I think all she did was for her own power and personal gain.
Did she end up accumulating a billion pounds of personal wealth as a result of her actions?

I'm supposed to be having a relaxing evening... so why the hell did I click on a thread about Thatcher??

Sorry people, but I'm gonna have to go and try to salvage some relaxation :p

Did she end up accumulating a billion pounds of personal wealth as a result of her actions?

Nah dude. She did it all for the fancy state funeral.

I got the impression that although many of her economic policies were unpopular, they were brutally necessary.

Actually, I thought that the UK was teetering on the brink of becoming a third world nation in terms of economy at the end of the 1960s.
stopping the militarism in the trade unions was necessary as it was causing inflation and actually making unemployment worse, but she went to drastic measures that were just too far and severely damaged the economic mobility of the country.

her widespread underfunding of the public sector, education and the NHS in particular damaged the country for years to follow, and only now are we seeing levels of investment rising to where they should be. privatisation was just evil and abhorently done. the rich-poor divide widened and unemployment rates went into double figures. ok so the rich-poor divide has gotten worse under Labour, but that's because the rich are getting rich at a pace that far outstrips growth in low income rates, not because the poor are getting - in real terms - poorer a la under Thatcher. and finally (of the things i can think to be angry about right now) her idiom of "there is no such thing as society" has, as an idea, damaged the social fabric of the country in ways you just can't quantify.


so yes, freeing up the labour market was a good thing. out of an absolute shitload of other things she totally butchered in the name of her evil, heartless conservative vision of the country.



:fluffle: :fluffle:

hehehe, imagine if I'd been a thatcherite..... :p then again, to be that i'd have to be stupid, heartless or insane (in the bad way!) in which case, you wouldn't be with me anyway because i like to think i'm the opposite of those things :p
if you were a thatcherite i would certainly not be with you :p
if you were just a tory i'd be hard enough :P


thankfully you're lovely, intelligent and socially-aware... not to mention compassionate and just fantastic... so i thank my lucky stars i have you (and that i can have you in my life because you're not a thatcherite :p)

stopping the militarism in the trade unions was necessary as it was causing inflation and actually making unemployment worse, but she went to drastic measures that were just too far and severely damaged the economic mobility of the country.

her widespread underfunding of the public sector, education and the NHS in particular damaged the country for years to follow, and only now are we seeing levels of investment rising to where they should be. privatisation was just evil and abhorently done. the rich-poor divide widened and unemployment rates went into double figures. ok so the rich-poor divide has gotten worse under Labour, but that's because the rich are getting rich at a pace that far outstrips growth in low income rates, not because the poor are getting - in real terms - poorer a la under Thatcher. and finally (of the things i can think to be angry about right now) her idiom of "there is no such thing as society" has, as an idea, damaged the social fabric of the country in ways you just can't quantify.


so yes, freeing up the labour market was a good thing. out of an absolute shitload of other things she totally butchered in the name of her evil, heartless conservative vision of the country.




if you were a thatcherite i would certainly not be with you :p
if you were just a tory i'd be hard enough :P


thankfully you're lovely, intelligent and socially-aware... not to mention compassionate and just fantastic... so i thank my lucky stars i have you (and that i can have you in my life because you're not a thatcherite :p)


Then in hindsight, if I were her, I would have let the unions utterly destroy the economy, and be blamed for not doing enough.

People would never have trusted the unions again, and I would, in the long term, accomplish the goal of removing their power.

Purcell
(1991) argues that the weakening of union power, especially collective bargaining, significantly weakened the constraints to management action, while Gregg et al. (1993) argue that a change in union status acts as a signal to workers of greater assertiveness on the part of management.


do they pay people to write the bleedin' obvious like this. :rolleyes:

put that one in the no shit file

do they pay people to write the bleedin' obvious like this. :rolleyes:

put that one in the no shit file

No, people go to uni to write that stuff.

No, people go to uni to write that stuff.

how come i never got away with writing essays about things that are obvious.

"the sky is blue - a dissertation" by the sr

how come i never got away with writing essays about things that are obvious.

"the sky is blue - a dissertation" by the sr

You probably didn't major in the arts.

You probably didn't major in the arts.

:D

I think all former heads of state of all nations should be launched out of cannons when they die.

there are 4 too many words in that sentence

there are 4 too many words in that sentence

Erm... former, when, they and die? :eek:

stopping the militarism in the trade unions was necessary as it was causing inflation and actually making unemployment worse

PM proves conclusively that reformism is in fact a bourgeoise ideology which ends up making attacks against the working class instead of supporting their demands.

No dammit because it'll mean quality TV programs will be cancelled. However my Politics teacher loves her but then again my politics tracher is a legend in our school so he is not all bad

Then in hindsight, if I were her, I would have let the unions utterly destroy the economy, and be blamed for not doing enough.

People would never have trusted the unions again, and I would, in the long term, accomplish the goal of removing their power.

Don't you think she was succesful? When has a strike ever really acheived anything since the Thatcher era finished?

PM proves conclusively that reformism is in fact a bourgeoise ideology which ends up making attacks against the working class instead of supporting their demands.
PM recognises that real-world considerations come first, and that change is slow.

The BBC recently ran a television series called "Tory! Tory! Tory!" detailing the precedent behind Thatcher and her years in power quite recently. What was unusual about it was the fact that it actually attempted to be balanced, rather than descend to the usual level of Thatcher bashing that the BBC so loves.

In 1979, Britain was a mess. An absolute and utter mess. We had a three day week, most of our industries were paralysed by strike actions, our currency was becoming more worthless with each passing hour and the government was virtually bereft of all power. Many of Britain's nationalised industries were terribly run and were providing increasingly poor service. Britain was the 'Old Man of Europe', one of the poorest of the western European nations.

In short, what was needed was a revolution. And a revolution is what Thatcher brought about. She reversed the economic fortunes of Britain in her time in office. Remember, it is not Brown and Blair who are responsible for Britain's current economic good fortune: the current economic situation would have never been possible were it not for the governments of Thatcher and Major. Blair was just lucky that the country got sick of the Tories at the same time that the Tories' plans were finally coming to fruition.

The familiar chant of "What about the 3 million left unemployed?" can easily be answered: one cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs. A revolution of any sort always causes problems but what is certain is that Britain is in a far better position post Thatcher than it was pre-Thatcher. In short, the ends justified the means.

The BBC recently ran a television series called "Tory! Tory! Tory!" detailing the precedent behind Thatcher and her years in power quite recently. What was unusual about it was the fact that it actually attempted to be balanced, rather than descend to the usual level of Thatcher bashing that the BBC so loves.

In 1979, Britain was a mess. An absolute and utter mess. We had a three day week, most of our industries were paralysed by strike actions, our currency was becoming more worthless with each passing hour and the government was virtually bereft of all power. Many of Britain's nationalised industries were terribly run and were providing increasingly poor service. Britain was the 'Old Man of Europe', one of the poorest of the western European nations.

In short, what was needed was a revolution. And a revolution is what Thatcher brought about. She reversed the economic fortunes of Britain in her time in office. Remember, it is not Brown and Blair who are responsible for Britain's current economic good fortune: the current economic situation would have never been possible were it not for the governments of Thatcher and Major. Blair was just lucky that the country got sick of the Tories at the same time that the Tories' plans were finally coming to fruition.

The familiar chant of "What about the 3 million left unemployed?" can easily be answered: one cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs. A revolution of any sort always causes problems but what is certain is that Britain is in a far better position post Thatcher than it was pre-Thatcher. In short, the ends justified the means.

Well...sick of that particular brand of Tory at least.....

PM recognises that real-world considerations come first, and that change is slow.

Then you should recognise that unions had nothing to do with inflation. Esp. as they held to the 5% pay increase limits 76-78.

I can't help wondering how many people in this thread were actually alive during the eighties, much less the 70s.

and I don't get why a Prime Minister would be performing some of the most unpopular actions ever just for "personal glory". what personal glory could be expected from the poll tax? and it's not like we couldn't NOT get into the Falklands. man you're all so naive.

I can't help wondering how many people in this thread were actually alive during the eighties, much less the 70s.

and I don't get why a Prime Minister would be performing some of the most unpopular actions ever just for "personal glory". what personal glory could be expected from the poll tax? and it's not like we couldn't NOT get into the Falklands. man you're all so naive.

Oh dear.

Oh dear.

damn straight

She can have a state funeral as long as I am allowed to dance on her grave singing "ding dong the witch is dead".

I don't like her. She didn't have a very nice demeanour.

Some of her economic policies were certainly pretty good (I mean, something had to be done, or Britain would be just like Poland by now), and some of it was just taking stuff too far.

Either way, you guys elected her, she held that office, she should get whatever honours come with it. If that includes a state funeral, she should get one.

If it doesn't (I don't actually know), then that's up to you to decide.

that carcass of corruption should get nothing but an unmarked grave

Yeah, it'd be great fun. There will be a big parade and a riot will start, and all the protesters will get savagely beaten by the police. It'll be just like old times...

Yeah, it'd be great fun. There will be a big parade and a riot will start, and all the protesters will get savagely beaten by the police. It'll be just like old times...
Ah...

*starts singing All In The Family theme song*

Ah...

*starts singing All In The Family theme song*

really that should be Till Death do Us Part.... All In The Family was based on Till Death...

Warren Mitchel....funny guy except for being a Hammer....

Save the cost of a funeral of any kind.

Shove that worthless old hag into an incinerator.

Now. Live.

Yes, of course she should.

They should do it in the North so we don't have to travel far to the well publicised location of her grave to spit/piss/dance on it.

No. The only reason Bliar is willing to make this exception is that he wants one himself, when the time comes. :mad:
Blair should be buried in the Bush family plot.

PM recognises that real-world considerations come first, and that change is slow.

PM has decided to stop supporting striking workers because the market should be our first consideration.

Unequivocally so. She rejuvenated Britain economically, restored a degree of national pride, and cowed the unions.

In 1979, Britain was a mess. An absolute and utter mess. We had a three day week, most of our industries were paralysed by strike actions, our currency was becoming more worthless with each passing hour and the government was virtually bereft of all power. Many of Britain's nationalised industries were terribly run and were providing increasingly poor service. Britain was the 'Old Man of Europe', one of the poorest of the western European nations.

In short, what was needed was a revolution.

In short, it sounds like we may have been close to one before Thatcher came along.

She should not. Only two Prime Ministers have recieved stae funerals. Churchill, who stood on the doorstep of Number 10 and single-handedly defeated Hitler by fliping him the 'v' and some other guy nicknamed GOM who was very friendly to postitutes. I don't think Thatcher deserves to be mentioned along side those two considering how hated she is.

Thatcher scares me. :(

I actually voted no, she doesn't deserve to get a state funneral. Although it would be fun, I can just imagine all the controversy. :)