# Was Thatcher good for the UK economy?



## Firefly (7 Apr 2011)

She basically cut-off any funding to businesses / sectors relying on government aid and a lot went to the wall. A lot of people were displaced and unemployment rose. Fast forward a few years and small businesses in the UK flourished as well as the financial services sector with the Big Bang. We have a few UK based contributers to this site and I was wondering if you thought that Thatcher was good/bad for the UK economy?


----------



## johnjoda (7 Apr 2011)

*The Iron Lady*

Personaly I think Maggie was ruthless to a point of no return. But her actions spoke words, with the exception of privatisation.


----------



## Protocol (7 Apr 2011)

*More flexible labour market*

less trade union power
less generous UI system
less employee protection
easier to hire and fire

Long-run result is lower unemployment


*More competitive product markets*

More competition
Privatisation


----------



## TLC (7 Apr 2011)

As someone who lived under that regime - she was a disaster - more poverty & misery.
Protocol - there is nothing wrong with protecting workers rights, I don't know when that became a bad thing.
We have experienced here what it is like when banks have been able to run-amok - not a good thing I think.


----------



## ringledman (7 Apr 2011)

She was truely excellent. 

She brought the UK back from the brink after Labour's disasterous ruin of the 70s and the IMF bailout.

The UK was a backwater after Labour bankrupted the country in the 70s. 

Thatcher came in and standards of living rose significantly across the board. 

Privatisation brought share ownership to the masses. 
Council house tenants could get on the property ladder. 
Broke the back of the wealth destroying unions. 
Revolutionised business in the UK for the better and businesses flourished. 

The UK's recent wealth is all down to her.

Without doubt the second greatest PM after Churchill.

And then we re-elected Labour once more and they bankrupted the country again...


----------



## ringledman (7 Apr 2011)

Firefly said:


> She basically cut-off any funding to businesses / sectors relying on government aid and a lot went to the wall.QUOTE]
> 
> Creative destruction working its magic.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chris (7 Apr 2011)

TLC said:


> As someone who lived under that regime - she was a disaster - more poverty & misery.


Short term pain for long term gain. I have friends and family in Wales that were severely affected in the short term by the closing of mines and other industrial production. They all eventually retooled and found far more productive, better paying and less dangerous work.



TLC said:


> Protocol - there is nothing wrong with protecting workers rights, I don't know when that became a bad thing.


It depends on what you mean by protecting workers' rights. In my opinion workers' rights have gone too far, and that employers' rights have been so adversely affected that they create less employment.



TLC said:


> We have experienced here what it is like when banks have been able to run-amok - not a good thing I think.


What we experienced here is an industry protected from newly created competition by excessive costs of regulatory compliance. The value at risk of an industry failure is far hire when value of risk is concentrated into a few companies.


----------



## Protocol (7 Apr 2011)

TLC said:


> As someone who lived under that regime - she was a disaster - more poverty & misery.
> Protocol - there is nothing wrong with protecting workers rights, I don't know when that became a bad thing.
> We have experienced here what it is like when banks have been able to run-amok - not a good thing I think.


 

Please note that I am not supporting these policies one way or the other.

But evidence suggests that excessive employee protection laws lead to a rigid lab mkt and less jobs in the long-run.


----------



## TLC (7 Apr 2011)

Of course excessive laws/regulation isn't the answer, but I would have hoped that by looking back at the history we would have learned something & be able to build a better society, government & commercial template for the future than what has gone before.
I remember the despair of father being unemployed, wanting work but unable to get it after working since he was 15 - some things just stay with you.


----------



## csirl (7 Apr 2011)

Thatcher was great for the UK economy - they'd be a 2nd world country at best if she hadnt sorted them out. Bad for vested interests, bad for anyone overseas who acted contrary to British interests, but great for the British people and economy.


----------



## csirl (7 Apr 2011)

P.S. wouldnt you love to have someone like Thatcher working for the Irish government in its dealings with the EU/IMF and bondholders?


----------



## TLC (7 Apr 2011)

No - we'd end up even worse off.  She had no concept of compromise.  She ended up being ousted because of her disasterous attitudes to people. The only way to deal with the EU/IMF/bondholders is in a measured & responsible way - that doesn't mean it's a weak response.


----------



## mercman (7 Apr 2011)

ringledman said:


> Without doubt the second greatest PM after Churchill.



Lived there in the late eighties and agree with most of your post, with one exception..............she hated the Irish with a passion


----------



## ringledman (7 Apr 2011)

mercman said:


> Lived there in the late eighties and agree with most of your post, with one exception..............she hated the Irish with a passion


 
Well from an economic point of view she was certainly one of the best PMs.


----------



## dereko1969 (7 Apr 2011)

Good for the Economy? Yes for the most part.

Good for Society? No definitely not, created huge divisions.

We don't live in economies, we live in societies. So I'd rather someone who benefitted society.


----------



## mercman (7 Apr 2011)

Sorry, I missed the economic point, she was fantastic for the economy. Took no guff from any sector, but for society it was pathetic. The Poll Tax riots were an example, and since she was ousted the general economy has been running in third gear.


----------



## ringledman (7 Apr 2011)

mercman said:


> Sorry, I missed the economic point, she was fantastic for the economy. Took no guff from any sector, but for society it was pathetic. The Poll Tax riots were an example, and since she was ousted the general economy has been running in third gear.


 
But surely the Labour approach of tax and overspend is just as damaging to society? 

We now have the same rioting and divisions in society as the Labour government and current opposition dangerously sell to the electorate that we can keep spending money we don't have. 

At least Thatcher told the truth. Work hard and you will be taxed low. Dont work and there is a little safety net and that's it. Intersting this approach has been proven to reduce unemployment and improve peoples motivation and ultimately their hapiness.

Labour - Get taxed heavily if you work, dont work and you will be rewarded. We will create a massive safety net off borrowed money (to increase our voting electorate) that your children will one day pay for. Dont worry the tories will be in then to blame.

The electorate always want reward without responsibility. 

Thatcher set out that long term reward only comes from responsibility. Economically, and I would argue socially, this was fantastic for the UK.

I think in 5 years we will see the huge damage that so called 'socially' nice parties like Labour can cause to both the economy and society over those 'nasty' tories who always like to tell the truth.


----------



## mercman (7 Apr 2011)

ringledman said:


> Get taxed heavily if you work, dont work and you will be rewarded. We will create a massive safety net off borrowed money (to increase our voting electorate) that your children will one day pay for. Dont worry the tories will be in then to blame.



This sounds like a futureistic story for Ireland. Believe me it was fantastic living in the Uk in the late 80s and early 90s. But like the Celtic Tiger, things were done wrong, very badly wrong and Society is now paying for it. But referring to the question of was Thatcher good for the economy, yes but as we have all learned, it takes a brave man or woman to put the foot on the brakes.


----------



## Guest105 (7 Apr 2011)

mercman said:


> Lived there in the late eighties and agree with most of your post, with one exception..............she hated the Irish with a passion


 

She sure did hate Haughey 

I was no fan of hers but I do think she encouaged people to become more individualised and the downturn of that was people became more selfish. I remember her eyebrow raising quotation when she said "There is no such thing as Society".


----------



## Complainer (7 Apr 2011)

Her legacy is alive and well, unfortunately.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/mar/18/westminster-soup-run-ban-anger


----------



## horusd (7 Apr 2011)

Her "no such thing as a society" formula left Britian a legacy of division and endemic social problems almost unheard of in the Western world. Having said that, I agree she did some good in terms of developing a liberal market economy. Problem is, she went too far. I dont doubt her personal courage either, the IRA bombing and her handling of her resignation were both done with great courage. Again the problem was she lost the plot, remember the "We" are a grandmother... I'm sure Lizzie up in Buckingham Palace was not best pleased with the grocer's daughter turned Queen!


----------



## Chris (8 Apr 2011)

dereko1969 said:


> Good for the Economy? Yes for the most part.
> 
> Good for Society? No definitely not, created huge divisions.
> 
> We don't live in economies, we live in societies. So I'd rather someone who benefitted society.


The economy is the most central part of western society. It is "free" market based economics that separated modern wealthy countries from those that fell behind. Arguing that you can simply differentiate society and economy does not make sense.
I would agree though that a lot of what Thatcher said and did should have been sold to the public better without aggravating a divide.


----------



## RoyRover (8 Apr 2011)

ringledman said:


> At least Thatcher told the truth. Work hard and you will be taxed low. Dont work and there is a little safety net and that's it. Intersting this approach has been proven to reduce unemployment and improve peoples motivation and ultimately their hapiness.
> 
> Labour - Get taxed heavily if you work, dont work and you will be rewarded. We will create a massive safety net off borrowed money (to increase our voting electorate) that your children will one day pay for. Dont worry the tories will be in then to blame.


 
+1

These are exactly the choices facing the Irish government now, but they lack the spine to take the hard decisions and so are storing up more and more trouble for the future.

The longer we have a union ridden bloated government sector, and an overgenerous welfare state, the longer we will stay in the mess we are in. 

Our current government has no appetite to address this overspending or the supply side elements like dramatically reducting the minimum wage and removing factors stopping businesses hiring staff, such as parental leave regulations or the 48 hour working time directive.

The parallels between Ireland now and Britain in the 70s are frightening:

Huge public debt
Rising taxes
The IMF being called in
Unions driving government policy
Overgenerous welfare state
We can continue to ignore this (which I fear we will) and we will slide back to the poverty of Ireland in the 70s and 80s, or we can implement the Thatcher style reforms that are needed to get Ireland back to work.

Sadly, with Labour holding the balance of power in the country, we are likely to slide a lot further into the mire before things change.


----------



## SarahMc (16 Apr 2011)

It was thatcherism and reaganomics kneeling at the feet of the Chicago school of economics, i.e. the market regulates itself that has us in the state we are in!


----------



## Purple (16 Apr 2011)

SarahMc said:


> It was thatcherism and reaganomics kneeling at the feet of the Chicago school of economics, i.e. the market regulates itself that has us in the state we are in!



If that is true then how do you explain the bubble here and how does it explain the origin of the credit crisis; the federal government in the USA underwriting every mortgage in the country and the push by Clinton to force lenders to lend to people with bad credit ratings?
If the market regulated itself then businesses would be let go bust, be they brothels or banks.


----------



## csirl (18 Apr 2011)

SarahMc said:


> It was thatcherism and reaganomics kneeling at the feet of the Chicago school of economics, i.e. the market regulates itself that has us in the state we are in!


 
Disagree - we're in the state we are precisely because the market was NOT allowed to regulate itself - the State stepped in and bailed out banks that would otherwise have failed.


----------



## Chris (18 Apr 2011)

Purple said:


> If that is true then how do you explain the bubble here and how does it explain the origin of the credit crisis; the federal government in the USA underwriting every mortgage in the country and the push by Clinton to force lenders to lend to people with bad credit ratings?


Don't forget the big "free-marketeer" Bush. Bush pushed more for loose monetary policy then Clinton, increased mortgage underwriting to a level never before seen and bailed out banks. One of the most expensive regulations ever introduced, Sarbanes-Oxley, especially to smaller businesses, came in under Bush. Fact is that between 1980 and 2009, for every deregulatory policy in the US there were 4 regulatory policies. The whole idea of blaming deregulation simply does not stand up to fact, but it is an easy target to sell to the public.
Which part of this is meant to be deregulated free markets I do not know.


----------



## RoyRover (18 Apr 2011)

What we need in Ireland is more State control, collectivism, and a general slide back to the mid-1980s when Ireland was pinned to the wall by the unions and run by an ineffective FG/Lab government that doubled the debt and presided over a huge rise in unemployment.

Look how well pandering to Socialism has benefitted us in the past Comrades


----------

