RichieC Loc: Adirondacks

I though a lot of her from over here, as do at least half our population....

I didn't have to live under her government, so perhaps some aren't as sad. She helped make Britain truly Great. In any case, my condolences to her family and all of those who mourn the passing of so great a lady.

Rathyatra Loc: Southport, United Kingdom

May she rust in HELL!!! - she did many bad things during her reign in government and people in Britain suffered greatly - she had no concern for the welfare of the vulnerable and thought that ' Unemployment was a price worth paying to carry out her Milton Friedman inspired economic experiments '
She also stated there was no such thing as society and it was everyone for themselves and let the devil take the hindmost.

So she may be missed by some people in the USA who never bore the brunt of her policies and thought the Reagan/Thatcher political partnership was a marriage made in heaven but she left a trail of social wreckage until she was eventually ditched by her own party.

GARGLEBLASTER Loc: Spain

I for one will not mourn her passing. She was one of the most hateful politicians ever to have achieved Government who tried her best to enrich the already wealthy and to empoverish the already poor. Yes, she was popular in the USA but Americans didn't have to live under her policies. It is wrong to think ill of the dead but in her case it's difficult to think otherwise.

Rathyatra Loc: Southport, United Kingdom

:thumbup: :thumbup:

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

She did rule for over 11 years which made her the longest-serving British Prime Minister in the 20th century, which contradicts your contention regarding the lack of support for her in Britain. 8-)

viscountdriver Loc: East Kent UK

Would you prefer Arther Scargill? That's what you would have got if it was not for her.

JADAV

Saddam Hussein ruled for 24 years - does that indicate that he had full support of the Iranian people? Thatcher's ideology polarised British politics so that the Labour party swung to the Left to the extent that a split was brought about with 4 major members forming the Social Democrat party. By default the only alternative to Thatcher's leadership became unelectable; a deplorable situation in any democratic country. Without strong opposition Thatcher was free to implement increasingly personal projects so that her own party threw her out. Falklands war arose due to her penny pinching attitude to supporting the islanders, Argentina saw the opportunity to take the islands. Thatcher's position dependent upon getting them back so absolutely committed to the war. Under funded armed services then had to commit to rescuing the islanders-replacing main gearbox on our aircraft carrier mid-Atlantic, flying longest distance bombing raid in planes from the 1950's etc. etc. Thatcher then takes the credit for their victory and gets re-elected.
Thatcher's defeat of the Unions in the Miners' strike due principally to their crass leadership and total lack of strategy of Arthur Scargill. Don't forget that the economic miracle of Thatcherism also coincided with the start of oil and gas bonanza of the North Sea which has largely now finished. I'm sorry to debunk the wonderful picture that seems to exist internationally about her but unfortunately many of her decisions have come home to roost. Personally I am waiting for my taxes to be thrown again into rescuing the privatised organisations, that were undersold, as they start to fail. Anybody remember the Rolls Royce rescue in the early 1970's? Why is it that capitalism is the answer to everything until business fails and the the tax payer picks up the pieces?
You must have noticed from the reactions listed today how Thatcher is regarded in Britain. People either benefitted or suffered from her policies - unfortunately the former are fewer than the latter and the gap between the rich and poor is greater than ever.

lateron Loc: Yorkshire, England

Whilst there is some truth in your comments, I think the facts have led you to the wrong conclusion. MUCH of the country did not support Arthur and the Miners. Yes, it was exceedingly sad that entire communities were decimated, but the fact remains that many blame 'Maggie for their own failings. The mines were not profitable, and would have been closed anyway. In a Capitalist society, the money has to come from somewhere! (it's called investment). No one would have put money into mining - recent closures, (which obviously had nothing to do with 'Maggie), have proved that.

JADAV

Thank you lateron for your comments on Arthur & the Miners; as it happens I agree with you. The majority of the country didn't support them and I don't believe that Scargill would ever have taken over, as suggested elsewhere on this site today. I intended only to indicate it was less Thatcher's victory than it was a lost cause for the miners. Economically I would say that you are correct. Having lost employment from mining communities (and then large parts of industry) does a Government have any responsibility for helping to create replacement jobs? It now appears that large numbers of ex-miners were encouraged instead to sign on long term disability whilst living in unsellable homes in ghost towns. This was done by a non-socialist party.
Why was it only after the riots in Toxteth that they were willing to invest capital into the infrastructure of Liverpool? This was claimed as a success by the Conservatives but was not applied elsewhere? Please feel free to respond as I am enjoying the opportunity to review a period that has so profoundly affected our lives in Britain. Hopefully the elapsed time allows for us all to take stock of things from a detached viewpoint. So far opinions are as divided as ever they were - no doubt the truth lies somewhere in between. I need to understand how we have all ended up in the mess we are now in - I don't think it is as simple as most people suggest. Many thanks.

breck Loc: Derbyshire UK

Hard times yes but she turned around a country that was going down the tubes, had no self confidence relyed on "Big Governmewnt" and could only make good cars on a wednesday"
We would be in a right mess without her

lateron Loc: Yorkshire, England

I'm sure that you are right - it isn't simple!!!!!!!!!!!!
I DO think that, as a Nation, we have become reliant on so-called 'Government hand-outs!
(At the root, we should, I think, acknowledge that "Governemnt" does not have any money!! It's all taxpayers money!).
You seldom, (if ever), hear anyone talking about 'responsibilities', but there are plenty 'aware' of their 'rights'. In my view, people forget that their welfare is at someone elses cost! Of course I think that nurses should get more money, as should Servicemen, (and women of course), pensioners etc. But I am also aware that all this is at a cost, - a cost which most of us think is unfair!! For heaven's sake, where is the money to come from?

ace-mt Loc: Montana

I greatly admired Mrs Thatcher and would like to offer condolences to those that will miss her.

JADAV

You capture the thrust of the pro-Thatcher consensus very well, breck. The state of Britain where unions held sway over Labour governments, subsidized businesses and a general feeling of dependence upon "Big Goverment" did exist. British manufacturing quality was in decline and there was an undeniable need for change. Were all of the changes under Thatcherism either good or successful in the long term? Are the improvements in British car manufacture due only to the fall of the unions and British Leyland or the introduction of Japanese/foreign investment and quality improvement methods. Doubtless the unions would have opposed the new working practices but where are the British owned manufacturing industries? Germany held on to it's industry and managed to not only rescue East Germany but is currently expected to bail out most of Southern Europe. The Germans don't blame low wages and costs in the Far East like the rest of us.
The claim that we'd be in a right mess without her suggests that our current position is somehow optimal? If it is solely the result of the actions of all governments since her dismissal I have difficulty believing that any of them were capable of actively constructing anything so destructive. Rather it appears that it was lack of action that perpetuated a dangerous situation. Thatcher's main strength seems to have been demolition of obstructions which then required a period of constructive leadership which neither she nor anyone following her applied themselves. I can't think of anything that she actually built for the country but I would like to be corrected. Her belief in the freedom of the market has since led to repeated situations where damage to the country's economy, freedoms and institutions has been blamed upon the "lack of regulatory bodies" - which were anathema to her.

JADAV

Again lateron we appear to agree on the use of taxpayers' money. Instead of robbing Peter to pay Paul without any exchange of goods or services, as part of the welfare budget is still being wasted, I'd prefer that money to be spent on capital investment into public infrastructure projects. The failure of public-private partnerships to achieve large scale improvements doesn't prompt me to believe that private investment is ever likely to be forth-coming. Meanwhile Asian countries are investing right now. Meanwhile the British public are upset over a fast train link project. I don't resent paying taxes but I hate them to be utterly wasted. I believe our society has a moral responsibility to care for the weak, incapable and aged that is to be shared by all of the rest of us capable of contributing.

Ka2azman Loc: Tucson, Az

I see something amiss here! The shoe is on the other foot. Americans are speaking how great the British had it under Thatcher and and the Brits saying you don't live under the consenquences of her guidence. This is reverse of the gun control situation here in America with the Brits interjecting thoughts on something they are not living under. This isn't to hi-jack the post, because it follows a course, you don't really know a situation unless you are living it and feeling the consequences of the actions. There is a sayiing in Martial Arts "there are three side (views) to a fight - your's - the opponent's - and a bystander's".

Maybe we all shouldn't be in such haste in relishing our thoughts and trying to force our opinions upon someone's else's life who is living in the situations or aftermath.