That doesn't negate the fact that the gap between the rich and poor shot through the roof under Thatcher..
Under Labour it was still the effect of her policies.
What exactly did Labour do then in its 13 years of office - bar bankrupt the country, allow house prices and rents to get out of control and fail to regulate the bankers properly.
If the gap between rich and poor was higher under Blair and Brown than under Thatcher then presumably it was down to their policies and not hers?
What exactly did Labour do then in its 13 years of office - bar bankrupt the country, allow house prices and rents to get out of control and fail to regulate the bankers properly.
If the gap between rich and poor was higher under Blair and Brown than under Thatcher then presumably it was down to their policies and not hers?
Thinking back I bought my first place (a one bed maisonette) in '86 for £20k with a 100% no deposit mortgage and sold it in '88 for £44k to get somewhere larger.
Thinking back I bought my first place (a one bed maisonette) in '86 for £20k with a 100% no deposit mortgage and sold it in '88 for £44k to get somewhere larger.
Who was in power then?
The Tories. A friend bought her house in London for for £100000 in 1987 no deposit and a 100% mortgage. By 1989 her house was repossessed and she was put into temporary housing accomodation as she had lost her job. Guess who was in power?
What exactly did Labour do then in its 13 years of office - bar bankrupt the country, allow house prices and rents to get out of control and fail to regulate the bankers properly.
If the gap between rich and poor was higher under Blair and Brown than under Thatcher then presumably it was down to their policies and not hers?
They adopted the same neoliberal polices started under Thatcher and then all they could ever really do was put the brakes on rising poverty under neoliberal forces. They introduced NMW and later working tax credits and also started sure start which has helped young mums and given thousands of children a better start in life than they otherwise would have had, so they did some good things. We all know what is happening now Tories are back in. http://www.cherieblair.org/charities/Poverty%20Summary.pdf
As per usual, it's all thatchers fault but never anyone who came after her.
Thatcher was very popular at the time, until the PollTax came about. She turned around a country that was on its knees to the Unions and gave us prosperity again.
It's a shame those on the left can't really give solid reasons behind hating her so much other than some rhetoric.
Or before. The last crash was partly bought about by excessive US mortage lending started as a policy by Jimmy Carter. The mess in Afghanistan and 911 and the Iraqi-Iranian war which led to 1991 and 2003 also has its origins in the decisions by Carter to back the doiwnfall of the Shah in Iran, and his failure to deter the Soviet Union from invading Afghanistan. And Britain's economic troubles in 1979 were the culmination of 30 years of avoiding tacling the decline of existing industries and not dealing with excessive union power.
"The Households Below Average Income Survey, published by the Department of Work and Pensions, shows that the incomes of the poorest 10% of UK households grew by just £24 per week in real terms over Labour's 13 years in power.
By contrast, the income of the top 10% of households increased by ten times that figure, going up from £897 to £1,153 per week (an increase of £256)."
From your link it looks like Thatcher's government managed to reverse the trend of the share of all income going to the richest 1%. It had been going down until 1979, and has been going up ever since.
Not the only thing that went up either, apparently.
'Poverty went up under Thatcher, according to these figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies. In 1979, 13.4% of the population lived below 60% of median incomes before housing costs. By 1990, it had gone up to 22.2%, or 12.2m people, with huge rises in the mid-1980s.'
Thinking back I bought my first place (a one bed maisonette) in '86 for £20k with a 100% no deposit mortgage and sold it in '88 for £44k to get somewhere larger.
Who was in power then?
And what is the price of it now (£150k?+) - and have incomes risen by as much? At least Thatcher didn't prop up the market with silly schemes risking taxpayer cash - and prices fell back to more realistic levels.
And what is the price of it now (£150k?+) - and have incomes risen by as much? At least Thatcher didn't prop up the market with silly schemes risking taxpayer cash - and prices fell back to more realistic levels.
About £90 - 95k but that doesn't alter the fact that it was Thatcher who first let house prices and rents get out of control and also fail to regulate the bankers properly.
One other Thatcher factor was council houses being sold off at lower than market value and with ridiculously cheap and easy mortgage arrangements, now that DID kick off the rise in house prices because a lot were being re -sold just a few weeks after purchase and at huge profit and so up went prices across the board.
Crikey even lock-up garages were being sold for silly money!
What does it say about Labour that they are so hateful of her legacy yet in 13 years of power they were disinclined to reverse any of it?
They reversed the homophobic element of her legacy. To the point where we're very near total equality. To the point that even Cameron is following it through, much to the dismay of the Thatcherite right
I wasn't alive when she was in office, but I can see the fruits of some of her decisions, such as mass privatisation, freeing up markets, and recognising that over-reliance on the mining industry was holding us back. I can understand her being hated up north, especially in Liverpool after ordering a "managed decline" of the city. The poll tax was obviously her biggest failure. She seemed to lose it a bit toward the end of her tenure, but she had the courage of her convictions, which is more than you can say for most MPs today.
As per usual, it's all thatchers fault but never anyone who came after her.
Thatcher was very popular at the time, until the PollTax came about. She turned around a country that was on its knees to the Unions and gave us prosperity again.
It's a shame those on the left can't really give solid reasons behind hating her so much other than some rhetoric.
Don't you see the irony in privatization resulting in foreign governments controlling rail and energy. In the case of rail, the burden on the taxpayer has hugely increased, while the ridiculous fares we pay are used to subsidize German rail.
So instead of the state controlling our energy and transport, foreign states, over which we have no say, control them. This makes us a nation of serfs.
Or before. The last crash was partly bought about by excessive US mortage lending started as a policy by Jimmy Carter. The mess in Afghanistan and 911 and the Iraqi-Iranian war which led to 1991 and 2003 also has its origins in the decisions by Carter to back the downfall of the Shah in Iran, and his failure to deter the Soviet Union from invading Afghanistan. And Britain's economic troubles in 1979 were the culmination of 30 years of avoiding tackling the decline of existing industries and not dealing with excessive union power.
You conveniently overlook the fact that the UK and USA destroyed Iran's democracy by ousting the secular, principled Mossadegh. The end result was inevitable; the Shah was a traitor, serving foreign interests and shafting the Iranian people, his fall was as certain as night following day.
She was losing popularity and could well have been a one term Prime Minister if it hadn't been for the Falklands which gave her an unassailable majority, which could not be realistically overturned in one parliamentary term. By 1987 the Labour party was disunited and fighting like ferrets in a sack. People went for the devil they knew.
Comments
What exactly did Labour do then in its 13 years of office - bar bankrupt the country, allow house prices and rents to get out of control and fail to regulate the bankers properly.
If the gap between rich and poor was higher under Blair and Brown than under Thatcher then presumably it was down to their policies and not hers?
Thinking back I bought my first place (a one bed maisonette) in '86 for £20k with a 100% no deposit mortgage and sold it in '88 for £44k to get somewhere larger.
Who was in power then?
The Tories. A friend bought her house in London for for £100000 in 1987 no deposit and a 100% mortgage. By 1989 her house was repossessed and she was put into temporary housing accomodation as she had lost her job. Guess who was in power?
They adopted the same neoliberal polices started under Thatcher and then all they could ever really do was put the brakes on rising poverty under neoliberal forces. They introduced NMW and later working tax credits and also started sure start which has helped young mums and given thousands of children a better start in life than they otherwise would have had, so they did some good things. We all know what is happening now Tories are back in.
http://www.cherieblair.org/charities/Poverty%20Summary.pdf
Or before. The last crash was partly bought about by excessive US mortage lending started as a policy by Jimmy Carter. The mess in Afghanistan and 911 and the Iraqi-Iranian war which led to 1991 and 2003 also has its origins in the decisions by Carter to back the doiwnfall of the Shah in Iran, and his failure to deter the Soviet Union from invading Afghanistan. And Britain's economic troubles in 1979 were the culmination of 30 years of avoiding tacling the decline of existing industries and not dealing with excessive union power.
From your link it looks like Thatcher's government managed to reverse the trend of the share of all income going to the richest 1%. It had been going down until 1979, and has been going up ever since.
Not the only thing that went up either, apparently.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/datablog/2013/apr/08/britain-changed-margaret-thatcher-charts
'Poverty went up under Thatcher, according to these figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies. In 1979, 13.4% of the population lived below 60% of median incomes before housing costs. By 1990, it had gone up to 22.2%, or 12.2m people, with huge rises in the mid-1980s.'
And what is the price of it now (£150k?+) - and have incomes risen by as much? At least Thatcher didn't prop up the market with silly schemes risking taxpayer cash - and prices fell back to more realistic levels.
About £90 - 95k but that doesn't alter the fact that it was Thatcher who first let house prices and rents get out of control and also fail to regulate the bankers properly.
One other Thatcher factor was council houses being sold off at lower than market value and with ridiculously cheap and easy mortgage arrangements, now that DID kick off the rise in house prices because a lot were being re -sold just a few weeks after purchase and at huge profit and so up went prices across the board.
Crikey even lock-up garages were being sold for silly money!
They reversed the homophobic element of her legacy. To the point where we're very near total equality. To the point that even Cameron is following it through, much to the dismay of the Thatcherite right
I wasn't alive when she was in office, but I can see the fruits of some of her decisions, such as mass privatisation, freeing up markets, and recognising that over-reliance on the mining industry was holding us back. I can understand her being hated up north, especially in Liverpool after ordering a "managed decline" of the city. The poll tax was obviously her biggest failure. She seemed to lose it a bit toward the end of her tenure, but she had the courage of her convictions, which is more than you can say for most MPs today.
Don't you see the irony in privatization resulting in foreign governments controlling rail and energy. In the case of rail, the burden on the taxpayer has hugely increased, while the ridiculous fares we pay are used to subsidize German rail.
So instead of the state controlling our energy and transport, foreign states, over which we have no say, control them. This makes us a nation of serfs.
You conveniently overlook the fact that the UK and USA destroyed Iran's democracy by ousting the secular, principled Mossadegh. The end result was inevitable; the Shah was a traitor, serving foreign interests and shafting the Iranian people, his fall was as certain as night following day.
She was hardly up against anybody of worth, Foot and Kinnock were a joke.