Margaret Thatcher

Was she a good leader brits?

I know the mere mention of her name sends lefties in to a huge frenzy, so I assume she had to be doing something right.

Other urls found in this thread:

spiegel.de/international/europe/the-iron-lady-s-views-on-german-reunification-the-germans-are-back-a-648364.html
youtube.com/watch?v=4IJjlYj4siU
youtube.com/watch?v=AaaQAg5_-f8
telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/10799816/Britons-suffer-unprecedented-fall-in-real-wages.html
businessinsider.com/roche-11-myths-about-the-economy-2014-7
cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/
theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/city-state-governments-privatization-contracting-backlash/361016/
bbc.com/news/magazine-21056703
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Nah she ruined the country for globalist kike interests and quick profit.

>mere mention of her name sends lefties into a huge frenzy.

I'm not a leftie mordibly obsese burgercunt.

She gutted all the industry out of this nation and got police to smash the shit out of the workers who protested to keep their jobs.

She was an evil witch.

She was based.

Not English, but I think she was pretty good, she wasn't Reagan but she was an admirable woman.
If people hate her, ask them what they were doing when she was in power and how much of it they were doing.

She did what had to be done, England had a huge problem with rich detached families and no middle-class so the poor were unable to work themselves up, the left had also completely destroyed England as an industrial country so she had to whip England back into work, which took a lot of balls.
If you weren't willing to change to the new English way of hard work and dedication, she was a nightmare and you would be even poorer, which is why lefties hate her.
She also stopped the massive and useless funding for projects like LGBT rights or other non-issue projects which people use to slander her and call her a LGBT-phobe which ofcourse isnt true, she was very progressive compared to the rest of the people in her party.

If you want to know the effectiveness of her policies, even leftist parties in England still want to keep some of them in place while at the same time shaming the right for admiring her

She should be a true icon for Feminism or any other group of people looking to empower women, she worked herself into a field consisting of only men back then and didn't complain, she didnt just want to be on their level but beat them at their own game.
Ofcourse movements like feminism are drenched in Socialism so they would never admire her.

What is usually brought up is the coal and miners strike in the 80s

She completely wrecked a shitty heavily subsidised state run coal industry in the UK. She only had the power to do this as it was nationalised by labour decades prior. She allowed it to be privatised whilst removing subsidies which suprise suprise very few mines were economically viable.

The only people mad at her are labour lefties who want goverment run industries that haemorrhage money.

Looks like you're outnumbered bro. I guess you're just a buttpained lefty

>[CURRENT YEAR]
>still uses left-right separation for politics
Shiggying @ u senpai

She saved Britain from becoming a third world country. Seriously. Britain had the shittiest post-ww2 economic growth (compared to France and West Germany and Italy) because the retarded mongs threw out Churchill and elected a communist after the war ended.

The most ironic thing about the Thatcher hatred is that Maggie actually came from a poor family, while most of her detractors were your typical fabian society champagne socialist "intellectuals"

John L. Lewis the head of some miners Union years and years before thatcher was the real reason the mines had to shut eventually.

The stupid cunt lobbied so hard for extra pay for miners, that everyone switched to coal. Then when coal mines in Britain had to be closed, people blamed based mags.

*switched to oil, my bad.

>She should be a true icon for Feminism or any other group of people looking to empower women, she worked herself into a field consisting of only men back then and didn't complain, she didnt just want to be on their level but beat them at their own game.

This, this a million times this. I fully understood this when she died and there was no feminist uproar about how everyone took to the streets singing 'Ding Dong, The Witch Is Dead' while in my country, the opposition leader was being hounded for standing in front of a sign (that he didn't create and repudiated) calling the female PM a bitch.

>If you want to know the effectiveness of her policies, even leftist parties in England still want to keep some of them in place while at the same time shaming the right for admiring her

This . No one has undone the things she did which says a lot and she is loved by the Right which is more that the left ever would for Blair

She abandoned Rhodesia and helped get MUGABE of all people installed into power.

That alone is a severe stain on her record.

>threw out Churchill

Churchill was a fucking retard who had a few witty quips and that is all
Margie was a legend, fuck unions

She made Britain great again.

"Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher bitterly opposed Germany's reunification."
spiegel.de/international/europe/the-iron-lady-s-views-on-german-reunification-the-germans-are-back-a-648364.html

why fuck unions

Churchill was a retard but Attlee was a literal communist.

terrible just terrible

globalist neolib kike

She was the Ray Gun of the UK

>wanting your wages undercut my niggers and spics

also you realize if you were in a union right now you could say whatever racist shit you wanted and not get fired right?

It's Labour's fault that UK industry is so incompetitive, they raised wages too much and nationalised everything. Attlee was an overrated meme.

Bollocks.

Certainly not in Britain anyway

Oh boy here we go

As the sole, sovereign issuer of a fiat, floating-rate, non-convertible currency, with all of its debts denominated in that same currency, the U.S. Federal Government can issue as many dollars as it wants, at any time, to anybody, for any reason. Solvency is a non-issue, as there is never a payment that a currency issuer cannot make in its own currency.

Anybody who applies the following expressions to the U.S. Federal government, including, but not limited to:

>"broke",
>"bankrupt",
>"insolvent",
>"going to default",
>"running out of money",
>"where's the money going to come from", >"can't afford X",
>"dependent on taxpayers/Treasury investors", >etc. etc.

can be immediately dismissed and declared to have absolutely no concept of how U.S. fiscal policy and operations work.


It's the private debt stupid

youtube.com/watch?v=4IJjlYj4siU

Paying off America's Debt is Simple

youtube.com/watch?v=AaaQAg5_-f8


I hate neolib kikes so much

Reagan was the same brand of cuckservative we see today though.

She wanted to nuke Argentina over the Falklands dispute

you can in the US

>high wages
>bad

by that logic India is the greatest country on earth

neolibs are so fucking stupid.

Pros
>stamped on NUM and other militant unions
>won Falklands meme war
>vehemently anti communist
>improved on how shit we were in the 70s
>made a lot of lefties butthurt

Cons
>neglected and essentially economically devastated large parts of the country
>over emphasis on london
>ushered in the age of the City wanker
>too pro america
>too globalist
>too obsessed with privatisation for ideological reasons
>went loopy towards the end

Overall i am ambivalent about her, but i am glad she tore Scargill a new arsehole and i share her hatred of communists

Look up what the 1970s were like in Britain

Thats why

>calls other people stupid
>says something breathtakingly stupid

She was more of a man than Trump will ever be.

She was an absolute solid leader for 8 years then it went tits up after 87. She was incredibly principled and she shook all the socialism out of Britain.

do you have any non neolib or boomer opinions?

maybe we should just cut all government spending because

>hurrr government spending is bad for the economy

that's the sort of retarded thinking that got you into this mess.

In reality government spending is good for the economy, high wages are good for the economy, and cheap shitskin immigrant labor (regardless of what you think) that raise housing costs and lowers wages isn't.

telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/10799816/Britons-suffer-unprecedented-fall-in-real-wages.html

member of UFCW local number 241 (I'm a retail meat cutter) and they have never done anything for me but take 12 bucks a week out of my check. Lost two jobs I absolutely should not have been fired from and other shops that arent union make equal wages, have equal benifiets, and work less hours than I do. Every union I have been apart of has only been because it was required and they have all been a sad fucking joke.

And replaced it with privatization, globalism, neoliberalism, and austerity.

But never mind that's good. It's good that the economy is stagnant, wages are stagnant, and housing costs are increasing

That's what Brits consider "progress"

You realize Regan effectively destroyed most unions in the 80s right?

Of course they're many are weak now, but I know people in trade unions that are never getting fired or replaced by spics

If you want to let Mexifats have an easier time replacing just get rid of all the unions. It worked great for the farm workers.

>look at me guys im doing a really good job of tearing this strawman i built to shreds
Who the fuck are you even talking to you gibbering mongoloid? When did i ever express any of the opinions you are ascribing to me? Carry on shrieking like a moron if you want i guess

>making your manufacturing more expensive
>while not increasing productivity

explain to me why low wages are good then fuckface.

I assume you have already bought your one way ticket to India since it's a low wage paradise.

Kill yourself

I think she was a good PM
and illustrate why.

By that logic paying labor in pennies would be the "most le efficient thing ever"

Actually I guess slave labor would be the most efficient. Why aren't you advocating bringing it back (presumably for everyone you wouldn't want any nasty wages getting in the way of production costs)

when are you moving to India again?

Hey it's someone living in a low wage paradise

It must be hard living there with so many westerners flooding your country since it's such a economic powerhouse

due to the low wages and all.

If government spending is good for the economy then communism would make a strong economy and Venezuela would be great.

It's very different in Britain. Unions are mostly socialist and communist that fund Leftist campaigns e.g. NoXenophobia, Antifa, etc. They have too much influence in politics and that's the problem Margaret Thatcher tried to fix (and was successful for a time).

...

Thatcher was pro-leave

If she were alive today we would be heading for Brexit

Yes it's always a good idea to destroy industry in your own country

Communism is the government ownership of the means of production "not" government spending.

If all you needed to be communist was for the government to spend money then literally every government in human history was "communist"

...

>b-b-but she destroyed labor and industry in Britain therefore she was good

Government spending is inefficient, since demand isn't factored in. Some spending is just spending for spending's sake, and just spending on what will keep people in power i.e. by voters or more commonly by lobbyists.

"Cheap shitskin labour" makes products cheaper, for the benefit of the consumer. Competition brings out the best in people as long as rules are agreed to and enforced

the last contract that came up for our local was voted like down something crazy like 500 to 30 and when we took the strike vote 2/3 voted in favor. Instead of a strike the union board gave a no confidence statement with a strike clause to the company and we got a raise of $1.05 over the next five years while those cocksuckers lined their pockets. its a fucking scam. I don't think the fucking spics would work for that.

> I'm not a lefties
> Glorified welfare queens were entitled to a job

> inflation does not exist

Who is this dingdong ITT going on about neoliberalism and saying privatization is a bad thing? Go back to teddit you fuck. Capitalism is, and always has been the single most effective economic method for progressively improving the standard of life from generation to generation.

>Government spending is inefficient

It increases demand in the economy. Every dollar spent goes not someone's pocket regardless of how it's spent.

>makes products cheaper, for the benefit of the consumer.

And it fucks up the economy because now everyone has lower wages and as a result there's lower demand

neolib idiots can't think two steps ahead.

Yes unions are weak now crushing unions was part of the neolib agenda along whit outsourcing and mass immigration.

they want you to work for piss low wages and dumb cucks will defend it saying that high wages for workers is "socialism"

Steady low inflation is good for the economy it spurs investment and discourages hoarding that would cause deflation (like what happened in the great depression)

Hyper inflation is only caused by some sort of crisis.

You are so fucking dumb that you don't realize neoliberalism, privatization, and globalism are all the same system run by wall street jews.

Do you not get that they want lower wages for whites and to increase their tax burden so they can crush them economically and politically (that is before they replace us will with mudshits and spics)?

fun fact: Whether UK should be part of the EEC was the one major area where Maggie uturned in her whole career

>Capitalism is, and always has been the single most effective economic method

I'm arguing for capitalism, you're arguing for globalism. You might as well saw we should invite all of Mexico because "hurr dey are cheap labor so it's good"

Hello Weimar Germany, how's that foreign loan?
>Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it

Jews want marxism you fucktarded banana. Are you suggesting that competition is a bad thing?

Name one country, JUST ONE, where socialism has ever actually worked

Privatization IS capitalism. You don't have any idea what you're talking about.

She was the last hope of the Bongs,

this guy has to be a shill. He just labels shit uncontrollably to pass of as analysis.

Demand would be there without the government taxation and spending. What you are saying is that spending is good for spendings sake. Whereas in a market, you spend on things you desire.

Not everyone has lower wages. Last time I checked the USA has pretty high wages with massive immigration. If you can use your skills you will have higher wages. if lower production costs allow you to use you more of your resources (time,capital) on your skills then you will have higher wages.

>muh Weimar

hyper inflation is only caused by a crisis or exogenous factors

It's never once in history been caused by deficit spending.

businessinsider.com/roche-11-myths-about-the-economy-2014-7

Jews want jewish control of society either through Marxism or globalism

>suggesting that competition is a bad thing?

Low wage for workers will always be bad

>where socialism has ever actually worked

You're just talking shit at this point since I don't support "socialism"

If anything you support globalism.

>Privatization IS capitalism

No you dumb fuck capitalism means competition

When you give a private entity a monopoly over public infrastructure you eliminate competition and have created a rent seeking monopoly, the exact opposite of what capitalism stands for.

You created an implicit oligarchy instead.

this

Everyone else in the thread is a faggot.

You're the neolib shill for the kikes

>lets cut the wages for white people and the public budget for all public goods for whites

Yeah what a great fucking idea

>Demand would be there without the government taxation and spending

No demand doesn't just "magically" exist you need to have spending in the economy and an entity (govenrment) that acts counter cyclically in a downturn.

> Last time I checked the USA has pretty high wages with massive immigration.

Fuck you

wages have been stagnant since the 60s "because" of mass immigration.

Every one of you globalist shills for low wages are such good goys.

If Margaret Thatcher were alive today she'd be rolling in her grave

yes.

she's like the anti-Hillary. she won in spite of being a woman, whereas Hillary is trying to win because she is a woman

The Kiwi is right, you are just throwing out words and you don't know what any of them mean. I suspect you're like 15.

When an industry is nationalized, it mean's it's a state-sponsored monopoly. When you privatize an industry, it means you're opening it up for COMPETITION in the private sector aka capitalism.

Go take a basic economic course.

If you increase the money supply, you will get inflation. There is generally more competition for the currency and it's value decreases.

You are talking out of your ass about privatization/capitalism/globalism or whatever and then using the jews as a scapegoat.

And it depends on how you define monopoly. If public infrastructure were to be owned in shares by the people who use it would it still be a monopoly?

The answer is yes, but incentive-wise it works differently.

...

>Margaret Thatcher

Fuck the Belgrano

The state doesn't work on a profit incentive and therefore doesn't charge monopoly rates for providing public goods and services

The second you give a private entity they charge monopoly rates

see Chicago or Mexico

cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/

theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/city-state-governments-privatization-contracting-backlash/361016/

>hurr basic logic is so shocking

I'd say "you're" the 14 year old libertarian that lives in his magic autistic fantasy world where government is "le evil bad guys with guns"

>If you increase the money supply, you will get inflation.

No shit genius. Too bad for you that low level inflation is good for the economy as I explained

>using the jews as a scapegoat.

Yes wall street dindu nuffin they gud bois they can fuck up every country with mass immigration, debt, and outsourcing, and it's completely fine.

I'm beginning to see why you're a libertarian

>. If public infrastructure were to be owned in shares by the people who use it would it still be a monopoly?

Public infrastructures don't operate based on a profit motive. If they did you'd be paying $10 for every gallon of water you used in the shower.

the only thing the State should be doing is standardising things like what plugs to use and voltages, the width of train rails etc

It is awful at everything else unless its pointing a gun at a worker's head. You wouldn't be typing the drivelling you are writing on internet as the State creates nothing.

yes private monopolies are so fucking great

oh wait

cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/

The state owning public infrastructure is fucking common sense unless you want to be overcharged billions by oligarchs

Apparently oligarchy is a fundamental tenant of capitalism to you idiots.

m8 if we nationalised our rail the trains would be 40 mins late every fucking day.

Its bad enough as it is under private investment.

Gubbermints dont just fix everything u know.....

also

>Mexican capitalism

kek

She was a cunt . She destroyed the lives of the working class. She looked after her own elites. I had a party when she died at my local miners club.

no lad, it's still shit here

Misunderstood villain, she did her best to avoid Serfdom by privatizing industries.

>Maggie uturned

This is because the EU has evolved over time and mutated into a very different beast to the one we signed up for.

Staying in the EU for historical reasons (Post-WW2) is completely flawed logic

...

All privatization does is increase prices

bbc.com/news/magazine-21056703

Same as Mexico, same as Chicago, same as everywhere else.

Labour was due to shut down the mines, and a Labour unions guy sold all the miners out

Tories are establishment, but Labour are establishment plus absolute cancer

The fact that she triggers lefties and northerners so much is why she is our greatest leader.

>privatization increases prices

And the wages of MP's

Things would have been so much better if she had wiped out the filthy Argentinean scum.

Thatcherism/Neoliberalism is why the world is on the brink of collapse.

I hope there's a special place in hell for her and Ronnie Raygun.

Your own article states that the Mexican government is _partially_ responsible for the monopoly.

I'm not saying all manner of monopolies are good. I'm saying the ownership structure of private enterprise (whether it be sole, or in shares) is more efficient than public ownership.

>If they did you'd be paying $10 for every gallon of water you used in the shower.
If everyone had shares in the utility company this would be money in their own pocket. This also serves as a measure to conserve water individually while minimising cost for the whole utility.

I'm not advocating to sell off utilities to one individual. There are differing methods of privatisation out there.

Privatisation =/= increase prices.

lol, true dat.

> Theres no such thing as society.
Her form of liberalism created cuckservatives.
Her only value was in wrecking the far-left and being a strong individual. Her assertions of rights-responsibilities balance are also important.

> If/when Merkel dies i'm going to hold a celebration to sing "ding-dong the witch is dead" the same as left-nuts did to her.

>Mexican government is _partially_ responsible for the monopoly

Yeah they privatized public infrastructure which lead to a monopoly. That should be a surprise.

>If everyone had shares in the utility company this would be money in their own pocket.

That's not how companies work. You're looking at billions of dollars for the CEO and owner and a few pennies for everyone else

just like

>cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/

>I'm not advocating to sell off utilities to one individual.

That's all privatization is. You're selling public infrastructure to a monopolies.

>Privatisation =/= increase prices.

It empirically does.

didnt she have a punch of pedos in her party? She would do whatever the kikes say to protect or else she would lose the elections

capitalism left unchecked naturally leads to monopoly and oligarchy. there's a reason why when mega-corporations first became a reality in the US it drove the passage of anti-trust laws giving the government power to break up monopolies.

textbook example is the deregulation of the US airline industry after the 1970s. it was expected to increase competition, increase service, and drive down ticket prices. what actually happened was it drove industry consolidation so now there's only 4 major domestic players, who act in cahoots keeping prices high. meanwhile the companies have slashed wages and service - domestic flying really sucks today.

so libertarian Sup Forums needs to realize that in real life deregulation and government is not always a bad thing. but then again pretty sure the majority of Sup Forums can't even afford a domestic flight so how would they ever know?

>Run government owned company into ground
>People get pissed
>Sell it
oldest trick in the book

>It empirically does.
proof?

I think you are confusing privatisation with monopolisation. Which for utilities is a very fine line and is synonymous for some methods of privatisation.

>Companies need to boost profit to raise share price and dividends or else CEOs get the sack

She wasn't even a Brit and ruined the country for her master soros.

Thatcher triggers the leftist, benefit scrounging scum and the socialist "workers" who'd strike every week over the most shitty excuses.

I'm centre-right and Margaret is still a cunt

Other than the Falklands, she didn't do anything close to making Britain great again.

She was a true patriot.