Margaret Thatcher: How PM Legitimised Green Concerns

What a great woman!

With a degree in chemistry, she not only was able to apply common sense to the typical "green" idiocy, in regard to the environment, but she privatized business, and was almost able to stomp out the stupidity of liberal socialism, making her country a much more stable and better place to live.

We sure could use more like her, right now.

What a great woman!

There's some very divided opinion on that over here. For the most part I'd agree that she was 'great', in that she at least had conviction in her beliefs. Every politician since has been 'John Major grey'. There was some joke back in the day that she had more balls than anybody else in the Cabinet Office. To use an oldie, 'you can drive on the left, or you can drive n the right, but drive down the centre of the road and you're sure to get pancaked'.

It's worth noting how she did a complete about-face on the topic of GW etc. One of her reasons was that the topic was ripe for hijacking by those of a socialist inclination. That's true enough, but she had also used the topic as a political battering ram - not in the sense of decimating the UK coal industry, but as a topic to out-think other European leaders on.

I'd salute her for being a person of conviction, but not her green credentials. At the end of the day, she scoffed at the idea of human induced GW. Either she made a huge gaff in her initial assessment, or she was playing the politics of it all. The kindest interpretation I can make is that she was a pragmatist, and with increasing political savvy realized that no global plan of action could ever be found. Having attained power by making the UK increasingly capitalist, her staying there depended on keeping big business happy. A political leader has to try and resolve a whole mass of issues, and she (rightly IMHO) judged that getting vocal on green issues was not the way to stay in power. I don't agree with her (latter) espoused views, but switching pony was the smart thing to do as a politician.

As you may have guessed I was never a fan of hers, but there are some pretty revolting sights on the media* of people celebrating her death. Mostly rent-a-mob who were still in nappies during the 80's and haven't the foggiest idea about the politics of the time. Half of them anarchists who will turn up for a riot of any sort, and the rest just disaffected kids who aspire to nothing more than being on a TV reality show.

Back to the OP; I honestly don't recall her earlier stance on GW. Probably because she was so active in other areas of politics and life. There is an interesting dilema raised - should we celebrate as a green heroin somebody who later took an opposite view ? On balance I'd say yes - it stimulated discussion that went beyond her on personal position on the topic.

For what it's worth I dislike her nemesis, Arthur Scargill, possibly even more. At the same time I'd consider him a 'great' figure in UK politics/society. When he dies, we're unlikely to see the sickeninmg sight of people celebrating. Mr's T will have won the final battle for the moral highground.

Sorry, Admin, a lot of that is political. You could hardly expect the topic to escape some of that. As I've said before, CR4 stuff is rarely far removed from politics. Thanks for an interesting blog entry - it's given me cause to check out some stuff I might not have otherwise found.

ps - Kram; I also much cheered to have somebody with a scientific background in politics. It doesn't give auto-credibility, but restored a lot more balance to the usual politicians we get. In some dusty corner of CR4 I listed the backgrounds of China's leading figures - it was something like 90% science/engineering background. If only Western governments had a bit more balance.

* There are going to be some very ugly scenes from the UK next week when they have Mrs T's funeral. I may well remove 'UK' from my location as a mark of disgust. The world is possibly about to see Brit culture at it's most vile.

Okay kris. We just got a dog yesterday, I'm beginning to launch a brand new product, and I've got a nerve in my lower back that's threatening to drop me; but enough about me....

My impression of Thatcher, falls along these lines. I'm fully willing to admit that it may not be an accurate representation.

http://personalliberty.com/2013/04/12/we-need-our-own-iron-lady-or-man/

What are the bad things about her?

and

Was your country in better or worse shape at the end of her time as PM?

WAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! I just spent an hour typing a lengthy reply and the computer crashed out on me !

Sorry about that - I'll do it over some time this weekend. One of these days I'll remeber to type lengthy post in Word first.

Hope you back holds up on you, I'll get back to this asap. I'm just going in the garden to scream for a few minutes !

I hate when that happens!

I typed out a well thought out, lengthy post last week, and my 5 year old daughter wiped it away while I was away from the computer.

It was such a well written post, I don't think I could capture it again.

Gardening is probably a better option anyway; I've got potatoes to plant.

Well, I'm glad you share my agony !

Seriously, I'd sat typing for what seemed like a short while but it was an age when I looked at the clock. No mater, there's benefit in thinking stuff over. Most stuff has a plus-side when you look at it.

You go steady on doing them spuds - getting them in the ground isn't too bad, but the day will come you have to pull them. Excellent life-skill training for youngsters. She'll get a day when she can write that one up as a homework project or 'show and tell' experience in class . I purchased some ladders in town earlier today - near killed me getting them back to Base A, but luckily my son and his mate were persuaded of the skills to be learned in manhandling some heavy goods for me.

Just a quick mention on spuds. I planted a load one year, and it turned out to be a real drought year. I costed out how muich the water cost, and it was way more than if I'd purchased the things in the shop. They tasted much better, and at least I could be sure they weren't covered in pesticide, but I don't think I'd ever do it again. The only saving grace was that I swapped some with a neighbour growing other veg. In some ways that relates to the original topic - we were both doing self-sufficient stuff, and it worked. At risk of being brief, Maggy Thatcher didn't translate her politics into average people showing enterprise, the 'work hard and you can improve your life' thing.

As said, I'll get back to you later. Watching various global TV news, I think it's very hard for us all to get a grasp on how things work in other countries. I'm in overall agreement with you, but a few aspects need pointing out. Catch ya laters

I'm a bit late in getting back, though on the upside Del had made a good post on some of the negatives. The only bit I disagree with was her "taking on a winnable war" - we only won by the skin of out teeth.

One thing that always struck me was how little (take that as about zero) she did to help other women climb the ploitical pole. Even some of her staunchest admirerers have conceded that wasn't because there were not enough with talent - she simply liked being the only woman in Cabinet.

In keeping with her economic beliefs, she turned many people into mini-capitalists. Public utilities were sold off at very low prices. The notion was to turn a vast swathe of the middle-earning folks into fervent capitalists. A great many simply puirchased and re-sold shares for a quick profit. However, we're now stuck with profit foccused utility companies and astronomic bills. I'd giggle, but a huge number of people in the social underclass didn't get a slice of that financial handout.

Towards the end, she bacame very imperious. One particular quote ('we have become a grandmother') struck many people as very odd in it's tenor - ie the use of the 'royal way. She seemed to see herself as a Britania type figure, and increasingly lost touch with the average person outside of Westminster.

If you can find any early footage of her, you'll see how she was very skillfully honed to give a more 'normal' appearence. Out with the rather snooty voice etc. Leopards don't readily change their nature even with a new coat of paint.

Gordon Gekko's 'greed is good' line, could almost have been a Thatcher quote. I believe that many of the current social ills are down to that way of thinking. She caused a huge change in attitudes which in my view amounted to creating a 'me me me' culture.

Ultimately, her own party (not the voting public) kicked her out of office.

She was a great person in my book, but she simply tried to go too far too fast, and she overstayed her time.

That's probably missed a whole lot I was going to say, but no matter. There may well be more comes to mind on Wednesday (her funeral). Right now I'm (like many) pondering the events in Boston. It looks to me like a disaffected domestic person(s), but security people in all places will be freaking out. That aside, what a totally hideous action .

I'll always look at government as the creator of most problems, and I'm sure that Thatcher had her drawbacks. As a free market capitalist, I also see unions as a hallmark of socialism, that hold far too much political sway.

In a true free market system, the government's role should be that of regulator, period. Preventing true monopolies from forming, going after cheaters and polluters, etc.

We have not seen that in the US for decades, and we are paying the price. Both republicans and democrats move massive amounts of money and government contracts to their political allies, and at $17 trillion in debt, I'd say we're beginning to feel the pain; it will get worse.

As far as the "me-me-me" culture, I see the same, but I don't see it as a product of capitalism; I see it as a product of socialism. 50% of our population pays nothing in taxes and is on some sort of government assistance. We will not be able to sustain those kind of numbers, the mathematics just don't work. One of my favorite quotes from Thatcher, was the one about socialism, and eventually running out of other people's money.

It's possible that she did go too far, too fast. We saw it in the former Soviet Union; they switched to a twisted form of capitalism almost overnight, and Russia is now run by elitists that border on criminal; many of them, former politicians. Not good. It left the majority of the population in poverty.

As far as the Boston bombing...I can't comprehend what goes through people's hearts and minds, to think that murdering the innocent is a good idea.

Some good and interesting points there. In many ways we could almost be living in the same country.

We get closer by the day. Government should not be in the business of attempting to control economies, outcomes, or people.

I very much agree with you. Government should only exist to enable people of endevour to improve there lot in life. Like it or not, there will always be 'have-not's', and it behoves us to help them up the rung.

The best thing we can do is to give any person a job. Not some made up job on minimum wage, but a job that gives them self respect and a feeling of 'I'm doing something of use'. The majority of people unemployed are not 'spongers' on society' - they would gladly put in a full weeks work to support themselves and family. I don't know how it is in the US, but the jobs simply do not exist over here.

The media like to highlight the feckless few. At risk of being contentious, FDR pulled America out of hell. As much as I would deride her, Maggy T would implement some sort of system to kick start things if she were here now. The unemployed masses simply need as job, and those not able who need support could be given help.

I don't consider that either left of right wing - simply giving people the chance to improve there lives, whilst taking care oi those who cannot.

Sorry, again, admin, but it's a reasonably important point; Many people here are in the position of hiring staff. It's worth considerig that it may well be worth hiring somebody who is 'in the gutter'. They may well turn out to be a very loyal and hard working employee. To make an iffy comparison, the best pets I've ever had have been rescue dogs/cats. Hire somebody who looks like they have a bad record and you take a chance....on the other hand it may be the best person you ever hired. If nothing else, you can't expect the Fed to do it for you.

We just got a rescue dog from the shelter last week. He's awesome!

FDR gets a lot of credit where it's not due. Strange as it seems, it was our entry into WW II that put us back on our feet. Not only did the war put about every able bodied person to work, but when the war ended, we had a massive manufacturing infrastructure in place and ready to roll.

I agree, that people inherently want to work and do well in their lives. Welfare was never intended to be a permanent lifestyle, but we have millions that are now there.

Right now, in the US, the maze of regulations and tax laws, has, what would otherwise be productive individuals, completely paralyzed. It's reached the point that local inspectors are shutting down kids' lemonade stands and church bake sales, for not having proper permitting.

Unfortunately, the government has become the single greatest obstacle to individual productivity and entrepreneurial spirit. Appointing more government panels to study the problem, is not going to fix it.

Exactamudo - that dog you got is probably the perfect family pet. It's a very crude comparison, but the same happens with people - you can take somebody from a disadvantanged backround, and given the chance they can excell in life. All they need is TLC and to see that it can be otherwise.

Amertcan politics is a bit beyond me, but I think there is an essential same - to work hard when there is an opportunity and improve ones lot in life is whaty we all aspire to. Over here, people simply can't find the jobs. We now have a culture where several genaration have not worked and live off the benefit system. The issue is how to change that, and without castigating those in that position.

It sounds like you may not like FDR, and I'm no fan of Thatcher, but strident leaders who create jobs may be what we need. Whowever it happens, we need to have people activly doing stuff - not the nonsense administration/paper shuffelling jobs - we need making and building stuff. Engineers and Scientists.

I hope admin won't kill this off - we are getting arond to something that is the very essence of what we do. It's about being consctrutive and helping society to be a better place.

Admin isn't going to kill it; it was political from the start. Besides, it's just the two of us.

I have a problem with both parties in the US:

The democrats simply want to expand entitlement programs that enable people to sit around and not work, while collecting money from the government.

The republicans run on killing those programs, with no alternative offered.

It's like Dumb and Dumber.

My goal would be to remove the, (government imposed), barriers that prevent people from starting their own businesses, and spending the money to educate and train the people that are currently stuck in the welfare cesspool.

I would also use the federal government to completely crush the inner city gangs that have people living in perpetual fear, encourage people to open businesses, and work toward turning our rotting cities back into safe and thriving places to live and work.

At the moment, it seems like we are getting zero return from our incredibly massive and expensive government.

I have to be quick (short of time), but that first line is spot on the mark.

A few days ago some bloke was beaten to death. No more reason than a small group of (almost) teens having a game of dare. Average sentance 5 years, and the profile suggests they will do it again. In all probabilty, they will be out in half that time. Believe me, it's bad over here.

I hear what you say, but am still thinking the root cause is a greed society. Instant grtatification seems to be the creed.

"1984" meets "A Clockwork Orange".

That is so scarily true .

We are getting flash mobs here too. Mostly beating people, but it's only a matter of time until they start killing.

I hate to keep ranting about the welfare state, but I think the lack of accountability and responsibility, along with looser moral standards, is creating packs of feral, (for lack of a better word), people. I'm a big guy, and these gangs of young kids make me nervous scare me sometimes.

It's maybe a bit tangential, but when people own stuff they are more inclined to look after it. In other words, if somebody can afford to own their car/home/whatever, they have a very vested interest in general 'law and order'. I think I see what you're saying, but the problem is how do we help people to become part of the 'winning side' in society - the majority of unemployed people would want jobs. The media distorts the picture a bit. Unemployed people atre not all neer-do well feckless types.

All to often I've seen people rioting and destroying their own communities. With nothing to lose, the rot seems to set in. People are not born bad - if somebody is born into a situation of poverty, and also one where education, the prospect of advancement by endeavour is not on the horizon, then we all could be in that underclass.

Whilst not making light of the topic, the film Trading Places seems to say a lot about it. We all get born into what Brit's quaintly call a 'postcode lottery'.

Moreover, I don't think much of the sickening stuff that happens in society is down to people at the lower end of the economic spectrum - they just can't afford slick lawyers. Was the banking collapse the fault of people borrowing beyon their means, or greedy bankers ? I'd suggest that there is failure on both sides - it's not possible to determine a persons moral value by the size of their wallet or their job status.

All that apart - I'm in complete agreement that the welfare state as structured here and in America is not sustainable. The real big question is how to resolve that. I'm damn glad that I'm not a politician - the unpalletable answers are going to upset people, and I'm quite sure the day will come when we all have to address that.

The borrowing problem was that people didn't think it was beyond their means - because the wbankers told them that they could afford it - leaning to all those so-called sub-prime loans. _{(Ok - I'll butt back out now)}.

Jump back in - that's a very good point. Call me a cynic, but people get rich by making other people poor. kram is going to love me for that one, but such terms are just relative.

Turn on the telly, and it seems like 80% of adverts are for ambulance chasing lawyers, or 'were you mis-sold PPI'. The other - 10% is 'sell your old gold' stuff, and 10% ridiculous 'payday loans' at umpteen thousand interest rate. Greed doesn't really observe any divisions of socio-economic status, the only difference is scale. 'Greed' is maybe a bit harsh a phrase, but it's all too easy for people to get pulled into that sort of trap. Mrs T encouraged that sort of culture, though it's very likely it would have happened whowever was in power. It's a sad fact that a rich person can go bust bigtime, yet continue to live a fairly good life - anyone poor will get canned by the legal system. That's the nasty side of Thatcherist economics. I very much doubt people of the ilk of Geoffry Archer are eating beans on toast tonight - the only reason is that he wasn't born into the harsher side of life. I don't subscribe to the politics of envy, but it seems increasingly hard for people to advance in life by effort and hard work.

Would you please stop apologizing to admin? And we don't have to go OT.

As a conservative, I believe in conservation. We have been provided with everything we need, and like kids with a basket of candy, we are consuming our resources to the point that it's making us sick.

We get those dire warning come ons over here too. Because I don't have a lot of money, I am immune from all of these worries. Humans have become the primary drivers of our own demise, and it's stupid.

The crash is going to come, and as far as I'm concerned, Janis Joplin had it right...

"Freedom's just another word, for nothing left to lose".

One of the things I did in my life that has stuck with me, is that when I was 17 years old and being raised in a fairly comfortable middle class world in Ct; during summer vacation before my senior year in high school, I bought a one way ticket to CA and lived as a homeless person for a couple of months. I slept on the beach, in parks, and anyplace else where I wouldn't get hassled by the cops or beat up by other street people.

Bottom line: Happiness is relative, and it takes very little to get there. I have to figure out a way to get this message to the masses.

I like to play safe - admin may only look at one or two posts in a thread.

OT doesn't bother me too much - I'm fairly OK with 'post and be damned'. If they don't lioke it I'm sure they will say.

That link was rather long - did you get the time to read it ?. In short, it states that the UK is bust. Were we an individual, we'd have been declared bankrupt long ago. The primary cause is given as a welfare system established long ago that is not sustainable. Although inclined to what might be considered left of centre, I can't fault much of the reasoning in that article. We kicked of a rollercoster almost 100 years ago that has no stopping it. It will stop, but that will be a helluva crash.

Happiness. Hmm....it might be a state of not having desire for material stuff ? I'm not sure, but come the day of economic collapse, I wonder who will feel most angst. I'd suspect it will be the people who put most store by material wealth, and they can be any end of the economic spectrum. That could amount to either loss of an expensive house, or not having a workable mobile phone (teenagers will shiver). Only time will really tell.

Sorry, Admin. Come the revolution you might need friends like me

Kris. The US is $17 trillion in debt, and the only answers from government is more spending.

There are predictions coming from the congressional budget office, (CBO), that, at current spending levels, our entitlement programs and funding our debt, will be 100%+ of GDP within a decade.

It's become quite apparent that our government has no intention of cutting back, so bracing ourselves is all we can do. Both Europe and America are on a trajectory towards disaster. It's difficult to talk about our supposed leaders, without cussing.

On a tinfoil hat note...I believe that the coming fall is what has our leaders so concerned about gutting the 2nd amendment. They know that fear, hunger and desperation are coming...guns will make it worse. I see guns as a necessity. Regardless of what happens, I will protect my wife and daughter with my life.

Yep, it's pretty much a similar thing over here. Any notion of debt being kept below 40% GDP long since went out the window. Comparing national statistics, about the only place worse to live looks like Japan.

Using the term 'leaders' in the context of politicians is somewhat of a farce currently. I've not seen lack of public confidence in them as low as it is right now.

As a constitutional conservative, crazy tea party type, I think that each individual has a particular strength and talent.

I would eliminate unions within government, for starters. I would crush the gang bangers. I liked Clinton's welfare to work program...which has now been eliminated. I would allow people to start businesses, and as long as they weren't polluting or doing anything detrimental, I would give them a year to get up and running...as in; no taxes, no permits, no government intervention at all; just go make or do something, sell it for money, and we will ease you into the tax system when you are up and running.

I would also attempt to restore some of the "old fashioned" thinking, like personal responsibility and the strength of the traditional nuclear family. Unlike some of my other conservative friends, I would not attempt to force morality through law; I would present it as the viable choice toward genuine happiness. Despite the press, women do not enjoy getting abortions, and people don't enjoy being addicted to drugs...they need viable options.