Reply to Whistling past the graveyard of socialism

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Whistling past the graveyard of socialism"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I just got back from the the socialist ghetto called the United Kingdom. It was horrible, I tell you. I mean, except for the abundantly free press, affordable health care, and robust capital markets, thriving arts scene and low taxes the place was so damn oppressive of the people's freedoms. [/quote]

True.

Thanks to Thatcher. And now ruled by Cameron.

Perhaps we US liberals and independents should start voting in mass for moderate pro-business Republicans?

[/quote]

Would they support universal health care?  Uhhhh, no.  And alas moderate Republicans in the US are a dying breed.  You're going to have to go with a Progressive candidate to get anything done. They're the up and coming political presence.

Then there's this, pulled from Wikipedia (but generally accepted) as consequence of Thatcherism:
Critics of Thatcherism claim that its successes were obtained only at the expense of great social costs to the British population. Industrial production fell sharply during Thatcher's government, which critics believe was the reason for increased unemployment during her early years as prime minister. There were nearly 3.3 million unemployed in Britain in 1984, compared to 1.5 million when she first came to power in 1979, though that figure had fallen to some 1.6 million by the end of 1990.  When she resigned in 1990, 28% of the children in Great Britain were considered to be below the poverty line, a number that kept rising to reach a peak of 30% in 1994 during the government of Thatcher's successor, John Major.[47]  While credited with reviving Britain's economy, Thatcher also was blamed for spurring a doubling in the poverty rate. Britain's childhood-poverty rate in 1997 was the highest in Europe.[47]  During her government Britain's Gini coefficient reflected this growing difference, going from 0.25 in 1979 to 0.34 in 1990.[48]

So any move toward "Thatcherism" would have to acknowledge and address this. Since families are the primary effective purveyor of child care (from raising to feeding to housing), it makes sense to help families avoid poverty so they can avoid child poverty.  Make sense?

[/quote]

1) Romney established and ran a much better health system than Obamacare. If more liberals and independents would have been willing to support him, perhaps he wouldn't have had to appeal to the right as a Presidential candidate?

2) Wikipedia is a great source for most things, no need to apologize

3) But, somehow, you only included what critics say. Without her, the UK most likely would have gone bankrupt in the 70s...and all those things you seemed to appreciate during your recent trip there would have vanished in thin air[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics