I was emailed this by someone who thought Margaret Thatcher was different to some of the negative attitudes bumping around -
He (Russell Brandt - Comedian) is claiming she is like the current lot of corporation-helping elitists? Not so. For instance, she encouraged the population to buy shares in the newly privatised companies like British Telecom, and overall about 20% of the UK population did so. She assisted two million people to buy their own homes ('right to buy' of State-owned council homes etc.). She sponsored assisted university places, and encouraged aspiration. Objectively, the latter is shown to be successful by the number of new small businesses which started during her time in office, which per annum was greatly increased. The wealth thereby generated can be quantified by per capita GDP growth, which was much improved and better than international competitors for a number of years. Her background was as a qualified chemist and subsequently tax lawyer, quite a contrast to David Cameron (current PM) who 'worked in PR' for Carlton Communications. For instance, her science background helped when she changed the law to ban CFCs.
She did regressive things too (e.g. Poll Tax), but in no way was she like David Cameron and the elitists currently in charge, who are corporate stooges frankly. Personally, I don't think she would have bailed out the banks; a classic example of how corporations have increased their power since 1979. She clearly didn't believe that state-owned big business was too big to fail, because she let them fail and/or sold them off, including the British car, coal mining, oil and telecoms industries. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine she might have added failing banks to this list!
"Facts, Russell, facts".
I'd love to see some well-researched objective commentary by economists etc in the media, rather than folks like this (literal) comedian, but there you go.
