Having the unemployment that we did was just a result of having decades of unsustainable employment that we had beforehand (and hence the inflation). By the late 70s the system wasn't sustainable and was inevitably going to crash. Thatcher was just the one who tore it down and was the only person around who had the guts to do it.
Note that in the long run, unemployment has decreased dramatically and sustainably. With manageable inflation, too. Economists such as ********** have attributed this directly to the reforms of the 80s:
http://personal.lse.ac.uk/********/papers/UK_U nemployment.pdf
Who's half baked management reforms were they?
Please read my post.
I've said time and again that I'd be with you in condemning Thatcher's health reforms. And several other aspects of her record. What I was trying to do was show that you're actually wrong on the slashing of spending.
our statistics show that succinctly, they were throughout her period in office financially inert.
They also disprove accusations made by others (I can't remember if you were among them or not and can't be bothered to check) that the poor were actively being screwed (excluding the 3m. unemployed who vanished in the long run and do not represent all of the poor). I think it's a little weak to hold such hatred for someone because they 'didn't benefit' the poor. And to ignore the fact that in the long run things improved sustainably and people weren't being screwed over by unions.