BarkellWH -> RE: The Trump Nightmare is Over! (Nov. 9 2020 2:20:16)
|
quote:
The British soon tired of their experiment with socialism, and elected a Conservative Parliament in 1979. This made Margaret Thatcher Prime Minister. Her term lasted until 1990. In my opinion, Margaret Thatcher’s policies were, by and large, good for Britain. Prior to Thatcher’s election, Britain had descended to the level of a Third World country. It had a GDP lower than Italy’s at the time. Inflation was running at over 20 percent. The bloated public sector (which was most of the economy; a private sector hardly existed!) was feather-bedded with far too many employees who were inefficient, creating a drag on the economy, like barnacles on the hull of a ship. Productivity was low. The British Miners’ Union held Britain in a stranglehold, and the British public was held hostage through Union demands and strikes. As a result, in the mid and late 1970s, Britain for a while went to a three-day work-week, there were power outages and brownouts, erratic heating, and garbage littered the streets. Meanwhile, the leader of the Miners’ Union, Arthur (“Red Arthur”) Scargill would take vacations on the Black Sea coast of Bulgaria and visit his friend, Bulgarian Communist leader Todor Zhivkov. (I was assigned to the American Embassy in Sofia, Bulgaria at the time and noted his presence.) When Thatcher assumed the position of Prime Minister, she privatized much of the inefficient and unproductive state sector and, as a result, it became more efficient and productive. GDP went up. She reined in the Miners’ Union that had been the source of so many of the problems facing the British, from forcing the three-day work-week to the power outages and lack of heating. Using monetary policy, Thatcher raised interest rates and reined in galloping inflation. And, of course, when Argentina invaded the British territory of the Falkland Islands, she sent the British fleet and forces to repel the invading Argentine forces, defeating them and reclaiming the Falklands. As a result of Thatcher’s policies, Britain became competitive again and assumed its place as a vibrant, respectable, medium-sized political and economic player on the world stage. Regarding Socialism, "Socialism" has come to mean anything it's advocates want it to mean. But just because many Americans lack precision in language and thought doesn't mean there is not a valid definition of Socialism. Socialism still means the public (i.e., government) ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. The Soviet Union and its Eastern European Satellites were all Socialist economies, although the Communist Party ruled. On the other hand, Sweden and the Scandinavian countries, often called "Socialist" by those using sloppy, imprecise language and thinking, are not Socialist. Their economies are 80 to 90 percent in private hands and are market-based. They are Capitalist, although they have a strong welfare state that exists alongside a Capitalist economy. Capitalism and a welfare safety net are not mutually exclusive. You note that The Scandinavian countries are far more unified socially than the USA ever has been. There is a simple explanation for that, as the Scandinavian countries are far more homogeneous than the US has been. That has changed somewhat over the past several years. As the Scandinavian countries have accepted more refugees and elements from non-Western cultures, there have been more instances of conflict between the Scandinavian population and the newcomers who in many cases have not adapted well to Scandinavian social and cultural mores. Bill
|
|
|
|