Thursday, 6 April 2006 - 3:56 PM BST

Thatcher's short sharp shock left many communities in Northern England fractured to this day, where drug dealing is the only "career" or drug taking, and its associated petty crime to fund the habit, the only alternative.

Maybe France and Germany saw the UK and decided to take things more cautiously. The UK has its ghettoes too but outside of these ghettoes Germany and France have something the UK does not have. Community.

Thursday, 6 April 2006 - 4:38 PM BST

You can't use N. Ireland as an example, people weren't opening businesses there in the 70s and 80s because of the political situation, so they missed out on the economic regenration that the rest of the country enjoyed.

Thursday, 6 April 2006 - 5:59 PM BST

"The UK has its ghettoes too but outside of these ghettoes Germany and France have something the UK does not have. Community."

What is the evidence for this comment? It's just empty bluster.

Thursday, 6 April 2006 - 7:12 PM BST

You shouldn't rejoice too much in the recent French riots, led by groups of disenfranchised youths. Maybe you've forgotten that five young Brits brought death and destruction to the capital last year, and that two weeks later another group of British youths tried to do exactly the same thing. Ten days of riots in France was pretty mild in comparison.

As for France and Germany, I am with you to some degree about their apathy and self-interest, but why is the quality of life still so good in France? Why are their schools so excellent? Why do they still have a massive auto industry: Citroen, Renault and Peugeot compared to our er...nothing? Why is the 'mini' now a German car? Why does France have higher broadband internet penetration than the UK? Why would I only buy a German power shower? Why do German companies now own so many of the old British merchant banks? Why do the French still turn out great movies every year? Why do German people speak such good English? Why is the French high speed train system so effective? Why are German white goods - bosch, miele, smeg etc - so clearly superior to anything produced in the UK? Why is the only English team left in the champions league captained, managed and manned by French talent?

People have been saying for years that the French and German systems are geared to failure. My opinion is that you'd be a fool to write them off.

Thursday, 6 April 2006 - 10:55 PM BST

Ever lived in France and Germany? Ever communicated with French and German people? I have on both counts. Much more pleasant than the UK, on both counts. Maybe you have been beaten down so much by the wrecking of the UK that you would never know any better.

Thanks to Conrad below for pointing out the nonsense of David's post. Hardly surprising as David only knows the interiors of dark rooms by night and is asleep by day.

Thursday, 6 April 2006 - 11:22 PM BST

I went out with a German girl for 10 years so in answer to your question yes. And, by the way, she much preferred living in the UK to living in Germany. I guess the grass is always greener.

Friday, 7 April 2006 - 12:07 AM BST

Breaking news...

BAE is to sell its 20% share of Airbus to EADS the remaining Franco-German owned company in Airbus.

So much for the superiority of the UK economy over the failing Franco-German economies.

EADS is the new European top dog in commercial and military aeronautics. Not any UK company.

You need to get a bit more perspective in your life David. You are far too narrow minded. The world does not solely consist of Iraqi "democracy" and the UK economy. Both of which are houses of cards and won't take much to topple.

Friday, 7 April 2006 - 11:02 AM BST

If you're going to use the terrorist attacks on London as 'proof' that the UK hasn't integrated better than France, you ought at least to be aware that France has had some near misses. I suggest that you read about the foiled plot to bomb the Strasbourg Christmas market in December 2000, which would have killed dozens of shoppers. And the attempt by Algerian terrorists to hijack a plane and fly it into the Eiffel tower. Again this was foiled at the last minute. One reason why the French don't take the 'war on terror' as seriously as the Americans is that they have been lucky to have been spared these atrocities.

I said that France had had two periods of rioting. The first was by the 'disenfranchised' but I don't think that this word applies to people who have places in the Sorbonne! I don't have time to elaborate on French education, but the picture of excellence that you paint isn't realistic. The latest Economist magazine goes into depth about the two-tier nature of it.

But even if I grant you that France and Germany have better education systems, it's irrelevant to my point about Thatcherism. I listed several things that these countries have done, which the anti-Thatcher crowd would have supported in the 80s. Disaster has struck them DESPITE having better education. Does this not prove my point?

DY

ps - I am spending the weekend at a friend's house in Guernsey, so I don't have time to argue this in great detail. Have a great weekend folks.

Friday, 7 April 2006 - 12:29 PM BST

Despite its problems, Germany still has the largest economy in Europe. Bearing in mind that they had to absorb 18 million people, that’s pretty impressive. Also, unemployment in the country is now falling while exports continue to grow. Oh yeah, and their public services, after decades of investment, are vastly superior to anything you’ll find in the UK.

You could also argue that one of the reasons why unemployment has been so high in Germany is due to a huge drop in investment in the country – this despite growing profits. This suggests that much of the money that used to be invested in Germany is now invested abroad (mainly in the 90’s in the US when the stocks were soaring and there was easy money to be made abroad) as those with money sought to get ever richer. Basically, they opted for greed, a philosophy Thatcher would no doubt recognize.

I lived in Liverpool in the early to mid 1980s, so I saw up close the suffering Thatcherism brought to the city. I wouldn’t wish it on any community. I certainly wouldn’t look back 20 years later and say that it was worth a price worth paying. It wasn’t. But, if you weren’t there you wouldn’t know what I’m talking about.

One of the problems with economists is that they see everything in economic terms. How do you quantify self-respect in economic terms? Or depression? Or suicide?

Even if I were to accept that the changing global economy meant that many traditional labour-intensive industries were no longer viable in the UK, I’d still reject her philosophy. The contempt she and her cabinet (“get on your bike”) had for those who bore the brunt of her failing policies (and let’s not forget the two recessions she presided over in the space of a decade) rendered them unfit for public office.

Oh yeah, and for someone who espoused the free market, why was Thatcher touring eastern Europe (post Berlin Wall falling) telling capitalists that the region was ideal for exploitation? The state utilities, she argued, offered perfect opportunities for private companies to create their own monopolies. So much for the benefits for the consumer brought about by a competitive free market.

Thatcherism was about the rich getting richer. Nothing else. It worked a treat.

Friday, 7 April 2006 - 4:12 PM BST

"Maybe you've forgotten that five young Brits brought death and destruction to the capital last year, and that two weeks later another group of British youths tried to do exactly the same thing."

Weren't this second group of "British" youths actually refugees from E.Africa who thought it would be a good idea to repay the UK's hospitality by killing its innocent civilians?

Saturday, 8 April 2006 - 3:01 PM BST

Jamie,

where would you rather live:

a) The Liverpool (or Brixton) of the 1980s

or

b) The suburbs of Paris and Marseilles where last year's violence erupted, in the present day?

DY

Monday, 10 April 2006 - 12:21 PM BST

David, I'd pick Liverpool if only because Everton were the best team in the country for a brief period. ;-)

I'm not sure what point you're making here though. I know France has got its problems, but I wouldn't write it off just yet. Besides, I've always thought there was something endearing about the cheese eating surrender monkeys trying to protect the French way of life from US cultural imperialsim. Probably doomed to failure, but nice that they think they've got something worth preserving.

Monday, 10 April 2006 - 7:59 PM BST

what absolute nonsense.
Thatcher and Tebbit and Parkinson etc were from lower middle class stock.
They were instumental in increasing the wealth and oportunities for the ambitious working and lower middle classes. They tried to introduce popular capitalism for all. That meant a share owning and property owning democracy,the right to buy your house,mortgages for the young,freedoms in the financial markets...before Maggie there was still restrictions on holiday money taken abroad!
It was at times brutal economically..i'm afraid in capitalist economies, recessions are absolutely inevitable...Britain was due enormous pain to pay for the years of ineffeciency and bloated public sector expenditure.People seem to forget how terrible Britain was in the 1970's.We were 'the sick man of europe'.We were a laughing stock.Rampent inflation, Tax rates of over 90% for the top end,how ridiculous ,how stupid. Strikes by public sectors every month.Paralysed public transport,the 3 day week..power cuts...rubbish piling up in the streets. Another bizzare arguement is the nostalgia for the old industries that Thatcher truncated.The miners for example...what was so marvellous about this lifestyle?Digging for coal in dangerous and dark holes deeper and deeper underground(at huge expence). What a job..how I wish my children could follow such a career.

As for France,this country is a basket case.The whole of Europe is subsidizing the french way of life.Take away the CAP and France would enter a recession of 1930's proportions.And if France is so wonderful, how come so many thousands of young french work in London and the south,often in less than generous remunerations ? And why did Viera say...I like the fact that in England you can see a black face reading the tv news..you would never see that in France. Its no surprise that thousands of immigrants gather at French ports desperate to sneak into Britain...they certainly don't want to stay in France.

Wednesday, 12 April 2006 - 8:14 PM BST

No.

And it's rather shocking that you think they were. It is at the core of the whole sorry tale that the perpetrators were born and educated in the UK.

Thursday, 13 April 2006 - 12:28 AM BST

Conrad,

the anonymous writer was talking about the 'second' attack on the London transport system, which fortunately did no harm as the explosives failed to go off.

Those arrested for it include Osman Hussain who was born in Ethiopa. Another was Yasin Hussan Omar who was born in Somalia and came to Britain to flee the civil war there. Also ">Muktar Said Ibrahim, born in Eritrea.

Sadly you're right about them getting an education here.

DY