Category Archives: Politics

Margaret Thatcher on the European Community Relations 1987 – 1990

 On the European Community Relations 1987 – 1990
Thatcher was beginning to see the harmful features of the European community in her second term. Thatcher feared the re-emergence of the Franco-German axis, inclinations towards bureaucratic solutions, and the EU’s ambition for power, a protectionist agenda and covert federalism. The German reunification made the Franco-German axis more lopsided: German dominance was certain. State interventionism in the Christian Democratic government disturbed Thatcher. She feared the corporatism of the EU. Thatcher was blamed for Brussels failures.

Jacque Chirac Chatting with SarkozyM. Chirac called Thatcher a ‘bitch’. Chirac had made the Gaullists a right-of-centre party committed to free enterprise. Chirac and Mitterrand were torn in France. Neither wanted to risk the agricultural vote as they vyied for the Presidency of France. The French election campaign put the rivalry in full swing. Thatcher noted that neither could be seen in the same room together. Mitterrand won the election and the disputes were over (1988); the EU could continue to function somewhat. They agreed on a 1.3% GNP for Community resources. Thatcher wanted effective and legally binding controls on expenditure, measures to reduce agricultural surpluses in which automatic price cuts were the principle weapon and make sure that Britain’s rebate, which had saved Britain 3 billion pounds in the past three years would be secure.


Thatcher was extremely sceptical about giving Brussels control over the British currency. The EMU (economic and monetary union), Central Bank and other centralizing tendencies in the EU were unsavoury to Thatcher. Then Thatcher gave her Bruges Speech. Thatcher’s speech clearly slowed the process of integration. She felt that Jacque Delor stopped being a functionary (bureaucrat) and became a political spokesman for federalism.

JacqueDelorsThe blurring of these roles is common on the continent. Scepticism was high in Thatcher mind. She had to ask if the British democracy, parliamentary sovereignty, common law, our traditional sense of fairness, our ability to run our own affairs in our own way might be subordinated to the demands of a remote European bureaucracy, resting on very different traditions? Thatcher despised the European ideal. Thatcher found it ironic that despite the suffering of the Eastern European countries, West Germany etc insisted on centralization. Thatcher rejected the idea of a “European super-state exercising a new dominance for Brussels. Willing and active cooperation between independent sovereign states is the best way to build a successful European community. Thatcher warned of the EU replacing NATO. Thatcher believed in a family of nations not one homogenising nation. Thatcher highlights the negatives of EU members such as Germany, France and Greece (with its financial scandal).

Thatcher "No,No,No"Thatcher claimed the French Revolution was not as revolutionary at the 1688 Revolution of England. Thatcher was set to attend the 200-year anniversary of the violent, horrible revolution, which led to Napoleonic rule and further suffering in Europe. Thatcher genuinely claimed that the French Revolution was nothing to celebrate really. Human rights were not developed by the French, she told a French newspaper. She also handed Mitterrand a copy of the A Tale of Two Cities because it explained her point most clearly.

French revolutionThatcher explains the Franco-German axis as a rising serpent destined to destroy England. Thatcher emphasizes that political union is now envisaged alongside monetary union. Behind political union lies with the Franco-German axis. They envisage a stronger European Council with more majority voting: but they did not want to see the powers of the Commission or the European Parliament increased. The French were federalist on grounds of tactics rather than conviction. The Germans wanted political union for different reasons and by different means. For the Germans, the price of quick reunification with East Germany on their own terms and with all the benefits which would come through Community membership (Germany would not behave like Hitler’s or Bismarck’s Old Germany). Germans were federalists by conviction while the French were senior partners: Germany was dominant. Thatcher is opposed to political union of either kind. Political union in a European Parliament must not mean the reduction of the role of NATO. Thatcher rejected Delors view of a federal Europe in which the European Parliament would be the Community’s House of Representatives, the Commission its Executive, and the Council of Ministers its Senate. “No, no, no,’ said Thatcher in the House of Commons.

Margaret Thatcher on the Community Charge & the EU

On the Community Charge
As part of the 1987 manifest, Thatcher implemented a tremendous unpopular tax on the people of Britain. It was known as the poll tax. It provided a single flat rate of tax on every working adult set by the local authority. It was abolished a few years later. This marked a turning point in Thatcher’s popularity and subsequent attacks from within her party.

On European Union Relations: 1983-1987

Thatcher believed that a free-market Europe was predominant even if there were signs of hidden protectionism. Thatcher wanted her country’s budget contribution sorted out quickly. There were underlying forced of federalism and bureaucracy gaining with the coalition of Socialist and Christian Democrat government in France, Spain, Italy and Germany. Britain wanted to negotiate the budget contribution per country GDP 1.3% but there were competing opinions on this matter. Thatcher believes that Franco-German deals were always being made behind Thatcher’s back. The EU is a complicated system. Each country tries to exempt its dairy or agricultural industries from free trade…Self-interest gets the better of all the members involved. There was a coordinated attack on Thatcher to ransom her 1983 budgetary rebate by offering a weaker deal with Britain on annual permanent budgetary arrangements. The EU then blocked payment of the 1983 refund when Britain refused a deal on budgetary contributions. A successful summit was needed by Kohl; the domestic situation in France and Germany influenced their efforts in the EU. Britain was not being treated fairly by France or Germany. Germany wanted special subsidies for farmers.

The enlargement of the community strengthens its value. Security for Thatcher while in Ireland was intense. The idea of bringing in Spain and Portugal would strengthen the union substantially. The costs would be high. Greece called for financial assistance and vetoed the enlargement until it received its fair dues. This was absolute nonsense. The Greeks had held the EU hostage while they had entered under similar circumstances before. The Greek government’s poor handling of their finances irritated Thatcher. Greece had to be paid in order to allow entrance. The Greek government got their bonanza. It wasn’t fair but it happened anyway.

The Falklands War highlighted the importance of EU cooperation as a military entity. Britain wanted to ride the EU tariffs. A single-market was salient in the views of Thatcher as well as the military aspect. Mitterrand and Kohl had little income compared to Schmidt and Giscard d’Estaing. Kohl was willing to subordinate German interest for French guidance since the assuaged the other smaller neighbours. Thatcher had the subtle-tariffs that existed between EU members. Open markets were her goal. Thatcher wanted national sovereignty on identity cards and policing. M Delors the president of the European Commission attacked Britain for reducing the financial leavers of the community. Thatcher doesn’t believe in Brussels federalism of social and economic policy for other countries. She was open market nothing else really. Thatcher is highly sceptical of the Franco-German bloc during this period.

USA Inc Criticism

  • I like the infographics.
  • Stating that you are “non-partisan” is hard to believe. She really means that she will take a centrist or independent position as opposed to the extreme partisanship that characterizes US politics? Everyone has a set of experiences that informs their understanding.
  • Mary Meeker, a Venture Capitalist, is concerned about a new business plan for the USA, so she is extrapolating business and family finance into government. This is a common analogy to simplify a complicated entity like the US Federal Government.
  • I don’t think balanced-budgets is a silver bullet solution to America’s whoas. Debt is about loaning out for investment, spending forward. What has changed is that the US is less confident about its future. Like the UK in the 1950s onward, there is this sense of a managed decline.
  • There are more fundamental problems with the US that aren’t related to the size of the US debt, like it’s trade in balance with China, it’s penchant to assist Morgan Stanley and other investment banks to behave without moral hazard, it’s service-based bubble economy, it’s mediocre manufacturing, it’s expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it’s aging population that are living longer and producing less value. Get them back to work?
  • If the debt to GDP ratio was such a problem then why didn’t the US have a financial crisis in the mid 1990s when debt to GDP was already bad enough? Japan has a huge debt to GDP and it’s been cruising along for a decade plus since it’s financial crisis. The debt is not the core fiscal problem in the US.
  • Spending beyond ones means as individuals or as companies is very bad, but a country is not analogous because that simply gets passed forward.

Problem: Raising Taxes Hurts Mary Meeker therefore She Opposes Any Tax Hikes.

  • If government were a business then it should surely increase revenue in the short-term by either cutting costs or raising prices. An obvious area for creating short-term revenue is through price discrimination against affluent customers.  These high tax payers have limited substitution possibilities i.e. they are unlikely to leave the US so increasing prices is wise for USA Inc. Of course, anyone in business knows that it is easier to cut costs (in the funnel) then increase prices (at the top of the funnel).
  • Why doesn’t she advocate tax hikes? Of course, higher taxes for the highest income earners harms her interest group and she can argue that higher taxes “lead to slower growth, less consumer spending” with less room to innovate and invest. Many democrats do not believe this is actually true. Most universities are filled with academics who say that “trickle down does not work.”
  • Increasing taxes will increase the power and size of the USA Inc to actually address the debt issue she is worried about. That solution doesn’t work for her because she wants to reduce the size of government, and restrict its influence. She never mentions the financial sector’s economic crisis but focuses a lot on government spending being too high for long-term obligations to Medicare and Medicaid and other “Entitlements.”
  • For Meeker, entitlements = waste. The very term Entitlement is a conservative spin on social spending. It implies that those who receive entitlements are literally entitled to being given money while being lazy. While some if not most are seniors, disabled or soliders.
  • Government is not analogous to a business. It’s an oversimplification to meet a value-laden hypothesis about what a prosperous country requires. Debt is an important part of investing in the USA’s future growth.

Conclusion: Meeker’s Hypothesis was probably exactly what her conclusions were. All the data was used to clarify what she wanted to believe in the first place. Notice that her recommendations do not effect her or her friends in any substantial way.

  • Babyboomers, Medicare, and Medicaid are the problem.
  • “The War in Iraq wasn’t even that big of deal compared to percentage of GDP”….except for the fact that it didn’t need to occur at all, and many of the costs are not measured by her metrics!
  • There has been a lot of evidence that the babyboomer retirement is not going to happen the way they would like. And we can’t afford to take care of the babyboomers, that’s agreed. But USA Inc cannot pull a GM restructuring.
  • Debt isn’t such a big deal. This is only a problem now that the economy is stagnant and the jobs of the future have actually been too efficient and have cut out people from making money.
  • Meekers is not willing to harm anyone that she values: 1) Private healthcare, 2) billionaires taxation, 3) financial institutions
  • Meekers is willing to harm anyone that is not of value to her: 1) Spending cuts on “Entitlements”, 2) Cuts to social programs for the least well off, 3) Extending retirement age since she loves her work and will likely die working at her VC fund.
  • It’s all very complicated, laden with value judgements. I think the US needs ambitious new goals!

Margaret Thatcher on Reforms, Family & Environment

On Reforms
Thatcher wanted to see improvements in the quality of education. Grammar and spelling were major problems for the British student. She believed a strong national curriculum would help. She also wanted to reward teachers who were graded positively and punish poorly graded teachers. Thatcher believed in measurement targets and empirical data as a valuable tool for determining success in education. Education was by no means completely reformed. The success was moderate: Thatcher wanted continued improvement. Housing was adjusted. The NHS spending increased 40% in less than a decade in office. Thatcher rejected pressure to put more money into the healthcare system. Thatcher laments the Scottish question of devolution. The Scottish Tories were very weak during her tenure. The 1987 election saw southern England vote Tory but Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland split the vote.

Margaret Thatcher ReformOn Family, Arts, The Environment, Privatization
Thatcher believes the BBC produces sub par material most of the time. She believes that the arts should be promoted. But whenever the state is too involved with a project it inevitably withers away, according to Thatcher. Crime is caused by a lack of family not by poverty as socialists believe. Socialists are wrong. Family needs to be protected at all costs. The Family was disintegrating in British life during the 1980s. Father’s who abandoned their children lead to a lower standard of living. Such abandonment has horrible ramifications. Thatcher believed that climate change was an emerging concern in society. She spoke about it in a speech. She was unsure of the cause but saw that scientific facts were mounting against polluters, and was convinced that future Prime Ministers would be called on for a global effort to combat environmental damage. Thatcher strongly believed in privatization and tax cuts as a solution to Britain’s ills.