Thatcher transformed the British economy and took on its welfare state and powerful unions. Her government cut, closed or privatized state-owned industries, notably struggling steel plants and coal mines, and radically cut taxes and public spending — strong medicine, she conceded, but precisely what was needed to restart a stagnant nation.
“The problem with socialism,” she once said, “is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
In case you were not around, the coal miners and others in England wanted to receive higher wages than their fellow countrymen. That is, they wanted everyone to pay exorbitant prices for coal, via government subsidies as they were producing coal at a loss relative to world market prices, so that they could live a better life than their fellow countrymen could all at the expense of others. She put a stop to that and they hated it her for it and still do. Today they celebrate. They don't even realize how selfish they are because they are that deluded by the people who get them to believe that they are deserving of everything they demand no matter who ends up paying for it as if the money just magically appeared and no one else had to give it up in order for them to have it. This is why it is so easy for politicians to buy votes. First you get people to believe they deserve something and then you promise to get it for them. But is it right?
I guess I am ignorant of history in this regard because other than the Falklands I'm unaware of any other significant impact she had on other countries since all their other contentious colonies were already divested before she came to office. I am unaware that any of their other territories like Bermuda, Gibraltar and the like that are actively seeking independence from England. My guess is they are better off as they are and they know it and choose to keep the status quo.
From what I understand even the inhabitants of the Falklands wanted to remain a British territory. It was the Argentineans who wanted to rule over them, not the people on the Falklands. I guess the Argentineans might claim that their people were replaced by outsiders but this is a matter of history. The fact is that there is no organized insurrection present on the islands to over throw the English occupants like the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza strip want from Israel. It seems that everyone there is content with the current state of the affairs which probably begrudges the Argentineans but it is true none the less. After all, if you had a choice as to who would run your government would you choose Argentina or England? Need I even ask?
But I’m guessing that the Argentineans would feel better if they could make slaves of the current inhabitants of the Falklands even if the people would rather remain under English governorship. I suspect that they see it as land to be ruled over by them, and what the current inhabitants want is of no consequence to them.
The Argentineans will get over it eventually. After all, they are Argentina and as such will never have the level of sophistication to challenge anyone like England and come out the winner. That would be like sending a janitor to Wall Street and expecting him to be able to convince an investment bank into performing a hostile takeover of a major company of his choosing. He would never make it past the receptionist.
Lets face it Obama is transforming the economy also. In another generation enterprising people that have drive and capability to create business will be going to other countries where they have a better chance for success. Poland anyone ?