Did the Major Government Largely Continue Thatcherite Economic Policie

The National Governments put in place several significant policies that were successful in bringing about economic recovery in Britain. In 1932 the decision was made to lower the bank rate to 2% which was beneficial to the

Labour disunity was a huge contributing factor as to why the conservatives were able to dominate from 1951 to 1964. However, there are also other factors that assisted conservative dominance. Whether that be conservative strengths, good timing, the end of austerity or their handle on public opinion, all factors contributed to the dominant years. However, how long the conservatives actually dominated is also a question. Did they dominate for the whole period, or just part of it? The years 1962-1964 question conservative dominance and how labour reunited.

Ronald Reagan, President of the United States from 1981 through 1989, created economic policies throughout his presidency that aimed to pull the United States out of a recession. His policies, called Reaganomics, reduced government spending and reduced tax rates in order to foster economic growth. Reagan also appointed many conservative judges to the Supreme Court and federal courts in order to shift ideologies to the right. Because of this, Reagan was both underrated and overrated as a president.

Although the UK Prime Minister is elected separately through Parliamentary elections, unlike the USA President, there is a trend for Prime Ministers to claim popular authority on the basis of electoral victory. Prime Ministers have therefore become the ideological consciences of their

The President of the United States during the 1980s was Ronald Reagan. The liberals were known as “Reagan Democrats”. The most significant event that happened under President Reagan was the Berlin wall being torn down. The wall being torn down was significant because of the end of communism. Reagan wanted to improve America.

Reagan had the same economic problems that his predecessor Jimmy Carter faced as president. One of these problems was very bad inflation in the economy.

The election campaign in 1964 was a close run contest even though there was a low public approval of the current Prime Minister Alec Douglas-Home. The labour party only won a majority of 3 seats. The reason for the decline in support for the Conservative party was because of events and scandals such as the Profumo affair

Deficit spending refers to the extent at which the government expenditure exceeds revenue over the financial period. This is the opposite of budget surplus. We may apply the term to an individual, private company or government budget (Brux, 2011).

This essay will examine the impact of the Conservative party during their period in office between 1951 and 1964. The assessments by historians of these thirteen years vary widely as the Conservative rule left behind a mixed feeling about its achievements. We will therefore be discussing to what extent their period in office can be described as “thirteen years wasted”, based on their performances in the political, economic and social sectors.

In 1997, Labour were very much in touch with the electorate and focused on salient issues, whereas the conservatives focused on issues such as trade unions and devolution which were not deemed as salient. This benefitted Labour as they gained a huge win at this election and rather than personality playing a huge part, it may have been their policies.

The government needs to take more caution creating the federal budget. Edwards stated that “Consider Canada's experience. In the mid-1990s, the federal government faced a debt crisis caused by overspending, which is similar to America's current situation. But the Canadian government reversed course and slashed spending from 23 percent of GDP in 1993, to 17 percent by 2000, to just 15 percent today. The Canadian economy did not sink into a recession from the cuts as Keynesians would have expected but instead grew strongly during the 1990s and 2000s."

Both of the Labour Governments had some great successes, for instance, the 1964-1970 Labour government won the 1966 election with a majority of 100 seats. The Labour government of 1974-1979 did not win the election with a majority but managed to reduce inflation in 1978 from 15% to 8% which was a very large success as inflation had been a problem for a long time. Just from looking at the two governments you assume that the 1964-1970 labour government was more successful than the 1974-1979 labour government because they were in power for longer, and they won with a much larger majority of seats in the elections.

Within seven years the wealthy had more money, but could also afford to give better pensions and pay raises. He reduced income tax from the top bracket 70% down to 28% spurring growth from the top on down and vice versa. This gave some people who lived in poverty a view that Reagan was indifferent to their struggles. This may have seemed the case but growth did happen, and hopefully those critics found jobs; however, driving to those jobs still pinched the pocket book a bit due to the energy crisis at that time.

Whether or not there truly was a ‘post war consensus’ in British politics from 1951 to 1964 is a highly debatable topic of which historians can often appear to be in two minds about; on one hand, Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson infamously described the period as ‘Thirteen years wasted’, whereas historian Robert Blake (a supporter of the Conservatives’, regards it as a ‘Golden age of growth’. The likes of Kevin Jeffrey’s even argue that consensus had even started before the war. Overall, the central issue was the idea of a mixed economy.

After various changes to the economic tax and interest rate, CPHP have conducted and compiled research into current public spending. The results show that there has been a dramatic reduction in the level of public spending in the UK.