No I mean it's not an objective of evolved democracies... only of Marxism.

km

Now now, equality is also traditionally the objective of the Nordic model, despite the rest of the world tending to see us as snobbish besserwissers, because we like to brag about the model.

de·moc·ra·cy (d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
4. Majority rule.
5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

So when they "evolve", #5 is discarded?

No the IFS isn't concerned with social equality but with wages, earnings and incomes. Social equality is largely what Thatcher achieved... which is why everyone kept voting her back into power.

km

LOL.. we've tried that line over herewith the Bush/Obama scenario.. doesn't float here. Good luck on your side of the pond.

Addressing the O.P.:

LO' on MT
Margaret Thatcher’s legacy of Socialism

I'm ok with that version.
Whichever lens you choose to view MT through.. she was iconic. I am no particular fan of MT .. or even Reagans politics, (although I liked him as a man).

Well that statement is not really true . The government used to own many services like the bus service for example - she privatized them all. She was no more a socialist than Reagan was. Plus she had the foresight to keep Britain out of the ERUO , citing that smaller countries will fail under that system which we are seeing today with Greece , Portugal , Spain and a few others.

Mind you that her enemies, if she was in the US they would be;
Far right Conservative Republicans - Tea Party - Fox News branded media.

I heard these comments on the morning radio news.

True, can't call her socialist, although she did add to government spending, despite cutting from some areas, like higher education and housing.

To be honest, I don't think you can really blame the Euro itself for the problems today in Greece, Portugal, Spain, et al. even though some of their problems are most likely partially due to free flow of capital and goods - and all the eurosceptic populist movements (European version of the Tea Party) obviously like to blame it all on the euro and the European Union, aside from immigration, of course.

Actually, part of those countries debt is in reality money owed to German and French banks - as well as to other countries' banks, but to a smaller extent. If these debts were to be nulled immediately, they would next fall on to those banks and then on the taxpayers - again, as they already have fallen to every European Union taxpayer. The eurozone countries obviously pay more, but even those countries not in the eurozone pay a smaller share through their contribution to the EU budget. And, at the bottom of this is also the US subprime crisis when you dig deep enough.

The problems in different European countries derive from very different circumstances. In Spain, for instance, the economic crisis is almost a duplicate of the American crisis back in 2008--same banking shenanigans with the same result. The same kind of thing happened in Cyprus. So in both places the problems are a direct result of early 21st century pseudo-capitalism. In Greece the problem has a different source, a combination of really over-generous benefits to Greek citizens and an under-willingness on the part of those same citizens to pay their taxes. The benefits side of things is "socialistic," but it's not just socialism that's responsible for the problem.

From this side of the pond, it seems that the most socialistic of European nations--the Scandinavians--are doing pretty well.

edit: I put "socialism" in quotation marks because I don't really know that Greece or any other place in Europe is, strictly speaking, socialistic. If there is public ownership of the means of production, then yes--socialist; otherwise, I don't know what to call it.