I was sat in a lecture (studying Sport and Exercise Science....not a fan of academia :wink: ) in my 2nd year of uni, a nutrition lecture, when the lecturer told a story about how he was advising triathletes on pre-race nutrition etc., when one of the athletes interrupted and asked whether the lecturer had ever competed in a triathlon. He hadn't.
Ultimately, my lecturer told us how this one question made him realise that he couldn't advise or give his opinion on a topic based purely on the theory and that he had to "practice that what he preached", later that year he competed in an iron man.
Whilst this is off topic I think it adds to the "you're younger than 35 how can you comment on MT" argument. Ste wrote a very eloquent post earlier and clearly understands the issues involved with MT's time as PM, but it doesn't change the fact that he wasn't alive during the winter of discontent, he did not experience life in Britain leading up to 1979, nor did he experience life during the 80's. Understanding the theory and discussing the "scars" left from that time clearly puts him well above the ill-informed, ignorant and propaganda fueled opinions of many vagrant "youths", but his opinion, in my opinion, can only ever reside in the shadows of the opinions of those that lived through that period of Britain's history.
I'm 25, and whilst I have my opinion on MT, I have no first hand experience (I can't remember how I perceived her policies during my first 3 years of life) of the effects created by MT's policies. I do not find it patronising to suggest that my opinion is worth less than somebody who actually experienced MT's time in office, I wholeheartedly agree that being of such a young age it is impossible for me to truly appreciate and empathise with the issues at large, I may be able to understand the theory behind the issues and I may even be well placed to discuss the effects of MT's policies 20+ after they were implemented, but for the purpose of this thread, my opinion, in my opinion, is vastly superfluous.