New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, scourge of monetary hawks and austerity-believers alike, has entered the tense debate on Margaret Thatcher's legacy and already drawn the ire of HSBC's chief economist.
In his latest "Conscience of a Liberal" blog post, Krugman admitted Thatcher turned the economy around, but argued that any benefits that emerged from her transformations occurred long after her period in office.
"If anyone tells you that Thatcher saved the British economy," Krugman wrote, "you should ask why the results of that salvation took so very long to materialize."
Krugman also made a snide attack on the rise of London's financial sector and the "rise of fancy finance," something brought on by Thatcher's 1980s deregulation.
Krugman's view was instantly challenged by HSBC's chief economist Stephen King, who tweeted, "Totally bizarre blog by @NYTimeskrugman on Thatcherism....no mention whatsoever of inflation."
(Read More: Margaret Thatcher's Greatest Moments)
King also took on Jonathan Portes, the director of the U.K.'s National Institute of Economic and Social Research, for only focusing on the rise of out-of-work benefit claimants during Thatcher's 11 years in power.
According to King, Thatcher's overriding impact on the U.K. economy was to bring down inflation, which he said was the major macro-economic problem of the late 1970s.
It isn't the first time that Krugman has waded into controversy across the Atlantic. He's been previously criticized for his opinions the Austrian and Latvian economies.
While Thatcher's death has led to an outpouring of sympathy from all sides of the international political spectrum, a glance at Britain's front pages shows the scale of divisiveness over Thatcher's legacy at home.
Headlines have varied from: "The woman who saved Britain" to "The woman who tore Britain apart."
Krugman does, however, give Thatcher some credit which will please her supporters.
"There is no question that Britain did turn around," Krugman wrote. "In the 1970s it was a country with huge economic problems; today, despite the failure of austerity policies, it's in a much stronger position."
Even opponents of Thatcher admit some change was needed. Tony Travers of the London School of Economics told CNBC that, "if you talk privately to many Labour politicians, they will admit Thatcher changed the economy in ways that although they didn't do it, in the end, they accept would have had to have happened."