People today have it far easier

Neil5234Neil5234 Posts: 1,515
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Than people in the 50s.
I do not know anyone who does not have a TV, washing machine, food in their belly, the average person today has a far far easies life than people in the 50s, people today are far fatter and unfit compared to people in the 50s which proves a lot, no decent treatment social care in the 50s, 90% could not afford a car! kids went to school without shoes in the 50s which would be daily mail front page today.......people had a hard hard life in the 50s, they deserve their pensions as they built this country.
«13

Comments

  • PrimalIcePrimalIce Posts: 2,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think so. All I see if people moaning yet people can afford to eat far better than 50-60 years ago. Even people classed as "in poverty" life a life style exceeding that of the average working class family.

    The only exception I think is property costs.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 929
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Yeh people had a hard life but people still have a hard life now. I think a lot of it is what you are aware of. It always baffles me when you get people who say "ahhh people in Africa would be grateful for your life" etc; but to be honest they are not aware of a better life.

    People in Africa etc; aren't aware of lavish lifestyles or nice things which can be had etc; but in the West we are brought up around the celebrity culture which makes us thing we should try and strive to live the same lifestyle as celebrities. It's the media's fault in some way to blame.

    Again, coming back to your original comment about the 50's. People back then would have found entertainment with marbles in the street etc; where as now that wouldn't keep a child occupied for any longer than 10 minutes. There is nothing wrong, but it's just that today thre is so much more on offer due to technology.
  • James FrederickJames Frederick Posts: 53,184
    Forum Member
    Of course but then again people in the 50's had it easier than people from 1900.

    People in 2070+ will have it easier than people do now
  • TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    PrimalIce wrote: »
    I think so. All I see if people moaning yet people can afford to eat far better than 50-60 years ago. Even people classed as "in poverty" life a life style exceeding that of the average working class family.

    The only exception I think is property costs.

    Poverty is relative. Half a million people using foodbanks to feed their families, I would call that poverty. Also shameful that it is happening in this day and age.
  • molliepopsmolliepops Posts: 26,828
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It depends how you mean easier, I think back in the 60s we saw our families far more, we had support systems and had time to help each other. Now life is so fast and people working so many hours we have to rely on government for support services which drives up taxes. Stresses are different and greater for many too.

    Also we looked forward to retirement with great enthusiasm, now we are worried to death we won't have enough money or we won't even live to retirement age.
  • PrimalIcePrimalIce Posts: 2,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    molliepops wrote: »
    It depends how you mean easier, I think back in the 60s we saw our families far more, we had support systems and had time to help each other. Now life is so fast and people working so many hours we have to rely on government for support services which drives up taxes. Stresses are different and greater for many too.

    Also we looked forward to retirement with great enthusiasm, now we are worried to death we won't have enough money or we won't even live to retirement age.

    But people work less hours now.
  • shackfanshackfan Posts: 15,461
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Of course but then again people in the 50's had it easier than people from 1900.

    People in 2070+ will have it easier than people do now

    Exactly. It's one of those pointless arguments. Well done op. Even people in Africa will think they are well off compared to their ancestors.
  • McMahauldMcMahauld Posts: 1,257
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Of course but then again people in the 50's had it easier than people from 1900.

    People in 2070+ will have it easier than people do now

    Exactly. (Was about to post similar comment)

    Edit - Mind you, that is if there ARE people in 2070!
  • SemieroticSemierotic Posts: 11,131
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The thesis of the OP seems to assume that material possessions make one happier. When in fact the media of today works far more aggressively to make people unhappier. And it seems to be working.
  • TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    McMahauld wrote: »
    Exactly. (Was about to post similar comment)

    Edit - Mind you, that is if there ARE people in 2070!

    There won't. The machines will have taken over and eradicated the human race.
  • SnrDevSnrDev Posts: 6,094
    Forum Member
    PrimalIce wrote: »
    But people work less hours now.
    Fewer.

    It's based on expectation. In the 50s & 60s we had 2 then 3 tv channels, nobody felt left out for not having a mobile phone, decent internet etc as no-one had thought of them (not as practical day-to-day objects). Colour tv was aspirational, and life was simpler. It's the explosion of choice that leads to dissatisfaction. If you moved someone from 1956 straight to today and made them continue to live the 50s austere lifestyle whilst the rest of us live a contemporary lifestyle, they'd soon want a part of it.
  • MrQuikeMrQuike Posts: 18,175
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Neil5234 wrote: »
    Than people in the 50s.
    I do not know anyone who does not have a TV, washing machine, food in their belly, the average person today has a far far easies life than people in the 50s, people today are far fatter and unfit compared to people in the 50s which proves a lot, no decent treatment social care in the 50s, 90% could not afford a car! kids went to school without shoes in the 50s which would be daily mail front page today.......people had a hard hard life in the 50s, they deserve their pensions as they built this country.

    I was 0-5 in the fifties. My grandparents were what's termed working class and they had TV and heating and food and transport enough to get to the pub as and when required. My parents both had jobs, central heating, a car (may have been a bike and sidecar) and TV (OK it was wobbly and there were only 2 channels of crap in B&W) in 1960. I never went without shoes though I only ever wanted the ones with the compass in the heel and the paw print soles. :(
  • SunnierSunnier Posts: 850
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The pace of life was gentler in the 50's'60's and 70's imo ~ Life is harsher today with the High cost of living i.e. Food,energy bills rent/mortgage etc,poorer working conditions with long hours and much less trade union protection,plus the Welfare state is being wound down!

    Also,food banks opening at 3 or 4 every week is very telling!
  • ffawkesffawkes Posts: 4,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Of course, modern marketing is designed to convince people that they need things they don't really need, as a result people have more possessions and a desire to get more, one downside being that they get ito debt to do it.
  • MrQuikeMrQuike Posts: 18,175
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    None of that expensive "label" fashion nonsense either. A knitted pullover off your nan every birthday. :)
  • TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    MrQuike wrote: »
    None of that expensive "label" fashion nonsense either. A knitted pullover off your nan every every birthday. :)

    Funny, I was under the impression that a lot of the fashion labels have been going much longer than this :confused:
  • McMahauldMcMahauld Posts: 1,257
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    PrimalIce wrote: »
    All I see is people moaning yet people can
    afford to eat far better than 50-60 years ago.

    People may be able to afford more food, but whether
    they are eating 'far better' food is something else...

    > > > Chemicals in Food
  • MrQuikeMrQuike Posts: 18,175
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Funny, I was under the impression that a lot of the fashion labels have been going much longer than this :confused:

    Possibly for the "posh" folk in London, New York and Paris.
  • MrQuikeMrQuike Posts: 18,175
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    McMahauld wrote: »
    People may be able to afford more food, but whether
    they are eating 'far better' food is something else...

    > > > Chemicals in Food

    I've read recently that minerals and vitamins in modern fruit and veg are much reduced. Also we don't get the bits of grit and dead insects that we used to - to say nothing about the lack of sunshine. And wayyy toooo many easily available cheap carbohydrates.
  • McMahauldMcMahauld Posts: 1,257
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The machines will have taken over and eradicated the human race.

    So no change then...

    > > The human body is a machine consisting of many different, interconnected machines
  • FrightfulBoarFrightfulBoar Posts: 885
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Neil5234 wrote: »
    Than people in the 50s.
    I do not know anyone who does not have a TV, washing machine, food in their belly, the average person today has a far far easies life than people in the 50s, people today are far fatter and unfit compared to people in the 50s which proves a lot, no decent treatment social care in the 50s, 90% could not afford a car! kids went to school without shoes in the 50s which would be daily mail front page today.......people had a hard hard life in the 50s, they deserve their pensions as they built this country.

    Excellent post.

    Hopefully people will read this and stop complaining about how badly off they are and that they don't get enough free money.
  • towerstowers Posts: 12,183
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    PrimalIce wrote: »
    But people work less hours now.

    Only because the benefit system or 'the bank of mum and dad' allows them too.

    Without the benefit system, people on minimum wage couldn't afford to live without their parents help.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,910
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yes i expect life is much easier in many ways. But if you don't have money life is still a struggle, that never changes. I hate the fact that life is all about money, the world revolves around it. Great if you have it, not so great if you don't.
  • FrightfulBoarFrightfulBoar Posts: 885
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    towers wrote: »
    Only because the benefit system or 'the bank of mum and dad' allows them too.

    Without the benefit system, people on minimum wage couldn't afford to live without their parents help.

    Total fallacy. Minimum wage is about 13k a year. A person can rent a room with all bills for £300 a month, leaving them over £500 for groceries and other assorted non-essentials.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,334
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ...and I suspect that people who lived through the 1920s to the fifties said a similar thing and so on. ^_^

    Edit: didn't realise someone already said a similar thing... :blush:
Sign In or Register to comment.