Options

Does Nigel Farage live in 1954?

ZimmieZimmie Posts: 1,244
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Not 2014.
«134567

Comments

  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Zimmie wrote: »
    Not 2014.

    Was Britain worse in 1954 then??:confused:
  • Options
    HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    Was Britain worse in 1954 then??:confused:

    Um, yes? It was 1954
  • Options
    exlordlucanexlordlucan Posts: 35,375
    Forum Member
    Whether he does or not he's still got people running around like headless chickens :)
  • Options
    gocompletelynutgocompletelynut Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Zimmie wrote: »
    Not 2014.

    Man you are on fire tonight I reckon the poll ratings will be dropping while we type.
  • Options
    2+2=52+2=5 Posts: 24,264
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    He is a man for some people. And not for others. Unfortunately some people cannot accept that and want him for all people.
  • Options
    exlordlucanexlordlucan Posts: 35,375
    Forum Member
    2+2=5 wrote: »
    He is a man for some people. And not for others. Unfortunately some people cannot accept that and want him for all people.


    And some don't want him at all, funny old world isn't it.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 9,720
    Forum Member
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    Um, yes? It was 1954

    And yet people were happier back then.

    They might not have lived very long, but at least they were fit and happy while they were alive.
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    Um, yes? It was 1954

    Were you around then then?
  • Options
    woot_whoowoot_whoo Posts: 18,030
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Meilie wrote: »
    And yet people were happier back then.

    They might not have lived very long, but at least they were fit and happy while they were alive.

    What makes you say that? :confused:
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    woot_whoo wrote: »
    What makes you say that? :confused:

    Do you think we're happier now then?
  • Options
    HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Meilie wrote: »
    And yet people were happier back then.

    They might not have lived very long, but at least they were fit and happy while they were alive.

    I'd imagine if you were a middle-class, middle-aged, white, straight, male things probably weren't too bad.

    Not so great for everybody else though.

    There was still plenty of misery and misfortune in the same sections of society then, it's just things such as racism, homophobia and sexism were much more rampant than they are today.

    Some people get the notion that the 'olden days' were better just because they remember them as being more familiar in a very progressive and changing world. You need to be careful not to associate blissfully ignorant comfort for what's necessarily 'right'.
  • Options
    woot_whoowoot_whoo Posts: 18,030
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    Do you think we're happier now then?

    Yes. I'm certainly happier living now than I imagine I would be in a year which still had rationing and food shortages and in which medication and health standards (as well as standards of living) were significantly lower. Are you unhappy today? If so, why?
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    I'd imagine if you were a middle-class, middle-aged, white, straight, male things probably weren't too bad.

    Not so great for everybody else though.

    There was still plenty of misery and misfortune in the same sections of society then, it's just things such as racism, homophobia and sexism were much more rampant than they are today.

    Some people get the notion that the 'olden days' were better just because they remember them as being more familiar in a very progressive and changing world. You need to be careful not to associate blissfully ignorant comfort for what's necessarily 'right'.

    What utter rubbish, yes rotten days when we actually made stuff and had almost full employment. I'd stake my life that if you did a straw poll of 'are you happy with your lot?' The 1954 one would score higher.
  • Options
    woot_whoowoot_whoo Posts: 18,030
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    What utter rubbish, yes rotten days when we actually made stuff and had almost full employment. I'd stake my life that if you did a straw poll of 'are you happy with your lot?' The 1954 one would score higher.

    But that's just assumption. I'm curious as to where the idea that people were happier in 1954 is actually coming from. It just seems to be nostalgia. Every generation thinks that preceding generations were golden ages. I'd stake my life that people in 1954 probably thought that people in the pre-war years were much happier.
  • Options
    BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    2+2=5 wrote: »
    He is a man for some people. And not for others. Unfortunately some people cannot accept that and want him for all people.

    There isn't anyone for all people, some people can't accept that.
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    woot_whoo wrote: »
    Yes. I'm certainly happier living now than I imagine I would be in a year which still had rationing and food shortages and in which medication and health standards (as well as standards of living) were significantly lower. Are you unhappy today? If so, why?

    I'm quite happy with my lot thanks, but you'd think otherwise reading all of the posts by the hand wringing left wing social injustice brigade on here.
    You might not have been happy in 1954 though, you might have to do physically demanding hard work in a factory that actually made stuff.
  • Options
    woot_whoowoot_whoo Posts: 18,030
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    I'm quite happy with my lot thanks, but you'd think otherwise reading all of the posts by the hand wringing left wing social injustice brigade on here.
    You might not have been happy in 1954 though, you might have to do physically demanding hard work in a factory that actually made stuff.

    The hand wringing left wing social injustice brigade? Are they a division of the Bleeding Heart Army or the Liberal Do Gooder Defence Force? Either way, I do hope they're not going multicultural mad and breaking soft touch Britain.
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    woot_whoo wrote: »
    But that's just assumption. I'm curious as to where the idea that people were happier in 1954 is actually coming from. It just seems to be nostalgia. Every generation thinks that preceding generations were golden ages. I'd stake my life that people in 1954 probably thought that people in the pre-war years were much happier.

    So if we're happier now, why are you continually camped on here moaning about unemployment,under employment, social injustice and poverty?
  • Options
    woot_whoowoot_whoo Posts: 18,030
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    So if we're happier now, why are you continually on here moaning about unemployment,under employment, social injustice and poverty?

    Am I? News to me. I don't want to stand in the way of a good rant, though.

    Incidentally, if you're so happy with your lot, I'm not sure why you'd be here complaining about how unhappy we all ought to be and how much better off we'd be in 1954. Curiouser and curiouser.
  • Options
    CLL DodgeCLL Dodge Posts: 115,865
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    Was Britain worse in 1954 then??:confused:

    Was for me. I wasn't around.
  • Options
    Phil 2804Phil 2804 Posts: 21,846
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    Was Britain worse in 1954 then??:confused:

    Given that it was the year Alan Turing committed suicide after being chemically castrated for being a homosexual I'm surprised you even asked that question.

    My dear departed Grandmother used to laugh at people who harked for the good old days, as having lived through them she was never scared to say they were shite and the present day so much better.
  • Options
    andyknandykn Posts: 66,849
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    in 1954 though, you might have to do physically demanding hard work in a factory that actually made stuff.

    In other words, we're much better off now.

    I've done "physically demanding hard work in a factory" and much prefer "physically demanding hard work" in a computer room (with the benefits of the Factories Act and Health and Safety at Work Act.)
  • Options
    HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    What utter rubbish, yes rotten days when we actually made stuff and had almost full employment. I'd stake my life that if you did a straw poll of 'are you happy with your lot?' The 1954 one would score higher.

    Conjecture at its finest.
    woot_whoo wrote: »
    But that's just assumption. I'm curious as to where the idea that people were happier in 1954 is actually coming from. It just seems to be nostalgia. Every generation thinks that preceding generations were golden ages. I'd stake my life that people in 1954 probably thought that people in the pre-war years were much happier.

    This is very true.
    trunkster wrote: »
    I'm quite happy with my lot thanks, but you'd think otherwise reading all of the posts by the hand wringing left wing social injustice brigade on here.
    You might not have been happy in 1954 though, you might have to do physically demanding hard work in a factory that actually made stuff.

    So now you're contradicting yourself?
    woot_whoo wrote: »
    Am I? News to me. I don't want to stand in the way of a good rant, though.

    Incidentally, if you're so happy with your lot, I'm not sure why you'd be here complaining about how unhappy we all ought to be and how much better off we'd be in 1954. Curiouser and curiouser.

    Indeed. It comes across as a bit ironic and bitter :D

    He/she just sounds like my grandfather.. wants other people to suffer because he had to.

    Things should get easier with every generation.
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    Conjecture at its finest.



    This is very true.



    So now you're contradicting yourself?



    Indeed. It comes across as a bit ironic and bitter :D

    He/she just sounds like my grandfather.. wants other people to suffer because he had to.

    Things should get easier with every generation.

    What are you on?:confused:
  • Options
    Phil 2804Phil 2804 Posts: 21,846
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Meilie wrote: »
    And yet people were happier back then.

    They might not have lived very long, but at least they were fit and happy while they were alive.

    Were they? My mum was born to a single mother in 1948 and grew up in a small rural town, her whole childhood was spent being made to feel inferior by hypocritical snobs. If you were in the queue at a shop and local Minister's wife or similar came in they'd always be served before you. She couldn't wait to get away from the place.

    The only people who could possibly think life in 1954 was better than now are people who read the Daily Mail and believe it to be the gospel of truth. :D
Sign In or Register to comment.