GDP shrinks at fastest rate for 60 years

thriftybabe

dopester wrote: »

Careful. Conrad-world has always been so cosy. Don't want you to wake up to the real world and begin thinking like a doomster, where you begin to recognise the serious challenges to our economy now the credit-expansion boom has ended.

That is funny my friend said to me that I need to live in the real world when I said that I may have to look for work with someone else! I was quite hurt at this as my OH and I run 2 businesses and have managed to bring our 2 kids up so far without the usual help from Grans, Inlaws etc. We are quite proud of the fact that we have stood on our own two feet and worked hard to get to where we are now. The other thing is my "good friend" gets paid every month along with her hubby and never needs to worry! We on the other hand at the moment are worried sick about not getting paid a rather large amount of dosh which could really muck things up for us!

carolt

Conrad wrote: »

For the first time a few people at a neighbours BBQ told me they were concerned about thier jobs. On the other hand they have a good amount of equity and v low payments so I don't think it will devastate any of them so the comparison with the 30's is a bit overdone as the masses didn't have huge cushions of equity nor parental wealth to get them through.

Umm...nor did most people have huge mortgages to worry about then, or debts to pay off, or credit cards.

Most people rented, at far, far lower costs than today's rents, let alone mortgages.

To see everything in the garden as rosy now is to ignore 800bn pounds of debt amassed in peacetime, that we, a a nation have to pay back.

Really2

carolt wrote: »

U

Most people rented, at far, far lower costs than today's rents, let alone mortgages.

I think in the 1930's rent was quiet high proportion of take home wage.

Given most people worked in low paid jobs there was not much option for ownership back then.

inspector_monkfish

Really2 wrote: »

I think in the 1930's rent was quiet high proportion of take home wage.

Given most people worked in low paid jobs there was not much option for ownership back then.

good job they never had credit cards then ! :eek:

carolt

Really2 wrote: »

I think in the 1930's rent was quiet high proportion of take home wage.

Given most people worked in low paid jobs there was not much option for ownership back then.

Not at all - food and clothing took up a much higher proportion of income - rent was far lower than now.

inspector_monkfish

carolt wrote: »

Not at all - food and clothing took up a much higher proportion of income - rent was far lower than now.

where you there ?

carolt

Is that relevant?

Harry_Powell

carolt wrote: »

Is that relevant?

I think inspector monkfish is hoping that you will provide figures to prove your statement that rent was a smaller proportion of income in the 1930's, unless you were actually there and remember it.

Really2

My wife as a nan in her 80's and she is better of now than back then. The quality of life and disposable income is a lot higher than back then.

Have you got any figures for average rent and average wage for the 30's?

carolt

Just checked - rent control was introduced during the first world war.

See:

http://www.rdg.ac.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=10400&sID=34517