A quarter of adults out of work

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

Was it?

Well that's the way they lived, so obviously it was.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well that's the way they lived, so obviously it was.

So cavemen had it really easy then?

Kohoutek

Wealth inequality in the UK is at the highest level since WWII. Yes, the average family had it easier in the 1950s, because wealth was more even spread back then between the poor, the middle classes and the rich.

Under New Labour, a trend has continued where the super rich are the group that have seen their wealth grow the most and families of average wealth have seen their wealth diminish the most.

If you don't believe me, then just read the statistical evidence:

http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/poverty-and-wealth-across-britain-1968-2005

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jan/27/unequal-britain-report

chucky

Kohoutek wrote: »

Wealth inequality in the UK is at the highest level since WWII. Yes, the average family had it easier in the 1950s, because wealth was more even spread back then between the poor, the middle classes and the rich.

Under New Labour, a trend has continued where the super rich are the group that have seen their wealth grow the most and families of average wealth have seen their wealth diminish the most.

If you don't believe me, then just read the statistical evidence:

http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/poverty-and-wealth-across-britain-1968-2005

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jan/27/unequal-britain-report

and living conditions were so much better in the 1950s :eek:

i'll wait for the statistical evidence to confirm that

Mrs_Bones

On major difference in the 50's is that people had no choice but to wait for what now could be considered luxury items. If setting up a home, things were got gradually or hand me downs from friends etc. Now people want things instantly and everything has to be the newest gadget. It's wants not needs that need two wages in alot of cases.

ukcarper

lemonjelly wrote: »

Loads.

Thing is a single wage was enough to easily keep a family back then, whereas now, it isn't.

But people live a much simpler life back then not so much technology no holidays especially abroad

ukcarper

chucky wrote: »

and living conditions were so much better in the 1950s :eek:

i'll wait for the statistical evidence to confirm that

I was bought up in the 50s it was so much better no centrel heating no bathroom outside toilets

no phone no TV

Kohoutek

chucky wrote: »

and living conditions were so much better in the 1950s :eek:

i'll wait for the statistical evidence to confirm that

What's that got to do with wealth inequality? Why can't we have relative wealth equality, like the 1950s, and also have a higher standard of living derived from improvements in technology too?

Really2

Kohoutek wrote: »

Wealth inequality in the UK is at the highest level since WWII. Yes, the average family had it easier in the 1950s, because wealth was more even spread back then between the poor, the middle classes and the rich.

No most were poor/low wage so if poverty is 60% of the average wage yes less were in poverty technically but comparatively the majority were actually poor.

If we all worked in factory's now and earned £100PW it would lower the point at where poverty was (it would be £60pw).

I was not aware we wanted back the times we had 95% earning a low wage and 5% a high wage?

Kohoutek

Really2 wrote: »

No most were poor/low wage so if poverty is 60% of the average wage yes less were in poverty technically but comparatively the majority were actually poor.

If we all worked in factory's now and earned £100PW it would lower the point at where poverty was (it would be £60pw).

I was not aware we wanted back the times we had 95% earning a low wage and 5% a high wage?

What era are you talking about? The 19th century?

Read the reports yourself - wages are more unequally distributed now than at any period since the Second World War.