Real term benefits cuts?

Girl_No1 said:.

A major factor in our ability to manage in the 50s and 60s is we were children, therefore did not have the responsibility to ensure that we 'managed'. 

Raceguy was not a child in the 50s, he was (based on his posts) a young adult.

Cartini said:

What I don`t understand is why people are bickering about "how it used to be" compared to "how it could be". 

Absolutely.

Girl_No1 said:

calcotti said:

Girl_No1 said:.

A major factor in our ability to manage in the 50s and 60s is we were children, therefore did not have the responsibility to ensure that we 'managed'. 

Raceguy was not a child in the 50s, he was (based on his posts) a young adult.

Cartini said:

What I don`t understand is why people are bickering about "how it used to be" compared to "how it could be". 

Absolutely.

I did not realise racyguy was a young adult in the 50s. 

That said, even if I had, I'd consider him an outlier on this forum and in society in general. 

I would still hold the view that the collective 'we' did not manage.  

woodbine said:

There is one huge difference between "now" and "back in the day" that being that extended families lived close to each other often on the same street, and looked after each other, sadly we have lost that, and with it the support network that existed. Today families are often spread out living miles apart and hence unable to offer that same level of support.

We seem to have stepped back to a time when the state wants to divorce itself from looking after people and dump them on charity once again, food banks being an excellent example. Some might say that "self help" is good for us I would say in 2022 it's immoral.

One other point the Tories seem to want to re-invent themselves the way they are talking they haven't been in power for twelve years but have just been washed up on the shores of Downing Street, never forget that they are totally responsible for the mess we are in, Osborne in 2010 promised to reduce the deficit to zero by 2015 he failed miserably and we now have a deficit that is totally beyond their control and debt that is eye-watering, never forget that.

The mess we are in, and the austerity that we have suffered, is because of the last Liebour government;  Truss has just added her pinch.  Thatcher took years to trash society, May took 2 years to almost trash democracy and now Truss, in less than a month, is having a good go at further trashing the economy.

Girl_No1 said:

Cartini said:

Girl_No1 said:

calcotti said:

Girl_No1 said:.

A major factor in our ability to manage in the 50s and 60s is we were children, therefore did not have the responsibility to ensure that we 'managed'. 

Raceguy was not a child in the 50s, he was (based on his posts) a young adult.

Cartini said:

What I don`t understand is why people are bickering about "how it used to be" compared to "how it could be". 

Absolutely.

I did not realise racyguy was a young adult in the 50s. 

That said, even if I had, I'd consider him an outlier on this forum and in society in general. 

I would still hold the view that the collective 'we' did not manage.  

That`s quite a sweeping statement.  It`s almost akin to saying "you aren`t allowed to have an opinion".

You can`t speak for the "collective",  you can only speak for your circumstances and possibly very close friends / family.  That doesn`t constitute "we" in the wider form.

Not really to both points.  

Of course everyone's entitled to an opinion, but facts are not negotiable despite the current political landscape appearing to make it so. 

Only those born in the early 40s or earlier would be adults with responsibility in the (late) 50s which means they now 80+yo.  Despite the aging demographic of the UK, octogenarians are not the majority.

In terms of the collective, I can confidently say the majority of people in the UK were born after the 40s therefore the collective did not manage poverty in the 50s/60s which was what the OP stated.

If you took an interest, you would find that the OP is in his 80`s therefore his comment carries weight.

Cartini said:

Girl_No1 said:

Cartini said:

Girl_No1 said:

calcotti said:

Girl_No1 said:.

A major factor in our ability to manage in the 50s and 60s is we were children, therefore did not have the responsibility to ensure that we 'managed'. 

Raceguy was not a child in the 50s, he was (based on his posts) a young adult.

Cartini said:

What I don`t understand is why people are bickering about "how it used to be" compared to "how it could be". 

Absolutely.

I did not realise racyguy was a young adult in the 50s. 

That said, even if I had, I'd consider him an outlier on this forum and in society in general. 

I would still hold the view that the collective 'we' did not manage.  

That`s quite a sweeping statement.  It`s almost akin to saying "you aren`t allowed to have an opinion".

You can`t speak for the "collective",  you can only speak for your circumstances and possibly very close friends / family.  That doesn`t constitute "we" in the wider form.

Not really to both points.  

Of course everyone's entitled to an opinion, but facts are not negotiable despite the current political landscape appearing to make it so. 

Only those born in the early 40s or earlier would be adults with responsibility in the (late) 50s which means they now 80+yo.  Despite the aging demographic of the UK, octogenarians are not the majority.

In terms of the collective, I can confidently say the majority of people in the UK were born after the 40s therefore the collective did not manage poverty in the 50s/60s which was what the OP stated.

If you took an interest, you would find that the OP is in his 80`s therefore his comment carries weight.

poppy123456 said:

Cartini said:

Girl_No1 said:

Cartini said:

Girl_No1 said:

calcotti said:

Girl_No1 said:.

A major factor in our ability to manage in the 50s and 60s is we were children, therefore did not have the responsibility to ensure that we 'managed'. 

Raceguy was not a child in the 50s, he was (based on his posts) a young adult.

Cartini said:

What I don`t understand is why people are bickering about "how it used to be" compared to "how it could be". 

Absolutely.

I did not realise racyguy was a young adult in the 50s. 

That said, even if I had, I'd consider him an outlier on this forum and in society in general. 

I would still hold the view that the collective 'we' did not manage.  

That`s quite a sweeping statement.  It`s almost akin to saying "you aren`t allowed to have an opinion".

You can`t speak for the "collective",  you can only speak for your circumstances and possibly very close friends / family.  That doesn`t constitute "we" in the wider form.

Not really to both points.  

Of course everyone's entitled to an opinion, but facts are not negotiable despite the current political landscape appearing to make it so. 

Only those born in the early 40s or earlier would be adults with responsibility in the (late) 50s which means they now 80+yo.  Despite the aging demographic of the UK, octogenarians are not the majority.

In terms of the collective, I can confidently say the majority of people in the UK were born after the 40s therefore the collective did not manage poverty in the 50s/60s which was what the OP stated.

If you took an interest, you would find that the OP is in his 80`s therefore his comment carries weight.

I'm confused here, the OP is woodbine, who is of working age because he still claims ESA.

If you are referring to racyguy, he is not in his 80's. Going by many of his other threads he is under the age of 80 but over 70.

@ShirleyW I am no spring chicken myself, for context.  My point was in response to the statement we managed in the 50/60s.  

My point was only those over 80 would have managed (as adults) in the (very late) 50s and throughout the 60s.

There was no knowledge to dismiss in OPs post.  It was a sweeping statement that 'we managed' in the 50s/60s.  A statement I consider misleading, in terms of the entire population.

Perhaps I had a sheltered childhood?  Because I was unaware of any 'need to manage' until I was an adult in the 80s, and I genuinely believe what is likely to be heading our way now is far, far worse than the 80s across the board - not minimising those who lost their homes due to spiralling interest rates etc. - but in my experience poverty was not endemic as it was in the 50s/60s.

Also, as another poster stated, families and neighbours (so far as I'm aware) worked together in the 50s/60s to help each other through the worst times.  Families are dispersed across the world now, and neighbours barely even know each other's names far less each other's financial circumstances.

racyguy said:

ShirleyW said:

@Girl_No1
I'm 68 years old.

I certainly had to manage as a child and young adult in the 60's, 70's and 80's and beyond.

I remember galloping inflation and my mortgage interest rising to 16%.

We managed by learning from older generations.  And whilst no we shouldn't have to in this day and age, we will have to.

So instead of dismissing the knowledge and advice of older generations maybe the younger generations could try listening and learning. 

There are many helpful threads detailing tips to help with the cost of living. 

I'm just shy of 80 and remember well the abject poverty of the 50's and 60's.
In 1963 I was 20

I have no idea how that was even possible.

Cartini said:

The mess we are in, and the austerity that we have suffered, is because of the last Liebour government;  Truss has just added her pinch.  Thatcher took years to trash society, May took 2 years to almost trash democracy and now Truss, in less than a month, is having a good go at further trashing the economy.

Can I ask what makes you think that? I don't understand because everything I read says differently and it's a line the tories trot out regularly but never give reasons or explanations. Is there something I could search that would help me understand better?