[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Exactly DR, like I said the situations are entirely different and neither is "better" or "worse", they can't be compared.

As Kirk says, yes, people might have had to bundle up in bed because it was so cold, but how often did they find themselves terrified to leave that bed because of what might be waiting for them next to the letterbox? Fearful of small debt demands that quickly become large amounts, of constant payments to dozens of people, missing just one of which could cause a debt spiral ending in bankruptcy?

There's also the element of hope. Kirk describes the "real poverty" of yesteryear, my dad talks about his childhood the same way. He now does pretty well for himself, as does Kirk based on what he's posted. How many children living in modern poverty really have any hope at all of pulling themselves out of that and into a better life? Some will but it's a tiny minority and no, it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with how "hard they work". Generations of families are STUCK in these situations, with little opportunity to work out of it.

But they can buy new trainers on their "Very" account and they have central heating so I guess they live lives of plenty. Whoopeedoo.

..yeah, this for me is the best comparison of 'modern day poverty' to 'back in the day' and something I see all of the time sadly, with many children having their lives almost 'mapped out'...in terms of materialistic things/possessions etc, people had less back in the day because there was less available to have back in the day/things that just didn't even exist...it was a much 'smaller world' before things like overseas travel/holidays became an availability to everyone for instance...now a family holiday to Europe for instance, can be reasonably priced/affordable for all and that's cool and fine for those who aren't on low incomes or are on benefits...which would be 'an equivalent poor to back in the day..'...but the problem is for those who are on low incomes, if that family holiday were to be something that they could consider, then there is a high likelihood that they could only consider it, if they were to go during school times when it's much cheaper....and why shouldn't they go/have that holiday..?..family time together (I think is essential to everyone/regardless of income..)...and a very valuable and important time spent for any family...but if they do go and during the school time, which is the only way it would be affordable, they then have to face fines for doing so, so basically being fined for not being able to afford in the first place/those very people who struggled to be able to afford a holiday, are given another 'debt' to pay/crazy.. if people who aren't on low incomes/parents make the choice of taking their children out of school because 'it's cheaper anyway even with the fine', then they're making a choice to do so..( I still don't think fines should apply though..).. but lower incomes don't have that choice because their choice would be that holidays would be unaffordable to them so they just couldn't have that leisure time with their family...

..it's not about, for most who have low incomes/are on benefits etc, having debt to have nicer 'luxury' things, I don't think either..(and it's all relevant to the present day, because many people also had debt back in the day to buy the larger things or things that were needed but wouldn't have been able to have been afforded outright/children's Christmas gifts etc.. debt in the form of things like Hire Purchase, pay weekly catalogues etc..also those who loaned money for interest...)...it's more about having debt for what's considered basic essentials now...how can for instance, someone look for employment without access to home internet in some form, so that would mean a computer/laptop/tablet etc...they're not 'luxury items'...would we expect someone on a low income to have no TV in their home/have no form of 'entertainment' if it wasn't an option to be affordable to go out... and as the availability of today, is of all flat screen TVs, then that's what a low income/on benefits person will probably have...would we expect them to hand wash nappies if they have children...?../no, of course not so a washing machine becomes an essential/a dryer becomes an essential/for parents working long hours, a microwave becomes an essential etc etc and all things that wouldn't have been available in the 40s but considered essentials of today because yes, a different world and a different world's needs....and of course, some form of central heating/all 'basics' because if these things weren't basic then we really would be sending 'the poor back to the 1940s' really...

..the single biggest expense for most people is the purchase of a house/for those who are fortunate enough to be able to make that purchase... and many more homeowners back in the day, owned their homes outright, with either no mortgage at all or a very small one, so whatever their shortage in other things may have been, they had that 'biggie'/much more affordable...young people today/many young people won't ever have that or they'll have to burden themselves with a huge mortgage to be able to have it/a mortgage that they then are going to be looking at trying to achieve in income to match the debt...we know that there are many older people now who have worked hard all of their lives and come from a childhood of what would have been considered 'poverty' back in the day, but now are in a position of being able to 'downsize' and think about lifestyle changes because they have worked hard all of their lives and have 'built something'...but for those on low incomes/on benefits.. the struggle is to be able to even upsize in the first place/to be able to build anything to even think about the downsizing...it's not even the low incomes either, is it...it's that it's much more difficult today in 2016..(imo..)...than it was back in the day and considering all things of the differences...but as you say, the two are hard to directly compare...I just know that I would rather be me and being me back in my day, than being either of my sons in the here and now and this day...