markg wrote:
That's just it though. Things seem to be getting shittier for a lot people with each passing generation.
I know what you mean - and actually agree with you - but we must remember that actually, it is NOT the case that things (i.e. living standards, disposable income, access to luxury goods etc.) are getting shittier across the generations. Actually the reverse is (broadly) true?
Recalling my childhood from the mid-70s through to the early-80s, my parents' generation basically, inarguably did not have it anywhere near as good as people of mine, and your generation. My old man worked all hours (and by that I mean 60hrs+/week; we hardly saw him as kids), slaving away as a toolmaker (a HUGELY skilled job with 7 year apprenticeship; he proudly wore his shirt and tie on the shop floor and was massively respected). My mum worked full time also, in an electronics factory (among other places), yet the five of us were crammed into a very modest (heavily mortgaged) semi in Clacton; he drove a 20 year old Austin 1100 which took whatever spare time he had in home maintenance and welding (as the thing was dissolving before our very eyes), and my mum (and we) got the bus. We had one rented Bush TV set in the house, an old school spin dryer and a washing machine that was at least 10 years old, went on ONE holiday (to Great Yarmouth) in my ENTIRE childhood and adolescence combined. I still remember the wonderment and awe when my mum was able to buy a
microwave. I mean like, can you seriously imagine this now?
What IS true to say is that the gulf between rich and poor has got greater (much greater, both under Tory and most especially New Labour administrations), which is actually what I think you're alluding to here. However, even the 'poor' - and most especially those of average means - ARE better off than they were.
Quote:
Nobody talks about any noble concepts any more. Things like social mobility, I don't remember the last time I heard a Prime Minister or opposition leader try to make a serious issue out of that. What do we get instead? Fucking Big Society nonsense,
Again, I agree. I'm not saying this to piss you off, but the last PM I heard discussing these big ideals/concepts was Thatcher - one way or another, be it the sale of council houses, deregulation of the mortgage market, removal of the closed shop, low taxation - she freed the working classes such as my dad and his family to aim far, far higher than they could ever have dreamt (or been 'permitted' to do), empowering and enriching them. Sure, she did not get everything right, far from it (the legacy of insufficient housing stock, most notably council housing, is all too evident), but the ideals, political ideology, objectives and deliberate execution of those big ideas were all there. With seismic results. Does anyone seriously think someone like me could've done what I have managed to do, if I was living in the 60s or 70s? I'd be where I started, in a factory somewhere, in a council house, earning a pittance with no realistic prospect or incentive for self-improvement.
Today's media-friendly "career politicians" lack that essential raw energy, vision and objective, which is one of the reasons why Farage has (wrongly imo) totally captured the public's imagination. We instinctively - and finally - rail against the 'me too' politically correct, consensus, media-driven politicians of today who dare not say "the wrong thing", who've never had a real job, who don't really seem to believe in anything much, besides themselves. For me, New Labour were the absolute epitome of this, and we've gone on from there. Cameron bears many similarities to Blair.
Quote:
wages so shit that working people are often unable to make ends meet,
Agreed; "something" needs to be done about the Living Wage. Why should the likes of Tesco or whoever be allowed to hire people in the middle of London @ £7/hour, with the UK taxpayer picking up a huge tab in Tax Credits? I don't pay my taxes to subsidise the likes of them paying low salaries!
The question as to what to do about it is a thorny one though, for sure.
Quote:
the poor and the sick being painted as worthless scroungers who we should no longer even bother to veil our contempt for.
Agreed, but I'm sorry, I want to differentiate between genuinely poor, disadvantaged, ill and/or disabled people (or people who are genuinely trying, but failing, to improve their lot) - upon which no decent person would not sympathise, and want to do something about their plight - and people who are not "ill" in any meaningful sense of the word (at least not too ill to contribute something useful to our society), or just plain lazy. Apologies, but we must acknowledge there are people like this, and plenty of them.