Mps Have Voted In Favour Of Assisted...
News0 min ago
Child Poverty Worse It Was In The 1960S
46 Answers
http://
How can this possibly be, answers please?
How can this possibly be, answers please?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"It found that around 3.6million children are now living in relative poverty today compared with 2million in the late 1960s."
I'm not sure that I'm right in saying this, but I wonder if the standards of relative poverty have changed such that using "relative poverty" is a meaningless comparison to make. Maybe back in the late 60s relative poverty meant far worse conditions than it does now?
Without access to the study this is just speculation, though.
I'm not sure that I'm right in saying this, but I wonder if the standards of relative poverty have changed such that using "relative poverty" is a meaningless comparison to make. Maybe back in the late 60s relative poverty meant far worse conditions than it does now?
Without access to the study this is just speculation, though.
Not quite sure what your question is. If you are believing the report then the doubling of child poverty is due to the problem veing ignored by successive Governments. If you are not believing the report then you can atgue that poverty in the 1960s and poverty now are different.
Whilst unemployment is not significantly higher now, there are a lot more people working on the minimum wage or working short hours. This means that relative to the 1960s, modern families have less money to bring up their children. And the gap between the rich and poor has widened considerably. There are more rich people now and more poor people than in the 1960s.
Whilst unemployment is not significantly higher now, there are a lot more people working on the minimum wage or working short hours. This means that relative to the 1960s, modern families have less money to bring up their children. And the gap between the rich and poor has widened considerably. There are more rich people now and more poor people than in the 1960s.
// The gap between the richest and poorest in society has widened since Labour came to power in 1997, according to a new study from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Health inequalities have also increased and poverty intensified for working-age people without children.
Progress towards a more equal society slowed, and in some cases "stalled", during the second half of Labour's time in office, according to the report published by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Improvements in tackling child poverty ground to a halt after 2005 and the UK still ranks equal bottom of the original 15 EU members, the report said. //
http://
Health inequalities have also increased and poverty intensified for working-age people without children.
Progress towards a more equal society slowed, and in some cases "stalled", during the second half of Labour's time in office, according to the report published by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Improvements in tackling child poverty ground to a halt after 2005 and the UK still ranks equal bottom of the original 15 EU members, the report said. //
http://
Poverty also rose during the 1980s and 1990s.
See graphs on page xii here.
http://
See graphs on page xii here.
http://
I agree that using a measure of relative poverty makes this all meaningless or near meaningless.
But even if there was a growing problem, it can only be that folk are now more convinced today than in the 60s, that they can have kids they can not afford. Quite possibly assuming the taxpayer will pay for them ? That would be a credible incentive for things to get worse; even though my suspicion is that they have probably improved in absolute, rather than relative terms.
But even if there was a growing problem, it can only be that folk are now more convinced today than in the 60s, that they can have kids they can not afford. Quite possibly assuming the taxpayer will pay for them ? That would be a credible incentive for things to get worse; even though my suspicion is that they have probably improved in absolute, rather than relative terms.
I'm confused as to how they guage poverty. In 1960 my parents had 4 children under 6 and my dad was a farm labourer on £9 a week , we lived in a tied cottage, i don't think mum got much family allowance but i remember sitting quietly on the chairs in the post office whilst she collected it. We didn't have a car and only my older sister was at school until i started in sept 1961, mum sent 2s a week into school for her school dinners and then i took the same in when i started. we rented a black and white tv from ashcrofts on beaconsfield corner from 1959, i think it was a few shillings a week. We had milk delivered every day and a bakery van came 3 times a week and the insurance man on a friday teatime, mum knitted and sewed and we had a huge vegetable garden and hens, we never went without, had fields and woods and ponies and dogs . Yet that was probably poverty.
Old Geezer, the birth rate has declined since the 1960s.
What we may call poverty is subjective, but t lack of disposable can be compared. And it would seem that poor people have less now than 50 years ago when they have paid their bills. The outward appearance of prosperity is probably paid for by the huge increase in credit debt.
What we may call poverty is subjective, but t lack of disposable can be compared. And it would seem that poor people have less now than 50 years ago when they have paid their bills. The outward appearance of prosperity is probably paid for by the huge increase in credit debt.
I agree with Dot....I don't know what poverty is, as i have never experienced it.
Let us keep to the groups of working class, middle class and upper class, in which case we were at the lower end of working class.
Grandad was a labourer on the railway he worked shifts to bring in a wage, a devout union man. Grandma kept the house, cooked the meals, cleaned and received her "housekeeping" once a week.
We couldn't afford to send me on school trips as i had to go potato picking to earn money for the home, a paper round for my own pocket money. Never could afford underpants for me and my shirts were bought from the Army and Navy stores and itched like hell.
One holiday a year, paid for by Grandads privileged tickets (Pass) walked 2miles to the railway station, day trip to Skegness and a walk back in the evening home, whilst other people were taking taxis.
Scholarship to Grammar School and was given vouchers for the uniform and school meals.Was embarrased when i got into the 1st Rugby team and grandad came in a flat cap muffler and his best suit, grandma followed behind to watch me play.
Was that POVERTY?........NO!.......that was a privileged upbringing.
Today's children have unrealistic levels of achievement without effort or sacrifice.........which era has the worse poverty?
No idea, as i have never experienced or indeed fully understood the concept in a developed world country.
Let us keep to the groups of working class, middle class and upper class, in which case we were at the lower end of working class.
Grandad was a labourer on the railway he worked shifts to bring in a wage, a devout union man. Grandma kept the house, cooked the meals, cleaned and received her "housekeeping" once a week.
We couldn't afford to send me on school trips as i had to go potato picking to earn money for the home, a paper round for my own pocket money. Never could afford underpants for me and my shirts were bought from the Army and Navy stores and itched like hell.
One holiday a year, paid for by Grandads privileged tickets (Pass) walked 2miles to the railway station, day trip to Skegness and a walk back in the evening home, whilst other people were taking taxis.
Scholarship to Grammar School and was given vouchers for the uniform and school meals.Was embarrased when i got into the 1st Rugby team and grandad came in a flat cap muffler and his best suit, grandma followed behind to watch me play.
Was that POVERTY?........NO!.......that was a privileged upbringing.
Today's children have unrealistic levels of achievement without effort or sacrifice.........which era has the worse poverty?
No idea, as i have never experienced or indeed fully understood the concept in a developed world country.
I agree with Dot and sqad. I was brought up in the 50's and we didn't have a car or television (I think we got a TV about 1958 which was rented)
My sister and I got new clothes twice a year and had to change out of our school uniforms as soon as we got home so as to keep them tidy.
My sister had a paper round and when I was 15 I worked in a coffee bar for 3 hours a day after school, if finances at home were okay I was allowed to keep what I earned otherwise it went in the pot.
When I passed the 11 plus I was told I couldn't go to grammar school as my parents couldn't afford the uniform, my nan provided this via a Co-op cheque.
We never, ever, went hungry..............
My sister and I got new clothes twice a year and had to change out of our school uniforms as soon as we got home so as to keep them tidy.
My sister had a paper round and when I was 15 I worked in a coffee bar for 3 hours a day after school, if finances at home were okay I was allowed to keep what I earned otherwise it went in the pot.
When I passed the 11 plus I was told I couldn't go to grammar school as my parents couldn't afford the uniform, my nan provided this via a Co-op cheque.
We never, ever, went hungry..............
-- answer removed --
I thought that Gromit, main difference of course being this is genuine. And folks are here denying they were poor, implying the definition means something different.
TV in the 50s ? You were lucky. Mid 60s TV, I lose track of dates but probably fridge mid 70s, shower over the bath about the same time, and a telephone even later than that. Are these things necessities now ? If so then of course they will claim less disposable once they've been paid for.
Thing is, I've yet to be convinced of a growing problem. There are poor but the welfare state ensures they get help. Maybe not as much as they'd wish.
TV in the 50s ? You were lucky. Mid 60s TV, I lose track of dates but probably fridge mid 70s, shower over the bath about the same time, and a telephone even later than that. Are these things necessities now ? If so then of course they will claim less disposable once they've been paid for.
Thing is, I've yet to be convinced of a growing problem. There are poor but the welfare state ensures they get help. Maybe not as much as they'd wish.
I agree with Dot ,sqad and craft.
I was 18 before we actually had a proper bath with hot and cold and an indoor toilet.My parents managed to bring up five children ,were never in debt and cut their coats according to their cloth .We were well fed and clothed even if it was hand me downs and stuff to eat that filled you up even if it was a bit stodgy .When I passed the eleven plus to go a grammar school my mother bought the uniform second hand .
Nowadays if they haven't got the latest designer stuff and up to date technology they think they're hard done by .
My generation had to get up off our backsides and work for what we wanted .
I was 18 before we actually had a proper bath with hot and cold and an indoor toilet.My parents managed to bring up five children ,were never in debt and cut their coats according to their cloth .We were well fed and clothed even if it was hand me downs and stuff to eat that filled you up even if it was a bit stodgy .When I passed the eleven plus to go a grammar school my mother bought the uniform second hand .
Nowadays if they haven't got the latest designer stuff and up to date technology they think they're hard done by .
My generation had to get up off our backsides and work for what we wanted .
Also agree with dot, sqad and craft!
I was an only child and in the 50s my parents found it a real struggle when I passed the 11 plus and went to grammar school. Getting the uniform meant real sacrifices and my dad did another job in the daytime as he was a GPO night telephonist.
Never went hungry, all home cooked nourishing meals using cheaper cuts of meat and growing our own veg., etc.
I was an only child and in the 50s my parents found it a real struggle when I passed the 11 plus and went to grammar school. Getting the uniform meant real sacrifices and my dad did another job in the daytime as he was a GPO night telephonist.
Never went hungry, all home cooked nourishing meals using cheaper cuts of meat and growing our own veg., etc.
Latest Posts
Car Won't Start, But Rac Can't Find...
Motoring13 mins ago
So It Was Just Another Dirty Con Trick...
News17 mins ago
Technology20 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.