News0 min ago
'what Would My Old Dad Make Of The Country We've Become?'
176 Answers
http://
There are many on AnswerBank who dislike Daily Mail columnist
Richard Little John, but maybe might still find this an interesting look back at how things once were.
There are many on AnswerBank who dislike Daily Mail columnist
Richard Little John, but maybe might still find this an interesting look back at how things once were.
Answers
If you weren't around at the time that this Richard Littlejohn was writing about why don't you take more notice of people who were..Some of you on here are only too ready to mock and poke fun at the 40s/50s. God knows what some of you will have to look back on when you are old and grey! Well let's see ---You will have Twitter, facebook ,ipad, ipod, tablets, kindles...
20:27 Sun 11th May 2014
Ah, but we have more than just your account to go on, don't we? Those of my relatives, for example, or assorted history books. And then, above it all, there are the incidents such as humbersloop telling of how his own elders thought the same of the world in the 60's as you do now.
There is nothing to Littlejohn's views, or yours, that deserves any specific rebuttal. Things have changed since the days of his, his father's and your childhoods, that is certain. In some ways they are worse. In others they are better. But there is no absolute decline, nor an absolute improvement, and the older generation who bemoan a world in decline are just the latest in a long line of Grumpy Old Men.
There is nothing to Littlejohn's views, or yours, that deserves any specific rebuttal. Things have changed since the days of his, his father's and your childhoods, that is certain. In some ways they are worse. In others they are better. But there is no absolute decline, nor an absolute improvement, and the older generation who bemoan a world in decline are just the latest in a long line of Grumpy Old Men.
True comparisons aren't really possible- as memories often are selective and come with some nostalgia. Also, your experience of a few years ago, possibly with small children at home/school days will not be the same point in your life that you are at now.
From AB alone, there seems to be a lot of self-contradiction (not you, personally, aog- but in general). From how strict and great the discipline was, to the "we ran wild, nobody knew where we were or what we were doing..."
From AB alone, there seems to be a lot of self-contradiction (not you, personally, aog- but in general). From how strict and great the discipline was, to the "we ran wild, nobody knew where we were or what we were doing..."
/// Back in the 1950s, the arrival of a child was considered women’s work. Fathers were not wanted on voyage, unlike today when they are expected to do everything other than physically giving birth. ///
/// No doubt, modern equality campaigners are already working on that. Prosthetic wombs and artificial insemination for men on the NHS? ///
Perhaps a rather humorous suggestion, but not a mile away from what we might expect in the future.
/// No doubt, modern equality campaigners are already working on that. Prosthetic wombs and artificial insemination for men on the NHS? ///
Perhaps a rather humorous suggestion, but not a mile away from what we might expect in the future.
Well in closing, i will ask all those who have took the trouble to read this bit of harmless nostalgia, why they have shown so much anger over it, please point out the passages that have caused offence, or is it just because it happens to appear in the Daily Mail and written by Richard John? (Hence my reference to that fact in my post).
But it seems that of all the passages from his article the last passages says it all apparently.
*** I can remember teasing that brilliant journalist and broadcaster Michael Parkinson about the amount of time he seemed to be spending down Memory Lane. ***
*** ‘Nowt wrong with that,’ said Parky. ‘You meet a better class of person down Memory Lane.’ ***
Fits perfectly it seems, judging by some of your present day comments.
But it seems that of all the passages from his article the last passages says it all apparently.
*** I can remember teasing that brilliant journalist and broadcaster Michael Parkinson about the amount of time he seemed to be spending down Memory Lane. ***
*** ‘Nowt wrong with that,’ said Parky. ‘You meet a better class of person down Memory Lane.’ ***
Fits perfectly it seems, judging by some of your present day comments.
> Well in closing, i will ask all those who have took the trouble to read this bit of harmless nostalgia, why they have shown so much anger over it, <
no anger from me aog did you miss my first posting
> form your link
> I shudder to think what Dad, who died in 1995, would have made of modern Britain, where the Welfare State has shamelessly institutionalised idleness as a way of life and six million people sit at home claiming an assortment of out-of-work benefits, while jobs they could be doing are filled by foreign immigrants imbued with the work ethic. <
from the office for national statistics
>The number of people out of work fell by 77,000 to 2.24 million in the three months to February, according to the Office for National Statistics. <
> The claimant count - the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance fell by 30,400 to 1.14 million in March. <
Understanding unemployment:
> A person is classed as unemployed if not only out of work, but also actively looking for work and available to start work within a fortnight <
>The unemployment figure is higher than the claimant count as many jobseekers do not or cannot claim JSA <
so which figures are true ? the mail or the office for national statistics ?
and
how many do not claim for an assortment of out-of-work benefits ?
10:50 Sat 10th May 2014
no anger from me aog did you miss my first posting
> form your link
> I shudder to think what Dad, who died in 1995, would have made of modern Britain, where the Welfare State has shamelessly institutionalised idleness as a way of life and six million people sit at home claiming an assortment of out-of-work benefits, while jobs they could be doing are filled by foreign immigrants imbued with the work ethic. <
from the office for national statistics
>The number of people out of work fell by 77,000 to 2.24 million in the three months to February, according to the Office for National Statistics. <
> The claimant count - the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance fell by 30,400 to 1.14 million in March. <
Understanding unemployment:
> A person is classed as unemployed if not only out of work, but also actively looking for work and available to start work within a fortnight <
>The unemployment figure is higher than the claimant count as many jobseekers do not or cannot claim JSA <
so which figures are true ? the mail or the office for national statistics ?
and
how many do not claim for an assortment of out-of-work benefits ?
10:50 Sat 10th May 2014
pixie373
//everything other than physically giving birth. ///
so what does that involve, exactly?
To name just a few.
Attending Antenatal classes,
http://
Taking one's turn in feeding, and changing etc.
Time off work to bond with one's child
Dealing with Postpartum Depression, I don't think the condition was even diagnosed back then.
I am not saying these modern things are not good, but you did ask "what everything other than physically giving birth" involved.
//everything other than physically giving birth. ///
so what does that involve, exactly?
To name just a few.
Attending Antenatal classes,
http://
Taking one's turn in feeding, and changing etc.
Time off work to bond with one's child
Dealing with Postpartum Depression, I don't think the condition was even diagnosed back then.
I am not saying these modern things are not good, but you did ask "what everything other than physically giving birth" involved.
DrFilth
Good point, by the way it was Little John's misinterpretation of those on benefits not the Mail's, he wrongfully included all benefits not just unemployment benefits.
/// The total number of people claiming benefits in the UK has been forecast to rise to more than 6 million when official figures are published later this month, according to the Conservative think-tank Policy Exchange. ///
/// The latest official figures, published in February, showed that the total was 5.8 million. This included 1.4 million on job seekers' allowance and 2.6 million on employment support – until recently known as incapacity benefit. People claiming other benefits – as lone parents, carers and because of disability – are also included. ///
http://
Good point, by the way it was Little John's misinterpretation of those on benefits not the Mail's, he wrongfully included all benefits not just unemployment benefits.
/// The total number of people claiming benefits in the UK has been forecast to rise to more than 6 million when official figures are published later this month, according to the Conservative think-tank Policy Exchange. ///
/// The latest official figures, published in February, showed that the total was 5.8 million. This included 1.4 million on job seekers' allowance and 2.6 million on employment support – until recently known as incapacity benefit. People claiming other benefits – as lone parents, carers and because of disability – are also included. ///
http://
and all that is about to change again
What is universal credit?
Universal credit (UC) is a new benefit which will begin to replace the following 'legacy' benefits* nationwide in Great Britain from October 2013 and in Northern Ireland from Summer 2014:
child tax credit
housing benefit
income related employment and support allowance
income based jobseeker's allowance
income support
parts of the social fund
working tax credit
Universal credit is an attempt to simplify the current benefit system in order to remove barriers to you getting and keeping work. The Government sees work as the route out of poverty rather than benefits. It hopes UC will also save money in the long term but, in the short term, the new system is expected to cost £2 billion to set up.
What is universal credit?
Universal credit (UC) is a new benefit which will begin to replace the following 'legacy' benefits* nationwide in Great Britain from October 2013 and in Northern Ireland from Summer 2014:
child tax credit
housing benefit
income related employment and support allowance
income based jobseeker's allowance
income support
parts of the social fund
working tax credit
Universal credit is an attempt to simplify the current benefit system in order to remove barriers to you getting and keeping work. The Government sees work as the route out of poverty rather than benefits. It hopes UC will also save money in the long term but, in the short term, the new system is expected to cost £2 billion to set up.
jim 360
/// But there is no absolute decline, nor an absolute improvement, and the older generation who bemoan a world in decline are just the latest in a long line of Grumpy Old Men. ///
It would be interesting to see any details of youths in the 50s, stabbing each other to death, or a child accused of allegedly stabbing his school teacher to death, or an off duty soldier being hacked to death on our streets, riots and looting, bombings, houses being torched, widespread child abduction, strikes by teachers and fire service personnel, need I go on?
Waits for "They did happen, but we didn't hear as much about them in those days, as we do today".
/// But there is no absolute decline, nor an absolute improvement, and the older generation who bemoan a world in decline are just the latest in a long line of Grumpy Old Men. ///
It would be interesting to see any details of youths in the 50s, stabbing each other to death, or a child accused of allegedly stabbing his school teacher to death, or an off duty soldier being hacked to death on our streets, riots and looting, bombings, houses being torched, widespread child abduction, strikes by teachers and fire service personnel, need I go on?
Waits for "They did happen, but we didn't hear as much about them in those days, as we do today".
-- answer removed --
Well obviously they happened. What sort of fairy-tale world were you living in? And you still have to address the whole point that this is nothing new, that every generation complains about the one that follows it.
One example of how things have got better, markedly, is car safety. The statistics of injuries are somewhat vague, so we will ignore them, but 2012 saw both the lowest number of fatalities since records began, but also comes at the time when car ownership is very, very high. Very few people, or at least households, have no cars, and many have two or more.
On the other hand, virtually no-one drove in the 30s and 40s, and even at last as the 1960s when the first motorways were built car ownership and car use was hardly that high. And yet the number of fatalities was between 4 and 5 times higher than in 2012. Of course, the rate of miles driven/ fatalities is even more significantly greater in days gone by than it is today.
This is a concrete example of something that has improved over time, and we should be grateful for that. The reasons for the change are many and complex (improved design and safety features, more awareness etc.), but the change certainly can't be denied. I do wonder how much attention was given to the 9,000+ road deaths in 1941, or the nearly 8,000 in 1966.
Every time you post about strikes, or violent behaviour, and in your last post, you keep implying that this is somehow new. It is certainly not new. As I've suggested before, statistics do show that the violent crime rate has risen since the 1940s, but is on a decline currently. So, also like I said before, the picture is mixed. Life expectancy is rising, general health is better this days, and so on. Those are hardly negligible changes.
I found this 1999 paper containing a whole bunch of general trends. Overall the picture is mixed, but on such matters as health and education in particular, we are very much better off than ever before.
http://
One example of how things have got better, markedly, is car safety. The statistics of injuries are somewhat vague, so we will ignore them, but 2012 saw both the lowest number of fatalities since records began, but also comes at the time when car ownership is very, very high. Very few people, or at least households, have no cars, and many have two or more.
On the other hand, virtually no-one drove in the 30s and 40s, and even at last as the 1960s when the first motorways were built car ownership and car use was hardly that high. And yet the number of fatalities was between 4 and 5 times higher than in 2012. Of course, the rate of miles driven/ fatalities is even more significantly greater in days gone by than it is today.
This is a concrete example of something that has improved over time, and we should be grateful for that. The reasons for the change are many and complex (improved design and safety features, more awareness etc.), but the change certainly can't be denied. I do wonder how much attention was given to the 9,000+ road deaths in 1941, or the nearly 8,000 in 1966.
Every time you post about strikes, or violent behaviour, and in your last post, you keep implying that this is somehow new. It is certainly not new. As I've suggested before, statistics do show that the violent crime rate has risen since the 1940s, but is on a decline currently. So, also like I said before, the picture is mixed. Life expectancy is rising, general health is better this days, and so on. Those are hardly negligible changes.
I found this 1999 paper containing a whole bunch of general trends. Overall the picture is mixed, but on such matters as health and education in particular, we are very much better off than ever before.
http://
jim360
You have gone to enormous trouble to prove to me that some things are much better today, and I would be a fool not to agree with you, but that is not the point either myself or Little John is making.
Once again provide me with proof that the particular points that I pointed out did actually take place in the 50s.
Teacher stabbed by pupil, youth on youth knife killings etc etc. I gave a list, I now await your response.
You have gone to enormous trouble to prove to me that some things are much better today, and I would be a fool not to agree with you, but that is not the point either myself or Little John is making.
Once again provide me with proof that the particular points that I pointed out did actually take place in the 50s.
Teacher stabbed by pupil, youth on youth knife killings etc etc. I gave a list, I now await your response.
