We hear that we are now a poor country. Expectations managed down and down. I wonder though. When Britain was at the height of its power and wealth, with the biggest, richest empire the world had ever seen, most of its citizens lived in abject poverty and insecurity. 12 to 14 hour working day, subsistance wages. Dickens and other writers chronicled this. Conversely, I am part of the post war baby boomer generation and have done more than okay. Far better off than my parents and the following generations, able to "acquire assets" property, decent pension, generous redundancy in late 90s. And yet, the "boomers" inherited the direst economy Britain has ever had. Having gone over to a war economy, Britain ended the war with a staggering debt 275% of GDP and a destroyed or commandeered industrial infrastructure. Houses destroyed or badly damaged. Massive social upheaval, trauma and loss. From this massive debt and destruction the succeeding generation of ordinary folk achieved a level of prosperity their parents only dreamed of. Millions of houses were built, the NHS was established, free higher education and maintenance grants. We could buy houses, got decent pay and pensions, had a good standard of living. Looking at history, it seems the wealth of a country is not the only or main determinant of how wealthy ordinary citizens are.

Entire Thread

Topic	Date Posted	Posted By
Is Britain poor or just most of its citizens?	17/04/26 19:43:00	Kathleen Healy
Re:Is Britain poor or just most of its citizens?	17/04/26 20:58:00	Janice Evans

Forum Home