Author Topic: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's  (Read 6436 times)

Offline bykerlads

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,232
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #18 on: Saturday 11 October 14 17:18 BST (UK) »
Yes, Igor, I doagree.
Maybe I sounded a bit harsh.
Perhaps I should have added that families are much more secure if the wife/mother also works and can provide an additional income stream.

Offline Plummiegirl

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,620
  • Me, Dad, Granddad & G/gran
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #19 on: Saturday 11 October 14 21:21 BST (UK) »
Until 1968 I lived in flats similar to those in those photos.  And I lived in Sth London.

We had no bathroom, and our toilet was a bricked off corner in the kitchen.  Mum always said she could sit on the loo and cook the dinner!

They were bug, rat and mice infested.  But we were happy.  Very cold in the winter, especially when money was tight and my parents could not afford coal.

When we moved to a flat at the Elephant and Castle that had a bathroom, it was sheer luxury!!!
Fleming (Bristol) Fowler/Brain (Battersea/Bristol)    Simpson (Fulham/Clapham)  Harrison (W.London, Fulham, Clapham)  Earl & Butler  (Dublin,New Ross: Ireland)  Humphrey (All over mainly London) Hill (Reigate, Bletchingly, Redhill: Surrey)
Sell (Herts/Essex/W. London)

Offline GillyJ

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #20 on: Sunday 12 October 14 22:26 BST (UK) »
I have not seen the article but when we grew up in the 50's / 60's we had coal fires and no central heating, no washing machine and in my early years a larder in the pantry instead of a fridge. When my grandmother came to live with us, Mum had her first washing machine and we had a big fridge.
The village we lived in had 4 grocer shops, 2 butchers, a chemist shop and a bakery as well as a shoe shop, a newsagent and a separate post office, and a sweet shop and every week we had a visit by a baker in a van, a fishmonger and a horse and cart came laden with fruit and vegetables. We were never short of food but we bought as we needed it rather than loading up from supermarkets ,which did not exist. Treats were for Christmas and birthdays only.We could buy small quantities as we needed them and we ate simply but well. We did not have many clothes apart from our school uniforms and Sunday best. I made a lot of my clothes as a teenager and was proud to wear them even though they were not bought.
When I became a student, my first year was spent in comfortable digs but in the second year three of us ventured into a flat. The kitchen was filfthy and we spent three days cleaning the grease from the cooker and floor, the bath was heated by a geezer fed with old pennies. Each time it fired up the lid blew in the air and it was quite a terrifying experience - a bath cost 4 pennies. There was a metal framed sofa bed which had a habit of folding up unexpectedly and all the furniture was old and battered but it was home for a year. We brightened it up by decorating large boxes with magazine cuttings and turning them into bookcases or waste bins and covered up the walls with big posters.
The next flat we had was half a house with a cellar that filled up with rainwater in the winter and we could hear the mice. Again the furniture was sparse and old and I recall my first bed had a horsehair mattress  which I replaced as soon as I could with a cheap mattress which three of us carried through the streets as we could not afford delivery costs. I painted the dull and scuffed boards a nice pale blue and kept warm over a little convector heater with my duffle coat over the bed to keep warm. there was no central heating, no washing machine and a shared fridge. We never thought of ourselves as poor but had very little money to spare, walked everywhere to save money ( no need to diet then!! ) and supplemented our income with little part time jobs that were advertised from time to time in the student union. I found one which gave me sixteen shillings a week - enough to have a few treats. By the end of term there was little money left and it is amazing how good a fried onion and pea sandwich can taste!!
Married life in a rented flat started for us - with our bed, my wardrobe from home, a second hand three piece suite with one collapsed chair, an old television cabinet to hold our food , two fold up garden chairs and a little table with a hole in the centre that had been used in the garden with a parasol. After a few months we could afford a rented television and bought a spin drier and a fridge on twelve months instalments and a pre-used cooker. We had very little cash to spare, did not smoke and went out infrequently but we did not expect to have everything at once.
I do not dispute the fact that there is poverty now and it is very hard for people to manage on low wages with high living costs and things have changed very much since I was young but we did struggle at times and did without things rather than go into debt.
 The freecycle sites and freegle sites are great now if you do need things and it is amazing what you can do with old furniture and a can of paint.
Today, it is very hard for young people to start off in homes of their own and some landlords can exploit people with high rents and there should be more social housing so that people can live in their homes at reasonable rates. Life in the old days was probably better and we did learn how to live within our means because we were not able to have everything we wanted and had to learn to wait for things as children.
 

Offline pinefamily

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,810
  • Big sister with baby brother
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #21 on: Monday 13 October 14 08:26 BST (UK) »
GillyJ,
Without hijacking this thread, or jumping on my soapbox (too much), I have to say the difference today to back then is that today people largely don't want second-hand, or hand-me-downs, and how can we really feel sympathy for the poorer sections of society when they all have mobile phones, big flat screen TV's, etc.?
I am Australian, from all the lands I come (my ancestors, at least!)

Pine/Pyne, Dowdeswell, Kempster, Sando/Sandoe/Sandow, Nancarrow, Hounslow, Youatt, Richardson, Jarmyn, Oxlade, Coad, Kelsey, Crampton, Lindner, Pittaway, and too many others to name.
Devon, Dorset, Gloucs, Cornwall, Warwickshire, Bucks, Oxfordshire, Wilts, Germany, Sweden, and of course London, to name a few.


Offline Annie65115

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,245
  • HOLYLAND regd with guild of one name studies
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #22 on: Monday 13 October 14 10:02 BST (UK) »
Some may, but they don't "all" have those luxury items. Don't believe everything that the right-wing tabloid press tells you

(you don't really believe everything you read in the newspapers, do you?)
Bradbury (Sedgeley, Bilston, Warrington)
Cooper (Sedgeley, Bilston)
Kilner/Kilmer (Leic, Notts)
Greenfield (Liverpool)
Holyland (Anywhere and everywhere, also Holiland Holliland Hollyland)
Pryce/Price (Welshpool, Liverpool)
Rawson (Leicester)
Upton (Desford, Leics)
Partrick (Vera and George, Leicester)
Marshall (Westmorland, Cheshire/Leicester)

Offline panic

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #23 on: Monday 13 October 14 10:06 BST (UK) »
GillyJ,
Without hijacking this thread, or jumping on my soapbox (too much), I have to say the difference today to back then is that today people largely don't want second-hand, or hand-me-downs, and how can we really feel sympathy for the poorer sections of society when they all have mobile phones, big flat screen TV's, etc.?
There isn't the same poverty today, thankfully, but publicity like this is politically motivated so when attacks come on the poorer sections of society, sympathy is much reduced, as they aren't that poor!

The state of housing in those pictures are appalling, and they seem to be slum dwellings. Mostly slums in the UK were demolished  in 1950's and 1960's, but many survived longer. If you look at back-to-back houses, mostly built in 18th & 19thC due to great influx into cities, these were typical slums, but they haven't all gone. Back-to-backs were built  up to 1909, when they were banned by a government act as they were deemed "unfit for human occupation", though in Leeds at least there was a last minute rush of applications pushed through which saw them being built up to 1930's.

The article does say that the photographs were done for Shelter to highlight poverty, but it was also opportunistic as many were getting demolished - I wonder if they have been? Leeds, currently, has the highest portion of back-to-back housing still standing in the UK, some 30,000 houses. This was not because any desire to keep them (though it seems there is an affinity with them, such that the National Trust spent £3m restoring some in Birmingham!) but budget constraints curtailed their demolition.

When I see talk of affordable housing schemes, I often fume - affordable to who? New builds in Leeds tend to be well over £100k, and whilst schemes like shared ownership can reduce the mortgage demands you have to look at back-to-backs that go for £60-80k (unless you want one in the more sought after areas of Leeds then its double that, at least) and its no wonder why they remain popular starter homes. They will continue to be the bane of the Council who would dearly like to demolish them all, some about a mile or so from me were deemed unsustainable boarded up for several years, partially demolished in 2012 to make temporary green space (i.e. wasteland until they build over them) that's still green space.
Shropshire: Bailey, Cadman, Chilton, Garbett, Pritchards
Yorkshire: Chilton, Cogan, Cooper, Farrar, Hammond, Nickless/Nicholls, Silkstone
Ireland: Brannan, Cogan, O'Connor

Offline pinefamily

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,810
  • Big sister with baby brother
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #24 on: Monday 13 October 14 10:22 BST (UK) »
Some may, but they don't "all" have those luxury items. Don't believe everything that the right-wing tabloid press tells you

(you don't really believe everything you read in the newspapers, do you?)

No, I don't believe everything I read or see in any mainstream media. That's why I get my news information from a variety of sources. I want to hear what is going on in the world, not what "they" want me to know.
I am Australian, from all the lands I come (my ancestors, at least!)

Pine/Pyne, Dowdeswell, Kempster, Sando/Sandoe/Sandow, Nancarrow, Hounslow, Youatt, Richardson, Jarmyn, Oxlade, Coad, Kelsey, Crampton, Lindner, Pittaway, and too many others to name.
Devon, Dorset, Gloucs, Cornwall, Warwickshire, Bucks, Oxfordshire, Wilts, Germany, Sweden, and of course London, to name a few.

Offline GillyJ

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #25 on: Monday 13 October 14 10:43 BST (UK) »
I think I  agree with you that expectations are very different now. There were no mobile phones, not every house had a tv of any type and you could only buy alcohol from an off licence so most people did not drink. Our culture has changed a lot and there are many  people in my locality who do recycle and are prepared to use hand me downs until they are in a position to buy new things.
Everyone is different but I do think that affordable housing is anything but that to the average wage earner.
Rented property is snapped up the minute it is on the market and yes it is very hard for some people to have an acceptable standard of living.

Offline Redroger

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,680
  • Dad and Fireman at Kings Cross 13.7.1951
    • View Profile
Re: Poverty in the 1960's and 1970's
« Reply #26 on: Monday 13 October 14 19:19 BST (UK) »

Some may, but they don't "all" have those luxury items. Don't believe everything that the right-wing tabloid press tells you

(you don't really believe everything you read in the newspapers, do you?)

No, I don't believe everything I read or see in any mainstream media. That's why I get my news information from a variety of sources. I want to hear what is going on in the world, not what "they" want me to know.
[/quote]
The point has been missed, those right wing papers control over 80% of the press and much of the TV news
Ayres Brignell Cornwell Harvey Shipp  Stimpson Stubbings (all Cambs) Baumber Baxter Burton Ethards Proctor Stanton (all Lincs) Luffman (all counties)