How the other half live - C4

[Deva Link]

MikeO996 said:

Clearly I missed something and am a bigoted t**spot

You've come to the right place though!

[OllieWinchester]

Am I the only one who thought the ex-gyppo was a bit stupid to try and become a barrister? After spunking all that money and time training, surely she should have realised that the chances of some snooty law firm taking her on were slim to none. If she had trained as an electrician or a plumber then she could be knocking back cocktails on the balcony of her holiday home by now...

[V]

OllieWinchester said:

Am I the only one who thought the ex-gyppo was a bit stupid to try and become a barrister? After spunking all that money and time training, surely she should have realised that the chances of some snooty law firm taking her on were slim to none. If she had trained as an electrician or a plumber then she could be knocking back cocktails on the balcony of her holiday home by now...

I don't see your point. There is no reason she shouldn't be able to become a barrister, and its disgusting if she is unable to go any further with it because of her background/ appearence.

[OllieWinchester]

If I was mired in the pit of poverty with a young child to bring up and i wanted to better myself, would you suggest I was better off trying to make my fortune by training to be an astronaut at huge expense with little chance of success, or learning a trade such as plumbing where i'm far more likely to succeed and attain a better standard of living? She would have been better off taking singing lessons and trying to win x-factor as far as i'm concerned.

[pistonlager]

Oakey said:

£40 a week on gas?

Very feasible.

I never watched this program but on the poor bit
I'll always remember what my grandmother said.
She grew up in 1920,30's Liverpool, very working class.
After the war she settled down south and grafted hard.

Anyway.

A few years back when tv was rubbing modern poverty in our faces her reply was

"they ain't poor they've got shoes"

I could see her point.

[RV8]

I visited the 'back to backs' which are run by the national trust in Birmingham, those houses give you an idea what living on the breadline in the late Victorian era to circa 1960's was like, the occupants worked or starved and shared a toilet with several other families. The people on this tv show were not 'poor'
Then maybe consider rio where people live in makeshift huts and women are forced into prostitution through poverty and children run drugs. The people on this tv show are not poor.
Look at industrial areas of India where people sleep in the room they work and streets flow with human excrement. The people on this tv show are not poor.
I have no sympathy for anyone who claims they are poor and spend the first bit of cash that comes their way on something like a bit of new technology for the house or a holiday, these are luxury items and if you are poor you can't afford luxury.

[cazzer]

Nothing wrong with Back to Backs. The row of houses on both sides of mine are back to backs. 3 Story and sell for around 150k.

[MVDD]

fking free loading scum.

"I've been looking for a bigger house for 7 years now"

So only two of your children are over 7 and two are under 2. Knowing full well that you were a dole snatcher, you and your divvy (sp!) of a Husband decided to have more children, knowing full well that you had no means of paying for them or bringing them up. Ignorant scum like this are what is slowly bringing this country to it knees.

In my class at Primary school there were three Sisters (Triplets) and they had 3 other Sisters in the same school. Total 6 children from 3 different guys. I saw one of the Triplets in the pub 6 months ago (first time in 20 years) and her and her Sisters have 20 children between them and still all live on the same council estate......on benefits. Although this is an extreme example, fk me, where are we going to be in 2 more generations (this mind set is fking us now)....these girls are not alone in their expectations of what we owe them for free. Utter scum.

[RV8]

cazzer said:

Nothing wrong with Back to Backs. The row of houses on both sides of mine are back to backs. 3 Story and sell for around 150k.

Yes nothing wrong with back to backs except these ones (and others like them) were built cheaply to provide inadequate housing for thousands of workers by large manufacturing plants.
I'm not saying you visit the ones I'm on about to determine their value, instead you visit the National Trust run ones near the bullring to to gain an insight to the social structure of Britain covering many decades - the houses have been restored to show the relative poverty people lived in. You have to book in advance to take a tour.
The point I was making is that what is regarded as real poverty is not real poverty IMO. Having an Internet connection and a ps3 with a roof over your head and food on the table all provided by the state for people who choose not to work is not real poverty. This is true not just in comparson with other countries but with our history, where having coal for heating was a luxury.

[pistonlager]

RV8 said:

Then maybe consider Rio where people live in makeshift huts and women are forced into prostitution through poverty and children run drugs.

I suppose we're lucky to have such a generous government, at least in our deprived areas it's a vocation.