Did you see the interview with Rushi Sunak when he complained, that as a child they didn't have Sky?
The interviewer had asked him, had his family suffered any hardships Rushi was taken unawares and looked embarrassed and answered 'lots of things' several times repeating just that. But pushed to answer something specific, he said that his family couldn't afford Sky, when he was growing up. His father was a GP and his mother was a pharmacist running their own chemists, and they had put their money into paying for private education for himself and his sister.
Sky TV!!!! When there are people who can't afford to eat and pay their bills? One of Dh's daughter's works for the Charity, 'Christians Against Poverty.' And she has said its difficult not to cry listening to some people, who through no fault of their own, now are not able to afford to live in their own homes, because the costs of energy, and household costs mean their salaries no longer cover the costs.
So I had no sympathy for Rushi Sunak, but last evening while chatting to my eldest son on the phone, he could see the other side of the coin. 'Rushi is 10 years younger than me,' he said, 'and at that point in time, everyone of his age group had Sky, so as a young boy, he would have felt he had missed out, because they didn't have Sky.'
He went on to say that he could remember when he was desperate for roller skates, because all his friends had some. He felt he was missing out because he didn't have any. But he had some a few days later as my Aunty had sent some money for him.
He went on to explain that when you're young and everyone else has the latest toy, it feels as though you are the only one without the toy. I love the way he says to me 'Mum, you have to realise some people value some things, you haven't even thought about.' Which is very true, I haven't lost my little Welsh Chapel ideas, so a bit narrow and I'm not in the real world some days.
And I didn't have this problem when I was young, because being a War baby, lots of children were like me and we played with what we had. As a matter of interest, when roller skates were the thing to have, when I was about 10, my aunty bought me some and my other aunty made me a pleated skirt to wear. But I was hopeless and spent a lot of time on my bottom, rather than skating!
So I feel I need to listen to two sides of stories and be a more understanding.. but I bet Rushi's parents didn't have to go without food, so their children could eat!
What's your point of view?
Chrisxx
8 comments:
Your son sounds like a very understanding person who can see things from another perspective.
I think most patents sheild their children from money worries and as a child you do only compare yourself to your friends, I remember clearly being talked out of having a bike one Christmas and persuaded that a doll would be better, I now understand that my parents couldn't afford a bike, there was 4 of us and there wasn't the money to spend on things like that, so I think it's probably relative, what one generation thinks is hardship another doesn't. In every generation there have been some families better off than others but we hear and are more aware of it now and as people in general have more nowadays it feels wrong that some don't.
I agree that Sunak has no idea what poverty is like. Also I've seen people comment that his parents' strong work ethic and desire to succeed coming before everything else probably stopped them getting Sky rather than cost.
I agree that going without Sky TV is not a hardship in the grand scheme of things, but people can only see things when they have had the exposure or experience to know about it. The older we are, the more experiences we've had to give us perspective on things.
I fear I am not as understanding as your son. If Sky was the worst of the prime minister’s wants as a child, he was privileged. So many are not these days or back then either.
I’m pretty certain that the main reason Sunak’s extremely wealthy parents didn’t have Sky TV in the home when he was a child was because Sunak was already 27 years old when Sky TV was launched.
Val.
I was a post-war baby too, but we lived in an area that while not affluent was certainly not poor--middle and upper middle class, for the most part. But we were such a large family that we did without many things our friends and neighbors had. I remember wanting pretty hairbows, pleated skirts and those fuzzy sweaters that were so popular in my teen years, but those were out of the question until we got some as hand-me-downs. Never got new clothes except once a new coat, another time a dress for a dance. How special that was! A working TV? Are you kidding, those were handed down too and usually didn't work. Dad got pretty good at repairing them.
But we didn't go hungry, we had a good house, we knew our parents loved us.
As for Mr. Sudak, I think your son nailed it. He certainly had a comfortable upbringing, far from want, but he could only compare what he had with what others around him had. My sons grew up without TV at all. Wonder what Rushi would have made of that!
I think he should have simply admitted that he had a well-provided-for childhood, for which he is very grateful, rather than try to come up with something. We all know he came from a well-to-do background and is now a millionaire, so trying to be "one of the ordinary people" will never work!
Post a Comment