Jump to content

Recommended Posts

LostThePlot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi Jonsuissy,

>

> Yes, can we have more please?

>

> I look at these and wonder just what the world was

> really like then? ED Grove just looks wonderful.

> LIfe at that pace, instead of today's frantic

> running about, must have been better for the sould

> and mind?

>

> E


Unless you were in the ruling classes or very rich, it was quite a struggle; the 1901 census shows three families, eight people in all, crammed into our 3-bed ED home, before it had a loo or a bathroom.


http://www.1901officialcensus.co.uk/

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3627-old-pictures/#findComment-113134
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

mockney piers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think you're right MP, he's looking up at

> Maudsley isn't he.



Does that mean the negative is the wrong way round? In my view that bridge is the one with the pub on it and the Sally Army building is up on the right.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3627-old-pictures/#findComment-117399
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think that's a big assumption.  Many people vote for the candidate precisely because they are a member of a particular party and represent that party's policiies.  I personally didn't know who McAsh was in the last election, but I knew what party he represented.  When politicians don't act "morally" what are we to think of them and their motivations? But I think there will be people who want to vote Labour, don't know that McAsh has defected and accidentally vote Green precisely because they do vote for the name.  Yes, you could say they need to read the ballot paper more carefully but it's possible to see one thing and not notice another.
    • Morally they should, but we don't actually vote for parties in our electoral system. We vote for a parliamentary (or council) representative. That candidates group together under party unbrellas is irrelevant. We have a 'representative' democracy, not a party political one (if that makes sense). That's where I am on things at the moment. Reform are knocking on the door of the BNP, and using wedge issues to bait emotional rage. The Greens are knocking on the door of the hard left, sweeping up the Corbynista idealists. But it's worth saying that both are only ascending because of the failures of the two main parties and the successive governments they have led. Large parts of the country have been left in economic decline for decades, while city fat cats became uber wealthy. Young people have been screwed over by student loans. Housing is 40 years of commoditisation, removing affordabilty beyond the reach of too many. Decently paid, secure jobs, seem to be a thing of the past. Which of the main parties can people turn to, to fix any of these things, when the main parties are the reason for the mess that has been allowed to evolve? Reform certainly aren't the answer to those things. The Greens may aspire to do something meaningful about some of them, but where will they find the money to pay for it? None of it's easy.
    • Yes, but the context is important and the reason.
    • That messes up Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - democracy being based on citizenship not literacy. There's intentionally no one language that campaign materials have to be in. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...