• gasgiant@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    4 months ago

    His parents were a GP and owned a pharmacy. They just didn’t get it for him/them for whatever reason.

    They certainly could have afforded it if they wanted to.

    There’s a massive difference between just not having something as a child and not even being able to afford it at all.

    I love these Tory twat stories where they try to relate to normal people. They’re so far off the mark it highlights just how clueless they are about real life.

    • br3d@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Loads of people - probably most people - didn’t have Sky. When did shoveling cash at Murdoch become some sort of minimum entry level for society? Not having a TV would be vaguely interesting, but not having Sky means nothing

  • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    I spent a few years in England as a kid (I’m from the U.S.) when they only had 4 channels, two of which were boring (to a kid) BBC shit. That was a hardship. Having nothing at all would have been preferable because I wouldn’t have wasted so many hours flipping between 4 fucking channels hoping for something, anything interesting to watch. I usually found it more fun to play with the teletext thing they had, but there wasn’t anything interesting on that either.