Showing you that your arguments contradict each other, isn't moving the goalposts.
The definition "better-off" is subjective. You cannot present statistics to back it up, despite your attempts to do so.
All you have provided us with is a statistic which states that mortgage is now 52%+ of disposable "individual" income in 2015, whereas it was 12% in 1971......and offer it up as conclusive proof that the 1971 man was "better off".
All you've really done is state that 2015 man pays a bigger %age of his income on his mortgage - thats it. You have provided precisely ZERO evidence that he is "worse-off" than 1971 Man.....which you could never do anyway, because the term is wholly-subjective, as we've just established.
If you enter the realms of "subjective" argument, then it is perfectly proper to start considering intangibles such as life-expectancy, sanitation, health, and all the other peripheral things that determine how well-off an individual is.
In real terms, 1971 Man probably paid about the same for his NHS service, as 2015 Man........but there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever, that (despite all of the NHS's fault) 2015 Man benefits from a much better Health Service than 1971 Man.
A low-income 1971 Man would perhaps have shared a bathroom with another family, and an outside toilet.. This is something that would be reflected in the purchase price of his house. 2015 Man would have no such concerns - no matter how far down the property-ladder he is.
