You can find bits about it all over the internet.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-voting-muscle
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/book...-WILLETTS.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...se-prices.html
An interesting debate both ways can be read at
http://www.totalpolitics.com/opinion...-selfish.thtml
The point isn't the relatively great prosperity, it's that all the money from that prosperity has been spent, along with more, and some of that 'more' has been saved up in PFI for future generations to pay, along with the distinct lack of signs of that prosperity.
Rather than saving up for pensions they covered current pensions, as generations do, and spent more than they were putting in despite the North Sea oil revenues and the relatively low cost of education and health care. Their parents paid for their education, my generation will pay for their health care and pensions in retirement.
Had they done something like
this there would've been little cause to complain.
Prosperity doesn't mean house prices rocket, they were fairly flat until 1997 despite periods of extremely rapid GDP growth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_property_bubble