Because you beat me to it, my dear chap. However, I fully support your attempt to ameliorate the woefully base level of literacy, grammar and syntax in some posts on this otherwise admirable forum.
I'm sorry, Professor, but you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
There were undoubtedly many aspects of our ancestors' lives that we today would find grindingly hard. But only because we have been exposed to, and become accustomed to, an easier existence. They knew no better, so there is no evidence that your somewhat exaggerated description of their tribulations had a deleterious effect on their basic quality of life.
The fact that life was harder then, without many of the material comforts with which we surround ourselves, does not mean that the building methods were inferior. The fact that we now build our houses using cement, gypsum, sealants, impervious waterproofers and other misguidedly "improved" materials, doesn't mean that these materials are better than those used by our ancestors. It simply means that we have failed to learn from history (and this, I would argue, is a trait at the very core of the human condition). We have allowed the economic pressure to finish a building job as quickly as possible to supercede the concept of "best practice". It's true that this has allowed many more people to live in their own homes, but it most emphatically does not mean that those homes are better built. How many of today's estate houses will still be standing in 500, 400, 300... etc years' time? Of course our period buildings have had to be maintained, repaired and renovated over the centuries, but it is a tribute to the quality of their original construction that so much of their original fabric still exists for us to enjoy and admire.
I shall now go and lie down with a wet towel on my forehead.
To my eye, the undifferentiated white flowers on the left beyond the border looks like a potato patch in full bloom - the antecedents of Duke of York or Arran Banner perchance?