‘Could’ specifies a possibility of an event occurring, as opposed to no possibility.

For example, I could have rice for dinner, however there is no way I could jump to the moon.

When applied to the context of this conversation:

A person born in the 90s could have had their childhood affected by the recession in the 80s. A person born in the 50s could not have had their childhood affected by the recession in the 80s.

Could is only vague in the scope of probability; this is because it’s a confirmation of the possibility, rather than a defined probability.

What part of the UK are they called doughballs? ive never heard them called that.

Only reference I can think of is Pizza express’ dough balls, but they’re a savoury dough ball rather than sweet like a doughnut.

One without a hole is a doughnut. One with is a doughnut ring.

Oh I understand that. I was just being facetious; my point was more to do with the definition of a hole, and how it’s used here to describe something that definitely is not a hole.

If we’re pedantic, then the doughnut hole is the middle bit of the original doughnut, now that this part has been punched out.

In the UK these are called doughnuts.

The presence of a hole isnt a pre-requisite to being deemed a doughnut here.

Calling something that has zero holes a ‘donut hole’, will absolutely have a local refer to you as a doughnut tho…