Life Improvements Since the 1990s • Hacker News Board

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#391

Post by lotsofpulp » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 8:30 PM UTC

nemo44x wrote: post #366

lotsofpulp wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These jobs pay really well and they offer a career ladder. You will be able to buy a home, have children, take vacations. But you need to show up every day and work. They obviously do not pay commensurate to the risks of job loss, lack of quality of life at a job, and/or to make up for the undesirability for the location they are in. The proof is the data showing wages for factory type work stagnating for many deca…

> They obviously do not pay commensurate to the risks of job loss, lack of quality of life at a job, and/or to make up for the undesirability for the location they are in. I mean, there's a lot of alcoholism problems and drug issues too. >People incorporate that knowledge, and let their kids know that those jobs are not worth investing in. I'm not sure the wisdom of the crowds is a great example here. How many kids a…

> Additionally, a lot of people think this kind of work is below them because they went to a university to study a field that they can't make it in.

People think it is "below them" because they saw the people who went into white collar professions in their parents' generation come out ahead. Pay enough (and advertise the pay) and people's perception will change.

>But you would think it isn't even available - but it is.

Where are the job postings showing the pay and benefits? Why do the stats indicate the wages not increasing much?

>There's a career out there in modern manufacturing if they are willing to humble themselves.

The situation might have changed recently, but those jobs have definitely not paid sufficiently for the past few decades to make it a worthwhile investment. This is shown by definition, since they are complaining about lack of candidates for the job positions. If they paid appropriately and competitively, by definition people would have opted to work those jobs.

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#392

Post by seanc » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 8:33 PM UTC

iambateman wrote: post #14

I often ask people: “if you could be 20-years old in 1991 or 2021, which would you pick?” An incredible number of people pick ‘91. Some people even ask to go back to the seventies. This article explains why I would much rather be young now rather than before.

I was in my 20's in the 90's. It's tough to say. On the one hand I feel like I was the last generation to take a mid-level software salary and pay off a degree and a "short commute" detached house before I was 40.

On the other hand, since I was in my 20's in the 90's I was a young child in the 70's and 80's when nerds were to be bullied, gay people were to be beaten, and God help you if you were Trans. That's still the case in much of the world, but looking at how my kids grew up, vastly improved since then.

So as a nerd, yes, the 90's were probably better for 20 year old me, but the 10's were definitely better for the 10 year old me.

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#393

Post by dhosek » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 8:39 PM UTC

tristor wrote: post #267

globular-toast wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Induction stoves are good for boiling water and nothing else. And I mean boiling, not simmering. I'm going back to gas very soon and can't wait to start cooking properly again.

Pretty much agreed. I thought induction was going to be the miracle technology that would make a kitchen both highly productive and capable while increasing safety standards markedly over working with open flame. I was all in on getting a high-end induction range to replace my older radiant electric range, and thanks to a friend's advice I decided to buy a freestanding single-burner induction cooktop to try it first.…

We're in the process of designing a new kitchen and I had thought that we might do a hybrid cook surface: use a six-burner space to have a 3–4 spot induction cooktop and a 2-burner gas cooktop. Hearing these accounts, I'm beginning to reconsider (certainly, there are some things, like roasting chili peppers that can only be done effectively on a gas range).

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#394

Post by throwaway-x123 » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 8:44 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #376

throwaway-x123 wrote: post #372

Life improvement is more free time. Free time is time free from necessary work. This includes free time from cooking, cleaning, etc, life support activities at home, too. In total, the number of working hours on average is higher than in 1990, I think, for full time workers. For some workers the work day increased to 12 hours/day, from 8 hours. It is unlikely the worker will be able to use his free time after long wo…

There's nothing stopping you from having more free time. Move to a low cost area, get a part time job, and live a frugal lifestyle. However most people have different priorities, and prefer to chase social status and material comfort at the expense of free time.

Why frugal lifestyle? Was it frugal lifestyle in 1970? From 1970 productivity increased a few times, so the work day can be reduced a few times.

I've spent some time looking for a part time job, there is none/rare. Also part time wage likely will not be enough for life support.

Almost no one have a choice in how many hours to work so we do not know what people prefer.

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#395

Post by unnouinceput » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 8:46 PM UTC

denton-scratch wrote: post #356

unnouinceput wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>[Edit] OK, I'll list one: permanent war. Before 90's US was in permanent war just as well. It was called the Cold War. So that one downside is actually non-existent - from "before" vs. "today" point of view.

"Non-existent" is a bit hyperbolic. I have no idea how many casualties resulted from the Cold War, I'd guess a few thousand. Even if 20,000 died, which I doubt, that's pretty good going for a war that lasted 30 years.

You seem to forget that Vietnam war was a side effect of the Cold War. USSR and US fought through proxies in Cold War, Vietnam being just one instance. Another one before was Korean War which resulted in splitting that peninsula. I'd say your 20k is a bit low, might want to reconsider it with at least one order of magnitude.

Oh, and since we are splitting hair here about numbers, US started a 20 years war as result of just 3k deaths during 9/11. You and US government have another order of magnitude disagreement about what constitutes a "good" number of deaths as war causalities.

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#396

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 8:54 PM UTC

throwaway-x123 wrote: post #394

nradov wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing stopping you from having more free time. Move to a low cost area, get a part time job, and live a frugal lifestyle. However most people have different priorities, and prefer to chase social status and material comfort at the expense of free time.

Why frugal lifestyle? Was it frugal lifestyle in 1970? From 1970 productivity increased a few times, so the work day can be reduced a few times. I've spent some time looking for a part time job, there is none/rare. Also part time wage likely will not be enough for life support. Almost no one have a choice in how many hours to work so we do not know what people prefer.

[deleted]

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#397

Post by Robotbeat » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 9:15 PM UTC

thegrimmest wrote: post #331

Robotbeat wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is much better and it shows that median household incomes hadn’t grown much until recently (as the tight labor market and years of boom have pushed up wages). I still think it’s crazy our minimum wage is so low ($7.50/hr today vs $11/hour in late 1960s in today’s money). IMHO, it should be pinned to productivity growth since the 1960s (the question is: should we have higher or lower inequality than in the 1960s?…

Isn't the fact of rapidly climbing, market-driven compensation for typically-minimum-wage jobs such as food service, hospitality and labour sufficient to dispense with minimum wages all together? Yes perhaps the market takes X years to adjust, but it does in fact adjust. Why not just wait the years and save all the bureaucracy. > they can just hire cheap workers and fire them as needed But doesn't increasing the mini…

No, because usually we aren’t in such an extremely tight labor market driven by high federal spending.

If you want to argue for indefinite high federal spending to guarantee a tight labor market for decades, then sure, a higher minimum wage might not be necessary. Is that what you’re arguing?

Because if a tight labor market is transitory (and minimum wage keeps dropping due to inflation), then businesses won’t be given a firm enough pricing signal to make productivity investments.

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#398

Post by ggreer » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 9:24 PM UTC

Clubber wrote: post #48

iambateman wrote: post #14

I often ask people: “if you could be 20-years old in 1991 or 2021, which would you pick?” An incredible number of people pick ‘91. Some people even ask to go back to the seventies. This article explains why I would much rather be young now rather than before.

1991. Less Orwellian. Back then, 1984 was a warning, not an instruction manual.

In 1991, distributing encryption software was a violation of US munitions controls.[1] At the time, it was not at all clear whether encryption software would remain legal for individuals to own and use. The US government was considering mandating backdoors in all consumer encryption, culminating in the development of the Clipper chip.[2]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#399

Post by minikites » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 9:31 PM UTC

thegrimmest wrote: post #318

minikites wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And yet in reality, somehow the world moved towards a much better place despite those things. It's not "somehow", you're glossing over the very real losses and very avoidable tragedies (fed by bigotry and fear) that happened during the AIDS crisis, which is my whole point. Progress isn't free and by ignoring the real losses and avoidable tragedies we repeat the same mistakes. That's why we have to confront the uncom…

But isn't the point that despite the very real and avoidable tragedies along the way, things have continued to improve quite quickly? So as we continue, we can expect more preventable tragedies (whatever "preventable" actually means), but also more progress to benefit the vast majority of us who do make it? I don't think we need to get bent out of shape about the aspects of human nature that cause horror and tragedy,…

>progress to benefit the vast majority of us who do make it

So what level of sacrifice should be required of those that don't make it? Going back to the AIDS example, government involvement was delayed because of bigotry, because it only affected people who didn't make it. Our economy is currently propped up by low wage workers both locally and globally who aren't making it. We don't do a good job at taking care of the sick and the poor. We're doing a terrible job at taking care of the environment. As you both have said, none of this is new, but it doesn't have to be this way. We know how to solve many of society's problems and we choose not to do so. If the core reason for these things is "human nature" and we shouldn't try to change, I don't think I have the defeatist attitude in that case. My attitude comes from seeing solutions that we aren't even trying to do, not that we -shouldn't- try.

>The good guys are winning, by a lot.

I don't see the good guys winning. The good guys currently have the high score, but the bad guys are on the upswing and scoring points on the good guys, who are just standing around.

Re: Life Improvements Since the 1990s

#400

Post by nemo44x » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 9:35 PM UTC

bob1029 wrote: post #374

nemo44x wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cast iron is excellent for storing a lot of heat and then releasing it over a long period of time for searing things, etc. I love my cast iron cookware. But it's not a good choice for more delicate cooking where you want to change the temperature of the pan quickly and temperature control matters. Copper is noted for this and is popular in professional kitchens for precisely this reason. And gas allows you to tilt a…

> I've never heard a chef say that getting a pan hot and staying hot quickly is their number 1 optimization I am certainly no chef. Just an engineer trying to optimize my time as much as possible, especially in areas where I do not really enjoy spending it. Reduction of delicate sauces, et. al. is not something I am strongly concerned with. Fast meal prep is the name of the game for me. I do still have the ability to…

For sure - different tools for different jobs. We use different software Dev tools for different projects.

I’m a hobby home chef so I guess my optimizations are different. I insist on an offset smoker when a pellet smoker would use much less of my time, for example.

Awesome you cook though especially when it’s not your preferred way to spend time! It’s so easy to fall into the pattern of just getting delicious restaurant food all the time but cooking for yourself and family builds something.