Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

loc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 659 posts

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#211

Post by Retric »

scottLobster wrote: post #165
jollybean wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 1922 only 5% of people went to University - now 50% go on to post secondary which is largely due to cost and opportunity. Only about 50% finished HS - now it's 95%. Doctors were not very affordable by anyone - now it's >90%. Most people didn't have running water and electricity yet now it's almost 100%. The only thing that's not as nice as 'real estate' - housing was cheap, but the houses were crap, and often you…

All of those facts are meaningless without context. Higher education is far more necessary for even a middle class existence than it was in 1922, and the middle class is getting less and less affordable. One of my grandfathers worked a family farm. My dad was able to grind his way out of the lower classes by working at Friendly's and other odd jobs to pay for college (up to and including his PhD). My father in law's…

A 1922s “middle class” experience is affordable for a most Americans today. As in shelter with heat, phone service, and electric lights but no appliances, no car, minimal access to effective healthcare etc.

Upward mobility is still available and just as rare. The health, intelligence, and drive that allowed someone in 1922 to better themselves are the same things that still allow someone to better themselves in 2022. It’s not easy, but it was never easy. Just look at how many people in 1922 where held back by the color of their skin.

As to getting a job at Walmart, have you ever actually applied? Their standards are incredibly lax.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#212

Post by elhudy »

scottLobster wrote: post #165
jollybean wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 1922 only 5% of people went to University - now 50% go on to post secondary which is largely due to cost and opportunity. Only about 50% finished HS - now it's 95%. Doctors were not very affordable by anyone - now it's >90%. Most people didn't have running water and electricity yet now it's almost 100%. The only thing that's not as nice as 'real estate' - housing was cheap, but the houses were crap, and often you…

All of those facts are meaningless without context. Higher education is far more necessary for even a middle class existence than it was in 1922, and the middle class is getting less and less affordable. One of my grandfathers worked a family farm. My dad was able to grind his way out of the lower classes by working at Friendly's and other odd jobs to pay for college (up to and including his PhD). My father in law's…

Further, healthcare costs are only “affordable” insofar as we are adding them to our country’s growing debt via medicare.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#213

Post by hunterb123 »

beaconstudios wrote: post #162
lettergram wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the book, look into the forums content, funding sources, history, etc I was pointing out the anti-United states propaganda has been going on for years.

I'm not going to do all that to verify your comment. It strikes me as an absurd claim, at least in part because nazis and communists are opposites, and everybody is predicting the fall of the US' dominance to China these days. The WEF is just liberal capitalism. The trend towards technofeudalism (everyone is renting their existence from big corps) has been going on for a while, at the hands of capitalists. Because it…

I don't see how you can read things like the Great Reset and think the things you do.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#214

Post by Server6 »

mstade wrote: post #58
haunter wrote: post #15

>Similar reforms apply to cooking, a great deal of which will survive among old fashioned people, but a great deal more of which will probably be avoided by the use of synthetic foods. This is very interesting especially if you think "synthetic foods" not just literally but as take out, processed products and such. I know a lot of young professional people who technically never cook. Like almost never and whatever th…

> This is very interesting especially if you think "synthetic foods" not just literally but as take out, processed products and such. I know a lot of young professional people who technically never cook. Like almost never and whatever they have at home is just snacks, if you hungry > order. There are a lot people like these. Anecdata – I'm on of these people. I live in central Stockholm, Sweden, and almost any hour o…

I did this for a decade and gained 60lb. I've since lost it, mainly from cooking at home.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#215

Post by throwaway0a5e »

Brendinooo wrote: post #65
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but long-distance data transfer was normal - and the fax machine sending pictures was overseas was just two years away (1924). "Quantity has a quality all its own" -Joseph Stalin Saying the fax let us move information long distance is like saying global trade was around in the middle ages because Macro Polo. The quantity difference is so big it becomes a qualitative difference. I can arrange to have an arbitrary in…

I get what you're saying, but I think I disagree. Ordering on Amazon from your phone is a much faster experience that reaches more products, but it is an analogue to mailing in an order from the Sears catalog. I don't think there's an 1822 analogue to the Sears catalog. And the quote was about "surprise". I don't think it'd be a complete shock to see that the world got more connected, ordering became easier, deliveri…

>Put differently, a lot of "0 to 1" stuff had happened by 1922.

How much of that 0-1 is stuff that existed in some niche or experimental capacity prior to 1822 but simply became possible at scale?

We had writing for millennia but the printing press changed the world.

We've had steel for millennia but the Bessemer process changed the world.

We've always been able to send information long distances but digital communications changed the world.

You can always pick whatever specific innovations you want as the 0-1 transition point but it's the widespread availability of something that changes the world.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#216

Post by beaconstudios »

hunterb123 wrote: post #213
beaconstudios wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to do all that to verify your comment. It strikes me as an absurd claim, at least in part because nazis and communists are opposites, and everybody is predicting the fall of the US' dominance to China these days. The WEF is just liberal capitalism. The trend towards technofeudalism (everyone is renting their existence from big corps) has been going on for a while, at the hands of capitalists. Because it…

I don't see how you can read things like the Great Reset and think the things you do.

I'm open to convincing arguments. What do you think the Great Reset is? To me it seems like late capitalists doing a capitalism as they always do, trying to eke out more profit by way of financier feudalism.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#217

Post by atlgator »

jollybean wrote: post #124
lettergram wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better Let me translate “you are slaves and you rent everything. We base your ability to purchase on a social credit score. But we let you rent houses in our artificially limited VR world.” I don’t make much of predictions like these. It’s ALWAYS a safe bet to assume people will lose liberty. To the point the FED was created in 1913, research w…

Central Banking has been one of the most powerful and liberating achievements of civilization. And you now have the 'freedom' to strike and sue your employer, women have the 'freedom' to actually have a job, you have the 'freedom' to attend college which only about 5% did at the time, you have the 'freedom' to do almost anything in life. And what 'freedoms' have you lost? Well, there's more taxation. And you have to…

Has Central Banking been liberating or do we only perceive it as such because it has historically aligned with American business and political interests? Would a small South American country being forced to sell it's natural resources or lose it's borrowing power agree? Would Middle Eastern countries that tried to form the petro dollar and were met with endless wars agree?

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#218

Post by Ostrogodsky »

elzbardico wrote: post #98
leadingthenet wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do any of those even come close to 1822-1922 changes of aviation, global telecommumications, ubiquitous electricity, cars, Quantum Mechanics, and so on? Space exploration, nuclear propulsion and satellites are great, but their impact on people’s daily lives is far smaller than the above, imo. I think the author was largely correct.

How not? Penicilin alone has a giant impact on the lives of people. What about anti-conceptionals too.

So did (even to a greater effect) the doctors washing their hands. Between 1822-1922, only in Physics humanity discovered/developed, the laws of Electromagnetism, the laws of Thermodynamics and their microscopic extension: Statistical Mechanics, the special theory of relativity, quantum mechanics and the General theory of relativity.

The last 100 years have been about doing things in large quantities in a cheaper, faster way. Of course there has been great progress (the era of the PC/Internet by far the most important one) but the rate is significantly lower.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#219

Post by MR4D »

md_ wrote: post #179
didericis wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain why the freedoms you mention are the result primarily of central banking and not social and technological change? The key freedom lost via central banking (at least irresponsible central banking) is the freedom of those in the future to do anything other than meet debt obligations. Debt and credit is obviously necessary, and making money easily accessible and keeping markets liquid is a good thing, bu…

I’m confused. If you mean public debt, doesn’t central banking free the public from meeting debt obligations when those obligations are denominated in the national currency? Countries can and do issue public debt in other currencies. If we all used gold or bitcoin, there’s no reason to think public debt would be lower. But the obligation to pay it back would, in a sense, be harder to dodge. It’s worth noting, as an a…

> If we all used gold or bitcoin, there’s no reason to think public debt would be lower.

For reference, public debt tends to be higher when based in currencies that can be more easily debased. This was true in Roman times as it is now.

I’m on my phone, so I’d have to look up the book, but it’s well documented.

Post reply on HN