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

Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

fullstackeconomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 500 posts

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#231

Post by pjc50 »

addaon wrote: post #5

"Even if someone managed to invent a robot nanny that kept kids safe as well as a human being, I wouldn’t want it to take care of my baby. I bet you wouldn’t either." This glosses over the purpose of child care -- it's more than safety, it's socialization, learning, etc. In a world where some level of automation (or offshoring) is possible for these services, I could definitely see some adoption. Think "Diamond Age."

Given the amount of discussion during the pandemic of "open the schools so the parents can go back to work, even if that means transmitting the virus between families", I think the demand for automated childcare would be huge.

It would be a status symbol to not have it, of course - real organically raised human children! - but the struggling middle class would pick up robonanny-as-a-service immediately if it was cheaper than other childcare.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#232

Post by jseban »

NoPie wrote: post #198

I have a different conclusion. The article mentions that the car would have cost her 3 months of income. That doesn't sound too much and is roughly about the same what people pay for cars today, maybe even more. The reason she thought about the car as a luxury and not a necessity is that then the society wasn't dependent on cars like we do today. They travelled less, worked closer to home, milkman brought milk to hom…

That was my conclusion as well, everything was simply insanely cheap then compared to today. A car today cost much more than 3 months salary, and to rent such an apartment would be basically impossible.

The rent was 12% of his income only. Which means a bachelor with a middle class job could easily rent an apartment with 4 bedrooms and 2 sitting rooms. LOL

Everything was much much cheaper. Except exotic food groceries.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#233

Post by pcardoso »

elcritch wrote: post #105
mattwad wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Egypt, that's true unless you haggle. You can always haggle to get close to Egyptian prices, but if I didn't have my friend with me to show me how to do that, I would have paid American prices the whole trip. I'm sure a lot of places work similarly. At the end of the day, they want to make a sale, doesn't matter who you are just what they think you'll pay.

Funny, I found shop vendors from some Arabic cultures would almost become offended if you _didn't_ barter with them -- at least if they knew you weren't just a tourist. For the (American) tourists wandering through they'd suck it up and just charge them 10x the price. ;)

Also funny, I visited Jordan 2 years ago, right before the pandemic. I was expecting to have to haggle prices like in other places but it just didn't happen, didn't feel I was paying tourist prices at all. Street sellers didn't push us to buy stuff. A street restaurant in Amman that didn't have a menu charged us around €4 for the meal, which was dirt cheap for what we had. All in all it was a very nice experience.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#234

Post by jseban »

dmz73 wrote: post #61

Interesting that he compares everything that is hard to compare but ignores one thing that would be very easy - rental pricing. You had to pay it then and you have to pay it now. "four bedrooms, two sitting rooms, and a “nice outlook on green.” The rent was £90 for a year." According to one CPI calculator ( https://www.in2013dollars.com ) "£90 in 1919 is equivalent in purchasing power to about £4,951.54 today" and "£…

Yeah, and that calculation also only adjusts rent for inflation, and in reality rent has risen much much more than inflation.

The rent for that apartment today would be more than 100% of the average middle class income.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#235

Post by Beltalowda »

geomark wrote: post #150
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Thailand I can say this isn't the case

In Thailand there isn't dual pricing for food. But there is for entry to many venues. It is institutionalized by the government - for example, the entry fee to national parks for non-Thais is 10x the Thai price.

This isn't even that uncommon in Western countries. For example Cardiff Castle has free entry for residents, but non-residents need to pay for entry (at least, that was the case when I was there a few years ago). The museum in my city in the Netherlands is €6 for residents of the city, and €13 for non-residents.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#236

Post by Accacin »

mannerheim wrote: post #53
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read this is surprisingly common especially with older couples. People like to have their own space and when you get older comfort is more important because your body isn't what it used to be. Snoring, keeping separate hours, stealing blankets, freezing feet, etc. It all adds up. People don't need to sleep all night together to be a couple or to have sex. If anything, its kinda weird we are expected to share a bed…

While apartments have gotten smaller over the past decade (and I can't find anything on apartment sizes in decades past), only about 20% of Americans live in apartments, and houses are way bigger than they used to be. > In 1950, the year Time magazine estimated that Levitt and Sons built one out of every eight houses in the United States, the average size of a newly built single-family home was 983 square feet — slig…

Crazy, my house in the UK is 93sq/m. I think this is a pretty 'average' size house in the UK :)

Edit: Wow, the average is much lower than that!

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#237

Post by jll29 »

Both the car and the nanny have a TCO that is vastly higher than the purchase price/salary: the car needs maintenance/service, parking, repairs, fuel, taxes and insurance, and the nanny needs a place to stay, food, and he/she consumes water and electricity.

People tend not to calculate TCO or even be aware of it, they just look at their monthly incoming and outgoing money and check if their cashflow doesn't hits 0.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#238

Post by thriftwy »

j7ake wrote: post #182

In 1919, one did not need a car to live, especially in London (true even in 2021). It was a luxury item. The lifestyle improvement of owning a car in London in 1919 was probably marginal except for social status. On the other hand, having a maid and nanny would dramatically improve your life, especially before inventions of washing machines. It is analogous to living in places like Singapore or Hong Kong, where ownin…

The car was probably more akin to a private jet. It would require a professional driver, for starters.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#239

Post by oleg_antonyan »

I can easily afford a car, but don't want to. The hidden cost of ownership, driving, all that stuff take a lot of attention. Not to mention that cars in a big city do more damage to your quality of life. Please, stop using cars as a proxy for prosperity. I hope one day personal cars become luxury again so only rich will be able to afford one, the rest would use public transport including self-driving car-sharing

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#240

Post by 01acheru »

thriftwy wrote: post #230
01acheru wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he meant "one or more vacations per year" not "one or more years long vacations" (it also confounded me when skimming)

That would mean that Russia is a country of very rich people, since even the blue collar workers here can afford a family vacation per year, going to e.g. Turkey or Egypt - these tours come pre-packaged therefore really cheap. Middle-class youth routinely have 2-3 of these, going to more exclusive destinations. A lot of these will never buy a car, especially a new one, since a new car costs 10 years worth of vacation…

I agree with you, I think it is a very US centric point of view.

BTW I think they where referring to middle class: you are middle class if you can go on vacation. (IMHO it doesn't make sense to be considered rich if you can go on vacation)

In Europe we are used to having a lot of vacation time, it (almost) doesn't matter which is your job, in the US it is not like this.

Post reply on HN