Live data from Hacker News

Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

washingtonpost.com

41–50 of 343 posts

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#41
post #30
post #17

American wages have been stagnated for over 30 years.

Everything I ever saw points to rising real wages over spans larger than 20 years. e.g., https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N (there's quite the dip after 2008). Could you provide a source?

Contrast it to GDP: https://wtfhappenedin1971home.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/wa...

Or labors share of the economy: https://wtfhappenedin1971home.files.wordpress.com/2020/09/ei...

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are made to fail fast, it's obviously by design. One simple thing I do in all my led light bulbs, that makes them last for an almost indefinite amount of time: remove the plastic bulb. One of the main reasons for one of the leds or one of the capacitors to fail, is the high temperatures reached during the operation of the device. Removing the bulb makes it a lot cooler, and in the last few years since I've been…

Huh, I wonder if drilled ventilation holes would work too...

When I first embarked on this quest to make my led bulbs stop failing, I saw a video of a russian guy that, beyond removing the bul itself, drilled roles on the base of the device, and plugged screws on them to create passive cooling. Not very safe, since the screws have access to the inside of the fixture, and can eventually touch the wires and become live, I wouldn't personally do it myself.

As for drilling holes on the bulb itself, I'm pretty sure it would not reduce the temperature as much as simply removing it, and in my experience, the luminosity is even better without those cheap plastic bulbs anyway.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#43
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

It's not racist for bringing it up - it's racist for blaming immigrants when it's the wealthy buying up and hoarding land and property, coupled with an out of control healthcare system, stagnant wages while corporate profits are huge, and lobbyists keeping politicians from meaningfully changing anything. I couldn't take you seriously, anyway. 2.7 million illegal border crossings have zero to do with 1.6 million housi…

>2.7 million illegal border crossings have zero to do with 1.6 million housing units

Only if you assume all 2.7 million people are now homeless.

Price is a function of supply and demand. Obviously, increasing the number of people within a system without commensurately increasing housing will result in upward pressure on housing prices.

You could argue that the system-wide effect is minimal, but you would need data to do that, which you haven't provided.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#44
post #26
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to blame pre BC humans for needing light, especially when nocturnal creatures existed. If anything this is an absolute win, we are still burning something in order to produce light, but what we burn is way less of a pollutant than wood.

I'm referring to light pollution, not the power source. It used to be that if you saw light at night, you knew humans were there - now we light millions of uninhabited acres.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=rWBCyNMfCAE

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#45
post #17

American wages have been stagnated for over 30 years.

Yet if you take into account welfare payments and programs, total income growth has been large. If you make 20K a year, you get about 40K of additional government welfare. If you make 45k a year, you get zero. For a vast number of Americans, increasing wage is a bad thing. https://www.illinoispolicy.org/illinois-warped-welfare-syste...

I don't think anyone expected anything different but the housing and childcare benefits basically account for 80% of the welfare trap.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#46
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything I ever saw points to rising real wages over spans larger than 20 years. e.g., https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N (there's quite the dip after 2008). Could you provide a source?

Contrast it to GDP: https://wtfhappenedin1971home.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/wa... Or labors share of the economy: https://wtfhappenedin1971home.files.wordpress.com/2020/09/ei...

50% wage share? I have heard that neoclassical economists still use 0.7 and when you tell them that this is wrong or doesn't work across countries (e.g. you've been cherry picking the data) they ignore you or treat you as some kind of crank.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not racist for bringing it up - it's racist for blaming immigrants when it's the wealthy buying up and hoarding land and property, coupled with an out of control healthcare system, stagnant wages while corporate profits are huge, and lobbyists keeping politicians from meaningfully changing anything. I couldn't take you seriously, anyway. 2.7 million illegal border crossings have zero to do with 1.6 million housi…

>2.7 million illegal border crossings have zero to do with 1.6 million housing units Only if you assume all 2.7 million people are now homeless. Price is a function of supply and demand. Obviously, increasing the number of people within a system without commensurately increasing housing will result in upward pressure on housing prices. You could argue that the system-wide effect is minimal, but you would need data to…

[flagged]

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#48
post #35

Considering that the amount of computing that could be rented for the price of a house every month could now be bought for $20, this isn't surprising. What's surprising is that with all these resources made available to the world, we still have systems that allow hoarding of wealth to such a degree that most people can't afford to own a home and many can barely afford rent and food.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

Blaming immigration on how much we aren’t building is a mental gymnastic I haven’t seen before.

Besides, those immigrants are the ones building those houses.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not racist for bringing it up - it's racist for blaming immigrants when it's the wealthy buying up and hoarding land and property, coupled with an out of control healthcare system, stagnant wages while corporate profits are huge, and lobbyists keeping politicians from meaningfully changing anything. I couldn't take you seriously, anyway. 2.7 million illegal border crossings have zero to do with 1.6 million housi…

>2.7 million illegal border crossings have zero to do with 1.6 million housing units Only if you assume all 2.7 million people are now homeless. Price is a function of supply and demand. Obviously, increasing the number of people within a system without commensurately increasing housing will result in upward pressure on housing prices. You could argue that the system-wide effect is minimal, but you would need data to…

>Obviously, increasing the number of people within a system without commensurately increasing housing will result in upward pressure on housing prices.

That was the explicit intent of prop 13. Triggering the NIMBYtastrophe and privatizing commensurate increases in rents and land values was an entirely deliberate and cynical wealth grab that drove millions into poverty in California.

I get that we're supposed to be more angry at immigrants than Howard Jarvis and his friends though.

Just as we're supposed to be upset at "AI taking jobs" rather than deliberate trade policy.

Scapegoats have gotta goat.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#50
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm referring to light pollution, not the power source. It used to be that if you saw light at night, you knew humans were there - now we light millions of uninhabited acres.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=rWBCyNMfCAE

SHIFTLOCKERDUDE

2 months ago

Tornado took it down last night

Sounds like someone somewhere also didn't like it ...

Post reply on HN