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

America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

derekthompson.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 196 posts

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#121

Post by retired »

axpy906 wrote: post #95
artisinal wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Natural parks. Tasty drinkable water from the tap in nearly the entire country. Being able to flush toilet paper. Free toilets almost everywhere. Being a country for 250 years is also quite an achievement. I’m European and have witnessed many wars on my continent in my lifetime. A childhood friend was shot down with a Russian surface to air missile.

I don’t know. There are other countries that have those properties. I am envious of Western Europe’s healthcare, social safety net, healthier food and holidays that you don’t work on. The comment came about from the last charts show religion, patriotism, etc down while money rose. It clicked.

Grass is greener. I’m currently in Spain. I don’t have access to the public healthcare system. Don’t have access to unemployment. A third of the population can’t even afford a holiday. People are getting more obese every year. Rent is higher than minimum wage.

EU is a good place to be but some people have this overly optimistic view of the place.

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#122

Post by throw0101d »

ra0x3 wrote: post #74
vitorfblima wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since he is explicitly comparing 2026 to 1926 I think his statement holds up.

Meh, seems he's using arbitrary metrics to make arbitrary claims (which is fine). But to just state that "Life is so much better in 2026 than in 1926 for Americans" is obviously a pretty nebulous statement. It's like saying "Beaches in 2026 are so much better than beaches in 1926". Sure you could cherry-pick some metrics to make the case, and someone else could cherry-pick metrics to make the opposite case. Sort've a…

> But to just state that "Life is so much better in 2026 than in 1926 for Americans" is obviously a pretty nebulous statement.

Given that there was no antibiotics in 1926, no chemotherapy or radiation therapy for cancer, no public pensions (so good luck getting old), hardly any indoor plumbing (even by 1940 it was about half), I think life is much better now that one hundred years ago.

What were infant mortality rates in 1926? Maternal mortality? Average life span? How many years did people live after retirement?

Can you list the ways in which you think life was better in 1926?

And to say life is better now is not to say it's perfect or to deny that improvements can still be made.

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#123

Post by jshier »

WalterBright wrote: post #114
bryanlarsen wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 1994, the Greatest Generation voted D+7, higher than any other generational cohort. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2015/04/30/a-different-...

Your link doesn't seem to cover the Greatest Generation. Also, the Democrat party has steadily moved leftwards over time. I don't have statistics, but combat veterans voice very negative opinions on Jane Fonda and her support for N Vietnam.

> Also, the Democrat party has steadily moved leftwards over time.

What an absurd statement. During the Great Depression FDR was considering a worker's bill of rights that would guarantee employment. In the '60s LBJ used the specter of a dead president to push through the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts (which have been considerably undone). In the '90s, Clinton undid the what remained of the Federal welfare state in this country. In the '10s, Obama was barely able to pass legislation that forced people to buy health insurance. In the '20s, Biden's major achievements were largely spending related. So in what universe has the party steadily moved leftward?

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#124

Post by retired »

axpy906 wrote: post #116
fluidcruft wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What food does Europe have that the US does not?

Its what’s not in the food like additives, preservatives, pesticides, gmos and growth hormone. EU has stricter regulations.

> EU has stricter regulations.

Different, not stricter perse. In the EU it is allowed to sell food with non-edible parts inside or cheese with maggots.

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#125

Post by dillondoyle »

abirch wrote: post #30
UncleOxidant wrote: post #24

I read Sinclair Lewis' Babbit last year and it was kind of depressing how little has changed since 1922. The political climate (at least as portrayed in the novel) seemed eerily similar to now. Maybe we continually go through oscillations.

I'm shocked how much the average American knows about how things work. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. I'm not surprised how quickly Americans are giving up their liberty.

46% dont even know what America 250 is... Worse 61% of https://www.cato.org/blog/gen-z-fails-basic-civics-quiz-amer...

a gross percent can't name the 3 branches or their Reps.

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#126

Post by weaksauce »

WalterBright wrote: post #114
bryanlarsen wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 1994, the Greatest Generation voted D+7, higher than any other generational cohort. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2015/04/30/a-different-...

Your link doesn't seem to cover the Greatest Generation. Also, the Democrat party has steadily moved leftwards over time. I don't have statistics, but combat veterans voice very negative opinions on Jane Fonda and her support for N Vietnam.

> Also, the Democrat party has steadily moved leftwards over time.

the only way someone thinks this is if they have fox news blaring all day every day. the dems keep moving rightward step by step to appeal to "moderates" while the right wing keep moving the overton window even further right.

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#127

Post by WalterBright »

scoofy wrote: post #109
WalterBright wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps due to those experiences, you will be the only generation that votes more left as you age. I doubt it. My dad lived through the Great Depression, and fought desperate battles in WW2 and Korea. As a young man, he was a socialist. His experience in fighting for American freedoms changed all that. Before he passed, he told me he regretted leaving me in a country that was significantly less free than when he wa…

“Left” doesn’t mean socialism. In the long run, it comes out of the enlightenment period, quite literally. Traditionally, the left is associated with small “L” liberalism, and the right is associated with small “C” conservatism. Generally speaking, it has been a historic debate between whether the “natural” way things are is good and prudent (e.g., monarchs, religion, castes, roles, and norms), or if the way things a…

[flagged]

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#128

Post by vitally3643 »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #70
dgellow wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you mean to say “how little”?

How much and how little are logically equivalent, although in vernacular usage it is of course common to use how little when implying the amount is less than one might expect, and how much to imply the amount is more than one might expect.

English is a very context dependent language, so the phrases "surprised by how much" and "surprised by how little" actually have opposite denotations. Mechanically, sure, they're interchangeable, but using the "incorrect" form carries extra connotations. You've used the counterintuitive form, demanding the reader more carefully consider your meaning, which heavily implies you're making a point beyond what appears in the text.

If the second half of that reader engagement doesn't pay off, the sentence reads as clunky or incorrect, likely a mistake from a second language speaker.

Natural languages are not code and words can't be swapped arbitrarily. Word choice and construction carries meaning in and of itself, totally divorced from the actual words used.

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#129

Post by artisinal »

lovich wrote: post #102
artisinal wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The schengen zone grants passport-free travel across 29 nations, spanning thousands of miles without a single border checkpoint. Not anymore. I got stopped between The Netherlands and Germany, between France and Spain, Denmark and Sweden. Germany has border checkpoints with most of its bordering countries. That is unheard of in the USA. You can travel thousands of kilometers without getting stopped by authorities f…

Eh, we kinda can’t crow about that with ICE now, especially since it’s not just at known checkpoints where they are demanding papers. Free speech is also on the outs since we’re having people getting jailed for not carrying the flame appropriately with regards to the late Mr Kirk. Oh, and people getting prosecuted for 8647 as the powers at be decided to interpret that as a death threat instead of call to impeach.

The numbers aren’t very clear but from what I can read online I see that the border checks in Germany resulted in a couple thousand deportations. Hundred of thousands of people checked.

Not comparing that to ICE as deportations in the EU are typically peaceful.

Re: America, 1926: A forgotten 100-year-old report

#130

Post by scoofy »

WalterBright wrote: post #127
scoofy wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Left” doesn’t mean socialism. In the long run, it comes out of the enlightenment period, quite literally. Traditionally, the left is associated with small “L” liberalism, and the right is associated with small “C” conservatism. Generally speaking, it has been a historic debate between whether the “natural” way things are is good and prudent (e.g., monarchs, religion, castes, roles, and norms), or if the way things a…

[flagged]

Again, "the left" is not a homogeneous entity. When talking about "the left" we should look at the left's coalition. We don't really have significant party platforms anymore, but I can assure you "rent control" would not get passed by the Democratic Party coalition in the House of Representatives right now, much less the Senate.

Associating a political coalition with their most extreme or noisy members is counterproductive. When looking for what a coalition stands for, it's better to look at the coalition member who are most productive with legislation in places they have control.

Post reply on HN