Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm hardly an expert so I'll welcome someone who is to correct my mistakes. However, the main problem with the gold standard was that it's too easy to corner the market in gold. As new economies gain traction, they have to purchase gold to back up their currencies. However, at the time the liquidity in gold was very, very low because everybody was hording it. This caused the price to spike. Occasionally large amounts…
Just an FYI, the Bretton Woods system was the gold tied system that lasted until the 70's and was discarded for a fully fiat system. From context it seems you're using the reference incorrectly to mean this post gold standard system.
Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
251–260 of 264 posts
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I offered 10 people the opportunity to live like people lived in the 1970's Do I also get a dozen brothers and sisters? Eat food, drink water and breath air without having to constantly worry about being them polluted or toxic? > would only have a black-and-white TV with 4 stations and a gramophone record player.. Sure. I would rather have a gramaphone record player or cassete player (which is more like 70s i think…
> Eat food, drink water and breath air without having to constantly worry about being them polluted or toxic? Sorry but you have a very rosy view of the 1970s. Would you drink this water [0]? Or fill your car with leaded Gas [1]? Use asbestos in your building [2]? DDT on your fresh food? [3] Air quality around the world is vastly superior to the 70s (people are still suffering because of it [4]). > than a 4k lcd tv t…
Who said pollution did not exist back in 1970. Just that it was more feasible to get stuff that you know that is not polluted. From local produce or farmed yourself.
> Air quality around the world is vastly superior to the 70s (people are still suffering because of it?
Oh yea? Can you provide some citations. By what factor have the number of automobiles multiplied?
> Your 4k TV today can still play Abba or boney M.
You are missing the point. The point is that the technology to consume art is irrelavant if the art produced is low quality in itself. I mean, where is M-tv today?
>There is also plenty of great music being produced now that can easily be found.
Oh yea? Again, where is M-Tv then? It's been ages since a new song have really captured my attention.
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Eat food, drink water and breath air without having to constantly worry about being them polluted or toxic? Sorry but you have a very rosy view of the 1970s. Would you drink this water [0]? Or fill your car with leaded Gas [1]? Use asbestos in your building [2]? DDT on your fresh food? [3] Air quality around the world is vastly superior to the 70s (people are still suffering because of it [4]). > than a 4k lcd tv t…
> Sorry but you have a very rosy view of the 1970s. Who said pollution did not exist back in 1970. Just that it was more feasible to get stuff that you know that is not polluted. From local produce or farmed yourself. > Air quality around the world is vastly superior to the 70s (people are still suffering because of it? Oh yea? Can you provide some citations. By what factor have the number of automobiles multiplied?…
There are plenty of ways to get locally farmed meat and vegetables. The fact that battery farmed chickens and industrially grown tomatoes are now easily accessible all year around in your local Walmart/Asda doesn't change the fact that I can go to my greengrocer and get fresh fruit and veg from 30 miles away.
> Can you provide some citations.
Yes, I did for everything I said in the previous post at the bottom. I even numbered them.
>art is irrelavant if the art produced is low quality...
> where is M-tv today
You don't have to judge by the lowest common denominator.
Just because the most popular music right now doesn't capture your imagination doesn't mean that 1) all popular music is bad, or 2) the older forms which you enjoy have been taken from you.
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
It never ceases to amaze me that people seem to be under the impression that there's no good jobs anywhere that isn't the coast. Oh well, I guess we silly flyovers can just keep this affordable and comfortable living situation to ourselves.
You've missed my point, or perhaps I wasn't clear enough, from parent: > The other thing people were more willing to do in the 1940s was move to where they could afford to live. Where can you move today that offers affordable living and a good, steady job? Lets say you were on the expensive east coast and wanted a cheaper, more affordable place to live, with work. You'd consider Pittsburgh or Detroit, maybe. Both tic…
I am coming from a tech perspective, but most of my friends and family are not. Their stories aren't wholly dissimilar - those of us who were in tech could afford homes faster than those who are not, but most everyone who is aiming to achieve that goal isn't having a problem doing so around here.
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sorry but you have a very rosy view of the 1970s. Who said pollution did not exist back in 1970. Just that it was more feasible to get stuff that you know that is not polluted. From local produce or farmed yourself. > Air quality around the world is vastly superior to the 70s (people are still suffering because of it? Oh yea? Can you provide some citations. By what factor have the number of automobiles multiplied?…
> From local produce or farmed yourself. There are plenty of ways to get locally farmed meat and vegetables. The fact that battery farmed chickens and industrially grown tomatoes are now easily accessible all year around in your local Walmart/Asda doesn't change the fact that I can go to my greengrocer and get fresh fruit and veg from 30 miles away. > Can you provide some citations. Yes, I did for everything I said i…
And you think that is free of toxins?
>Yes, I did for everything I said in the previous post at the bottom. I even numbered them.
No. You said air pollution around the world is vastly superior now. The link you provided said "People are dying from pollution sustain during the 70s". If you don't see the difference, then I wish you a good day and let us drop this conversation.
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#256Humans are social animals. One of the primary drives of most social animals is to get as high up in the status/dominance hierarchy as possible, since this improves an organism's access to mates. Status and dominance are relative to other members of the species and, thus, unrelated to the absolute level of an organism's access to food and other resources.
Except that pretty much no social animal with dominance hierarchy has a ranking function as simple as "status=mates". Most animals track the cost(e.g. more stress, higher metabolic rate) of high status vs the rewards. Which means that in an environment of abundance, the cost often exceeds the rewards. There's also the phenomenon of reverse hierarchies (essentially, lower ranking members band together to keep anybody…
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans are also security focused rational animals, and if we can believe that there really is enough for us and no one will take it away, then happiness might be for all. Perhaps UBI will make us all happy
> if we can believe that there really is enough for us What I am saying is that humans are not wired for the concept of "enough". We have already had something similar to UBI in the form of fossil fuels and the abundant energy they provide, which have tremendously lowered the cost of the bare essentials in the developed world in the last 100 years. You can go into any super market in the US and buy a days worth of ca…
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
Say there is some function connecting some measure of wealth to some measure of happiness. And the function would be monotonically increasing. Well, the measure of wealth in the modern era ought to be orders of magnitude bigger than it was in the stone age. Back then people had control over something like 10 items. There were no property laws to ensure you kept them, either. If you got a minor cut it could get infect…
> Well, the measure of wealth in the modern era ought to be orders of magnitude bigger than it was in the stone age. This is what I don't understand. Why should this make happiness "orders of magnitude bigger"? Isn’t it possible happiness has increased, just not by orders of magnitude?
So if you expected wealth to be connected to happiness, and the connection is linear, you would expect happiness to be similarly off the scale.
It doesn't seem to be the case, so maybe it's something like a logarithm, so there's still an upward slope but it's barely anything.
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is this the case while the average wage has not even kept up with inflation?
Firstly, wages grew much more rapidly until 1970. Secondly, even since then in the US wages have not fallen in real terms, they have just been level with inflation. The phenomenon where labour gets more costly despite no gains in productivity because on average society has become wealthier is called Baumol's cost disease ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%27s_cost_disease ). While a servant is not much more effic…
Employers everywhere are saying the same thing - we can't find anybody competent at this form of labour. The normal response on HN will be "raise wages" - which we do and we tell them we can pay a lot more if they can perform ... except we still can't find anybody who has their shit together to the point they're capable of earning themselves a minimum wage. The opportunity costs of hiring create a situation where hiring anybody is a losing proposition - making employers very conservative despite the market braying for new workers. We want to hire because we want to make money, we'd do it if we could.
We can get people 'available to work' but they're so inept they can't be employed productively or even trained up because the snobbery of poverty is real and - a value judgement I know but it has to be said - prospective employees are also typically unusually unreliable people with smartphone, videogame or drug addictions, distracted, zero attention span.
I despise that arrogant middle class perspective of those who believe you just need to throw warm bodies at blue collar work. It does not work. It hasn't been true for a long time. "The world needs ditch diggers too" doesn't operate in a world where the ditch digger is using a mechanical excavator and is paid $60+ per hour is competing with an idiot using the excavator who will cost tens of thousands if he busts a pipe or hits something valuable. Literal shovel ready jobs do not exist! Tyler Cowen describes this in his book, Average is Over - the situation is not what politicians and most people think it is.
There's was a natural aptitude or blue collar culture that went unappreciated that is simply missing today. Now people are going to pay for that expertise in a way nobody had to before. Most blue collar workers operate together with a collection of machinery to augment their effort which is very expensive - a joinery guy installing a kitchen I saw last month had 20k of Festool tools laying around him, that's not even his workshop - the barrier to entry is getting higher all the time.
People have been saying labour compensation would occur (migration, middle class adaption, upskilling, machine replacment, houses built in factories) would occur for over a decade now and it hasn't happened in a meaningful way at scale and now the average age of a plumber in some states is near 60.
If you want to send in the Androids to do work, now would be a good time Silicon Valley... I suspect it's not really happening.
In a nutshell - just as infrastructure has been physically neglected in the West - so too has the skillset of the workers that maintain it. Where are the AR Platforms that teach a framer how to toenail studs into place? Has anybody here heard of companies producing such modules?
In ten years things are going to look very dire for the typical white collar worker, probably a good portion of the population is going to go bankrupt and lose their property - potholes and lots of anger.
As you've mentioned when the middle class lost all their servants to the factories and farms because the wages were higher - suddenly women who never had to clean or cook had to learn those skills - this was one of the drivers behind electrical home tools for cleaning and cooking (most cooking books were invented around this time says the Gastropod food podcast) and the feminist political movements. I think this will happen again and automation will occur but it's on the scale of decades, not years.
tldr; This gets worse before it gets better.
Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps the deficit of happiness can be better explained by one of Peter Thiel's most excellent reductionist observations: The countercultural in the '60s was the hippies. You know, we landed on the moon in July of 1969. Woodstock started three weeks later, and with the benefit of hindsight, that’s when progress ended, and the hippies took over the country. [1][2] Perhaps, for too long, the left has engulfed and held…
“That’s when progress ended”, really? That alone is enough to discredit Thiel on the topic
I believe Thiel is correct in what he is saying and that is terrifying. It is going to take Westerners a long time to finally wake up and when it finally does it'll be jarring and immensely depressing.