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

Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 264 posts

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#41

Post by igol »

groby_b wrote: post #9
tapatio wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty sure everyone, except for the 1%, struggle to get daycare, medical care, and education.

You might want to visit Europe at some point. That's a very specific US problem. (Europe's not problem-free, but access to daycare/medical care/education is much easier to obtain there)

Sort of. It is probably better but if you don't have stable living conditions, which many people don't, that affects everything else. So you can say that people have access to daycare, but if you involuntarily have to move around a lot that is a real overall decrease in quality of that daycare.

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#42

Post by hcnews »

I am not onboard with the idea that humans need to be happy 100% of the time.

I am going to be unhappy, even frustrated trying to improve things or create new things (as an artist or engineer). Healthy unhappiness, as I see it, is required for evolution/human-advancement.

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#43

Post by TaupeRanger »

greenhatman wrote: post #34
coldtea wrote: post #14

The title is a little out of date. Prosperity has been increasing in the 20th century, but has not increased for a few decades. Sure, crap like gadgets is now cheaper, but buying a house, giving your kids an education, and so on have increased. In the 40s and 50s a middle class household could get by just fine (and the house be bought) by a single income earner. Such a house now would be on the verge of bankruptcy. A…

>giving your kids an education Only if you insist on universities. You can get an education almost for free on the internet.

What a weird comment. There are a huge number of fields where you simply can't avoid "insisting" on universities. Try being a particle physicist outside a university lab. Try being any kind of medical professional without going to med school. Try being a lawyer with going to law school.

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#44

Post by paulcole »

greenhatman wrote: post #34
coldtea wrote: post #14

The title is a little out of date. Prosperity has been increasing in the 20th century, but has not increased for a few decades. Sure, crap like gadgets is now cheaper, but buying a house, giving your kids an education, and so on have increased. In the 40s and 50s a middle class household could get by just fine (and the house be bought) by a single income earner. Such a house now would be on the verge of bankruptcy. A…

>giving your kids an education Only if you insist on universities. You can get an education almost for free on the internet.

Rightly or wrongly, in much of the US parents consider private schools (elementary/middle/high schools) the only option.

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#45

Post by ianai »

technobabble wrote: post #18
coldtea wrote: post #14

The title is a little out of date. Prosperity has been increasing in the 20th century, but has not increased for a few decades. Sure, crap like gadgets is now cheaper, but buying a house, giving your kids an education, and so on have increased. In the 40s and 50s a middle class household could get by just fine (and the house be bought) by a single income earner. Such a house now would be on the verge of bankruptcy. A…

To further your analogy, it sometimes feels that the Maslow's hierarchy of needs is "hollowed out" at the bottom of the pyramid, and to keep the hollowing out disguised, companies and advertisers divert attention to the top of the pyramid i.e. "look how everything's awesome! Take your complimentary beer".

I’m confused by “hollowed out Maslows pyramid of needs”

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#46

Post by panopticon »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #27
joe_the_user wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, claims for increase in prosperity seem pretty illusionary. Headline: Most Americans are one paycheck away from the street Subheading: Some 63% of people can’t deal with a $500 emergency The website is CBS Market, fairly respectable, draws on several plausible studies. Link: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/most-americans-are-one-pay...

This has largely been debunked -- the questions asked were not about their access to sufficient funds. For example, the median American household has $1000 per month in disposable income ("beer money") after all typical living expenses. This fact alone should immediately raise questions about the assertion that the majority of households can't afford $500 in one-time cost, emergency or not. The major source for this…

A Bankrate[1] survey found that only 37% of respondents could cover a Given that, I'd say a large percentage of Americans do not have plenty of emergency cash. That's not to say most of America is "one paycheck away from the street" like the parent comment quoted...

[1]: https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/survey-how-american...

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#47

Post by daniel_levine »

TuringNYC wrote: post #23
r00fus wrote: post #15

The article cites income increase but doesn't talk about the necessary factors even if you're only talking numbers: 1) real inflation (ie, cost of living has skyrocketed due to rent/medical) outweighs any income increases. 2) overall wealth was not accounted for - in fact many Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, probably far more than at any corresponding postwar period in the US. In short "prosperity" != inco…

Well said, and the easiest metric you could look at w/r/t cost-of-living is the average income : house price ratio. What was once withing reach for most educated workers is now often a fantasy for the rich. Unfortunately it is also what the lion's share of paychecks is often spent on.

Real GDP per capita covers this. Inflation encompasses cost of living. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A939RX0Q048SBEA Missing a breakdown by quartile, but it's the right metric

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#48

Post by [deleted] »

greenhatman wrote: post #34
coldtea wrote: post #14

The title is a little out of date. Prosperity has been increasing in the 20th century, but has not increased for a few decades. Sure, crap like gadgets is now cheaper, but buying a house, giving your kids an education, and so on have increased. In the 40s and 50s a middle class household could get by just fine (and the house be bought) by a single income earner. Such a house now would be on the verge of bankruptcy. A…

>giving your kids an education Only if you insist on universities. You can get an education almost for free on the internet.

[deleted]

Re: Why Prosperity Has Increased but Happiness Has Not

#49

Post by randomdata »

coldtea wrote: post #14

The title is a little out of date. Prosperity has been increasing in the 20th century, but has not increased for a few decades. Sure, crap like gadgets is now cheaper, but buying a house, giving your kids an education, and so on have increased. In the 40s and 50s a middle class household could get by just fine (and the house be bought) by a single income earner. Such a house now would be on the verge of bankruptcy. A…

> In the 40s and 50s a middle class household could get by just fine (and the house be bought) by a single income earner.

Has that really changed?

A manufacturing business in my area is currently hiring everyone who shows up to an interview. They pay they are offering isn't wonderful (at least if you concept of money has been warped by the IT industry), but you should expect to make around $40,000 per year to start. Perusing the real estate listings, I see a three bed, two bath detached home near to that business listed at $139,000.

Rule of thumb says you shouldn't spend more than three times your income on housing, but many suggest you can go as high as five times income. We're at 3.4 times income. It's not ideal, but it seems doable, especially if you want to live like it is the 1940s. The cost of cell phone each month can easily apply $50-100 more to your mortgage payment each month instead.

I will point out that our example job is one that you can walk into and start today. If you take a little more care and look around and risk a few rejections before finding work, there are plenty of jobs that pay considerably more. In those cases, one person buying a home should not be an issue whatsoever. A $45,000 income would provide the necessary amount for the three times income rule of thumb to buy this home in question.

Post reply on HN