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

Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

theparisreview.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#81

Post by fastball »

ikeboy wrote: post #57
fastball wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems the gap between poor and 'typical' rich has come down a lot How do you figure? Back then you could rent a 3bed in NYC for $2000 (in todays dollars). That actual cost for a 3bed in NYC is probably closer to 4k or 5k, as I think a 2bed will usually run you about 3.5k p/m. So basically the only thing that can be gleaned is that property prices have gone up across the board, unlinked to inflation. EDIT: the actual…

I'm currently in a 4bd in the 2700 range

Not sure how your anecdote is relevant to averages.

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#82

Post by ikeboy »

fastball wrote: post #81
ikeboy wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm currently in a 4bd in the 2700 range

Not sure how your anecdote is relevant to averages.

The article isn't making a claim about averages. It's saying you could rent - possible the average was higher.

Average is irrelevant anyway, since that includes extremely expensive apartments nobody needs.

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#83

Post by kiliantics »

fastball wrote: post #55
petercooper wrote: post #48

So it says $450k then is equivalent to about $11M now, a multiple of about 24. So scaling up.. the coal miner's daily pay was about $36 in today's money and monthly rent about $144. A 3 bed NYC apartment, on the other hand, was about $1920 in today's money. Seems the gap between poor and the 'typical' rich has come down a lot, even if it doesn't feel like it.

Seems the gap between poor and 'typical' rich has come down a lot How do you figure? Back then you could rent a 3bed in NYC for $2000 (in todays dollars). That actual cost for a 3bed in NYC is probably closer to 4k or 5k, as I think a 2bed will usually run you about 3.5k p/m. So basically the only thing that can be gleaned is that property prices have gone up across the board, unlinked to inflation. EDIT: the actual…

Not to mention that most 2 bed apartments in NYC in that kind of price range are actually a 1 bedroom that's been converted. I've even seen one bedrooms made into 3 bedrooms plenty of times.

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#84

Post by ringaroundthetx »

petercooper wrote: post #48

So it says $450k then is equivalent to about $11M now, a multiple of about 24. So scaling up.. the coal miner's daily pay was about $36 in today's money and monthly rent about $144. A 3 bed NYC apartment, on the other hand, was about $1920 in today's money. Seems the gap between poor and the 'typical' rich has come down a lot, even if it doesn't feel like it.

Thomas Piketty's book Capital in the 21st Century goes into this.

Wealth inequality was much greater in the 19th century in the old world and the new world, but we are getting back to that point.

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#85

Post by fastball »

ikeboy wrote: post #82
fastball wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure how your anecdote is relevant to averages.

The article isn't making a claim about averages. It's saying you could rent - possible the average was higher. Average is irrelevant anyway, since that includes extremely expensive apartments nobody needs.

  extremely expensive apartments nobody needs
Apartments nobody needs but that some people can afford. Which to me says the gap has become wider, not smaller.

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#86

Post by ikeboy »

fastball wrote: post #85
ikeboy wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article isn't making a claim about averages. It's saying you could rent - possible the average was higher. Average is irrelevant anyway, since that includes extremely expensive apartments nobody needs.

extremely expensive apartments nobody needs Apartments nobody needs but that some people can afford. Which to me says the gap has become wider, not smaller.

I think at some point in this conversation everyone started to talk about different things.

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#87

Post by dlwdlw »

dmix wrote: post #63
petercooper wrote: post #48

So it says $450k then is equivalent to about $11M now, a multiple of about 24. So scaling up.. the coal miner's daily pay was about $36 in today's money and monthly rent about $144. A 3 bed NYC apartment, on the other hand, was about $1920 in today's money. Seems the gap between poor and the 'typical' rich has come down a lot, even if it doesn't feel like it.

Not to mention the quality of life of the poor now, vs even the 1980s, let alone 1880s, has significantly improved. The poor didn't have smartphones, flat screen TVs, and broadband internet plus quality/variety of food. In the rush to close a largely abstract gap (as it is by nature entirely relative to some previous, also unique, point in history) I worry we risk losing touch with the practical day-to-day gains/cost…

A lot of former addicts often reminensce about their addiction days. Exposure to such a large maximum of happiness recalibrates life so that everything becomes dull. Even if quality of increase in absolute terms, if the relative difference increases then the net effect is feeling poorer.

In today's networked world perhaps this is the reason a lot of people feel dumb or not wealthy, it's just too easy to compare. For most people, society is the calibrating factor as most people do not have the luxury of having enough abundance to go through sufficient mid life crisis' to formulate a personal model of quality and individual agency.

Life primarily is about A reason to live once you escape the survival scripts.

Re: Mark Twain’s Get-Rich-Quick Schemes

#89

Post by spiderfarmer »

PeachPlum wrote: post #41
spiderfarmer wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historically, the price of food was much higher than it is now. Thank our farmers for operating more efficient year after year. https://mjperry.blogspot.nl/2010/07/as-share-of-income-ameri...

Efficiently collecting subsidy.

Nonsense. Here in NL our farmers could operate much more efficiently if it wasn’t for subsidies and the regulations that come with it. It’s not free money, it’s mostly a bandaid for wounds inflicted by the government. How would you feel if the government decided you can’t use your computer anymore and have to back to programming with punchcards? Farmers have to live with rules like this every day.
Post reply on HN