4 ms·

The result of this study really resonates with me. The accuracy of the conclusions it draws may be questionable, but it resonates none the less. I think that we

by bronz 11y ago

The result of this study really resonates with me. The accuracy of the conclusions it draws may be questionable, but it resonates none the less. I think that we may be finally experiencing the consequences of our irresponsible behavior in earlier decades. Many good changes have been brought about, sure. But we threw away the sanctity of the family unit. We taught everyone that making a modest living is for "losers." We let our schools become daycare centers. And in many ways I feel that we lost our morality. And now that all the money is gone it doesn't work anymore.

forgetsusername 11y ago
>And now that all the money is gone it doesn't work anymore. There is more global wealth than at any point in human history, and it's still growing. A financial crisis and a decade of "economic stagnation" are nothing in the grand scheme of things.
- meric 11y ago
  Increasing inequality sucks the wealth into the top. At first, most citizens in developed countries benefits from rising inequality as the wealth from poorer countries are channeled into the country. As inequality rises, the bottom levels start to lose wealth to the upper levels. As it rises past your neighbourhood, you'll see your neighbourhood getting poorer, while the countries' richest get richer and richer. That's why there's more global wealth than at any point, still growing, but it looks like everyone is getting poorer, because almost everyone is. Not saying that's good or bad, maybe it's even necessary in our society for inequality to continue to rise and then collapse. Many communist experiments have already been tried. EDIT: All conjecture.
  - enjo 11y ago
    Even if that's true, you're average person on earth is generally better off than their parents were. In the United States it's not quite as cut and dry, but in general you are likely at least as well off as your parents. Inflation adjusted wages have been relatively flat, not decreasing (unless new data I haven't seen suggests otherwise). At a macro scale people in the United States aren't getting poorer, they're just not getting relatively richer over time.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > Inflation adjusted wages have been relatively flat, not decreasing Inflation adjusted median household income peaked in 1999, and its current level is below what it was in 1997. [0] Mean household income has done better, because the very good results at the top influence the mean, but have no impact on the median. Real hourly wages for middle- and low-income workers have been stagnant for decades; over a ~3 decade period dropping slightly for low income workers and gaining slightly for middle-income workers. (And lower for both categories than they were a decade ago.) And real hourly wages for young college graduates are below what they were in the late 1990s. And, in the same time as wages have dropped, the key non-wage benefit (employer health coverage) has also dropped, with fewer recently-employed young graduates (of high school and college, measured separately) having employer-sponsored insurance than in the past. [1] > At a macro scale people in the United States aren't getting poorer, they're just not getting relatively richer over time. No, other than capitalists and a narrow slice of elite workers, they're actually getting poorer. [0] https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MEHOINUSA672N [1] http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/
      - chillwaves 11y ago
        It's worth noting that "wealth" can be measured by standard of living which is undoubtedly increasing in some aspects. You can't deny how enriching the internet is for most people, as an example (and it is extremely cheap and easy to acces). That said, people are being squeezed in other aspects of life that create very low standards of living. Maybe they have to work multiple jobs and do not get a set schedule, so they can never plan time off. Maybe they are struggling with crushing debt and working a min. wage job. There are a lot of ways that society can be broken, that a person's life can be devalued even if their standard of living rises by some specific metrics.
        ragnarok451 11y ago
        Something I've been thinking about - why do we deserve the chance to not have to work long hours/multiple jobs? Most of the world has no such opportunity. They spend long hours for even the chance to put food on the table, with no internet access or modern luxuries that we have! They would give so much even for access to that. Meanwhile, it seems most Americans feel entitled to not only their high standard of living but a relaxed (in comparison) work environment and scheduling freedom. Perhaps the answer is that we all need to adjust to the reality that such freedoms only come with hard work, good planning, and some luck. It seems to be the reality that most of the world has already dealt with.
superuser2 11y ago
>But we threw away the sanctity of the family unit. What do you mean? Because people who use those words generally mean "the gays are destroying the world" and I'm hoping that's not it.
- bronz 11y ago
  I understand. But I didn't mean it that way. Gay people were left out of this analysis completely.

by bronz 11y ago

forgetsusername 11y ago

>And now that all the money is gone it doesn't work anymore. There is more global wealth than at any point in human history, and it's still growing. A financial crisis and a decade of "economic stagnation" are nothing in the grand scheme of things.

meric 11y ago
Increasing inequality sucks the wealth into the top. At first, most citizens in developed countries benefits from rising inequality as the wealth from poorer countries are channeled into the country. As inequality rises, the bottom levels start to lose wealth to the upper levels. As it rises past your neighbourhood, you'll see your neighbourhood getting poorer, while the countries' richest get richer and richer. That's why there's more global wealth than at any point, still growing, but it looks like everyone is getting poorer, because almost everyone is. Not saying that's good or bad, maybe it's even necessary in our society for inequality to continue to rise and then collapse. Many communist experiments have already been tried. EDIT: All conjecture.
- enjo 11y ago
  Even if that's true, you're average person on earth is generally better off than their parents were. In the United States it's not quite as cut and dry, but in general you are likely at least as well off as your parents. Inflation adjusted wages have been relatively flat, not decreasing (unless new data I haven't seen suggests otherwise). At a macro scale people in the United States aren't getting poorer, they're just not getting relatively richer over time.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > Inflation adjusted wages have been relatively flat, not decreasing Inflation adjusted median household income peaked in 1999, and its current level is below what it was in 1997. [0] Mean household income has done better, because the very good results at the top influence the mean, but have no impact on the median. Real hourly wages for middle- and low-income workers have been stagnant for decades; over a ~3 decade period dropping slightly for low income workers and gaining slightly for middle-income workers. (And lower for both categories than they were a decade ago.) And real hourly wages for young college graduates are below what they were in the late 1990s. And, in the same time as wages have dropped, the key non-wage benefit (employer health coverage) has also dropped, with fewer recently-employed young graduates (of high school and college, measured separately) having employer-sponsored insurance than in the past. [1] > At a macro scale people in the United States aren't getting poorer, they're just not getting relatively richer over time. No, other than capitalists and a narrow slice of elite workers, they're actually getting poorer. [0] https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MEHOINUSA672N [1] http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/
    - chillwaves 11y ago
      It's worth noting that "wealth" can be measured by standard of living which is undoubtedly increasing in some aspects. You can't deny how enriching the internet is for most people, as an example (and it is extremely cheap and easy to acces). That said, people are being squeezed in other aspects of life that create very low standards of living. Maybe they have to work multiple jobs and do not get a set schedule, so they can never plan time off. Maybe they are struggling with crushing debt and working a min. wage job. There are a lot of ways that society can be broken, that a person's life can be devalued even if their standard of living rises by some specific metrics.
      - ragnarok451 11y ago
        Something I've been thinking about - why do we deserve the chance to not have to work long hours/multiple jobs? Most of the world has no such opportunity. They spend long hours for even the chance to put food on the table, with no internet access or modern luxuries that we have! They would give so much even for access to that. Meanwhile, it seems most Americans feel entitled to not only their high standard of living but a relaxed (in comparison) work environment and scheduling freedom. Perhaps the answer is that we all need to adjust to the reality that such freedoms only come with hard work, good planning, and some luck. It seems to be the reality that most of the world has already dealt with.

superuser2 11y ago

>But we threw away the sanctity of the family unit. What do you mean? Because people who use those words generally mean "the gays are destroying the world" and I'm hoping that's not it.

bronz 11y ago
I understand. But I didn't mean it that way. Gay people were left out of this analysis completely.