6 ms·

The article strongly refutes your assertion that "Our standard of living is simply much higher today." Obviously the standard of living is in decline. An artic

The article strongly refutes your assertion that "Our standard of living is simply much higher today." Obviously the standard of living is in decline. An article such as this provides some evidence, as does the well known fact that the male median wage has been in decline since 1973.

hiram112 10y ago
Spot on. Every time I mention the high price of homes and how hard it is for non-boomers to enjoy such things as their own home, possibility of kids, family, stable jobs, there's never a shortage of defenders telling me that I'm out of line: they didn't live in a McMansion and get a new iPhone every year; younger folk have it easy and complain too much. Well sorry, the exact same 1200 ft^2 brick home built in the 50s, that you bought for 2 year's salary (with a high school education) in the 70's, NOW costs 6 times my salary (or 12 times the median salary for the area). The $600 iPhone which I absolutely need for any modern job (thanks to BYOD) isn't gonna make a dent in the cost of housing, health care, and college these days.
- adevine 10y ago
  > The $600 iPhone which I absolutely need for any modern job (thanks to BYOD) I agree with your overall point that things like housing, healthcare, and education are much more expensive today and are much more difficult to acquire, securely, on a median income. However, when you say things like "I absolutely need a $600 iPhone for any modern job", it comes across like out-of-touch whining. No, you do not need the latest iPhone for any modern job. You want the latest iPhone. You can get a very capable, brand new Android phone for around $100 bucks.
  - mjmahone17 10y ago
    In the same way that client-facing bankers don't need to wear suits. If part of your job is conveying status, bringing an Android to work conveys a completely different kind of status than an iPhone. It may not feel good, but that doesn't mean $600 for an iPhone, even when you can barely afford food/rent, is poorly spent.
    - Rumudiez 10y ago
      If you're in a position where 1) your phone is out of your pocket and 2) you need to impress people, I'd be willing to bet you can afford the nicer phone or justify its cost to your management. Functionally you don't need a smartphone to do most work. And that's coming from someone who works with the devices at a major telecom...
    - adevine 10y ago
      Oh, puhleeze, this is just straight up bullshit. A client-facing banker may need to wear a suit, but no one gives a shit if it's a Saville Row bespoke version. If it's so important for your job that you need an iPhone because an Android is somehow for the unwashed masses, you can afford it.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- flubert 10y ago
  >Every time I mention the high price of homes... Location. Location. Location. 1,480 sq. ft., $23,000 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/113-Bernal-Ave-Hickman-KY-42050/2140814520_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/113-Bernal-Ave-Hickman-KY-... 918 sq. ft., $18,000 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/309-W-B-St-Ramona-KS-67475/2104566833_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/309-W-B-St-Ramona-KS-67475... 1,056 sq. ft., $24,999 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/943-Wisconsin-Ave-Beloit-WI-53511/40548188_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/943-Wisconsin-Ave-Beloit-W... 1,134 sq. ft., $27,000 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4751-Bellm-Dr-SPC-20-Klamath-Falls-OR-97603/75167888_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4751-Bellm-Dr-SPC-20-Klama... 2,064 sq. ft., $28,500: http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/908-Lelia-St-Newport-AR/109048103_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/908-Lelia-St-Newport-AR/10...
  - galdosdi 10y ago
    Jobs? Jobs? Jobs?
    - flubert 10y ago
      Live in SF bay area and save up $50k (One year if you could make $120k(?) and live with your parents?). Buy two $25k houses, one to live in, one to rent out for your living expenses. Semi-retire. ?
      - galdosdi 10y ago
        That's great for the small minority of people like you or me for whom that ("just make $120k. just go save $50k annually.") is a realistic achievable plan. Everyone else who's not in this small minority still has a right to complain about coastal/urban housing prices.
        flubert 10y ago
        Yeah, just to be clear, the question marks in the original were my attempt at saying I was unsure of how realistic the proposition was. Certainly hanging around HN, you could easily come to the conclusion that $120k is essentially a starting salary for software engineers in the Silicon Valley area (and how that's not enough, since the VCs are always taking the bulk of the value). But I don't have a feel for how "true" that is. My own personal story is that I live on a large plot of land in a large house, and support a wife and 4 kids on a significantly smaller income in fly-over country.
CWuestefeld 10y ago
I don't see any such refutation in the OP. And our standard of living is obviously far higher than at any time in the past. Even given wage (lack of) changes, the access to more and better medicines, having at our fingertips the entire artistic output of the history of the world, safer and longer-lasting cars, longer life expectancy, ubiquitous and free to nearly-free instantaneous communication, ubiquitous good sanitation, refrigeration, lower crime rates, lower pollution, and on and on. I can't fathom how anyone can claim that virtually any American is better off than his counterpart from any time in the past. So let's do a thought experiment: can you pick a past time in USA history where you'd like to be transported, keeping everything else (such as your economic quintile) equal, where you'd be better off? Or forget about keeping things equal, would you rather go back a hundred years and be in John Rockefeller's shoes? There's a good argument to be made [1] that you're better off than he was. [1] http://cafehayek.com/2016/02/40405.html http://cafehayek.com/2016/02/40405.html
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  I'd give up current times to go back to the 50s-70s where you could comfortably live on one income in the suburbs. I don't much care for safer cars, longer life expectancy, instant world wide communications compared to the freedom of living a much better life during one of the most prosperous times in US history. Quality of life experiences feels like it was much better before the 21st century race to the bottom. What's the point of living "better" if you're going to be chained to a desk or job for 50-60 years, or constantly have to retrain decade after decade?
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
    On the other hand, the lives of people who are non-white, non-male, non-straight, or any combination thereof.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - flubert 10y ago
clarkmoody 10y ago
I think we're confused about the definition of "standard of living"

hiram112 10y ago

Spot on. Every time I mention the high price of homes and how hard it is for non-boomers to enjoy such things as their own home, possibility of kids, family, stable jobs, there's never a shortage of defenders telling me that I'm out of line: they didn't live in a McMansion and get a new iPhone every year; younger folk have it easy and complain too much. Well sorry, the exact same 1200 ft^2 brick home built in the 50s, that you bought for 2 year's salary (with a high school education) in the 70's, NOW costs 6 times my salary (or 12 times the median salary for the area). The $600 iPhone which I absolutely need for any modern job (thanks to BYOD) isn't gonna make a dent in the cost of housing, health care, and college these days.

adevine 10y ago
> The $600 iPhone which I absolutely need for any modern job (thanks to BYOD) I agree with your overall point that things like housing, healthcare, and education are much more expensive today and are much more difficult to acquire, securely, on a median income. However, when you say things like "I absolutely need a $600 iPhone for any modern job", it comes across like out-of-touch whining. No, you do not need the latest iPhone for any modern job. You want the latest iPhone. You can get a very capable, brand new Android phone for around $100 bucks.
- mjmahone17 10y ago
  In the same way that client-facing bankers don't need to wear suits. If part of your job is conveying status, bringing an Android to work conveys a completely different kind of status than an iPhone. It may not feel good, but that doesn't mean $600 for an iPhone, even when you can barely afford food/rent, is poorly spent.
  - Rumudiez 10y ago
    If you're in a position where 1) your phone is out of your pocket and 2) you need to impress people, I'd be willing to bet you can afford the nicer phone or justify its cost to your management. Functionally you don't need a smartphone to do most work. And that's coming from someone who works with the devices at a major telecom...
  - adevine 10y ago
    Oh, puhleeze, this is just straight up bullshit. A client-facing banker may need to wear a suit, but no one gives a shit if it's a Saville Row bespoke version. If it's so important for your job that you need an iPhone because an Android is somehow for the unwashed masses, you can afford it.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
flubert 10y ago
>Every time I mention the high price of homes... Location. Location. Location. 1,480 sq. ft., $23,000 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/113-Bernal-Ave-Hickman-KY-42050/2140814520_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/113-Bernal-Ave-Hickman-KY-... 918 sq. ft., $18,000 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/309-W-B-St-Ramona-KS-67475/2104566833_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/309-W-B-St-Ramona-KS-67475... 1,056 sq. ft., $24,999 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/943-Wisconsin-Ave-Beloit-WI-53511/40548188_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/943-Wisconsin-Ave-Beloit-W... 1,134 sq. ft., $27,000 http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4751-Bellm-Dr-SPC-20-Klamath-Falls-OR-97603/75167888_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4751-Bellm-Dr-SPC-20-Klama... 2,064 sq. ft., $28,500: http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/908-Lelia-St-Newport-AR/109048103_zpid/ http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/908-Lelia-St-Newport-AR/10...
- galdosdi 10y ago
  Jobs? Jobs? Jobs?
  - flubert 10y ago
    Live in SF bay area and save up $50k (One year if you could make $120k(?) and live with your parents?). Buy two $25k houses, one to live in, one to rent out for your living expenses. Semi-retire. ?
    - galdosdi 10y ago
      That's great for the small minority of people like you or me for whom that ("just make $120k. just go save $50k annually.") is a realistic achievable plan. Everyone else who's not in this small minority still has a right to complain about coastal/urban housing prices.
      - flubert 10y ago
        Yeah, just to be clear, the question marks in the original were my attempt at saying I was unsure of how realistic the proposition was. Certainly hanging around HN, you could easily come to the conclusion that $120k is essentially a starting salary for software engineers in the Silicon Valley area (and how that's not enough, since the VCs are always taking the bulk of the value). But I don't have a feel for how "true" that is. My own personal story is that I live on a large plot of land in a large house, and support a wife and 4 kids on a significantly smaller income in fly-over country.

CWuestefeld 10y ago

I don't see any such refutation in the OP. And our standard of living is obviously far higher than at any time in the past. Even given wage (lack of) changes, the access to more and better medicines, having at our fingertips the entire artistic output of the history of the world, safer and longer-lasting cars, longer life expectancy, ubiquitous and free to nearly-free instantaneous communication, ubiquitous good sanitation, refrigeration, lower crime rates, lower pollution, and on and on. I can't fathom how anyone can claim that virtually any American is better off than his counterpart from any time in the past. So let's do a thought experiment: can you pick a past time in USA history where you'd like to be transported, keeping everything else (such as your economic quintile) equal, where you'd be better off? Or forget about keeping things equal, would you rather go back a hundred years and be in John Rockefeller's shoes? There's a good argument to be made [1] that you're better off than he was. [1] http://cafehayek.com/2016/02/40405.html http://cafehayek.com/2016/02/40405.html

toomuchtodo 10y ago
I'd give up current times to go back to the 50s-70s where you could comfortably live on one income in the suburbs. I don't much care for safer cars, longer life expectancy, instant world wide communications compared to the freedom of living a much better life during one of the most prosperous times in US history. Quality of life experiences feels like it was much better before the 21st century race to the bottom. What's the point of living "better" if you're going to be chained to a desk or job for 50-60 years, or constantly have to retrain decade after decade?
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  On the other hand, the lives of people who are non-white, non-male, non-straight, or any combination thereof.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- flubert 10y ago

clarkmoody 10y ago

I think we're confused about the definition of "standard of living"