Yeah, my 'factual errors' are 'extreme', and then you rebut pretending that books don't exist anymore. You're painting an overly rosy picture of the past, and y

Yeah, my 'factual errors' are 'extreme', and then you rebut pretending that books don't exist anymore. You're painting an overly rosy picture of the past, and you are wrong about medicine not improving in the past 45 years (mental health in particular). Not to mention that you seem to think that the civil rights movement was done and dusted by 1970. Union participation is not a measure in and of itself of life quality, and you conveniently ignore that jobs back then tended to be much more menial and boring - in the modern day we have the relative luxury of saying 'no' to those jobs (hence immigrants doing them). And, frankly, saying the internet and mass interpersonal communication was 'played out' as of 2005 is utter horseshit. Besides, how seriously should we take a source which damns radio, television, the film cinema, the telephone, and the internet, over 150 years when humanity had none of these beforehand? Should we go back to pre-1870 times, when being illiterate was commonplace instead of being notably unusual? I'm not sure how info/comms was somehow better then. Picking out 1995-2005 as being 'the only good decade for comms' is ludicrous. It's also possible for inequality to increase, yet have the lower bound also increase. Yes, income disparity has increased, but life quality is not measured only in dollars. Try being gay in the '70s for a clear example. And it's not like homeless people are a new thing this century - they were around back then as well.