3 ms·
If you're referring to safety from physical harm you're correct. But I'd argue that the erosion of many social safety nets has left a lot of people less economi
by wefarrell 10y ago
If you're referring to safety from physical harm you're correct. But I'd argue that the erosion of many social safety nets has left a lot of people less economically secure.
- wyldfire 10y agoBut "economic security" as relative to their peers at this time is very different from the worst case for all their ancestors. Perhaps even the worst off are much better off now.
- sjclemmy 10y agoIn a comment thread on a forum I am offering a non-nuanced binary view. How economically secure does a hunter gatherer or subsistence farmer feel, with no medicine, lots of superstitious practices and complete dependence on the crops/weather... etc.
- smacktoward 10y agoThe problem is that satisfaction is completely relative. A hunter/gatherer with no medicine and loads of superstitions doesn't feel anxious when everybody else is a hunter/gatherer with no medicine and loads of superstitions too. They feel anxious when they are that way, but they can look over a fence and see other people living in nice houses and living forty years longer than they do. Progress is not uniformly distributed, and even in "advanced" societies there are wide and growing gaps between a small, privileged few and the rest who have to make do with much less. It's completely understandable why that would make people anxious, even if they have access to Netflix.
- zardo 10y agoThat depends on the person's beliefs. Whether or not you experience the feeling of security is just as much about your internal representation of the world as it is about the external world.
- sjclemmy 10y agoExactly.
- warlox 10y agoRead a Dickens novel and tell me about how great the social safety nets in Victorian England were.