4 ms·

I agree with the general gist of this, but I think you're down playing how much stuff people can buy now. Furthermore, if everyone's getting paid more, isn't i

I agree with the general gist of this, but I think you're down playing how much stuff people can buy now. Furthermore, if everyone's getting paid more, isn't it natural that person intensive activities like construction, infrastructure, health, and schooling will cost more? But stuff, stuff is ridiculously cheap at the moment. Perhaps you yanks didn't see it so much as you were already rich in the 80s/90s, but compared to my childhood in the UK, all the children I know get mountains of presents. Literally so many they get bored opening them. I can get cheap salad any time of year. Cheap fruit, milk, bread, etc. I can buy mounds of rice, pasta, etc. for literally pence. TVs in every room, not just one per household. People have espresso coffee makers in their kitchens! Everyone has at least one computer, if not one per child, and another in their pocket. Everyone's got at least one console or some such device. Everyone can afford Sky or Virgin or whatever cable channel.

Arizhel 10y ago
You're massively overvaluing toys and other consumer goods, and you're massively undervaluing real estate. Having nice TVs doesn't make your quality of life that much better now than back in the 80s. Living in a terrible neighborhood with crime because you can't afford to live in a decent neighborhood on a single income makes your quality of life much worse than back in the 80s when a single income could afford a nice house.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Perhaps it's worth asking why preventing crime is so much harder today than in the past. That might lead to uncomfortable conclusions, however. Apart from the crime prevention, what does the terrible neighborhood lack that the nice neighborhoods in 1970 had?
  - enjo 10y ago
    Perhaps it's worth asking why preventing crime is so much harder today than in the past It's not tho is it? In the United States at least crime is much lower than it was since like the 50's.
  - watwut 10y ago
    Good school. Employment opportunities. Cleanness.
- occamrazor 10y ago
  By almost every metric, crime has gone down in the last 30 years.
  - didibus 10y ago
    True, though that seems unexplainable. Vox had a good piece on it a while back, concluding that it's probably the sum of a lot of small factors.
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    On average, sure. In specific places, no. These days, if you can't afford more than a crappy apartment, you're going to be living in a place with drug dealers and occasional murders. And with the high rents, having a single income (and worse, having to support a family on that) means that the crappy apartments now cost what, 30+ years ago, a decent but modest home in a decent neighborhood cost. So maybe living in downtown areas isn't nearly as dangerous as it was back in the 70s-80s (when NYC's Times Square was full of prostitutes and muggings were common), but affording a place that doesn't have you surrounded by drug dealers and ex-cons is more out-of-reach and costly (and those once-seedy downtown areas are now completely unaffordable if you don't make $150k+).
ashark 10y ago
> Furthermore, if everyone's getting paid more, isn't it natural that person intensive activities like construction, infrastructure, health, and schooling will cost more? Yes, more. Not disproportionately more (except for certain things with natural limits like land and education at high-name-recognition universities). Not wildly disproportionately more. The blog post[1] I mentioned (prominently linked on HN when it came out) covered the phenomenon pretty thoroughly, without offering much in the way of explanations, though ruling some out. [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost-disease/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost...

Arizhel 10y ago

You're massively overvaluing toys and other consumer goods, and you're massively undervaluing real estate. Having nice TVs doesn't make your quality of life that much better now than back in the 80s. Living in a terrible neighborhood with crime because you can't afford to live in a decent neighborhood on a single income makes your quality of life much worse than back in the 80s when a single income could afford a nice house.

yummyfajitas 10y ago
Perhaps it's worth asking why preventing crime is so much harder today than in the past. That might lead to uncomfortable conclusions, however. Apart from the crime prevention, what does the terrible neighborhood lack that the nice neighborhoods in 1970 had?
- enjo 10y ago
  Perhaps it's worth asking why preventing crime is so much harder today than in the past It's not tho is it? In the United States at least crime is much lower than it was since like the 50's.
- watwut 10y ago
  Good school. Employment opportunities. Cleanness.
occamrazor 10y ago
By almost every metric, crime has gone down in the last 30 years.
- didibus 10y ago
  True, though that seems unexplainable. Vox had a good piece on it a while back, concluding that it's probably the sum of a lot of small factors.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  On average, sure. In specific places, no. These days, if you can't afford more than a crappy apartment, you're going to be living in a place with drug dealers and occasional murders. And with the high rents, having a single income (and worse, having to support a family on that) means that the crappy apartments now cost what, 30+ years ago, a decent but modest home in a decent neighborhood cost. So maybe living in downtown areas isn't nearly as dangerous as it was back in the 70s-80s (when NYC's Times Square was full of prostitutes and muggings were common), but affording a place that doesn't have you surrounded by drug dealers and ex-cons is more out-of-reach and costly (and those once-seedy downtown areas are now completely unaffordable if you don't make $150k+).

ashark 10y ago

> Furthermore, if everyone's getting paid more, isn't it natural that person intensive activities like construction, infrastructure, health, and schooling will cost more? Yes, more. Not disproportionately more (except for certain things with natural limits like land and education at high-name-recognition universities). Not wildly disproportionately more. The blog post[1] I mentioned (prominently linked on HN when it came out) covered the phenomenon pretty thoroughly, without offering much in the way of explanations, though ruling some out. [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost-disease/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost...