3 ms·

On the order of unlikeliness of hiring someone to brush your teeth, or sing your theme song when you walk into rooms. But that kind of personal service is some

On the order of unlikeliness of hiring someone to brush your teeth, or sing your theme song when you walk into rooms. But that kind of personal service is something we see less of, now, not more. The middle class in the US is rich compared to lords and ladies of 200 years ago, but have no personal servants. Software developers and medical doctors and middle executives could hire batmen and butlers and maids, but mostly do not, even when the money to do so is just sitting in their bank account and they complain about how little time they have to clean and service their house, cars, etc. Why is that?

frobozz 10y ago
1: Automation. Availability of white goods is the reason why most people don't have servants. If I had a spare full-time wage hanging around, I don't think I could find enough work for a servant to do in my house. 2: We don't have full-time personal servants, but a lot of people I know have a char who comes once a week; take their cars to a garage for servicing; buy prepared food; pay a window cleaner every so often; get the car cleaned whilst doing something else etc. I'd also dispute the "richer than lords and ladies" statement, I think it selects one definition of "rich" and ignores the rest. Yes, we have cars, electronic entertainment, indoor plumbing, free education, and access to healthcare beyond the wildest dreams of our 18th century forebears. However, I couldn't live off income from the tenants on my estate, no matter how well I manage it, or how frugally I live. At my income, I certainly couldn't afford to employ, feed and house the 15 or so employees in a typical aristocratic household (one could argue that some of those are now white goods, which I can afford). Nor would I be able to maintain both a large house in my seat and a smaller (yet still substantial) one in Mayfair (as well as membership of White's and Brooks's). I doubt if I could afford a small country cottage, a studio flat in London, and membership of a gym.
brownbat 10y ago
I didn't literally mean those options, or even personal service. I meant even if I knew what it would be, no one would believe me, because it would sound insane.

frobozz 10y ago

1: Automation. Availability of white goods is the reason why most people don't have servants. If I had a spare full-time wage hanging around, I don't think I could find enough work for a servant to do in my house. 2: We don't have full-time personal servants, but a lot of people I know have a char who comes once a week; take their cars to a garage for servicing; buy prepared food; pay a window cleaner every so often; get the car cleaned whilst doing something else etc. I'd also dispute the "richer than lords and ladies" statement, I think it selects one definition of "rich" and ignores the rest. Yes, we have cars, electronic entertainment, indoor plumbing, free education, and access to healthcare beyond the wildest dreams of our 18th century forebears. However, I couldn't live off income from the tenants on my estate, no matter how well I manage it, or how frugally I live. At my income, I certainly couldn't afford to employ, feed and house the 15 or so employees in a typical aristocratic household (one could argue that some of those are now white goods, which I can afford). Nor would I be able to maintain both a large house in my seat and a smaller (yet still substantial) one in Mayfair (as well as membership of White's and Brooks's). I doubt if I could afford a small country cottage, a studio flat in London, and membership of a gym.

brownbat 10y ago

I didn't literally mean those options, or even personal service. I meant even if I knew what it would be, no one would believe me, because it would sound insane.