4 ms·

Poor being obese is not a sign of prosperity. There are many countries that are not prosperous at all with obesity problems. Obesity can be due to genetics, lac

Poor being obese is not a sign of prosperity. There are many countries that are not prosperous at all with obesity problems. Obesity can be due to genetics, lack of access to healthy food or time for recreation, etc. High unemployment doesn't mean much if real wages are dropping for most people and necessities like housing or Healthcare are becoming less affordable even for those employed. I agree that there are people out there incentives to make things seem worse than they are, but I so think things are pretty bad.

trentnix 7y ago
Once upon a time being poor absolutely meant being hungry. No more. That is an utterly remarkable change and is unprecedented in all of human history. And so many wizards of smart assured the people of their time that population growth was going to lead to famine. They were dead-ass wrong.
- Ozzie_osman 7y ago
  Yes, you are absolutely right. Thank God we don't have famines, but that's a really low bar to strive for as humanity. People only being able to afford food and a lifestyle that lead to obesity and a whole host of other health problems is still pretty bad, imo.
  - trentnix 7y ago
    Nonsense. It's a really big deal. It's probably the greatest accomplishment in all of human history. But to concede a point, there's no finish line in the race to improve human health and experience.
    - votepaunchy 7y ago
      Perhaps second or third to the vast reductions in maternal/infant death and from communicable diseases. Likewise, still work to be done.
    - Ozzie_osman 7y ago
      I do agree it's a huge deal. I think my bigger source of disagreement was pointing to things like obesity as a sign of prosperity. I guess everything is relative. Obesity is relatively better than famine. But overall, the article is arguing that many things are getting worse recently, which I think is true. Despite improvements in science, technology, productivity, and economic growth, groups of people are facing lower affordability of basic needs. Whether or not economists are to blame is another matter.
- krilly 7y ago
  I think we can all agree This is due to technological advancement, not economics, which is what we are discussing
  - gbacon 7y ago
    Reasons why said technological advancement occurs in some times and places but not others is most definitely a question of economics.

trentnix 7y ago

Once upon a time being poor absolutely meant being hungry. No more. That is an utterly remarkable change and is unprecedented in all of human history. And so many wizards of smart assured the people of their time that population growth was going to lead to famine. They were dead-ass wrong.

Ozzie_osman 7y ago
Yes, you are absolutely right. Thank God we don't have famines, but that's a really low bar to strive for as humanity. People only being able to afford food and a lifestyle that lead to obesity and a whole host of other health problems is still pretty bad, imo.
- trentnix 7y ago
  Nonsense. It's a really big deal. It's probably the greatest accomplishment in all of human history. But to concede a point, there's no finish line in the race to improve human health and experience.
  - votepaunchy 7y ago
    Perhaps second or third to the vast reductions in maternal/infant death and from communicable diseases. Likewise, still work to be done.
  - Ozzie_osman 7y ago
    I do agree it's a huge deal. I think my bigger source of disagreement was pointing to things like obesity as a sign of prosperity. I guess everything is relative. Obesity is relatively better than famine. But overall, the article is arguing that many things are getting worse recently, which I think is true. Despite improvements in science, technology, productivity, and economic growth, groups of people are facing lower affordability of basic needs. Whether or not economists are to blame is another matter.
krilly 7y ago
I think we can all agree This is due to technological advancement, not economics, which is what we are discussing
- gbacon 7y ago
  Reasons why said technological advancement occurs in some times and places but not others is most definitely a question of economics.