4 ms·

Is it just me, or is it a little silly to compare the 1919 world economy pre-mass production/consumerism with today? The irony to most of this shutdown is that

Is it just me, or is it a little silly to compare the 1919 world economy pre-mass production/consumerism with today? The irony to most of this shutdown is that "essential" businesses are still open. What the Great Pause has exposed is the shallowness and fragility of mass production/consumerism. During the pandemic of 1919, 80-90% of household income was spent on food and essential needs. Can you even imagine if we spent 80-90% of our income on essential needs? Well shit, we wouldn't hurt so much when non-essential business was put on pause, that's for sure.

clairity 6y ago
> "Can you even imagine if we spent 80-90% of our income on essential needs?" most american households (as in >50%) do spend 80-90% (or more) on essential needs.
- Exmoor 6y ago
  You may very well be right, but I'd be curious if you have a source for that?
  - sushshshsh 6y ago
    Most of these things seem quite essential and aren't cash in the bank equivalents (pension is debatable) https://images.app.goo.gl/HLGya1YkFJ5vv5oS8 https://images.app.goo.gl/HLGya1YkFJ5vv5oS8
    - ajzinsbwbs 6y ago
      If you think about which of the industries in that chart are partially or fully shut down, it seems pretty consistent with the 14% unemployment we got.
  - edoceo 6y ago
    Piketty has a book called Capital in the 21st Century, which makes similar statements and has pointers to his reference material here: http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/en/capital21c2 http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/en/capital21c2 Also, it's a good book.
- twblalock 6y ago
  In the early 1900s most American households spent 80% of their income on food, clothing, and housing -- and the food was by far the largest expense, more than housing. The picture for American families today is much better. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/how-america-spends-money-100-years-in-the-life-of-the-family-budget/255475/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/how-ame...
  - claudeganon 6y ago
    This data seems to stop in 2003, before Great Recession and the massive increase in housing costs in urban centers. Also doesn’t seem to take into account the dramatic increases in healthcare costs in the intervening years. I’m not sure how useful it is as a measure?
    - twblalock 6y ago
      Do you honestly believe that modern households, even after the Great Recession, spend more on food than housing? Come up with better data if you don't like mine.
      - claudeganon 6y ago
        No? I think that housing prices as a percentage of income have increased since then and are trending worse for younger generations, which a quick google suggests is true: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Harvard_JCHS_Americas_Rental_Housing_2020.pdf https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Harvard_JCH... https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/real-estate/2018/05/18/millennials-spend-large-percentage-income-rent/609061002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/real-es... The late 90s (just before this study ends) were also one of the last periods of meaningful wage growth. So combined with, again, a lack of consideration about things like rising healthcare costs, it’s difficult to view this study as relevant or meaningful. And especially when the data ends before the now two largest downturns since the Great Depression.
      - geofft 6y ago
UncleOxidant 6y ago
About 1/3 of people in the US lived on family farms in 1919. Which pretty much means that 1/3 of the population was already working from home.
closeparen 6y ago
It's interesting to see loss aversion made so explicit in these suggestions that we should abstain from nice things unless we can guarantee them forever.

clairity 6y ago

> "Can you even imagine if we spent 80-90% of our income on essential needs?" most american households (as in >50%) do spend 80-90% (or more) on essential needs.

Exmoor 6y ago
You may very well be right, but I'd be curious if you have a source for that?
- sushshshsh 6y ago
  Most of these things seem quite essential and aren't cash in the bank equivalents (pension is debatable) https://images.app.goo.gl/HLGya1YkFJ5vv5oS8 https://images.app.goo.gl/HLGya1YkFJ5vv5oS8
  - ajzinsbwbs 6y ago
    If you think about which of the industries in that chart are partially or fully shut down, it seems pretty consistent with the 14% unemployment we got.
- edoceo 6y ago
  Piketty has a book called Capital in the 21st Century, which makes similar statements and has pointers to his reference material here: http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/en/capital21c2 http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/en/capital21c2 Also, it's a good book.
twblalock 6y ago
In the early 1900s most American households spent 80% of their income on food, clothing, and housing -- and the food was by far the largest expense, more than housing. The picture for American families today is much better. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/how-america-spends-money-100-years-in-the-life-of-the-family-budget/255475/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/how-ame...
- claudeganon 6y ago
  This data seems to stop in 2003, before Great Recession and the massive increase in housing costs in urban centers. Also doesn’t seem to take into account the dramatic increases in healthcare costs in the intervening years. I’m not sure how useful it is as a measure?
  - twblalock 6y ago
    Do you honestly believe that modern households, even after the Great Recession, spend more on food than housing? Come up with better data if you don't like mine.
    - claudeganon 6y ago
      No? I think that housing prices as a percentage of income have increased since then and are trending worse for younger generations, which a quick google suggests is true: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Harvard_JCHS_Americas_Rental_Housing_2020.pdf https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Harvard_JCH... https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/real-estate/2018/05/18/millennials-spend-large-percentage-income-rent/609061002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/real-es... The late 90s (just before this study ends) were also one of the last periods of meaningful wage growth. So combined with, again, a lack of consideration about things like rising healthcare costs, it’s difficult to view this study as relevant or meaningful. And especially when the data ends before the now two largest downturns since the Great Depression.
    - geofft 6y ago

UncleOxidant 6y ago

About 1/3 of people in the US lived on family farms in 1919. Which pretty much means that 1/3 of the population was already working from home.

closeparen 6y ago

It's interesting to see loss aversion made so explicit in these suggestions that we should abstain from nice things unless we can guarantee them forever.