4 ms·

The basics of life that consume the expenses of most people you had in the 1960s was significantly more affordable back then, and many would wish they could get

by novok 6y ago

The basics of life that consume the expenses of most people you had in the 1960s was significantly more affordable back then, and many would wish they could get that. You can't easily today, especially in health care. In the past, college, room & board was payable with the part time work of a college student working low end jobs. You cannot do that today. Single income households were a common occurrence, since dual income households competing for housing were not out competing single income houses. And I don't mean this in a crypto conservative way, even Elizabeth Warren wrote a book about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap Could you buy a 1970s level of service health plan today and expect a similar cost profile? No. The non-essential extras that didn't consume much of the budget in the past anyway being nicer or cheaper, such as clothing, entertainment and so on? Cold comfort. After you have 10 shirts, 10 more cheap t-shirts have little utility. HD video is nicer, but TBH, old SD TVs also give you %80 of the entertainment value. 2500 sqft of house is nice, but 1500 sqft of house is still giving you %80 of the benefit and so on. There is diminishing marginal value to these improvements.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
>The basics of life that consume the expenses of most people you had in the 1960s was significantly more affordable back then, and many would wish they could get that. You can't easily today, especially in health care. While I agree with much of your comment, healthcare in particular is very hard to compare across different times. The quality of healthcare has improved dramatically, as has the qualifications of those providing healthcare. Does a doctors visit for a flu in 1960 cost more even inflation adjusted in 2020? Probably. But the doctor is probably more educated, and the healthcare providers are more equipped and able to handle more complicated diagnoses. Current costs might not be in line with the increase in level of care, but the product offered in the 1960s is different to the product offered today. There's also been significant changes to liability for healthcare providers since the 1960s that are tough to take into account comparison wise.
- dantheman 6y ago
  Yet cosmetic surgery and eye care have both gotten better and cheaper, so maybe there is something else going on... Perhaps it's the way the supply is controlled and a market can't work because of government intervention.
- novok 6y ago
  Yes I agree that it's impossible to buy 1960s healthcare today. What I'm saying is many would be very happy to be able to buy 1960s healthcare today, legal liability differences and all, for a much more affordable 1960s equivalent price, which you can calculate as hours worked at the median hourly wage during both times, thus sidestepping comparability issues. But you cannot. Also many other developed countries deliver modern health care for significantly cheaper prices than the US does.
SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
> Single income households were a common occurrence, since dual income households competing for housing were not out competing single income houses. And I don't mean this in a crypto conservative way, even Elizabeth Warren wrote a book about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap I haven't read the book, but her speech a decade ago is really eye opening. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A

by novok 6y ago

lotsofpulp 6y ago

>The basics of life that consume the expenses of most people you had in the 1960s was significantly more affordable back then, and many would wish they could get that. You can't easily today, especially in health care. While I agree with much of your comment, healthcare in particular is very hard to compare across different times. The quality of healthcare has improved dramatically, as has the qualifications of those providing healthcare. Does a doctors visit for a flu in 1960 cost more even inflation adjusted in 2020? Probably. But the doctor is probably more educated, and the healthcare providers are more equipped and able to handle more complicated diagnoses. Current costs might not be in line with the increase in level of care, but the product offered in the 1960s is different to the product offered today. There's also been significant changes to liability for healthcare providers since the 1960s that are tough to take into account comparison wise.

dantheman 6y ago
Yet cosmetic surgery and eye care have both gotten better and cheaper, so maybe there is something else going on... Perhaps it's the way the supply is controlled and a market can't work because of government intervention.
novok 6y ago
Yes I agree that it's impossible to buy 1960s healthcare today. What I'm saying is many would be very happy to be able to buy 1960s healthcare today, legal liability differences and all, for a much more affordable 1960s equivalent price, which you can calculate as hours worked at the median hourly wage during both times, thus sidestepping comparability issues. But you cannot. Also many other developed countries deliver modern health care for significantly cheaper prices than the US does.

SketchySeaBeast 6y ago

> Single income households were a common occurrence, since dual income households competing for housing were not out competing single income houses. And I don't mean this in a crypto conservative way, even Elizabeth Warren wrote a book about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap I haven't read the book, but her speech a decade ago is really eye opening. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A