4 ms·

Is it not the case that we could work 15 hours per week and maintain the lifestyle that was prevalent during Keynes' day? That is, isn't our inflation-adjusted

Is it not the case that we could work 15 hours per week and maintain the lifestyle that was prevalent during Keynes' day? That is, isn't our inflation-adjusted total compensation more than 3x what it was in the mid 1930s? The average inflation-adjusted salary in 1935 was only in the realm of $10,000 (in 2020 dollars). So you could work 15 hours per week at that standard of living if your take-home wage was $13/hour. Of course, there are other obstacles to making this work. You can't, for instance, get housing for as cheap as was possible then due to increased construction standards. But that (and other similar obstacles) are not the result of some cabal of billionaires. Some costs in the US, medical being the primary example, are more expensive than they should be due to financial and political scheming. But most things are not. I'm from the state of Arkansas, where housing is quite cheap. When I lived there (until 2014), my total cost of living was around under $800/month (rent+utilities+food). This comes out to $9600/year.

pmiller2 6y ago
It is not possible. Housing, medical care, movie tickets, college tuition, prescription drugs, and a host of other things have gone up in price far faster than inflation since then. You can't even buy a house that was around when Keynes was for the inflation adjusted price it was then. What would your cost of equivalent housing have been in Keynes' day?
- gamegoblin 6y ago
  A typical house in the 1930s cost between 50-100K in 2020 dollars. Houses can be had this cheap all over the country. To use my hometown as an example, consider this 1948 house that Redfin believes is worth $30K: https://www.redfin.com/AR/North-Little-Rock/707-Gardenia-Ave-72117/home/82955744 https://www.redfin.com/AR/North-Little-Rock/707-Gardenia-Ave... It's 3 miles from the downtown of a half-million person metro area. If you're willing to go up into that $50-100K range, you will find plenty of fine houses in mid-sized cities throughout the Midwest/South. The apartment I rented was an 1100 square foot, 2 bedroom townhouse a block from the bus stop -- $350/month.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    But, that's not the "typical" house anymore. You're equating the very cheapest houses and apartments today with the median/typical house from then. You can't even live where you could in 1930 for the same money you could then. You can't rent for what you could in 1930. You can't go to the doctor. You can't buy a car. You can't send your kids to college. There are more things you just can't do today on 1930-equivalent money. Need I go on?
    - gamegoblin 6y ago
      To re-iterate my original statement: "Is it not the case that we could work 15 hours per week and maintain the lifestyle that was prevalent during Keynes' day?" I'm explicitly talking about living as if it were the 1930s. No internet. No cable. No air conditioning. No eating at restaurants multiple times per week. Small house. No college. Maybe no car. So you say I am equating the cheapest houses today with the median back then, which is absolutely correct. That is exactly what I am trying to say. You can live a median 1930s lifestyle for dirt cheap today. That house was built in 1948 and is basically the same as most other middle class houses built in that time period. In 1930, fewer than 1% of people graduated from college. So if you want to live a median 1930s lifestyle, you probably don't have to worry about sending your kids to college. You don't need college to command the $13/hr wage that is necessary to live this lifestyle anyway. Only 48% of households owned a car in 1930, so if you want a median 1930s lifestyle, that may involve not owning a car. And if you do own a car, a used car from 2005 can be had for $1000 and trounces any middle class 1930s car from that era in every metric.
      - pmiller2 6y ago
        Okay, sketch out a 1930s New York City lifestyle in New York City, then. Tell me how I can go to the doctor. Tell me how I can continue to live, if I'm a diabetic. Tell me how I, personally, can live, considering I have asthma, and albuterol wasn't discovered until the 1960s (and is much more expensive now than it was then). I guess I can save money by not buying a radio, because there's nothing worthwhile on there anymore, anyway.
pmiller2 6y ago
Hey, so, quick question... if I'm not debating in good faith, how do you explain my total lack of downvotes in this thread, and your multiple downvotes? Seems like someone understood what I was saying and agreed, yeah? Maybe I'm not the problem.

pmiller2 6y ago

It is not possible. Housing, medical care, movie tickets, college tuition, prescription drugs, and a host of other things have gone up in price far faster than inflation since then. You can't even buy a house that was around when Keynes was for the inflation adjusted price it was then. What would your cost of equivalent housing have been in Keynes' day?

gamegoblin 6y ago
A typical house in the 1930s cost between 50-100K in 2020 dollars. Houses can be had this cheap all over the country. To use my hometown as an example, consider this 1948 house that Redfin believes is worth $30K: https://www.redfin.com/AR/North-Little-Rock/707-Gardenia-Ave-72117/home/82955744 https://www.redfin.com/AR/North-Little-Rock/707-Gardenia-Ave... It's 3 miles from the downtown of a half-million person metro area. If you're willing to go up into that $50-100K range, you will find plenty of fine houses in mid-sized cities throughout the Midwest/South. The apartment I rented was an 1100 square foot, 2 bedroom townhouse a block from the bus stop -- $350/month.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  But, that's not the "typical" house anymore. You're equating the very cheapest houses and apartments today with the median/typical house from then. You can't even live where you could in 1930 for the same money you could then. You can't rent for what you could in 1930. You can't go to the doctor. You can't buy a car. You can't send your kids to college. There are more things you just can't do today on 1930-equivalent money. Need I go on?
  - gamegoblin 6y ago
    To re-iterate my original statement: "Is it not the case that we could work 15 hours per week and maintain the lifestyle that was prevalent during Keynes' day?" I'm explicitly talking about living as if it were the 1930s. No internet. No cable. No air conditioning. No eating at restaurants multiple times per week. Small house. No college. Maybe no car. So you say I am equating the cheapest houses today with the median back then, which is absolutely correct. That is exactly what I am trying to say. You can live a median 1930s lifestyle for dirt cheap today. That house was built in 1948 and is basically the same as most other middle class houses built in that time period. In 1930, fewer than 1% of people graduated from college. So if you want to live a median 1930s lifestyle, you probably don't have to worry about sending your kids to college. You don't need college to command the $13/hr wage that is necessary to live this lifestyle anyway. Only 48% of households owned a car in 1930, so if you want a median 1930s lifestyle, that may involve not owning a car. And if you do own a car, a used car from 2005 can be had for $1000 and trounces any middle class 1930s car from that era in every metric.
    - pmiller2 6y ago
      Okay, sketch out a 1930s New York City lifestyle in New York City, then. Tell me how I can go to the doctor. Tell me how I can continue to live, if I'm a diabetic. Tell me how I, personally, can live, considering I have asthma, and albuterol wasn't discovered until the 1960s (and is much more expensive now than it was then). I guess I can save money by not buying a radio, because there's nothing worthwhile on there anymore, anyway.

pmiller2 6y ago

Hey, so, quick question... if I'm not debating in good faith, how do you explain my total lack of downvotes in this thread, and your multiple downvotes? Seems like someone understood what I was saying and agreed, yeah? Maybe I'm not the problem.