6 ms·

It's very much debatable which perspective is "more grounded." Especially when one of them is based on ignoring an unprecendented economic bubble and hoping fo

by eps 5y ago

It's very much debatable which perspective is "more grounded." Especially when one of them is based on ignoring an unprecendented economic bubble and hoping for the best. No reasonable person in rudimentary touch with reality can have elevated "anticipated life satisfaction" in this context.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> No reasonable person in rudimentary touch with reality can have elevated "anticipated life satisfaction" in this context. This is a perfect example of the internet cynicism I was referring to. There's a general vibe on sites like Reddit and HN that the average people are wrong and they shouldn't be happy because everything is actually terrible and they just haven't figured it out yet. Can we stop acting like these people are wrong or stupid and just accept that maybe people really are doing well?
- humbleMouse 5y ago
  Are we going to have any arctic ice left? That’s the type of question that keeps me from being too jovial.
- meowkit 5y ago
  > Can we stop acting like these people are wrong or stupid This is really hard to do given my conversations with most people in real life. There is a shocking obliviousness to climate change, plastic pollution, economic problems, healthcare (personal and the system), philosophical/existential inquiries, etc. Not to say people don’t know climate change is happening - they just aren’t aware of any details beyond surface level memes. Ignorance is bliss, as the saying goes. But also a reminder that frustration and outrage drive content algorithms, so its no surprise that kind of content dominates the text based social media.
  - iamstupidsimple 5y ago
    Long ago, my dad checked out of news media entirely, and the effect on his mental health was incredible. Personally, I don't think I can turn a blind eye to the rest of the world, but IME those that do are generally much happier.
    - heckingoodtimes 5y ago
      What do they say again? > Ignorance is bliss. I didn’t grasp this when my HS English teacher imparted this on us, but having consumed much of the trending Reddit content, it makes a lot more sense these days.
      - nitrogen 5y ago
        When we all first hear this expression we assume that ignorance is a bad thing, thus we should not be like all the blissfully ignorant. But maybe it was really advice -- don't expand your circle of awareness too far beyond your circle of influence.
  - Robotbeat 5y ago
    To be honest, I think there might be a point where if you’re too plugged in to environmental social media, you end up opposing fairly practical approaches to solving it because increasingly-niche concerns. The “good is the enemy of the better” effect. Normie: “Oh cool, electric cars are improving that means less pollution and i spend less on gas!” Too-online environmental person: “But ACKSHUALLY, electric cars are terrible because theoretically lithium might have some environmental impact and we need to ban all cars if we REALLY care about the environment, so electric cars are bad because they’re stopping us from banning all cars.” Normie: “Solar power is good; I heard a little bit about climate change, so I’m glad some people are working to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.” Left Caucus of Nevada: “ Arevia Power withdrew their application for the Battle Born Solar project. Congrats to @saveourmesa and the other activists who put in the work to keep the community healthy, safe, and whole” https://twitter.com/LeftCaucus/status/1418403704047243264?s=20 https://twitter.com/LeftCaucus/status/1418403704047243264?s=...
    - goodpoint 5y ago
      Your example proves the opposite. The person you accused of being "too plugged" correctly points out the ineffectiveness of electric cars.
      - Robotbeat 5y ago
        Thanks for that. I was intending it to be an honest reflection of what some people actually think. Electric cars are between 2 and 20 times better than the status quo. The end result of opposing electric cars won’t be that cars get banned but that we’ll just use internal combustion engine cars.
        sudosysgen 5y ago
        It's simply not that. Electric cars aren't just being proposed as a temporary replacement for ICEs, they're increasingly being proposed as a replacement to public transit. See the Loop, and various autonomous taxi schemes that compete not with personal car ownership but with public transport. Beyond that, we live in a world of limited resources and path dependency. Every dollar being spent on subsidizing electric cars is a dollar not spent on public transport. So as soon as we're no longer talking about getting ICE cars off the road, we're spending money on tech that is not good enough instead of tech that is good enough. It's not the good being the enemy of the better, it's the less bad being the enemy of good enough. A world where we're spending 5000$+ from taxpayer money on EVs while dealing with ineffective public transport, which incentivizes people to move to suburbia and double their CO2 emissions, isn't going to cut it. So by all means we can work on EVs as a backup plan for those that will never use public transportation or human powered transport, but the second it's harming actually working transportation tech, and in the US that's starting to happen, it's doing more harm than good.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    > climate change, plastic pollution, economic problems, healthcare (personal and the system), philosophical/existential inquiries, etc If you're not doing actively something about it, what's the point of keeping this in mind if it only makes you sad? It seems like some people like having a moral high ground by being sad at important issues, but I don't really see the point. Either do something, or don't do anything.
  - goatlover 5y ago
    > There is a shocking obliviousness to climate change, plastic pollution, economic problems, healthcare (personal and the system), philosophical/existential inquiries, etc. Not to say people don’t know climate change is happening - they just aren’t aware of any details beyond surface level memes. In the 60s-80s, there was impending nuclear war, overpopulation, acid rain, the hole in the ozone layer, radioactive and chemical waste, deforestation of the Amazon at an alarming rate, and various species placed on endangered lists. That and all the religious rapture expectations, in the US at least. Somehow civilization managed not to collapse or annihilate itself decades ago. So the updated crisis of climate change, plastic in the ocean, etc. starts to sound like more of the same doomsday talk. Not that all of these things aren't problems to deal with, but are they existential in nature? Do they mean we should expect life to get worse? Because the overpopulation bomb and mass starvation didn't pan out. We produce more food now than we ever have. Acid rain and the ozone layer were manageable. Species often make recoveries after being protected. Rivers recover after being cleaned up. A majority of the original Amazon still remains, even though deforestation and fires remain concerns. There are more trees in the world today than 100 years ago. And standards of living having been going up around the globe over that same time, while absolute poverty has been diminishing. Maybe we can manage our problems and avoid the worst case scenarios. In the movie Tomorrowland, Hugh Laurie as the villain does give a really compelling speech in which he talks about how all the doomsday expectations are an excuse to not fix problems, which contrasts with the main character, who is very optimistic that humans can find solutions, unlike all her classmates and teachers.
somehnacct3757 5y ago
You can both acknowledge economic bubbles and have life satisfaction. It's as simple as not tying your own happiness onto gargantuan systems well outside your individual control. I bristle when others captured by internet outrage loops suggest that I too must share their outrage or I'm unreasonable, out of touch, etc. Did you recognize that you have become a recruiter for social media algorithms?
- nemo44x 5y ago
  I estimate around 20%-30% of the country has a mental health issue ranging from depression to narcissism to outright sociopathy and misanthropy. And they occupy a disproportionate amount of social media, etc congregating and spreading their sad world views everywhere. I think it’s difficult for people with these types of issues to cope with problems that are out of range for any one person to fix, for coming to terms with change, and to fixate on these things. Just bring in a constant panic state while everything seems so out of control. It’s sad because it’s just a very bad way to spend a life when there’s so much good and beautiful everywhere. The internet was great before everyone got in the pool and 30% of them started pissing in it.
tayo42 5y ago
I think your mixing up two different questions. This article is asking is your personal life good. Im generally happy with my own life and think it'll get better, that doesn't mean I think the world is on a good path. I think I can live a decent life independent of whatever is going on in the world at large. Like even if there is an economic bubble what does that really mean for you? Is your long term personal life satisfaction really tied to the economy? Maybe you'll have a bad year like 2008 did to some but you'll probably bounce back
- beerandt 5y ago
  >I think your mixing up two different questions. That's what the pollster and reporter want you to do. This has become an extremely common method of polling manipulation, and I can't believe more people don't see right through it.
l33t2328 5y ago
Why is it a bubble?
- username90 5y ago
  This study is from June, USA still paid a lot of stimulus money in June. Being happy from stimulus money is a bubble, it wont last.
  - l33t2328 5y ago
    When will it not last till? There will always be another crash...

by eps 5y ago

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> No reasonable person in rudimentary touch with reality can have elevated "anticipated life satisfaction" in this context. This is a perfect example of the internet cynicism I was referring to. There's a general vibe on sites like Reddit and HN that the average people are wrong and they shouldn't be happy because everything is actually terrible and they just haven't figured it out yet. Can we stop acting like these people are wrong or stupid and just accept that maybe people really are doing well?

humbleMouse 5y ago
Are we going to have any arctic ice left? That’s the type of question that keeps me from being too jovial.
meowkit 5y ago
> Can we stop acting like these people are wrong or stupid This is really hard to do given my conversations with most people in real life. There is a shocking obliviousness to climate change, plastic pollution, economic problems, healthcare (personal and the system), philosophical/existential inquiries, etc. Not to say people don’t know climate change is happening - they just aren’t aware of any details beyond surface level memes. Ignorance is bliss, as the saying goes. But also a reminder that frustration and outrage drive content algorithms, so its no surprise that kind of content dominates the text based social media.
- iamstupidsimple 5y ago
  Long ago, my dad checked out of news media entirely, and the effect on his mental health was incredible. Personally, I don't think I can turn a blind eye to the rest of the world, but IME those that do are generally much happier.
  - heckingoodtimes 5y ago
    What do they say again? > Ignorance is bliss. I didn’t grasp this when my HS English teacher imparted this on us, but having consumed much of the trending Reddit content, it makes a lot more sense these days.
    - nitrogen 5y ago
      When we all first hear this expression we assume that ignorance is a bad thing, thus we should not be like all the blissfully ignorant. But maybe it was really advice -- don't expand your circle of awareness too far beyond your circle of influence.
- Robotbeat 5y ago
  To be honest, I think there might be a point where if you’re too plugged in to environmental social media, you end up opposing fairly practical approaches to solving it because increasingly-niche concerns. The “good is the enemy of the better” effect. Normie: “Oh cool, electric cars are improving that means less pollution and i spend less on gas!” Too-online environmental person: “But ACKSHUALLY, electric cars are terrible because theoretically lithium might have some environmental impact and we need to ban all cars if we REALLY care about the environment, so electric cars are bad because they’re stopping us from banning all cars.” Normie: “Solar power is good; I heard a little bit about climate change, so I’m glad some people are working to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.” Left Caucus of Nevada: “ Arevia Power withdrew their application for the Battle Born Solar project. Congrats to @saveourmesa and the other activists who put in the work to keep the community healthy, safe, and whole” https://twitter.com/LeftCaucus/status/1418403704047243264?s=20 https://twitter.com/LeftCaucus/status/1418403704047243264?s=...
  - goodpoint 5y ago
    Your example proves the opposite. The person you accused of being "too plugged" correctly points out the ineffectiveness of electric cars.
    - Robotbeat 5y ago
      Thanks for that. I was intending it to be an honest reflection of what some people actually think. Electric cars are between 2 and 20 times better than the status quo. The end result of opposing electric cars won’t be that cars get banned but that we’ll just use internal combustion engine cars.
      - sudosysgen 5y ago
        It's simply not that. Electric cars aren't just being proposed as a temporary replacement for ICEs, they're increasingly being proposed as a replacement to public transit. See the Loop, and various autonomous taxi schemes that compete not with personal car ownership but with public transport. Beyond that, we live in a world of limited resources and path dependency. Every dollar being spent on subsidizing electric cars is a dollar not spent on public transport. So as soon as we're no longer talking about getting ICE cars off the road, we're spending money on tech that is not good enough instead of tech that is good enough. It's not the good being the enemy of the better, it's the less bad being the enemy of good enough. A world where we're spending 5000$+ from taxpayer money on EVs while dealing with ineffective public transport, which incentivizes people to move to suburbia and double their CO2 emissions, isn't going to cut it. So by all means we can work on EVs as a backup plan for those that will never use public transportation or human powered transport, but the second it's harming actually working transportation tech, and in the US that's starting to happen, it's doing more harm than good.
- Zababa 5y ago
  > climate change, plastic pollution, economic problems, healthcare (personal and the system), philosophical/existential inquiries, etc If you're not doing actively something about it, what's the point of keeping this in mind if it only makes you sad? It seems like some people like having a moral high ground by being sad at important issues, but I don't really see the point. Either do something, or don't do anything.
- goatlover 5y ago
  > There is a shocking obliviousness to climate change, plastic pollution, economic problems, healthcare (personal and the system), philosophical/existential inquiries, etc. Not to say people don’t know climate change is happening - they just aren’t aware of any details beyond surface level memes. In the 60s-80s, there was impending nuclear war, overpopulation, acid rain, the hole in the ozone layer, radioactive and chemical waste, deforestation of the Amazon at an alarming rate, and various species placed on endangered lists. That and all the religious rapture expectations, in the US at least. Somehow civilization managed not to collapse or annihilate itself decades ago. So the updated crisis of climate change, plastic in the ocean, etc. starts to sound like more of the same doomsday talk. Not that all of these things aren't problems to deal with, but are they existential in nature? Do they mean we should expect life to get worse? Because the overpopulation bomb and mass starvation didn't pan out. We produce more food now than we ever have. Acid rain and the ozone layer were manageable. Species often make recoveries after being protected. Rivers recover after being cleaned up. A majority of the original Amazon still remains, even though deforestation and fires remain concerns. There are more trees in the world today than 100 years ago. And standards of living having been going up around the globe over that same time, while absolute poverty has been diminishing. Maybe we can manage our problems and avoid the worst case scenarios. In the movie Tomorrowland, Hugh Laurie as the villain does give a really compelling speech in which he talks about how all the doomsday expectations are an excuse to not fix problems, which contrasts with the main character, who is very optimistic that humans can find solutions, unlike all her classmates and teachers.

somehnacct3757 5y ago

You can both acknowledge economic bubbles and have life satisfaction. It's as simple as not tying your own happiness onto gargantuan systems well outside your individual control. I bristle when others captured by internet outrage loops suggest that I too must share their outrage or I'm unreasonable, out of touch, etc. Did you recognize that you have become a recruiter for social media algorithms?

nemo44x 5y ago
I estimate around 20%-30% of the country has a mental health issue ranging from depression to narcissism to outright sociopathy and misanthropy. And they occupy a disproportionate amount of social media, etc congregating and spreading their sad world views everywhere. I think it’s difficult for people with these types of issues to cope with problems that are out of range for any one person to fix, for coming to terms with change, and to fixate on these things. Just bring in a constant panic state while everything seems so out of control. It’s sad because it’s just a very bad way to spend a life when there’s so much good and beautiful everywhere. The internet was great before everyone got in the pool and 30% of them started pissing in it.

tayo42 5y ago

I think your mixing up two different questions. This article is asking is your personal life good. Im generally happy with my own life and think it'll get better, that doesn't mean I think the world is on a good path. I think I can live a decent life independent of whatever is going on in the world at large. Like even if there is an economic bubble what does that really mean for you? Is your long term personal life satisfaction really tied to the economy? Maybe you'll have a bad year like 2008 did to some but you'll probably bounce back

beerandt 5y ago
>I think your mixing up two different questions. That's what the pollster and reporter want you to do. This has become an extremely common method of polling manipulation, and I can't believe more people don't see right through it.

l33t2328 5y ago

Why is it a bubble?

username90 5y ago
This study is from June, USA still paid a lot of stimulus money in June. Being happy from stimulus money is a bubble, it wont last.
- l33t2328 5y ago
  When will it not last till? There will always be another crash...