2 ms·
>I don't know which 70s the author grew up in but I don't think a minimum wage worker had a pristine supercomputer in their pocket and a big flatscreen tv on th
by andrepd 5y ago
>I don't know which 70s the author grew up in but I don't think a minimum wage worker had a pristine supercomputer in their pocket and a big flatscreen tv on the wall.
Yes, I know that you cannot afford housing, or decent healthcare, or access credit, that childhood poverty has increased, that you're 100K in debt for getting an education, that worker's rights are being eroded, that we've bailed out the very rich to the tune of trillions for the second time in a little over a decade... but have you considered that in the 70s you didn't have a Samsung Galaxy Pro S37+ Ultra©™? /s
I can't believe I'm reading this, it's the stereotypical "consoom" meme.
- dd36 5y agoI can’t tell if it’s a joke?
- notahacker 5y agoOther stuff being bad (mostly for reasons other than globalization) is irrelevant to the obvious absurdity of the claim in the original article that globalization didn't allow us to have more consumer goods for less, it just made the consumer goods worse. The claim being addressed was that consumer electronics are so much worse than the consumer electronics of the 1970s it cancels out price cuts: he even makes up a number to go with it! You can't defend instances of the "everything was better in the good old days" meme as laughably specific as saying we're $2000 worse off buying modern appliances than 1970s ones by pointing to other stuff where the evidence might not point in the opposite direction.