4 ms·

I mostly agree, though I think there are differences you'd notice rather quickly (but nothing as big as moving from 1890 to 1950) If you removed all the screen

I mostly agree, though I think there are differences you'd notice rather quickly (but nothing as big as moving from 1890 to 1950) If you removed all the screens you'd probably first notice what's missing as opposed to what's different. In many of today's homes you wouldn't see things like tape / record players, stereos, VCRs, telephones, books, maps, yellow pages, rolodexes, calendars - all of these having a digital replacement. And depending on the affluence of the home you'd notice a lot more variety of specialty things - for example kitchen equipment (espresso machines, burr coffee grinders, instant pots, sous vide machines, mini blow torches, automatic ice cream makers). There are thousands of available board games now compared to the 80s - and it is super easy to have specialty hobby items as they're cheap and readily available. If you went to the grocery store you'd see a far greater variety of vegetables, prepared foods, cheeses, meats, "exotic" ingredients etc. I think the big differences are around convenience, variety, and availability - and for whatever reason they don't feel quite as big, even though the work that goes into making that possible is astoundingly large and complex.

lr4444lr 4y ago
Much of that is consumption, though. I don't want to knock consumption, but it's not productivity.
- bluGill 4y ago
  Consumption is directly related to production. If I was willing to live on the minimum I could have retired after only a couple years. People retire at 65 now like before, but with a lot more stuff their additional productivity gave them. People seem to like it, so the argument that they shouldn't have so much junk is a bit flat.
  - lmm 4y ago
    Is all that extra stuff making them happier? Or are they just acquiring it to keep up with their neighbours? Maybe someone who retired early on the minimum would genuinely be less happy, but only because of seeing how much "better off" everyone else was.
    - MrJohz 4y ago
      I don't have a huge amount of evidence for this (I suspect you do not for your claim either), but I would guess that yes, it does make people happier. The stuff I own is not keeping up with the neighbours, it's stuff that is meaningful to my hobbies. I have a cupboard full of board games because that makes me happy. My friend has a cupboard full of kitchen equipment because that makes them happy. My other friend has a basement with a home gym, my other friend has a mountain of books, and another friend has lovely furniture. Which all implies that we're not really trying to keep up with each other, because if we were, we'd now be competing in completely different races. And even when I meet people with a similar interest to me (e.g. board games), the wealth and variety of the medium means that we'll probably still have very different interests within the world of board gaming. So it logically seems to me that, if anything, the era of social competition is waning because people are more willing to accept that they want different things to their neighbours.
    - bluGill 4y ago
      Yes it makes them happy. Not just the consumption itself, but the act of earning it, and the competition is what some people live for. Maybe your values are different, but those people don't understand your values any more than you understand theirs
- jodrellblank 4y ago
  What things do you do at home that you would count as productivity? I'd say dishwasher and microwave would be much more common today than in the 80s. Clothes washing machine probably not more common but today's would be brighter, beepier, more economical on power and water and with better chemical detergents. Power Showers compared to waiting for an immersion heater to heat a hot water tank, maybe, high power transistors seem to be more of a thing than in the past. Portable Li-Ion power tools could improve DIY productivity for people who do that kind of thing. Battery portable vacuum cleaners and Roombas? Is that about it? You can't "productivity" sleeping or oven baking or raising children or relaxing or socialising or a lot of household living experiences. You can productivity your paper work, insurance, banking, but that's screen based. Once you've got clothes from a hand wash to a machine there isn't much pressure for it to be very fast compared to kinda slow, since you aren't hanging around waiting.
  - lr4444lr 4y ago
    All fair considerations, but I think the main point is a matter of degree between the two time periods. Surely there were also less visible efficiencies that took place during the first period too, i.e. the electric fridge vs. an ice box, but that's not the point of the comparison, I think.
dumpsterlid 4y ago
Also, homes in the US are generally FAR better insulated than they used to be, especially windows.

lr4444lr 4y ago

Much of that is consumption, though. I don't want to knock consumption, but it's not productivity.

bluGill 4y ago
Consumption is directly related to production. If I was willing to live on the minimum I could have retired after only a couple years. People retire at 65 now like before, but with a lot more stuff their additional productivity gave them. People seem to like it, so the argument that they shouldn't have so much junk is a bit flat.
- lmm 4y ago
  Is all that extra stuff making them happier? Or are they just acquiring it to keep up with their neighbours? Maybe someone who retired early on the minimum would genuinely be less happy, but only because of seeing how much "better off" everyone else was.
  - MrJohz 4y ago
    I don't have a huge amount of evidence for this (I suspect you do not for your claim either), but I would guess that yes, it does make people happier. The stuff I own is not keeping up with the neighbours, it's stuff that is meaningful to my hobbies. I have a cupboard full of board games because that makes me happy. My friend has a cupboard full of kitchen equipment because that makes them happy. My other friend has a basement with a home gym, my other friend has a mountain of books, and another friend has lovely furniture. Which all implies that we're not really trying to keep up with each other, because if we were, we'd now be competing in completely different races. And even when I meet people with a similar interest to me (e.g. board games), the wealth and variety of the medium means that we'll probably still have very different interests within the world of board gaming. So it logically seems to me that, if anything, the era of social competition is waning because people are more willing to accept that they want different things to their neighbours.
  - bluGill 4y ago
    Yes it makes them happy. Not just the consumption itself, but the act of earning it, and the competition is what some people live for. Maybe your values are different, but those people don't understand your values any more than you understand theirs
jodrellblank 4y ago
What things do you do at home that you would count as productivity? I'd say dishwasher and microwave would be much more common today than in the 80s. Clothes washing machine probably not more common but today's would be brighter, beepier, more economical on power and water and with better chemical detergents. Power Showers compared to waiting for an immersion heater to heat a hot water tank, maybe, high power transistors seem to be more of a thing than in the past. Portable Li-Ion power tools could improve DIY productivity for people who do that kind of thing. Battery portable vacuum cleaners and Roombas? Is that about it? You can't "productivity" sleeping or oven baking or raising children or relaxing or socialising or a lot of household living experiences. You can productivity your paper work, insurance, banking, but that's screen based. Once you've got clothes from a hand wash to a machine there isn't much pressure for it to be very fast compared to kinda slow, since you aren't hanging around waiting.
- lr4444lr 4y ago
  All fair considerations, but I think the main point is a matter of degree between the two time periods. Surely there were also less visible efficiencies that took place during the first period too, i.e. the electric fridge vs. an ice box, but that's not the point of the comparison, I think.

dumpsterlid 4y ago

Also, homes in the US are generally FAR better insulated than they used to be, especially windows.