3 ms·

I'm not sure how it's possible to "not see a path" when every long-term global trend shows material wealth has been increasing for centuries. By every measure f

I'm not sure how it's possible to "not see a path" when every long-term global trend shows material wealth has been increasing for centuries. By every measure from standard of living to health and happiness the positive trend data is overwhelming. I suggest you go look at the objective long-term data and stop letting negative spin from click-driven media and politicians trying to drive their various agendas rob you of reality.

CrackerNews 4y ago
The keyword is global. For example, China is reducing extreme poverty (again the keyword is extreme).
- the_only_law 4y ago
  I find it difficult to believe GP didn’t know this.
  - BeFlatXIII 4y ago
    The fact that people of similar belief spam facts about global poverty reduction on stories of pessimistic Americans seems to indicate that they do not, in fact, understand this.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
JohnFen 4y ago
> I'm not sure how it's possible to "not see a path" when every long-term global trend shows material wealth has been increasing for centuries. It's because I'm thinking about my children's well-being. That's near-term, local stuff. That the long-term global trend is going up doesn't mean the short-term local trend is also going up. Also, I'm comparing my children's standard of living to my own. I'm not comparing my children's standard of living to that of past eras. > stop letting negative spin from click-driven media and politicians You're assuming quite a lot about about me here.
defterGoose 4y ago
I think the obvious response is that material wealth is only well correlated with life satisfaction up to about 100k/yr or so. And only certain sub-categories of that wealth have any sort of durable correlation at all. If every segment of society would agree that they rate as "reasonably happy/satisfied" then I'd agree that your assumed standards actually mean something, but that's just not the case. And we don't have great historical satisfaction data to compare with.

CrackerNews 4y ago

The keyword is global. For example, China is reducing extreme poverty (again the keyword is extreme).

the_only_law 4y ago
I find it difficult to believe GP didn’t know this.
- BeFlatXIII 4y ago
  The fact that people of similar belief spam facts about global poverty reduction on stories of pessimistic Americans seems to indicate that they do not, in fact, understand this.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

JohnFen 4y ago

> I'm not sure how it's possible to "not see a path" when every long-term global trend shows material wealth has been increasing for centuries. It's because I'm thinking about my children's well-being. That's near-term, local stuff. That the long-term global trend is going up doesn't mean the short-term local trend is also going up. Also, I'm comparing my children's standard of living to my own. I'm not comparing my children's standard of living to that of past eras. > stop letting negative spin from click-driven media and politicians You're assuming quite a lot about about me here.

defterGoose 4y ago

I think the obvious response is that material wealth is only well correlated with life satisfaction up to about 100k/yr or so. And only certain sub-categories of that wealth have any sort of durable correlation at all. If every segment of society would agree that they rate as "reasonably happy/satisfied" then I'd agree that your assumed standards actually mean something, but that's just not the case. And we don't have great historical satisfaction data to compare with.