3 ms·

> In the past 50 years, despite overall economic growth, the quality of life for most Americans has declined I would like to see some citations for this becaus

by jl6 3y ago

> In the past 50 years, despite overall economic growth, the quality of life for most Americans has declined I would like to see some citations for this because there are many things that make up quality of life, and many ways to measure them. The subsequent paragraphs talk about a decline in real wages for "Americans who didn’t have a four-year college degree", but QoL is not all about wages. Consider the example of European countries who typically appear high up in QoL rankings despite having lower median wages.

sergiosgc 3y ago
> European countries who typically appear high up in QoL rankings despite having lower median wages. Those have low inequality in personal income, plus a strong social security net. USA lacks both of these characteristics.
- jl6 3y ago
  Sure, which I think supports the idea that there are things other than wages that influence QoL. We are told here that QoL was better 50 years ago. I wonder how many people, given the choice, would choose to live in 1973 instead of today.
- Turing_Machine 3y ago
  And yet far more Europeans emigrate to the U.S. (on a proportional basis) than emigrate the other way. Particularly skilled Europeans, but even unskilled ones. Maybe the "QoL rankings" don't accurately reflect what people really want?
  - sergiosgc 3y ago
    Quoting Scott Galloway: The US is a great country to live in if you're young. It is an extremely efficient capitalist society, at the expense of having no social safety net. If you're healthy and on your way to a Phd, you don't really need a safety net. If you're unhealthy and old, you won't pack and move to Denmark. Hence the migration stats.
    - Turing_Machine 3y ago
      First, the Department of Health and Human Services has an annual budget of > $US 1.8 trillion, or a little over $US 5,000/year on a per capita basis. Note that this doesn't take social programs administered by other departments and agencies into account (e.g., the Department of Education, the Veteran's Administration, the Social Security Administration...). Those also do a great deal of social spending (especially Social Security). While this is probably not as high as the EU on a per-capita basis, it's quite unfair to characterize it as "no" safety net. Also, I find Galloway's argument that older people are too unhealthy to move back to Denmark (or wherever)... unpersuasive. You can be pretty damned unhealthy and still get on a plane nowadays.
tivert 3y ago
>> In the past 50 years, despite overall economic growth, the quality of life for most Americans has declined > I would like to see some citations for this because there are many things that make up quality of life, and many ways to measure them. There's that famous graph that shows flat real wages from the 70s onward for most people, and very well-known problems with extremely important goods like healthcare access and housing. Sure, most Americans (even poor ones) have gotten significantly larger and higher-resolution televisions and gizmos like cell phones during that time, but I think those things are actually pretty marginal (and perhaps even negative), from a quality of life perspective.
- Turing_Machine 3y ago
  The Internet has made a good portion of the sum total of human knowledge available to anyone with a cheap cell phone plan. Yes, most of them are using it to play games and look at funny cat pictures, but some are not, or at least not exclusively. I'm not being snobbish here -- I like funny cat pictures myself, but that's not how I spend most of my online time. That's far from "marginal" or a "gizmo", IMO, and I don't think we've even begun to see the final outcome.
  - tivert 3y ago
    > That's far from "marginal" or a "gizmo", IMO, and I don't think we've even begun to see the final outcome. Come on. The internet is really a gizmo that in no way is a substitute for basic needs (like housing, healthcare, or security) when evaluating someone's quality of life. That's pretty easy to show: if you were given a choice between: 1. being homeless but having access to "a good portion of the sum total of human knowledge" through "cheap cell phone plan." 2. having a home, but no internet access. Which would you choose? Wikipedia won't keep the rain off your head. IMHO, software engineers are often very poor judges of the true value of the tech-gizmos they spend so much time with.

by jl6 3y ago

sergiosgc 3y ago

> European countries who typically appear high up in QoL rankings despite having lower median wages. Those have low inequality in personal income, plus a strong social security net. USA lacks both of these characteristics.

jl6 3y ago
Sure, which I think supports the idea that there are things other than wages that influence QoL. We are told here that QoL was better 50 years ago. I wonder how many people, given the choice, would choose to live in 1973 instead of today.
Turing_Machine 3y ago
And yet far more Europeans emigrate to the U.S. (on a proportional basis) than emigrate the other way. Particularly skilled Europeans, but even unskilled ones. Maybe the "QoL rankings" don't accurately reflect what people really want?
- sergiosgc 3y ago
  Quoting Scott Galloway: The US is a great country to live in if you're young. It is an extremely efficient capitalist society, at the expense of having no social safety net. If you're healthy and on your way to a Phd, you don't really need a safety net. If you're unhealthy and old, you won't pack and move to Denmark. Hence the migration stats.
  - Turing_Machine 3y ago
    First, the Department of Health and Human Services has an annual budget of > $US 1.8 trillion, or a little over $US 5,000/year on a per capita basis. Note that this doesn't take social programs administered by other departments and agencies into account (e.g., the Department of Education, the Veteran's Administration, the Social Security Administration...). Those also do a great deal of social spending (especially Social Security). While this is probably not as high as the EU on a per-capita basis, it's quite unfair to characterize it as "no" safety net. Also, I find Galloway's argument that older people are too unhealthy to move back to Denmark (or wherever)... unpersuasive. You can be pretty damned unhealthy and still get on a plane nowadays.

tivert 3y ago

>> In the past 50 years, despite overall economic growth, the quality of life for most Americans has declined > I would like to see some citations for this because there are many things that make up quality of life, and many ways to measure them. There's that famous graph that shows flat real wages from the 70s onward for most people, and very well-known problems with extremely important goods like healthcare access and housing. Sure, most Americans (even poor ones) have gotten significantly larger and higher-resolution televisions and gizmos like cell phones during that time, but I think those things are actually pretty marginal (and perhaps even negative), from a quality of life perspective.

Turing_Machine 3y ago
The Internet has made a good portion of the sum total of human knowledge available to anyone with a cheap cell phone plan. Yes, most of them are using it to play games and look at funny cat pictures, but some are not, or at least not exclusively. I'm not being snobbish here -- I like funny cat pictures myself, but that's not how I spend most of my online time. That's far from "marginal" or a "gizmo", IMO, and I don't think we've even begun to see the final outcome.
- tivert 3y ago
  > That's far from "marginal" or a "gizmo", IMO, and I don't think we've even begun to see the final outcome. Come on. The internet is really a gizmo that in no way is a substitute for basic needs (like housing, healthcare, or security) when evaluating someone's quality of life. That's pretty easy to show: if you were given a choice between: 1. being homeless but having access to "a good portion of the sum total of human knowledge" through "cheap cell phone plan." 2. having a home, but no internet access. Which would you choose? Wikipedia won't keep the rain off your head. IMHO, software engineers are often very poor judges of the true value of the tech-gizmos they spend so much time with.