>So the writer chooses to start out right away with the obvious fallacy that people can't be both happier than in decades and also miserable. You are making th

>So the writer chooses to start out right away with the obvious fallacy that people can't be both happier than in decades and also miserable. You are making the (unfounded) assertion that there is some absolute scale of misery and so someone could be less miserable than they've been in decades and yet still be "miserable" because they haven't hit "happiness" on the absolute scale. But there is no such absolute scale. If someone is happier than they've been in decades they can't be miserable because that's just a term describing their personal low.