4 ms·
well productivity gains are largely met with higher standard of living, quality of life and the upward movement of the lowest classes, for one.
by calvinmorrison 5mo ago
well productivity gains are largely met with higher standard of living, quality of life and the upward movement of the lowest classes, for one.
- p-e-w 5mo agoThat hasn’t been true for decades in the West, even though per-capita productivity has been steadily rising since WW2.
- MichaelZuo 5mo agoAre you sure? From the data I’ve seen the bottom decile Americans consume significantly more per capita compared to even 2006. e.g. plane travel was completely absent amongst the bottom decile in 2006, like so close to zero mileage per capita per annum it was a rounding error.
- p-e-w 5mo agoPlane travel is a very poor proxy for quality of life. Home ownership, high-quality food, working hours etc. seem far more relevant.
- MichaelZuo 5mo agoHuh? People will, intentionally, work longer hours to afford more frequent plane travel. And to upgrade classes, perks, lounge access, etc… I’m pretty sure there are literally millions of people like that.
- king_geedorah 5mo agoIs bottom decile consumption a good measure of economic health? In a way it seems it could signal the opposite, ie in the past the bottom decile was saving that money in an effort to change their economic conditions vs spending it now could indicate a lack of hope for upward mobility. To your example it seems worth noting that the quality of the air travel experience appears to decline over time as well.
- MichaelZuo 5mo agoBottom decile consumption is the best measure of economic health for the bottom decile… it clearly cannot be the best measure across the entirety of the population. Real physical consumption is by far the hardest metric to game or play tricks with. Yes technically, some probably are trading a bit of their future prospects for a nicer flight schedule, less red-eyes, etc… But I don’t see how that is relevant at all?
- ux266478 5mo agoYes actually, this is remarkably well studied: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/08/07/for-most-... I hate to imagine what this graph looks like today, given the massive amount of inflation that's happened in the last 6 years.
- passive 5mo agoThat's not generally true in the US over the last 40 years, where the gains from productivity increases have been accumulated almost entirely by the top classes. Yes, lower classes have access to many more conveniences then they might have had in earlier decades, but they are working far more hours, and their expected lifespan has started decreasing.
- calvinmorrison 5mo agomy dad grew up in a house without running water in a town where everyone worked in a mine and the lead was everywhere. he hitchiked to alaska for seasonal work in a fish cannery. Yeah I don't know... i think things are better than they were 40 years ago.
- Sl1mb0 5mo agoThere are still people in America who live without running water. There are still people who work on fishing boats in Alaska. There are still people who hitchhike. This is literally just an anecdote trying to deflect from contemporary problems. I don't see any value in this sort of discourse. Just because things may have been worse for specific individuals does *not* mean that current problems shouldn't be addressed.
- calvinmorrison 5mo agooh no an anecdote! run away!
- shimman 5mo agoYou should, especially when said anecdote amounts to "shut the fuck up and be thankful to your corporate overlords peasant."
- jmye 5mo ago> Just because things may have been worse for specific individuals does not mean that current problems shouldn't be addressed. Suggesting that things are better now than they were in 1986 for the overwhelming majority of people is not, in any way whatsoever, suggesting that "problems shouldn't be addressed". Come on. Y'all have got to start actually reading things before smashing that reply button.