3 ms·

1) Architecture is a matter of taste, so debate is usually not fruitful. But when I walk through an old city, I find all the old buildings much more pleasing t

1) Architecture is a matter of taste, so debate is usually not fruitful. But when I walk through an old city, I find all the old buildings much more pleasing to the eye than the new buildings. For an extreme example, compare Boston City Hall ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Boston_City_Hall.JPG/800px-Boston_City_Hall.JPG http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Bos... ) to the State House ( http://graphics.worldweb.com/PhotoImages/Articles/USA/Boston_Tours_State_House.jpg http://graphics.worldweb.com/PhotoImages/Articles/USA/Boston... ) 2) The two have nothing to do with each other. While the rise in life expectancy happened gradually over the course of the century, the rise in divorce rates was very sharp from 1965 to 1980. 3a) Again, the rise in illegitimacy happened between 1965 and 1980 and has generally been a social disaster. 3b) In terms of material well being perhaps. In terms of culture, absolutely not. Read "Gang Lead for a Day" and then compare to "How the Other Half Lives". And violent crime certainly has not been falling in the inner cities: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=271919 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=271919 4) Read Robert Putnams's Bowling Alone. Basically TV and video games have replaced the old civic organizations like the Masons or bowling leagues. 5) High drop out rates are a feature. It means young adults aren't required by law to waste their life earning a meaningless credential just to enter their chosen profession. I discuss this in full in this thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=358326 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=358326 6) What government spending do you find so useful? The military bases in 170 countries? The carrier fleet that would last about 30 minutes in modern cruise missile warfare? The space shuttle program that only makes news when a shuttle explodes every ten years? The corn and ethanol subsidies? The housing/welfare programs that have created a permanent urban underclass? Medicare/medicaid, which consume 7% of GDP on healthcare, yet only manage to cover a fraction of the population? 7) My point was that the overall employment rate among black men has declined dramatically. This is a disaster. Even if their material well being is ok, being unemployed is emasculating. 8) The problem is the Dilbertization of the economy. The soulless organization man companies, filled with pointy haired bosses, are a child of World War II. 9) Well I certainly hope so. 10) Both U.S. today and U.S. pre-Fed had a nasty business cycle. But the advantage of the system back then was that in the panic of 1907 Wall St. bailed itself out. No need for several trillion dollars of government money. Other advantages of 1907 include no inflation, no Sarbox, and companies actually paying dividends. Overall, I would still prefer to live in 2009. But that's almost entirely due to the exponential growth of technology. But remember that technology can move in a different direction than the other components of a society. Technology is much, much better today. But the political system is far, far worse. Culture is better in some ways ( Rock & Roll, movies, blogs) and worse in others (fewer civic organizations, awful architecture). There is no reason we could not restore the political system of 1909 while keeping all our new fangled toys. Then we would have the best of both worlds. On the other hand, if the political situation continues to deteriorate, eventually technological growth will start to slow down or even reverse. That is scenario that must be averted.

Retric 18y ago
Read up on the government of 1908, it was extremely corrupt. Anyway, Technology is driving most of the social changes you're talking about. Something like 50% of the average persons medical expenses occur in the last year of their life which makes insuring the old extremely costly. The government pays for ~50% of all medicine in the US and most of it would not exist if a) it where not available and b) people where not living as long. The world would probably be more wealthy without that drain, but I don't know if it would be better. I expect the government of 1908 was more corrupt than the government of today, people did not have the money to let government take that much off of them. 1908 introduced the Model T, before that modern roads where pointless in most places. I think the streetlight best summarizes government involvement, when 1000 people per hour are driving underneath them it's a extremely useful, but they are pointless in the middle of a corn field. Nobody is going to pay per light to see at night so it's really just a question of government/local groups or nothing. Saying public infrastructure is best served by private companies seems to miss the poor service they provide. EX: Cellphone coverage in the US. So yes taxes are up, but it's not like the money is set on fire we are getting a lot of services from that money. When it comes to social organizations things like MMO guilds and facebook let people be far more social than the average pre car social club. While face time might be decreasing the average person is far more social today than at any other point in history. And considering how much more free time people have facetime might also be increasing. Edit: Over the last 100 years the middle class and the wealthy have left city's and have only recently been returning. Murder statistics among the poor and they have always been high so correlating it with city living is missing the point. You can look at the murder rate in inner city's or the murder rate among high school dropouts and see the same trends. PS: I think human nature has changed little over time, most social changes are a reaction to increased technology / prosperity and throughout history the rich tended to become fat, self absorbed, and decedent. The powerful / well connected become corrupt. And working people get stepped on.
- bokonist 18y ago
  Read up on the government of 1908, it was extremely corrupt. Indeed it was. But perhaps you have heard the name K Street before? The retail, envelopes-full-of-cash corruption is now mostly gone. Corruption today is organized, supersized, and legalized. It's called interest group politics. Worse, because government is so much bigger, both in revenues and the extents of its regulations, interest group politics has a far more pernicious impact on our lives than the corruption of 1909 ever did. The world would probably be more wealthy without that drain, but I don't know if it would be better. Even given that we want to spend more on healthcare, the government healthcare programs waste somewhere on the order of 80% of the dollars spent. My point was that the taxes we now pay are not being put to good use. I expect the government of 1908 was more corrupt than the government of today, people did not have the money to let government take that much off of them Just look at the rates. Combined federal tax rates for a median earner in 1909: 0%. Combined federal tax rates for a median earner 2009: ~20%. The government was very corrupt then, but at least people new it was corrupt and thus had little inclination to vote in leaders that would raise taxes. Our modern government, via its K-16 education system, has basically taught everyone that the government is our mother and that giving it money is righteous and good. So yes taxes are up, but it's not like the money is set on fire we are getting a lot of services from that money. Federal taxes do not pay for streetlights and cell phones ( and neither does much of state and local taxes). I generally view the interstate highway program as a disaster that destroyed urban neighborhoods and created an unsustainable reliance on automobiles. When it comes to social organizations things like MMO guilds and facebook let people be far more social than the average pre car social club. You have got to be be kidding. Human beings did not evolve to socialize via text. Over the last 100 years the middle class and the wealthy have left city's and have only recently been returning. Murder statistics among the poor and they have always been high so correlating it with city living is missing the point. Murder statistics among the poor and they have always been high so correlating it with city living is missing the point. This simply false. At the turn of the century, 85% of the population of Milwaukee were immigrants or the children of immigrants. Yet the homicide rate was 3.7. The other big northern cities were similar. The people in these cities were mostly poor immigrants. Yet they worked hard and moved forward in life. In the 60's, breakdowns in law enforcement, "urban renewal", and the growth of the welfare state allowed the growth of a large criminal underclass in the cities. Riots and muggings pushed the hard working middle class out into the suburbs Poverty does not cause crime. Culture and lack of rule of law cause crime.

Retric 18y ago

Read up on the government of 1908, it was extremely corrupt. Anyway, Technology is driving most of the social changes you're talking about. Something like 50% of the average persons medical expenses occur in the last year of their life which makes insuring the old extremely costly. The government pays for ~50% of all medicine in the US and most of it would not exist if a) it where not available and b) people where not living as long. The world would probably be more wealthy without that drain, but I don't know if it would be better. I expect the government of 1908 was more corrupt than the government of today, people did not have the money to let government take that much off of them. 1908 introduced the Model T, before that modern roads where pointless in most places. I think the streetlight best summarizes government involvement, when 1000 people per hour are driving underneath them it's a extremely useful, but they are pointless in the middle of a corn field. Nobody is going to pay per light to see at night so it's really just a question of government/local groups or nothing. Saying public infrastructure is best served by private companies seems to miss the poor service they provide. EX: Cellphone coverage in the US. So yes taxes are up, but it's not like the money is set on fire we are getting a lot of services from that money. When it comes to social organizations things like MMO guilds and facebook let people be far more social than the average pre car social club. While face time might be decreasing the average person is far more social today than at any other point in history. And considering how much more free time people have facetime might also be increasing. Edit: Over the last 100 years the middle class and the wealthy have left city's and have only recently been returning. Murder statistics among the poor and they have always been high so correlating it with city living is missing the point. You can look at the murder rate in inner city's or the murder rate among high school dropouts and see the same trends. PS: I think human nature has changed little over time, most social changes are a reaction to increased technology / prosperity and throughout history the rich tended to become fat, self absorbed, and decedent. The powerful / well connected become corrupt. And working people get stepped on.

bokonist 18y ago
Read up on the government of 1908, it was extremely corrupt. Indeed it was. But perhaps you have heard the name K Street before? The retail, envelopes-full-of-cash corruption is now mostly gone. Corruption today is organized, supersized, and legalized. It's called interest group politics. Worse, because government is so much bigger, both in revenues and the extents of its regulations, interest group politics has a far more pernicious impact on our lives than the corruption of 1909 ever did. The world would probably be more wealthy without that drain, but I don't know if it would be better. Even given that we want to spend more on healthcare, the government healthcare programs waste somewhere on the order of 80% of the dollars spent. My point was that the taxes we now pay are not being put to good use. I expect the government of 1908 was more corrupt than the government of today, people did not have the money to let government take that much off of them Just look at the rates. Combined federal tax rates for a median earner in 1909: 0%. Combined federal tax rates for a median earner 2009: ~20%. The government was very corrupt then, but at least people new it was corrupt and thus had little inclination to vote in leaders that would raise taxes. Our modern government, via its K-16 education system, has basically taught everyone that the government is our mother and that giving it money is righteous and good. So yes taxes are up, but it's not like the money is set on fire we are getting a lot of services from that money. Federal taxes do not pay for streetlights and cell phones ( and neither does much of state and local taxes). I generally view the interstate highway program as a disaster that destroyed urban neighborhoods and created an unsustainable reliance on automobiles. When it comes to social organizations things like MMO guilds and facebook let people be far more social than the average pre car social club. You have got to be be kidding. Human beings did not evolve to socialize via text. Over the last 100 years the middle class and the wealthy have left city's and have only recently been returning. Murder statistics among the poor and they have always been high so correlating it with city living is missing the point. Murder statistics among the poor and they have always been high so correlating it with city living is missing the point. This simply false. At the turn of the century, 85% of the population of Milwaukee were immigrants or the children of immigrants. Yet the homicide rate was 3.7. The other big northern cities were similar. The people in these cities were mostly poor immigrants. Yet they worked hard and moved forward in life. In the 60's, breakdowns in law enforcement, "urban renewal", and the growth of the welfare state allowed the growth of a large criminal underclass in the cities. Riots and muggings pushed the hard working middle class out into the suburbs Poverty does not cause crime. Culture and lack of rule of law cause crime.