7 ms·

In 1964 U.S. News Predicted the Future

30 points by taylorbuley 12y ago

pgrote 12y ago
It is a slideshow. Here are the topics: 1) U.S. Population: 395 million 2) “Trillions will have the place in the vocabulary that millions had 50 years ago and billions have today. Overall spending will be in the trillions. So will debt.” 3) “A population crowded into great strips of cities will be struggling to enjoy driving 200 million or more automobiles where there are 66 million now.” 4) “Supersonic transports that, within a decade or so, are to carry passengers across the American continent or to Europe in an hour and a half probably will be in the process of being replaced by rocket transports capable of cutting that time in half.” 5) “China within a half century will be pushing past 1.5 billion people and will face a desperate need for more space. If the world is to see a nuclear war, that war might be one fought between Russia and China for control of the wide-open spaces of Russia’s Far East.” 6) “An American in another 50 years long since will have been on the moon. Space will have become an element of supporting defense platforms, communications satellites, maybe launching platforms for ventures not yet dreamed of.” 7) “Hydrogen weapons will have proliferated among many nations of the world. China is sure to have them. France will, too. So will Germany. Israel and Egypt may. American officials place at 15 or 20 the nations that will have nuclear weapons before the end of his century.” 8) “If the record of the past is repeated, the dollar of 2014 will be an 11-cent dollar in terms of 1914 … In terms of today that value will have been cut by 67 percent.” 9) “The 60-hour week of 1914 that became the 40-hour week of 1964 probably will be the 30-hour workweek of 2014 – a six-hour day five days a week. Average family income, now $7,800 a year, is likely in another half century to exceed $20,000 a year in 1964 dollars.” 10) “Life in 1964 may appear as the ‘good old days’ when contrasted with the scramble for an existence in the crowded turmoil of a concentrated, automated and computerized world of tomorrow. It will be a world moving at rocket-like speed.”
- taylorbuley 12y ago
  Adjusting for inflation, $7,800 in 1964 is $59,858.71 in 2014 dollars http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=7%2C800&year1=1964&year2=2014 http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=7%2C800&year1=1... $20,000 in 1964 dollars is $153,483.87 in 2014 dollars. http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=20%2C000&year1=1964&year2=2014 http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=20%2C000&year1=...
  - simulate 12y ago
    Thanks for the stats. That means the actual median income of $53,046 between 2008 - 2012 is about 10% lower than the median income 50 years ago, adjusted for inflation. I knew real income was lower over the past twenty years or so, but negative real income growth for the last 50 years is much worse than I thought.
- pachydermic 12y ago
  $20,000 in 1964 equates to $153,483.87, according to [1]. The population of china is currently 1.365B, according to [2]. A dollar today is equivalent to $0.04 in 1914 according to [1]. I should add at this point that there are a lot of different ways to measure inflation. The number of passanger vehicles is around 250 million in the US today - how many of those are "cars" is up to interpretation. [3] 1: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population 3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States#Total_number_of_vehicles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_Unite...
michaelochurch 12y ago
The one that matters most (#9) and is objective is the milestone that, not only did we miss it, but we've actually back-slid.
- logfromblammo 12y ago
  Well, the productivity increase math probably worked out, but they didn't consider that companies would first choose to have 3 employees working 40 hours a week instead of 4 people working 30, then follow that trend to 45 hour work-weeks and massive systemic unemployment. The 1980s hadn't happened yet, you see.
- bryondowd 12y ago
  If the randomly selected inflation calculator I used is correct, the median family income today is about $6,785 in 1964 dollars. Quite sad. EDIT: Correction. They must be using mean instead of median for their 'average' family income. A quick check shows the median 1964 family income was $6,569. So at least we're slightly up from that. Source http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-25.pdf http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-25.pdf
  - michaelochurch 12y ago
    ... also, the 2014 number is with two incomes, expensive and shitty healthcare, unaffordable real estate, and ridiculous college tuitions.
    - maxerickson 12y ago
      That is the narrative of anger. On the other hand, there are 113 million households and 155 million people in the work force, so 2 incomes isn't typical for a household (It's only possible for ...oops). Edit: (This ignores people collecting benefits or retirement payments, but I guess those aren't bleak signals. It makes the statement I had made about 1/3 nonsense though.) Much of the care that makes medicine expensive simply wasn't available in the 1960s, so is a hard sell as a regression (you know, trauma care, the huge improvements in care for heart disease, the huge improvements in treatment of cancer, the panoply of drugs that treat conditions that may or may not exist, etc). Real estate is expensive in many cities, but in towns, you can't sell a 2,000 square foot house, never mind selling it at a price resembling expensive. Real estate pricing is a symptom of other things going on in the economy, not a particularly huge problem all on its own. Mean student debt runs less than $30,000 and activists won't even report the median. Pointing out what is wrong (if anything significant...) with this article might make for some good discussions: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2013/09/24/five-myths-about-college-debt/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2013/09/2... None of that means I think that the U.S. system of paying for health care is sensible or that I am opposed to figuring out a better way to make education available or anything like that.
loumf 12y ago
They say that called the US Population correct at 395m, when it's 316m. It was 191m in 1964. So instead of over 100% increase it was 65%. Doesn't feel close to me. For something like this, where we have good models (for example Social Security needs to predict US pop correctly) -- need to be a lot closer to call it "Correct". Looks like they misread the baby boomer trend -- and didn't predict the effect of widespread, effective, legal birth-control, women entering the workplace in larger numbers, etc.
- loumf 12y ago
  According to this: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9828&page=43 http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9828&page=43 The UN 30 year projections for the US/Australia/Japan group is around 5% error.
driverdan 12y ago
Terrible slideshow format and poorly formed conclusions that don't support the data. Too bad they didn't predict the decline in journalism.
5h 12y ago
Following from the last point, It's a nice thought to consider that in the future our present will be viewed by some as "the good old days". I wonder what aspects of today will be desirable to hackers of the future.
UPCequals666 12y ago
This was not a prediction,its them showing you what the elite had in store for the people.

30 points by taylorbuley 12y ago

It is a slideshow. Here are the topics: 1) U.S. Population: 395 million 2) “Trillions will have the place in the vocabulary that millions had 50 years ago and billions have today. Overall spending will be in the trillions. So will debt.” 3) “A population crowded into great strips of cities will be struggling to enjoy driving 200 million or more automobiles where there are 66 million now.” 4) “Supersonic transports that, within a decade or so, are to carry passengers across the American continent or to Europe in an hour and a half probably will be in the process of being replaced by rocket transports capable of cutting that time in half.” 5) “China within a half century will be pushing past 1.5 billion people and will face a desperate need for more space. If the world is to see a nuclear war, that war might be one fought between Russia and China for control of the wide-open spaces of Russia’s Far East.” 6) “An American in another 50 years long since will have been on the moon. Space will have become an element of supporting defense platforms, communications satellites, maybe launching platforms for ventures not yet dreamed of.” 7) “Hydrogen weapons will have proliferated among many nations of the world. China is sure to have them. France will, too. So will Germany. Israel and Egypt may. American officials place at 15 or 20 the nations that will have nuclear weapons before the end of his century.” 8) “If the record of the past is repeated, the dollar of 2014 will be an 11-cent dollar in terms of 1914 … In terms of today that value will have been cut by 67 percent.” 9) “The 60-hour week of 1914 that became the 40-hour week of 1964 probably will be the 30-hour workweek of 2014 – a six-hour day five days a week. Average family income, now $7,800 a year, is likely in another half century to exceed $20,000 a year in 1964 dollars.” 10) “Life in 1964 may appear as the ‘good old days’ when contrasted with the scramble for an existence in the crowded turmoil of a concentrated, automated and computerized world of tomorrow. It will be a world moving at rocket-like speed.”

taylorbuley 12y ago
Adjusting for inflation, $7,800 in 1964 is $59,858.71 in 2014 dollars http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=7%2C800&year1=1964&year2=2014 http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=7%2C800&year1=1... $20,000 in 1964 dollars is $153,483.87 in 2014 dollars. http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=20%2C000&year1=1964&year2=2014 http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=20%2C000&year1=...
- simulate 12y ago
  Thanks for the stats. That means the actual median income of $53,046 between 2008 - 2012 is about 10% lower than the median income 50 years ago, adjusted for inflation. I knew real income was lower over the past twenty years or so, but negative real income growth for the last 50 years is much worse than I thought.
pachydermic 12y ago
$20,000 in 1964 equates to $153,483.87, according to [1]. The population of china is currently 1.365B, according to [2]. A dollar today is equivalent to $0.04 in 1914 according to [1]. I should add at this point that there are a lot of different ways to measure inflation. The number of passanger vehicles is around 250 million in the US today - how many of those are "cars" is up to interpretation. [3] 1: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population 3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States#Total_number_of_vehicles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_Unite...

michaelochurch 12y ago

The one that matters most (#9) and is objective is the milestone that, not only did we miss it, but we've actually back-slid.

logfromblammo 12y ago
Well, the productivity increase math probably worked out, but they didn't consider that companies would first choose to have 3 employees working 40 hours a week instead of 4 people working 30, then follow that trend to 45 hour work-weeks and massive systemic unemployment. The 1980s hadn't happened yet, you see.
bryondowd 12y ago
If the randomly selected inflation calculator I used is correct, the median family income today is about $6,785 in 1964 dollars. Quite sad. EDIT: Correction. They must be using mean instead of median for their 'average' family income. A quick check shows the median 1964 family income was $6,569. So at least we're slightly up from that. Source http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-25.pdf http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-25.pdf
- michaelochurch 12y ago
  ... also, the 2014 number is with two incomes, expensive and shitty healthcare, unaffordable real estate, and ridiculous college tuitions.
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    That is the narrative of anger. On the other hand, there are 113 million households and 155 million people in the work force, so 2 incomes isn't typical for a household (It's only possible for ...oops). Edit: (This ignores people collecting benefits or retirement payments, but I guess those aren't bleak signals. It makes the statement I had made about 1/3 nonsense though.) Much of the care that makes medicine expensive simply wasn't available in the 1960s, so is a hard sell as a regression (you know, trauma care, the huge improvements in care for heart disease, the huge improvements in treatment of cancer, the panoply of drugs that treat conditions that may or may not exist, etc). Real estate is expensive in many cities, but in towns, you can't sell a 2,000 square foot house, never mind selling it at a price resembling expensive. Real estate pricing is a symptom of other things going on in the economy, not a particularly huge problem all on its own. Mean student debt runs less than $30,000 and activists won't even report the median. Pointing out what is wrong (if anything significant...) with this article might make for some good discussions: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2013/09/24/five-myths-about-college-debt/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2013/09/2... None of that means I think that the U.S. system of paying for health care is sensible or that I am opposed to figuring out a better way to make education available or anything like that.

loumf 12y ago

They say that called the US Population correct at 395m, when it's 316m. It was 191m in 1964. So instead of over 100% increase it was 65%. Doesn't feel close to me. For something like this, where we have good models (for example Social Security needs to predict US pop correctly) -- need to be a lot closer to call it "Correct". Looks like they misread the baby boomer trend -- and didn't predict the effect of widespread, effective, legal birth-control, women entering the workplace in larger numbers, etc.

loumf 12y ago
According to this: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9828&page=43 http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9828&page=43 The UN 30 year projections for the US/Australia/Japan group is around 5% error.

driverdan 12y ago

Terrible slideshow format and poorly formed conclusions that don't support the data. Too bad they didn't predict the decline in journalism.

5h 12y ago

Following from the last point, It's a nice thought to consider that in the future our present will be viewed by some as "the good old days". I wonder what aspects of today will be desirable to hackers of the future.

UPCequals666 12y ago

This was not a prediction,its them showing you what the elite had in store for the people.