(09-30-2015 09:36 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:31 AM)Hitch Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:28 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:04 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 08:24 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Yet by virtually any measure, the standard of living is greater than it was 40 years ago. Even people considered "poor", eat better, have better health care, live in better housing, etc.

Today virtually everyone has a wide screen TV, cable, cell phones, computers, Nike sneakers, transportation, etc. They have access to inexpensive goods at Walmart and other outlets. And those who make different choices, have easier access to a wide range of illicit drugs.

Life is good.


Note: this post is mildly sarcastic, but is generally true.

Just because you have a nice TV doesn't mean life is good. I see lots of poor people everyday that have HD TV's but not much else.

Regardless, the point is that 40 years ago they didn't have HD TVs. Ergo, all else equal, their standard of living is higher.

Food is cheaper, clothing is cheaper. Housing, medical care, and education is way more expensive. The family budget it zero sum, not growing.

The reason that medical care is more expensive is that there are far more treatments available than there were 40 years ago. And all of those are costly. Just look at a comparison of life expectancy. For males there has been a 13% increase and females have an 8% increase. That alone implies a better standard of living.

This: Most every cure for a disease adds to the overall cost of healthcare. People with Diabetes died young 50-70 years ago. We've put 30-40 more years on their lives and added more medical cost.

I'm not saying it's bad, but it is the truth.

(09-30-2015 09:04 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 08:24 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Yet by virtually any measure, the standard of living is greater than it was 40 years ago. Even people considered "poor", eat better, have better health care, live in better housing, etc.

Today virtually everyone has a wide screen TV, cable, cell phones, computers, Nike sneakers, transportation, etc. They have access to inexpensive goods at Walmart and other outlets. And those who make different choices, have easier access to a wide range of illicit drugs.

Life is good.


Note: this post is mildly sarcastic, but is generally true.

Just because you have a nice TV doesn't mean life is good. I see lots of poor people everyday that have HD TV's but not much else.

FWIW I agree to some extent. I think we need to remove electronics and most consumer goods from the CPI and base it on Food, Shelter, Fuel, and other necessities like Clothing.

The vast majority of the jobs lost in manufacturing has NOT been due to companies shipping jobs overseas. The loss in jobs is due to productivity gains and technology introduced into U.S. plants.



Case in point. Look at the U.S. steel industry today vs. what it used to be like yesterday. Since the 1980s, there has been a 5 fold decrease in the man hours needed to make a ton of steel in the 1980s vs today.

Quote:The U.S. steel industry operates more than 100 steelmaking and production facilities, producing 98 million tons in steel shipments valued at $75 billion in 2014.

The steel industry directly employs about 150,000 people in the United States, and it directly or indirectly supports more than one million U.S. jobs.

Labor productivity for the U.S. steel industry has improved five-fold since the early 1980s, when the average steel mill produced one ton of steel for 10.1 worker hours. The 2014 average was 1.9 worker hours per ton, with many facilities producing a ton of steel in less than one worker hour.

https://www.steel.org/about-aisi/industry-profile.aspx

Manufacturing jobs have increased a lot in Louisville in recent years GE, Ford all have added Thousands of new jobs but not because of Obama. It's because These companies are building newer and higher quality products that meet the demands of what consumers need and want. And Unions and Companies work a lot closer together today than 20 years ago with the same goals to produce the best products. Also Others have greatly added to their work forces for similar reasons like UPS, Amazon have. Yes technology has improved to produce product, but You still need hands on people to do it faster and smarter these days.

(09-30-2015 09:40 AM)Hitch Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:36 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:31 AM)Hitch Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:28 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:04 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Just because you have a nice TV doesn't mean life is good. I see lots of poor people everyday that have HD TV's but not much else.

Regardless, the point is that 40 years ago they didn't have HD TVs. Ergo, all else equal, their standard of living is higher.

Food is cheaper, clothing is cheaper. Housing, medical care, and education is way more expensive. The family budget it zero sum, not growing.

The reason that medical care is more expensive is that there are far more treatments available than there were 40 years ago. And all of those are costly. Just look at a comparison of life expectancy. For males there has been a 13% increase and females have an 8% increase. That alone implies a better standard of living.

Longer life expectancy is a good thing, but only if the standard of living doesn't decline dramatically towards the end of life. Lots of elderly are struggling financially.

I could easily make the argument that longer life expectancy is a bad thing...

but that would be a waste of time....like me responding to this post....or responding to a dung beetle....or running the yammer on a politico board....or fk'n with people on a politico board....or expecting everyone to behave on an internet board....or expecting everyone to have the same level of intelligence.....or believing in god...or that happiness comes from magic rays of sunshine...

the end result only yields pathetic....

that sums up politics and those that don't do a thing about it other than run their yammers on a politico board....

the pussification that so many biatch about is defined by most that post here.....

y'all have a great day....Imma gonna goes plays outsides nows....

just can't fix stupid fk'n people.....

(09-30-2015 09:31 AM)Hitch Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:28 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 09:04 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 08:24 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  Yet by virtually any measure, the standard of living is greater than it was 40 years ago. Even people considered "poor", eat better, have better health care, live in better housing, etc.

Today virtually everyone has a wide screen TV, cable, cell phones, computers, Nike sneakers, transportation, etc. They have access to inexpensive goods at Walmart and other outlets. And those who make different choices, have easier access to a wide range of illicit drugs.

Life is good.


Note: this post is mildly sarcastic, but is generally true.

Just because you have a nice TV doesn't mean life is good. I see lots of poor people everyday that have HD TV's but not much else.

Regardless, the point is that 40 years ago they didn't have HD TVs. Ergo, all else equal, their standard of living is higher.

Food is cheaper, clothing is cheaper. Housing, medical care, and education is way more expensive. The family budget it zero sum, not growing.

And economic security is much worse. There are ways to sort it all out

1) Housing. Mortgage interest will only be deductable for first mortgages under 400,000 on a primary residence only. Property tax exemptions should only be allowed up to the median home price in a market.

2) Medical care. The private sector has failed. We need to simply make Medicare the system for all Americans. And mandate that Medicare pay no more than the G7 average for pharmaceuticals.

3) Education. This one is easier. Simply allow people to discharge educational debt via bankruptcy if more than a certain percentage of graduates in any given major/school combination are in default or economic deferral. That would put the brakes on education price rises very quickly. Because the lenders would be in the business of ensuring that the school's price rises actually equaled future earning power for the borrowers.