Rapid Technological Growth: Why is the Cost of Living Still So High?

[Mean MrMustard]

If you lived a 1950s lifestyle today, it would be incredibly cheap even compared to the US national average income. A tiny house, single tiny television, single cheap car with no safety features, and little radio are very affordable. We've upped the social requirements for all of those things, and the price has increased to match. It's no mystery.

/thread

 

[First]

Because improvements don't scale precisely linearly or exponentially, there's always a bottleneck to progress that isn't necessarily strangled by some unknown or suspected externality. Sometimes, new technology just takes decades to get past old technology, most clearly exemplified by airplane and auto technology that at its core hasn't changed in 50 years, especially air travel. Automobiles are just starting to migrate to electric, and that's a good trend, but oil-based energy is one of many old technologies that are just waiting to be outdone by some evolutionary (or even revolutionary) new energy technology. Energy evolution alone is a multi-decade boom/bubble waiting to happen. That's adjust the progress curve.

 

[Zorkorist]

Or, we could be living beyond our means.

-John

 

[wuliheron]

Or, we could be living beyond our means.

-John

Nah. The sad truth is the UK is now the only other wealthy country with a lower social mobility rate then the US, and that's if you don't include the 13 million illegal aliens. While the rich get richer everyone else is lucky if they can tread water and winning the lottery is becoming more viable then getting ahead through hard work and talent.

 

[Attic]

It doesn't seem right does it? It's a great question to ask. One thing that stands out to me is that workers haven't been rewarded for any of the technological advancements that allow them to be more productive. While a worker produced 1 zarblat an hour 10 years ago, and today produces 10 zarblats an hour, he is likely earning roughly the same or perhaps much less than his 10 year older former self when inflation is taken into account. The owners have siphoned off any benefit of the increased efficiently into thier back pocket.

To me it all boils down to companies having too little incentive to reward the worker. If we had higher employment rates I think this would largly take care of itself as there would at least be some competition for attaining workers.

I don't understand the 9% unemployment rate I see all the time. Everytime I read anything regardign unemployment I always come away with the picture that as a nation we are much closer to 20% unemployment.

We need companies who are more competitive for a low to medium skilled workforce for a lot of the poeple who have been crushed over the last 20 years to see any improvement in their earnings. This won't happen due to offshoring being more lucrative than a concious.

We need a majority of companies that share their profits with their employees/owners rather than exculsively with the owners.

 

[charrison]

No. That's a myth. Americans spend less on appliances than we did 40 years ago.

Yes but 40 years ago, our homes average 1500 square feet and may not have the appliances that come standard today. Today the average homes is around 2200 square feet and families are smaller. The 2 car family is becoming the 3 car family. There used to be a single phone in the house, now many have a landline and every family member has a smart phone and a data plan. Add in a cable.

Much of our financial problems are self inflicted.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

all the dollars are being issued as debt from the beginning. /thread

 

[Texashiker]

Rapid Technological Growth: Why is the Cost of Living Still So High?

Because companies are going to SQUEEZE every penny they can out of you.

A couple of years ago I was on a flight to Washington state. There were 3 men sitting in front of me, they worked for an insurance company and were talking about raising rates. They were laughing about how much money the company was bringing in, the bonus they were going receive and how great everything was going. Going for them at least. There was no mention of human decency, and keeping rates were they were affordable. All they were worried about was how much money and profits the market could support.

Why is the cost of living so high? I think it all boils down to human greed.

 

[wuliheron]

Yes but 40 years ago, our homes average 1500 square feet and may not have the appliances that come standard today. Today the average homes is around 2200 square feet and families are smaller. The 2 car family is becoming the 3 car family. There used to be a single phone in the house, now many have a landline and every family member has a smart phone and a data plan. Add in a cable.

Much of our financial problems are self inflicted.

I don't know if real estate is a good measure since, until the collapse, it was a classic investment for people. However, it is pretty obvious from the lack of savings and the amount of debt Americans have that they've been at least reluctant to adjust their lifestyle to the economic reality that they've been loosing ground for decades.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Yes but 40 years ago, our homes average 1500 square feet and may not have the appliances that come standard today. Today the average homes is around 2200 square feet and families are smaller. The 2 car family is becoming the 3 car family. There used to be a single phone in the house, now many have a landline and every family member has a smart phone and a data plan. Add in a cable.

Much of our financial problems are self inflicted.

Some are, but the bulk of the issue is deeper that. Outside of the "ooh, shiney" tech toys we have today compared to 40 years ago, we simply are not fundamentally much better off. And many of those toys and second cars have become necessary to maintain that same stagnant standard of living.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A

The real problem is, beyond the stagnant wages and living standards, is we are MORE reliant on money for mere survival today, which is the exact opposite of what SHOULD be happening as technology progresses. Technological progress by definition means less dependence on structural resources, so WTF is going on?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EewGMBOB4Gg

 

[ShawnD1]

Me I'm still waiting for the paperless office we were promised cira 1980.

I just printed a document to PDF then sent it to 3 people. Done deal.

 

[werepossum]

Oh goody, another "where's my robot butler?" lamentation. They all begin and end the same. Please prove me wrong...
Yes. People work. Now before I read any more of your post (And yes, I am writing this reply as I read your post. I really have only read two sentences.) ponder this: You go to a game preserve to see the smartest lions in the world. There are two separate prides of lions in this preserve. They are so smart they have each constructed large paddock containing large game animals, and have built dams and waterworks to ensure that the grass inside is always growing, and the system is tuned to produce plenty of food for them to eat. Also the game have been trained so that whenever the population reaches its target capacity, a plump antelope walks through of a narrow passage into a chute where it is killed and eaten by the lions outside. One pride decides it doesn't need to do any hunting ever again and just lays outside the antelope chute completely sedentary for their entire lives. The other pride continues to improve their paddock's design, waterworks, a blood capture tray to save waste, and even experiment with more intricate machines to accomplish more elaborate projects. Which of the two prides would you find more impressive?
I actually want to work more than 10 or 20 hours a week.
There are lots of homes available for incredibly reasonable prices. Take an average smartphone bill plus car payment plus cable bill plus a low rent payment and you can afford a modest home. Not affording a home is a combination of choosing to believe that luxuries are necessities, and not being willing to "settle" for a truly modest house.
This seems liek a non-sequitur to me. It doesn't really have anything to do with the thesis as introduced, and it also doesn't come with any numebrs. I'll choose to ignore it for now.
Offset by people's choices largely.
That is probably a big part of it, although I'm not sure food prices have ever truly been "low". When looked at globally, agricultural production has an uncanny way of tracking demand very accurately. Large price fluctuations often result from very minor mismatches between supply and demand. Larger population has increased volatility which makes the highs higher and the lows lower.


Because if you want to work 25 hours a week and your neighbor wants to work 30 hours a week, you are goign to feel sorry for yourself that your flying car is slower than his, and you're going to break your back working 32 hours a week to catch up to his "normal" standard of living.
I'm never sure what most government stories about "hungry" really mean. Yes there are legitimate poverty and hunger issues to be dealt with, but claims like this:don't actually say anything specific at all. They cheapen the discussion with deliberately unquantifiable "findings" and layer it with politicized conjecture.

LOL Excellent, humorous and undeniable. The average American lives in more square footage, owns larger (and more) automobiles, and spends far more than the average European. We opted for stuff, they opted for more time off. Countries with our work ethic, less consumerism, and more patience, like Japan, enjoy an even higher standard of living.

Technology makes things more complicated, not less. Someone did a study some years back on the effect of computers on productivity. The result was they made no or perhaps a slight negative difference. That's because the reports which were done quarterly went to monthly then weekly then daily. Made no real difference, but it sounded good. As far as technology and medicine you now have a lot of expensive diagnostic equipment and tests. We can treat diseases that killed people before. A dead diabetic is far cheaper than a well managed one. Technology is no magic bullet.

Quoted for truth. As many others here have pointed out, our standard of living has gotten much higher. We own things, and can do things, we hardly dreamt forty or fifty years ago. None of those things, where a big screen TV or an artificial heart, are cheap.

 

[charrison]

Some are, but the bulk of the issue is deeper that. Outside of the "ooh, shiney" tech toys we have today compared to 40 years ago, we simply are not fundamentally much better off. And many of those toys and second cars have become necessary to maintain that same stagnant standard of living.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A

The real problem is, beyond the stagnant wages and living standards, is we are MORE reliant on money for mere survival today, which is the exact opposite of what SHOULD be happening as technology progresses. Technological progress by definition means less dependence on structural resources, so WTF is going on?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EewGMBOB4Gg

Stagnant wages? really? Today's consumer has far more buying power than ever. The consumer has decided to want more.

 

[Zebo]

USA has become a win big lose big society. Offshoring, flat taxation, inshoring,etc

CNN did a special program on this problem a couple weeks ago and told the story of how fifty years ago, a person without a high school education could get a good job in the steel industry or in any other labor-intensive industry and make a very good living ($75,000 - $85,000 a year in today's dollars), buy a nice home and a decent car and easily support his family until he retired from the workforce.

Today - we offshore that uneducated job to $10 a day India or China for maximum profitability for shareholders.

Each year, the income disparities between labor and capital gets larger. Not to complicated to understand the mechanics. Capital also has luxury of waiting anything out so they can always buy low sell high. I'm not rich but I am sitting on three lots I paid $27K-35K for until I can make my money back and then some. I can do this forever. Multiply that x billions of dollars of anything.

How we reversed the classic rich get richer poor get poorer/Mathew effect whatever you want to call it before was tariffs, high, as high as 91% taxation under IKE, strong labor unions etc. to get money back in little people hands.

 

[Craig234]

The answer is simple.

For the last 30 years, basically all the economic growth in the country has gone to the top.

The bottom 80% have gotten basically none of it, while it's highly top-heavy in the top 20%.

The lower end of the top 20% got a few percent, up to the top 0.1% who got hundreds of percent of increase, shooting up their share of wealth.

But Craig234, you say, what about the improvements for people, like bigger homes? If the bottom 80% got nothing after inflation, what about the improvements?

There are a few things behind that, at least.

One is that yes, technological improvements do have benefits. No one in 1900 flew jets across the world. No one in 1940 had a big screen tv.

The second thing is that we've greatly increased two-income households - while all the real increase in productivity from that has gone to the top.

One income households used to buy the home, raise the kids.

The third thing is the massive debt the public has taken on to pay for the improvements.

If we didn't have a class war with radical policies shifting wealth to the top, Americans today WOULD be far wealthier.

You see the right here put out a lot of fact-free ideological propaganda for their argument. The fact is, the economic growth has hugely gone to the top.

Save234

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Stagnant wages? really? Today's consumer has far more buying power than ever. The consumer has decided to want more.

You keep alleging such things but it's simply not true. Most two income households today can barely afford the housing, healthcare, and education levels one income households held 30 years ago. The first link in my post you apparently didn't bother to look at demonstrates this pretty clearly.

 

[Craig234]

You keep alleging such things but it's simply not true. Most two income households today can barely afford the housing, healthcare, and education levels one income households held 30 years ago. The first link in my post you apparently didn't bother to look at demonstrates this pretty clearly.

Lot of silence from the right for some reason in response to the facts. Guess they're looking for the next 'guy cheated welfare' story to scream about.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Lot of silence from the right for some reason in response to the facts. Guess they're looking for the next 'guy cheated welfare' story to scream about.

They'll be back. Facts don't phase those folks.

 

[Jhhnn]

They'll be back. Facts don't phase those folks.

Of course not. They refuse to question their own beliefs, their Faith, and just throw a few more sandbags on the mental bunker when their basic assumptions are questioned. They crave certainty at any cost. If they admitted to themselves that they were wrong about anything, they might discover that they've been wrong about a lot of things, and their worldview would crumble.

 

[charrison]

You keep alleging such things but it's simply not true. Most two income households today can barely afford the housing, healthcare, and education levels one income households held 30 years ago. The first link in my post you apparently didn't bother to look at demonstrates this pretty clearly.

Yet most two households income opted for the biggest house they could afford, 2+ cars, cell phone for everyone in the family, cable and eat out a few times a week. There has been economic progress, has it been well spent is a different question.

 

[Zorkorist]

What are ya'll talking about?

There have always been the rich people in the world, they are miniscule and inconsequential to the way the world works.

What's lacking today, that was not lacking 50 years ago, is opportunities for unskilled labor. Simple things like having a maid, have disappeared. Steel making, and other unskilled jobs, have disappeared.

And this is not the fault of the Rich People, this is the fault of Government, Lawyers, and Insurance Companies.

-John

 

[Matt1970]

Lot of silence from the right for some reason in response to the facts. Guess they're looking for the next 'guy cheated welfare' story to scream about.

Becuase you guys don't see a problem with it costing a company $75 an hour to have a guy turn a bolt on an assembly line. You guys don't see the fact that the very people bitching about no jobs here have no problem running to Walmart and grabbing the cheapest thing they can find, a Chineese made product. Sure jobs went overseas, but when you make products here that have to sit on a shelf next to the same products from overseas that cost 1/2 as much, Americn products won't sell. This ball got rolling back in the 70's when people started buying import cars and stereo's made in Japan.

 

[Zorkorist]

Yet most two households income opted for the biggest house they could afford, 2+ cars, cell phone for everyone in the family, cable and eat out a few times a week. There has been economic progress, has it been well spent is a different question.

It's all been borrowed, when you look at our debt.

There is no economic progress, simply more and more debt.

And taxation, and regulation.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Economic Progress, would be America not in debt. Americans not in debt.

The New Colossus
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

-John

 

[charrison]

It's all been borrowed, when you look at our debt.

There is no economic progress, simply more and more debt.

And taxation, and regulation.

-John

Ok, lets assume it is all borrowed. Whose fault is that?