Comment box Scope: response to the article, personal opinion Tone: neutral Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none This is a great article and I agree with it insofar as this is a better way to measure...
Exemplary
Comment box
Scope: response to the article, personal opinion
Tone: neutral
Opinion: yes
Sarcasm/humor: none
This is a great article and I agree with it insofar as this is a better way to measure costs.
Housing shouldn't be so expensive. I support zoning policies that dramatically increase the supply of housing. I also disapprove of the idea of housing being an investment, including for 'regular people'; it's unsustainable.
Transportation shouldn't be so expensive. I support better public transportation alternatives as well as transit-oriented zoning and development patterns that decrease people's transportation needs.
Healthcare shouldn't be so expensive. I support universal healthcare paid for by taxing people with higher incomes and corporations with higher revenue. Tax the billionaires yes yes
etc
That's how I vote and have always voted and will always vote.
But I also feel compelled to point out that people's expectations of what "normal" is has changed a lot over time. I don't agree with the author's dismissal or half-acknowledgement of the change in standards at the very end of their conclusion. The expectations of what constitutes 'thriving' are not marginally higher, they are significantly higher.
When inflation-adjusted figures report that a 2022 earner could afford roughly what a 1985 earner could, that assumes the 2022 earner still plans to drive a 1985 car, live in a 1985 house, watch a 1985 television, and receive 1985 medical care. That’s not possible, nor is it what being “middle class” in 2022 means. Consider instead the costs of a 2022 car, a 2022 house, a 2022 television, and 2022 medical care—the things a 2022 middle-class family should be able to afford—and the picture looks quite different.
The picture 'looks quite different' because the commodities being compared here are fundamentally more resource-intensive.
People choose to live in larger houses today than they did in 1985. In addition to being larger, the houses also have way higher electricity usage and more complex construction, including new systems, like HVAC. They're more air-tight, they have different materials, and often people want bigger lots/yards and bigger garages too. There is definitely an inflation of expectations. Obviously, the cost of housing has inflated way faster than people's expectations have inflated. But their expectations have still inflated, and that contributes to the overall increase in cost. (Not to mention intangible increases in expectations, like aesthetic desires for one's 'neighborhood character' that manifest as NIMBY voting blocs, which dramatically raise prices via housing scarcity.)
People also choose to drive significantly larger vehicles than they did in 1985, and often more of them. These cars have all sorts of gadgets that are definitely not necessary for transportation but increase the cost. If a manufacturer relaunched a car from 1985, it would not sell for its own merit, but mainly for nostalgia and some niche markets (such as people who like small cars). This is also an inflation of expectations.
A television today may cost about the same or less than one in 1985, but people's expectations of how many televisions (or equivalent screens) they need to feel "normal" has gone up dramatically. Everyone needs a phone and a laptop now to feel 'middle class'. For a family of four that's like nine devices. Not to mention all the normalized electronic Alexas and air-headphones and pods and speakers and smart refrigerators and whatever. The amount of appliances in general is higher... more dishwashers, more washing machines and dryers, many middle class people have multiple fridges these days, etc.
Perhaps more significant than individual gadgets is that the amount people are choosing to spend on services to do tasks they used to do themselves has also increased over time. Eating out at restaurants is an example of this (instead of cooking)... certainly more common than it used to be. Grocery delivery and meal delivery is constant. The number of taxi (uber) rides many people take is astronomical. There is definitely a tendency in the middle class or aspiring middle class to throw things out and buy new ones rather than fix them (sewing holes, darning socks, etc).... same problem. In the past that would have been seen as wasteful, but now it is just normal? And so on.
People's expectations have gone up in just about every regard. There is nothing wrong with standards going up to a certain extent. I mean I'm glad our standards for sanitation are better than in 1985 or 1935. And there are some environmental and other reasons for these increases in expectations; yeah it's hotter outside now so more people want AC, okay. But it's important to understand that life in 1985 was not 'the same as 2024 but cheaper'. The standards of what was considered 'wealth' and socially acceptable as a middle-class person were different too. I don't think it's wrong to say that we are wealthier today than we were in the past. We totally are wealthier. It's just that society and individuals in it have repeatedly made decisions that make the definition of "normal" more expensive than it used to be.
In many respects I think that these expectations are unreasonable. It is not reasonable for everyone to live in a single-family home with three cars, a gigantic yard, multiple children and dogs, etc. while also having a thousand electronic devices, accumulating endless amounts of random junk and collectible figurines constantly, eating out at restaurants and having things delivered multiple times per week, and taking vacations on airplanes to other countries. People have still internalized these images as 'the middle class lifestyle' or at least as 'the desirable lifestyle' and are frustrated that they can't attain them. It isn't environmentally or economically realistic to begin with.
The article says that in reality, "people manage." Many people do not end up having all the gadgets and whatnot. But then they're even more emotionally frustrated about not obtaining these unrealistic social status markers. The unrealisticness hasn't changed.
I have heard people say phrases like 'Desire is the root of all suffering' which seems very apt. I'm not a monk but I think most people could stand to reevaluate how they actually derive happiness, because it mostly seems to come from having and spending money on things. I'm personally upset with how much my life costs, but part of that is because my expectations are stupidly unrealistic. I like spending money on lots of things but I think we are taking it too far with conflating living and luxury. Even if our goal is 'thriving' it simply does not need to be that resource-intensive.
Again as an advocate for housing and transportation I know most of this problem currently can be addressed by better wage equality and less economic inequality in general. There is easily money in society to solve this problem. But I can guarantee you most people are not critically thinking about the fundamental costs of their resources on society and the environment. Because all resources have some fundamental cost, that lack of critical thought means that we will run into this same problem again, infinitely, unless we are able to re-evaluate our expectations... or unless we completely eradicate all life in the universe in order to obtain maximum resources to meet our endlessly rising expectations.
Comment box
This is a great article and I agree with it insofar as this is a better way to measure costs.
That's how I vote and have always voted and will always vote.
But I also feel compelled to point out that people's expectations of what "normal" is has changed a lot over time. I don't agree with the author's dismissal or half-acknowledgement of the change in standards at the very end of their conclusion. The expectations of what constitutes 'thriving' are not marginally higher, they are significantly higher.
The picture 'looks quite different' because the commodities being compared here are fundamentally more resource-intensive.
People choose to live in larger houses today than they did in 1985. In addition to being larger, the houses also have way higher electricity usage and more complex construction, including new systems, like HVAC. They're more air-tight, they have different materials, and often people want bigger lots/yards and bigger garages too. There is definitely an inflation of expectations. Obviously, the cost of housing has inflated way faster than people's expectations have inflated. But their expectations have still inflated, and that contributes to the overall increase in cost. (Not to mention intangible increases in expectations, like aesthetic desires for one's 'neighborhood character' that manifest as NIMBY voting blocs, which dramatically raise prices via housing scarcity.)
People also choose to drive significantly larger vehicles than they did in 1985, and often more of them. These cars have all sorts of gadgets that are definitely not necessary for transportation but increase the cost. If a manufacturer relaunched a car from 1985, it would not sell for its own merit, but mainly for nostalgia and some niche markets (such as people who like small cars). This is also an inflation of expectations.
A television today may cost about the same or less than one in 1985, but people's expectations of how many televisions (or equivalent screens) they need to feel "normal" has gone up dramatically. Everyone needs a phone and a laptop now to feel 'middle class'. For a family of four that's like nine devices. Not to mention all the normalized electronic Alexas and air-headphones and pods and speakers and smart refrigerators and whatever. The amount of appliances in general is higher... more dishwashers, more washing machines and dryers, many middle class people have multiple fridges these days, etc.
Perhaps more significant than individual gadgets is that the amount people are choosing to spend on services to do tasks they used to do themselves has also increased over time. Eating out at restaurants is an example of this (instead of cooking)... certainly more common than it used to be. Grocery delivery and meal delivery is constant. The number of taxi (uber) rides many people take is astronomical. There is definitely a tendency in the middle class or aspiring middle class to throw things out and buy new ones rather than fix them (sewing holes, darning socks, etc).... same problem. In the past that would have been seen as wasteful, but now it is just normal? And so on.
People's expectations have gone up in just about every regard. There is nothing wrong with standards going up to a certain extent. I mean I'm glad our standards for sanitation are better than in 1985 or 1935. And there are some environmental and other reasons for these increases in expectations; yeah it's hotter outside now so more people want AC, okay. But it's important to understand that life in 1985 was not 'the same as 2024 but cheaper'. The standards of what was considered 'wealth' and socially acceptable as a middle-class person were different too. I don't think it's wrong to say that we are wealthier today than we were in the past. We totally are wealthier. It's just that society and individuals in it have repeatedly made decisions that make the definition of "normal" more expensive than it used to be.
In many respects I think that these expectations are unreasonable. It is not reasonable for everyone to live in a single-family home with three cars, a gigantic yard, multiple children and dogs, etc. while also having a thousand electronic devices, accumulating endless amounts of random junk and collectible figurines constantly, eating out at restaurants and having things delivered multiple times per week, and taking vacations on airplanes to other countries. People have still internalized these images as 'the middle class lifestyle' or at least as 'the desirable lifestyle' and are frustrated that they can't attain them. It isn't environmentally or economically realistic to begin with.
The article says that in reality, "people manage." Many people do not end up having all the gadgets and whatnot. But then they're even more emotionally frustrated about not obtaining these unrealistic social status markers. The unrealisticness hasn't changed.
I have heard people say phrases like 'Desire is the root of all suffering' which seems very apt. I'm not a monk but I think most people could stand to reevaluate how they actually derive happiness, because it mostly seems to come from having and spending money on things. I'm personally upset with how much my life costs, but part of that is because my expectations are stupidly unrealistic. I like spending money on lots of things but I think we are taking it too far with conflating living and luxury. Even if our goal is 'thriving' it simply does not need to be that resource-intensive.
Again as an advocate for housing and transportation I know most of this problem currently can be addressed by better wage equality and less economic inequality in general. There is easily money in society to solve this problem. But I can guarantee you most people are not critically thinking about the fundamental costs of their resources on society and the environment. Because all resources have some fundamental cost, that lack of critical thought means that we will run into this same problem again, infinitely, unless we are able to re-evaluate our expectations... or unless we completely eradicate all life in the universe in order to obtain maximum resources to meet our endlessly rising expectations.