Is life now better or worse than 40 years ago?

http://able2know.org/topic/122739-1

Quite a rehash of personal history; mine is so "blassay"(sp) in comparison. Thanks for sharing it.

Forty years ago, antibiotics were in their infancy and heart bypass procedures were almost unknown. We live in an era where the world is open to us--The Internet--Television--Blackberries. Schools no longer block aspiring and deserving students from attending( It was only after World War II that schools like Harvard began taking students of the Jewish faith).

The good old days were not so good. If we compare our lives to those who lived NOT ONLY 40 years ago but during the Great Depression of the thirties; World War I; the Westward Expansion; the Revolutionary War in the USA; the Reformation; the Renaissance; the Middle Ages; the Fall of Rome and the decline of the Athenian Empire, we find that we are far far more fortunate than almost all of our ancestors.

I agree that so many things are better, but for me, where I am things are NOT better in the financial aspect. It's a shame. Hubby was 'down-sized' and lost a job with a nice salary and benefits. That was 7 years ago. We're still trying. Savings are gone, we can't afford to move and are on public assistance. I'm going to school to get my masters. It really stinks to be in this place (financially) with 2 growing kids and a house we could never sell in this market or even think about moving. So, I sure hope & pray things get better! Sorry to be the wet blanket, but that's just the way things are for us here (in Michigan) and now. We keep on keepin' on, taking work where we can & interviews as they come, but so far ... not so good.

I am so sorry to hear that devries, and hope you'll get back on your feet.
With your masters you should be able to hold the fort down for a while. Best
wishes to you and your family.

devreis, There are millions of American families just like yours, and just as recently as a few weeks ago, McCain told the American People that our economy was in good shape. This is the man the conservatives are supporting to be our president; the very man who chose Palin, a loose canyon, to be his veep.

It's scary.

Thanks, cj. The jobs are pretty scarce on my front as well, unfortunately, but thank you so much for the well wishes. Hopefully something good comes out of it.
And, ci, it IS scary! To tell you the truth, I can't get fired up over either candidate. I'm a GDI (gosh darn independent) to the core & I really don't trust either of them to truly make things better.

As a matter of fact, the Unemployment Rate stood at 6.1% at the beginning of September. Any good Economics Book will state that 5% Unemployment is akin to full employment since there are always people leaving one job to take another. The vast majority of the rest are people who do not have sufficient training or education to fit into another slot. There are very few jobs that can classify as lifetime jobs expecially in the private sector. People need to have enough education and/or training so they can switch to another completely different area.

Advice to young people? An advanced degree in Mathematics is superb.
On the other hand, a BA in History or English won't equip you for job changes very well.

Actually a BA in a humanities type of subject is a good education if you go into IT. There are legions of IT folk who cannot string together a good sentence, run a meeting, make a presentation or translate what they say and do when it comes to working with end users or building (and defending!) a budget. I've found a Philosophy degree to be quite helpful in that area. I'm no programmer but I always land on m'feet.

That 's the degree I took, pre-law,
but I 'm still a computer dunce and computer ignoramus first class !

Well, like I said, I'm no programmer. A lot of it baffles me. But I've found that I have a niche of being the team communicator. I do the documentation, I speak up in the meetings, I soothe the ruffled feathers, that kind of thing.

In 1968, I did not have a 7 foot HDTV with maximum pixels.
I did not even have a videotape recorder,
and I had fewer guns in my collection.





David

I question the 5% and 6.1% figures produced by our government. Look at it this way; if we lost over 600,000 jobs since January, and it requires at the very minimum creating 100,000 jobs every month to meet demand, there is a disconnect between layoffs and job creation to come up with those two figures.

I'll say again, I'm very skeptical about numbers created by our government.

If someone is skeptical about figures produced by the government, then,all things being equal, one must be skeptical of all figures produced by the government, including GDP, Balance of Payments, etc.etc. and one must,of course, be skeptical of all figures released by the government including figures from the eras of FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson,Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan. Bush Sr., Clinton, and the present administration.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were nineteen months of Unemployment during the first Clinton presidency which had over 6.1% unemployment.

Then,of course, if figures are to be believed, one must view the figures for productivity. According to those measures, it now takes 98 persons to produce what 100 people produced at the beginning of the year. I guess that the villan in that case would either be the government, which must be distrusted or technology, which allows more production with fewer workers.

We talked about this (topic) today, a couple of friends, who all were between 15 and 25 years, 40 years ago.

Of course, we didn't have all the "advantages" of modern life.
But even without tv and videotape: we knew what to do - ourselves - and weren't addicted to what 348 channels want us to watch (and buy).

(I wonder, David, of now you can kill one person more often at the same time than 40 years ago.)

When I began school, at age 5 in NYC, tho I got good grades,
I was not much impressed with it.
I had a HUGE jurisdictional challenge to compulsory education:
" Where in the HELL do thay get the right to have ME
go over THERE ?????? " I ranted of my mother.
We had a conference, she explained the value of education
and I GRUDGINGLY conceded that she had a point.

I TOLERATED school, but the best part of the day was the end of it
and the best day of the school year was the LAST one.
In CONTRAST, NOW when I watch the History Channel, the Discovery Channel,
the National Geographic Channel, the Military Channel, the Science Channel
and surely many others, I LOVE it. I have videotaped the shows,
and played them back if I hear a word imperfectly.
I enjoy learning the subject matter, particularly human psychology,
which I have loved even before guns.






I appreciate the humor, Walter, but a goodly number of years
have passed since last I added to my gun collection for security concerns.
When I buy another gun now, it is out of enjoyment of its esthetic or historical value
(e.g., my 9mm 1940 Luger P-'08, whose provenance is unknown, but shoud have been interesting.
I can see handware on it; matching serial numbers on all numbered parts)
or
my .32 caliber Browning FN M1910 pistol,
a duplicate of the one used to kill Archduke Franz Ferdinand Hapsburg and Sophie, on June 28, 1914,
starting the First World War, which was the historical foundation for the Second and Third World Wars.





David

http://able2know.org/topic/122904-1

barackman, It's not possible for anyone including the government to accumulate 100% accurate statistics on anything, because they cannot possibly include all of the variables required to do so. They can estimate numbers and use statistics to determine some level of accuracy, but it's impossible to get 100% accuracy.

It's also because nothing is static, and the variables continues to change. What the government produces today is already old info.

You are correct. It is not possible for anyone including the government to accumulate 100% accurate statistics on anthing because the cannot possibly include all of the variables required to do so.

Therefore, we can make no comparisons between the adminstrations of FDR,. Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush. Sr. Clinton, and Bush Jr.

So we don't have 6.1% unemployment now because we can't get 100 accuracy.

and we don't have a ten trillion dollar national debt because we can't get 100% accuracy.

Really?????