Hacker News Reader

Comment by tossandthrow | Hacker News Reader

The main thing is, that I could actually support a household of 6 people on a single income if I was allowed to fix the comfort at the 60s level.

1. No flying on vacation and only simple camping as vacation 2. No technology: Computers, phone, television. Nothing, and no associated costs with subscriptions, etc. 3. Eat like it was the 60s, mainly potatoes (I am from Northern Europe).

That said: I truly believe in the parent commenters key idea. We need to create more real prosperity for people. But in order to do that, we need to adjust the activities – Marketing and expensive dead-end projects (read: projects that occupy a lot of person-hours) does not achieve real prosperity.

View on HN

No, you couldn't. The average working male earning 6200 USD a year in 1963 was supporting 2-3 other people (i.e., the nuclear family), not 5. This is almost directly in line, via inflation, with the average US household income and size in 2024.

I agree with the larger point about prosperity, and I think there are ways in which the US (and other developed countries) have gone backwards in QoL metrics. But a serious conversation about that needs to start with numbers rooted in reality, not a rose-glass view of the past.

Yes, so I am saying that a median income today could sustain a 6 person household if you were allowed to fix your comfort level to the level of the 60s. That is 3 more than a single median income supported in the 60s.

I am definitely not trying to paint a rose-glass view of the past. I am saying that we do have more prosperity today than we had 60 years ago.

I am also saying that we pay of a lot of time to have things that provide diminishing returns. (Ie. would you rather have flush toilets or access to facebook - style of reasoning). Maybe the famous 80% value for 20% cost is also inflating?

Sorry, I badly misread your post! I agree about the diminishing returns.

Take your typical family of 4 living on 2 incomes today.

Are they living in a 1,500sf house (median size in 1960)? Without AC, no cable TV, no computers, 1 car, no exotic / organic foods except from the garden, few toys, 60’s era medicine. Do they actually repair or even make clothes? How about home repairs?

My mother was a teen in the 60’s and while objectively they were well above the median income for the time period in many ways they lived like extremely poor people do in 2024. Some of that was actually saving money for retirement, but mostly it was just far lower expectations.

Right. By virtually every metric, the average American family is materially more prosperous than they would have been in the 1960s.

Backwards movement in QoL metrics is mostly on the left tail: impoverished Americans have access to AC and refrigerators, but often live in food deserts or are subjected to perverse policies in our social safety net (e.g. welfare cliffs that punish people for working by taking away benefits that enable them to work).

You make some valid points but one nitpick: what we call organic food today, they simply called food in the 60's since all food was by definition organic.

That is abjectly false. Synthetic pesticides have been used since before the second world war. Silent Spring was written in 1962 about the effects of the amounts of DDT that had already accumulated in the environment by that point.

No. Because the things that cost significant amounts of money aren't computers, phones, and tvs (notice that poor people have these). It's the minimum bar to be a player in society that has been raised.

1960s - could have a good career without college education and it was inexpensive - can afford a house - can often not have a car

2020s - need bachelors degree to get started, probably also need a professional degree - houses occupy - need cars (likely for all adult family members)

What is it then, that is so super expensive today, that wasn't too expensive in the 60s?

also it is a strawman to mention the poor people has it. the hierarchy of what you spend money on is not settled in a hiatorical occurance of said product. you don't buy a watch before a phone because it was invented first.

also, it is completely irrelevant. my proposition is that if you fix your comforts at the 60s level then you have greater spending power than equivalent people of the 60s

> What is it then, that is so super expensive today, that wasn't too expensive in the 60s?

- Education. Include how much education you need and prep (duration increases costs and reduces wages).

- Insurance,

- Health care

- Transportation (gas, cost of vehicles, average commutes).

- Professional services (accounting, law, etc).

- Housing

The point is in 1960 you could be a normal member of society with no health insurance, a high school diploma, one car for your family, and 1000 square foot house downtown.

That game plan is no longer viable.

We were actually flying on vacation in the 1960s though.

My maternal grandfather was a school principal and his wife didn't need a job. They went to England and Spain on vacation.

We also of course absolutely loved potatoes. We still do.

Like peter theil says, in 40 years only technology has improved , the real world has declined.

Should we value technology so much that we cheer on the loss of the real world?

What exactly has declined?

Mainly potatoes is bullshit.

Not for Northern Europe in the 50's.

Sild og poteter (herring and potatoes) is still a meme for being poor in Norway.

Potatoes are a main staple in many ways outside of the cities even to this day.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com