Is the average person better or worse than earlier?
Obviously this is a loaded question and very complex, as it has to factor in a massive amount of information, which is largely subjective in terms of good and bad, as well as make assumptions as to what is worthy of better and worse. There is likely no objective answer to the question, but I still think it is worth considering, because it is the average person we have to rely on.
For instance, supposedly we are getting smarter by three IQ points every decade, but that is a standardized test (with questionable accuracy), which means that it doesn't give an advantage. But it would be interesting to see that change across populations to see if it is a standard increase, or if some regions, or groups, that isn't happening.
We are innovating and developing more technology, however it really is and may always have been, only a small percentage of us that are contributing creatively to this. For the majority, we are workers, doing the bidding of a corporate directive, helping a small fraction of society increase their wealth over others. So, since this is a world dictated by economic activity, wealth distribution might be a good indicator of whether we are better than earlier.
Economically better?
Let's look at the US and who is living the American Dream.
So, in about 35 years, the top 1% has increased their total ownership from 30% up to about 38%, while the next 9% are relatively static at around 38%, but the bottom 90% (funny how the considered "bottom" is nearly everyone), has fallen from 33% all the way down to 24%. Let's visualize what that means using 100 people and 100 dollars to represent total wealth.
1 person has $38
9 people have $4.22 each
90 people have $0.26 each
Now, this is using the totals for each bracket averaged over the group, but in reality, the difference between the top and the bottom of the one percent, is far greater than the difference between the bottom of the one percent and the bottom.
We can look at this if we use 1000 people and 1000 dollars.
10 people have $38 each
90 people have $4.22 each
900 people have $0.26 each
But the top 1% looks more like this:
1 person has $250
2 people have $40
3 people have $10
4 people have $5
They are all wealthier than the next 9%, but there is a massive difference of 50x between top and bottom. At least from a distribution of wealth (resources) standpoint, we are not better. And, this is at least partially caused by what was mentioned above, where we are working for others, but sharing in less of the rewards. The optimization of business hasn't been spread evenly through to the workers, because it is designed to benefit the owners, which means that by design, the wealth gap will continue to widen.
Are we physically better?
This is a hard metric to measure, because there is a lot of variation in what is physically better, as well as variation in the way we calculate it and, our ability to identify issues. For instance, it could be that a particular illness has increased in prevalence, but that is because our testing has improved. It can also be that what we value in health conditions has changed. So, risking the wrath of @bozz, I am going to look at it from the standpoint of obesity in the US.
Note: All of those bars indicate obese people.
The dark blue bars are severe obesity. So, while obesity has over tripled in the US over the last 60 years, severe obesity has hockey-sticked, and gone 900%.
Them gainz.
At the same time, we have better hygiene and healthcare, far more knowledge on health factors and how to affect them, more access to reliable food sources and access to any information we might want at our fingertips. Yet, the average American (70%) is overweight, with almost half in total considered obese. That is not the sign of being physically better, even though social media is filled with "fitspo" influencers with sixpack abs and thigh gaps.
Against Better, For Worse
While there are many factors in play to what makes us better or worse off than the past, I see that one of the core reasons is that we are less capable and take less responsibility for ourselves. Once upon a time, in order to survive in this world, we had to work and we had to build ownership in some way, otherwise we were left completely out of society. We built our own houses, we traded with neighbors, we ran our own businesses, we worked as family units, we spent leisure time improving our abilities.
Now though, as we become more disconnected and "independent" from each other, we have actually become more reliant on corporations to provide for us, to offer what we used to do ourselves, or have someone in our family or community help us with for some kind of trade. These are the same corporations that maximize their gains, to offer the highest ROI to the owners, increasing wealth gaps and decreasing distribution of wealth. And, since "money is power" in the economy by design, the power of legislation lays i the hands of the few.
Vote For Me...mes
And this is part of the reason why governments are never going to be in the best interest of the masses, because it is being influenced by two fundamental components of the system. The first is the obvious one, where the "rich get richer" and therefore have more influence over the direction of things like legislation. This means that those in power, are those who get to choose where wealth flows and inevitably, more of it is going to flow to the areas that increase those ROI numbers for owners, because that is the mechanism used.
But, the other reason is that the masses who "vote" are average people, and average people (using US to illustrate) are those who are likely in the bottom 90% of the economy, controlling a total of 24% of the wealth. If money is power, they have little. Not only that, the average person is also physically obese (standing in for unhealthy), which means they are likely reliant on various services, or are struggling.
You know what happens when we are both economically struggling and physically struggling? They are also likely to be emotionally struggling too, as there are multiple stresses, little chance for respite and life is a constant battle. Under stress, do we make good decisions?
From an economic standpoint, even if the entire 90% were able to unite and combine forces for a solid direction, the wealth is dwarfed by the other 10%. However, that isn't going to happen anyway, because it is within that 90% that most division lays, where people are emotionally supercharged at trivial ideas, like the color of skin, or where someone is from.
Meme
/miːm/
an element of a culture or system of behavior passed from one individual to another by imitation or other non-genetic means.
Socialized productization
Culture is propagated in the masses, but it isn't necessarily seeded by the masses. It is often like how the British royal family would do silly things like lift their finger whilst drinking tea, to see how long it took for their servants to pass it through to become popular culture. Now, the royals are the corporations, who are taking the profits from the spread of their ideas, their products.
And, politics is another form of productization, and has nothing to do with human advancement of wellbeing. It is about controlling the flow of resources to maximize the growth of what the controllers hold. Voting in a new president and changing parties, does nothing, especially because we are conditioned to vote for personalities, not ideas and practical changes. Not that we could make good decisions in those areas anyway, since we can't even make the right decisions on average to take care of our personal finances, and our own health.
While me might like to think that we are capable, I think that due to our cultural and personal habits that make us renters of our lives, not owners of our lives, we are not in the condition to make the changes necessary. Because of this, we keep clinging to a fantasy that if we come together and vote for the right person or party, things will change.
They will not.
The only way to change things isn't through resetting the system, it is by demolishing the system and rebuilding something entirely different all together. A system that doesn't maximize profit for the few, but one that maximizes wellbeing for the many. The current economic practices do not do this at all, and the longer they are operating, the more out of balance and sync the global economy and community becomes, which leads to large-scale disruption across everything that matters to us.
We don't own anything. We don't make anything. We don't apply anything.
Yet, we all believe we are qualified to say who and what is better and worse.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
All those figures are quite relative as there is a huge difference depending on the country you live in. Cost of life and social security makes a big difference to anyone. Just in the US, considered the highest GDP per capita country, there are many who lack a good health service due to the way they manage health over there.
Finally, all the figures should consider a way to measure the quality of life. Last week I had a chance to meet with colleagues from Iran, Colombia, several EU countries, and the US. Iranians were happy as the meeting was in Turkey, they had a hard time trying to get a visa to travel to many first-world countries. Colombians told me they cannot get out at night for a walk, it is too dangerous so they basically commute from home to work in the car to avoid security problems.
How do we integrate all that in "only" financial stats?
GDP (in my opinion) is such a terrible indication of how a country is doing. People can be completely unemployed and starving, but robots can keep the GDP high.
I completely agree. It just doesn't work in that way - which is why it is far easier to pretend that money means wellbeing.
The biggest factor here is the timelines you are comparing. What is earlier? If it is pre-pandemic vs now, I would say the average person is worse now. If it is comparing 15th century vs now, I think the average person is better now.
But it is good that you also gave examples. Economically, I think we are currently worse. Families are able to buy houses and feed a family on a single income, while that is very difficult for a single person now. Physically, weight gain has been increasing, but health wise, I think we are better now. The advancement in medicine and technology keeps more people alive, and grow older. Vaccines help prevent diseases like Polio. Cancer is no longer untreatable, and we are able to save more lives as a whole.
There are also a lot of conveniences now that are affordable to the masses. People are able to afford more flights, get a car, cellphones, computers, etc. These things cost a lot before the 2000s. So while I think we are worse in some aspects, we are also better off in other things.
I would say "in living memory" - parents, grandparents etc.
My question is - is living longer a sign of wellbeing? I am not sure if elderly people are living a better life now. At least observationally from watching my grandfather, then my father, it has degraded. Should saving lives be the goal, or should quality of life factor in? As said, health is complex, which is why I went with obesity, as it is a bit more objective. Perhaps if the average person was less overweight, some of the diseases wouldn't be as bad also.
Convenience is also the likely candidate for a a lot of the problems we face too - definitely in the case of obesity. Then, flights, cars, cellphones, computers, are also empowering economically, but might be degrading our social lives, plus also putting us further into debt.
Interesting things to consider!
Yeah, that physically better question is a good one. I definitely think the life expectancy is higher, but I don't think we are made of as sturdy stuff as people were back in the day. We need more people digging ditches and doing manual labor.
Funny you should say this, but I reckon this might actually have a positive effect on mental health, if it is for a purpose. For many of us, what we do daily doesn't have much of an immediate reward and the purpose is sketchy. Manual labor, like gardening, can help build a positive mindset, as well as a stronger body.
I was expecting worse from you ;P
Just didn't know a better way to demonstrate it. Just so you know, that has been my point in the past with using obesity also - it is a cultural condition on the state of our overall health I think. The numbers for other aspects are just not there, or are very muddy.
It's fine, I am used to it from you! :) It's funny though because when I look at my health chart and I see them label me as obese, it never really registers. I mean, I know I have a gut, but I don't feel "obese". At least not most of the time. I actually don't have a problem talking about obese people, because it's definitely an epidemic in the US, people are making poor choices when it comes to nutrition and living a pretty sedentary lifestyle that is adding to the problem. My issue is the assumption that someone isn't trying just because they aren't skinny. Each of our bodies are different and different things work for different people. You can't know what that person is struggling with or how hard they are trying but not seeing results. It's the generalizations that get me more than anything.
Wild times for sure man. The challenge is - how do we turn this thing around and head in a better direction? That’s a bitch of a climb lol.
I think one of the things that’s the most frustrating is people are unhealthy from eating shitty foods and they can’t afford the better ones. I guess they could technically start to grow some things on windowsills of apartments and stuff but sadly that’s not going yo happen for most people. Breaking that cycle too is going to be tough.
With the automation and shedding of jobs in the coming years - how are people even going to be able to fight back against being forced into using UBI and the requirements associated with that? You know that’s going to come with some lovely strings attached to the end of pointy things.
Indeed. I think it firstly has to start at the personal level, but it can't end there. I reckon we have to be a bit more objective without our look at "who we are" and far more proactive at applying change with intention.
Just think about all the shit that is required to make shitty food that advertises well for profits, and how simple good foods take far less energy to produce. It is a resource issue, isn't it?
I know it. I have been writing about it for years and believe it is going to be crushing. There are some models that might ease the pain, for instance where people reduce their work hours to 4 days a week, with the 5th covered by UBI for training or leisure etc, that way more people will have jobs, but I am not sure that will work long term either, as profit-seekers will maximize again.
I don’t think people are physically stronger now than before. My great-grandfather, at the end of the 19th century, ran on the railway 17 kilometers in the morning and 17 kilometers in the evening, and the rest of the time he mowed the grass on hot days.
Reminds me of my dad, who used to mow a very large lawn with one of those mechanical push cutters. It was a constant load of work. As it was finished, it was almost time to start again.
The truth is that everyone is physically and economically or financially struggling. Unfortunately, some people tend to satisfy their physical lifestyle at the detriment of their financial lifestyle so they will still be lagging financially
It is one of those issues like general health, only consider one factor and ignore the rest, the system collapses.
Of course worse than earlier. I think things such as cost of living, reaching basic needs, human psychology and social relations, working conditions, nature and so on have progressed on a negative way.
I agree with you. There is more opportunity for us to address these things, but we aren't actually doing it.
I think pandemic attempted to reset the system but the elites realized that getting back would be harder. So they managed to pull back remote work and also now slowly force the people to go back at pre 2019 days. And worst thing is that it would just become harder to compete as well. I just don't understand how the retirement plans be in upcoming future when even young will starve and may come against old people.
I think we are seeing how the future looks, as even in the "developed" countries, youth crime is on the rise. This is driven largely by cultural change so far, but it is going to be layered with economic pain and lack of opportunity on top.
It's quite hard to tell which is better but I think a balanced approach between money and physical health is the best. I think we are so use to technology so we aren't as physically fit anymore. I find myself sitting down a lot.
Hello tarazkp!
It's nice to let you know that your article won 🥉 place.
Your post is among the best articles voted 7 days ago by the @hive-lu | King Lucoin Curator by blind-spot
You and your curator receive 0.2094 Lu (Lucoin) investment token and a 6.00% share of the reward from Daily Report 125. Additionally, you can also receive a unique LUBROWN token for taking 3rd place. All you need to do is reblog this report of the day with your winnings.
Buy Lu on the Hive-Engine exchange | World of Lu created by @szejq
STOPor to resume write a wordSTART