[StandardFuture]

Sigh ... I hope this style of commentary comes to a swift end on the internet (and especially places like HN). Making a list of observations and declaring a pattern is not how objectivity works. Your list conveniently ignores the massive increase in housing, education, and healthcare costs alongside a declining average income (inflation-rated).

I also notice your time scales jump back 50+ years to the 1960s ... But, do all of your same observations hold up within the last 30 years? Some, maybe. How about 20? Much fewer. How about 10 years? Almost none.

Funny, that must be why attempting to make objective arguments with anecdotes does not actually qualify as "objective". Huh, imagine that.

[WalterBright]

My "anecdotes" are pretty easy to verify for yourself. Ask someone who has been around a while. The tourism industry has been recently in the news as place after place is groaning under the weight of tourists loving them to death.

housing - a couple factors at work here. Increasing population means housing is going to cost more. There's no getting around that.

education - you can get an MIT education for free on youtube. I've been filling in gaps in my education that way. For FREE!!! How awesome is that? The cost of attending college has indeed gone way up - due to government policy.

healthcare - this cost increase is driven by government policy.

[lordnacho]

Both housing and education are also largely driven by regulation. Housing when it comes to restricting new building, and education in regards to student loans.

[StandardFuture]

> Housing when it comes to restricting new building

Which is a very relevant form of regulation with regards to housing costs, because this regulation tends to exist more in places with high housing demand. So, you can still buy a cheap house in the middle of nowhere where there also is likely (gasp) no regulations on housing. Not sure what the causal relationships are exactly but the correlation seems to be there for sure.

I just sum it up as the baby boomers fucking over their kids for a quick buck, but shrug what do I know?

[samatman]

Your comment is low quality and doesn't add to the discussion.

novok, by contrast, makes all the same points, correctly, and without all the histrionics.

It can simultaneously be true that the technical 'dividend' is enjoyed by practically everyone in the developed world, and that the necessities of ordinary life have become more expensive, saving rates have plummeted, and precarity has been normalized.

Indeed, this appears to be the case. Expecting every comment on the Internet to cover everything salient about a given topic is unrealistic. Good thing we have the nested forum format, so that other people can fill things in!

[StandardFuture]

> Your comment is low quality and doesn't add to the discussion.

Please do not make personal attacks against people on HN. There is literally no reason to tell someone that their on-topic and very-relevant comment/response "is low quality doesn't add to the discussion". It is petty.

> Expecting every comment on the Internet to cover everything salient about a given topic is unrealistic. Good thing we have the nested forum format ...

Again, my response was utilizing the HN format to fill in some missing information and make a very relevant point about improved formatting of arguments in general.

> It can simultaneously be true that the technical 'dividend' is enjoyed by practically everyone in the developed world, and that the necessities of ordinary life have become more expensive, saving rates have plummeted, and precarity has been normalized.

It CAN be true, yes. It can also be true that the technical dividend is far out-weighed by rising costs. It can ALSO be true that globalization has changed the pricing dynamic mentioned in GP more so than a "technical dividend".

[samatman]

By "personal attacks" do you mean comments such as this one:

> Sigh ... I hope this style of commentary comes to a swift end on the internet (and especially places like HN)

?