Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by joelthelion 396 days ago
On the other hand, productivity has improved tremendously. It's not clear that we actually need everyone working.
5 comments

You absolutely don't need to work 37 hours per week if you are willing to live 200km from the big cities in an old house.

You buy something dirt cheap for less than 80k USD. It's not great, it's old run down. But if you do minimal repairs and don't live the high life, you can get by with very little.

But if you want a new car and nice comfy house in a decent location, with all the modern amenities, well, that's expensive.

>something dirt cheap for less than 80k USD

brother rusted out farm houses 2 hours from any office building, let alone one that hires programmers are like 350k in rural states. Idk where you live, but it ain't Earth.

https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/1618-Beave...

For those who don't want to click, a house in Des Moines for $125000 - this was the very first house that came up when I searched des moines real estate, I didn't bother to look farther.

Houses less 400k DKK ~ 60k USD, granted houses at price range are small, worn down, far from cities and job market in area a bit challenged - but not impossible.

https://www.boligsiden.dk/tilsalg/villa?sortBy=timeOnMarket&...

I'm not suggesting that this high life or secret to happiness. Just that of you want to work less, you can choose to spend less.

Personally, I'm happy with my 700k USD home, I'd probably be working anyways, since to me it's preferable to work full time and enjoy modern amenities.
Patently false. 30 seconds on Zillow and there's plenty of 2b2bth homes in Austin for 350k.
How about ND? Steele, New Salem, or Turtle Lake for example.
I'll concede that of the two properties available in Turtle Lake North Dakota you can get a trailer on someone's property for ~100K, 417 Putman St, Turtle Lake, ND 58575 looks like you got me there.

EDIT: reporting back from Steele, looks like there's an undeveloped acre next to a highway and a power junction for ~75K, it's under 80k so I guess you know where to find me pitching my tent.

Productivity improvements have been partially eaten up by cost of living increases. We don't need everyone working, but how do we decide who has to work and who gets stuff for free? Should workers pay higher taxes to support more retirees?
Cost of living doesn’t wipe out productivity increase. Cost of living is a money transfer. People buy things from other people. The question is therefore where is this money actually going. A casual look at how richness is shared in the USA will give you the answer to that.
You explained it yourself. People buy things from other people. The money goes in a circle
> Should workers pay higher taxes to support more retirees?

With what money? The poor folk don't have any by definition, the middle class is being squeezed out of existence, which leaves... who...?

Yes? Old age, and to an extent disability, are great systems for deciding this because unless you die young everyone becomes both.
So how much lower should the retirement age be, and how much should taxes increase to enable that? Have you done the math on that?
how are will still framing this as an ethical dilemma?! THE RICH should pay higher taxes to support retirees! there are people with hundreds of millions of dollars! we just turn down the dial labeled "how rich you get to be" until this shit gets figured out
If you’re willing to put up with 1925 living standards, you can get away with working way less than people worked in 1925, and way less than most people work in 2025.
What is 1925 standards? All organic food? Mostly tailored clothing? Custom fitted shoes? Only one spouse working? Brand new, incredibly high tech cars being made affordable to the average factory worker? Incredibly high tech entertainment centers? They even had washing machines. So are we talking giving up a dishwasher, a clothes dryer, and only having 1.5 baths in houses? Or are we talking the affordable city workers' hotels where man/women mingled, that enable people to live affordably with dignity in the city center, and actually have a life?

What does '1925' mean? No more shein plastic semi-disposable clothes that fall within what 1920's would consider sci-fi dystopian, universal basic income disposable clothes? Or hormone/chemical saturated 'food' that they wouldn't recognize as such? Or huge McMansions made of literal urea board and plastic extruded chemical 'luxury vinyl' floors? Brand new technology such mass produced cars, affordably available to the average person?

You have a really rosy view of life in 1925.

Only half of US households had electricity. I imagine many of the ones that were electrified didn’t have washing machines.

Likewise, about half of US households had indoor plumbing. So we’re not talking about giving up multiple bathrooms, we’re potentially talking about giving up bathrooms, period. Do you enjoy outhouses? I don’t.

Only one spouse working? That’s a myth. Who do you think was making those tailored clothes, washing the dishes, washing clothes by hand, and all that? Maybe you mean only one spouse getting paid to work, which is quite different.

You’re looking at a life in a small, drafty house that’s very cold in the winter and excessively hot in the summer (my houses were like that in the 1980s, even), crapping in an outhouse, and washing clothes by hand. But you won’t be washing a lot of clothes, because you’ll probably only have one or two sets.

If this lifestyle sounds attractive to you, you can have it right now for quite cheap.

Yes, but living in a house without indoor toilet and no electricity.

Organic fresh food you'll have no fridge to keep in.

I bet you'll not be able even start a 1925 car without proper training.

Jevons paradox. Productivity has increased, but so has consumption because those productivity increases have decreased cost and made many things more affordable and normal.
Sure, if you want to freeze your quality of life at 1980 standards.

I, on the other hand, prefer 2020 standard of life so I’m going to keep working.

1980 standards supported people having more kids than 2020 standards so it's not exactly been an improvement.