[pembrook]

I find it amusing you keep insulting me as "ignorant" of the past while all your points rest on the Golden Age Fallacy.

You seem to have invented a fanciful storybook idea of how the average person lived before the industrial revolution, and have ignored every single one of the downsides and discounted all of the upsides of the past 200 years.

There's no further argument to be had though, because yours is not a rational position, but one rooted in emotional feelings and personal frustration. You believe a past you never experienced was better. No logical rebuttal I waste time assembling can refute a fantasy world.

[wolvesechoes]

First, there is no such thing as Golden Age fallacy.

Second, you created a strawman just to feel better.

> have ignored every single one of the downside

I didn't. I said your claims are non-trivial, and enumerated some examples of downsides created by past technical revolutions. There were upsides, there were downsides. It was you who have claimed that "99% are better off". I never claimed anything like that, nor anything that could be considered an opposite..

> You believe a past you never experienced was better

Point me to the exact place where I expressed such belief.

> No logical rebuttal I waste time assembling can refute a fantasy world

You couldn't assemble logical rebuttal because the issue at stake is material, not logical. Learn the difference.

I get it, you are a fragile snowflake that cannot bear criticism, but please, don't put words into my comments even though you cannot find them there.