Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
I dunno. Life expectancy is higher, even much of the poor have TV, internet, smartphones. Most welfare programs now consider internet service in the basket of necessities in needs calculations. Huge advantage over previous generations just in the access to information/education the internet provides.

Fluoride in water has reduced oral diseases (once the source of most diseases), social welfare is better than it was a generation ago...Not saying everyone is doing better, some people are in unbelievably bad situations...I don't think yesterday's rich have shown as much improvement in their quality of life as the poor of previous generations. The luxuries of life, no question...

Are we still poorer than the rich? Yeah. Is the pooling of wealth aggregating among fewer people? Yes. Are the poor worse off than the poor of yesterday? Not so sure. Not saying they're not, just find it hard to believe intuitively. If they are, advocate groups are doing a piss poor job of making it a more important social issue.
Read the book!

But like I said earlier, the standard of living of the working poor has yet to decline. However when you consider that it has been sustained by:
  • Borrowing via credit cards, second mortgages, etc., (as I mentioned above)
  • Cheap goods for China et al., (as mentioned), and also
  • Two working spouses
  • Longer working hours
  • Second jobs,
it's obvious the things don't bode well for sustaing it much longer.

Have advocacy groups done a good job? No. Have political parties on the life done a good? No, propably because they get more and more of their funds from the establishment. Have the right-wing parties done a good job? Hell, yes; a damn good job of selling free enterprises & small government mythologies by appealing to peoples fears & prejudics