If you're a woman, would you rather live in the 1960s or 2020s? If you were black or any other minority, in the 1960s or 2020s? If you're gay, would you rather live in the 1960/80s or in the 2020s?
Average US life expectancy was in about 70 in the 1960s, and mid-70s in the 1980s, and approaching 80 until COVID hit. Cancer survivorships has improved (not only because better screen and treatment, but also because of less cigarette smoking). The infant mortality rate now is a fifth of what it was in the 1960s.
Of course for all these numbers non-US developed countries are much better.
Generally, to say that life is better now is not to say it's perfect or to deny that improvements can still be made.
> People are not starving, but at the cost of eating "manufactured" foods that will make them sick in 20 - 40 yrs.
Groceries have gone from being 14% of household spending in the 1960s to being less 6% (takeout from 4% to 6%). In 1900 food was 40%:
* https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/business/arch...
Being able to cook healthy meals for yourself has probably never been easier and less expensive than it is now.
The piece compares the USA and 100 years ago. He notices that we are still in a time of large social change, often in some of the same areas, while also noting that we are materially more comfortable.
I don't think "this some sort of a paid advertising piece, to make you feel better about inflation, lack of affordable medical care, lack of affordable housing, lack of jobs for recent graduates, etc...", I think it's just a historical retrospective.
Author is pointing out that material, we're more comfortable than 100 years ago, and it's true.
It was arguable also true in 1926 - I I'd rather have been 26 in 1926 than 26 in 1826 (especially if I were a woman or black), and I'd rather be 26 today than 1926.
Being educated enough to whine on the internet about how despite recently graduating from university, I've not found a job that pays me enough to buy a home in a super expensive metropolitan area, while not ideal, is still, in my opinion, than moving from the farm to go work in various factories and shops in the city.
Have you ever seen a graph of the stock market?
It doesn't always go up all the time, but in the long run, it generally goes up on average.
When I read articles, in addition to thinking "good information", I now always ask 3 more quesitons: (1) why was it written? (2) who benefits? (3) who paid for it (not necessarily with money)?
Given that there was no antibiotics in 1926, no chemotherapy or radiation therapy for cancer, no public pensions (so good luck getting old), hardly any indoor plumbing (even by 1940 it was about half), I think life is much better now that one hundred years ago.
What were infant mortality rates in 1926? Maternal mortality? Average life span? How many years did people live after retirement?
Can you list the ways in which you think life was better in 1926?
And to say life is better now is not to say it's perfect or to deny that improvements can still be made.
There’s no magical low effort way to avoid regression to the global mean, as the population more than doubles in size.
That takes serious, coordinated, and sustained work across decades to avoid.
Yes, there is still much work to be done to improve the United States, but I’d rather be poor in the United States today than wealthy in the United States 100 years ago. I suspect that most educated people would choose likewise.