> People today are MUCH better off on just about every dimension than in the 1940s!
replySure, but that wasn't the premise. Young people (< age 55) today have a far smaller share of current total wealth than young people did of total wealth in 1940.
And until 1940, each generation accumulated a greater share of value than the generation before. Post-1940, each subsequent generation has a smaller and smaller slice of the pie.
Why should share of wealth be the primary metric to measure against?
replyIsn't the thing that we should optimize for is human living standards improve and happiness increases?
The former (share of wealth) is a metric, while the latter (living standard and happiness) is outcome.
I know that for me, the outcome is what's important.
>> with each successive generation since the 1940s, wealth has concentrated further in older generations.
replyHe never said living standards were better in the 40s.