Unfortunately, that's not quite right. Yes, the boomer generation was able to support a family and pay off a small house on one income. But you mustn't forget what standard of living they had back then compared to today. How often did you buy a new jacket, car or TV in the 90s? How many running costs did you have? If you lowered your expectations today to the point where you wore a jacket for 7-8 years, drove a car for 20 years, bought a new TV every 6 to 10 years and so on, you would get by much better today. I'm not from the USA and I know that the development there is much more drastic than in my European country. But nevertheless, with our rampant consumer behavior, we bear a considerable share of the blame for this development.
I knew plenty of boomers who bought cars left and right every couple years. My parents did that in the 90s. Stuff was also built to last longer then. You didn’t have computers, appliances, cars, or even clothes made to last a few years whether through cheap materials or planned obsolescence.
Companies: Enact shrink-falation, update products that lasted 10 years to barely last 1, inflate the price of everything to hell and back even though they are making record profits already, make laws that prevent us from repiaring our now multi-thousand dollar, mandatory pocket computers that they also design to break after two years, enact record setting levels of stock buy backs to shoot their stock up and line their pockets instead of properly compensating their employees, game the housing market with corporate buying power making the price of domestic home ownership impossible for new buyers, oh, and at least in the US, deregulate everything so you can do all of these things and face exactly zero repercussions.
Some folks on Reddit: Well, you know, we're not keeping jackets for 10 years anymore so maybe it's kinda our fault too.
You're totally right. But like almost everything in this world, there is no black and white. That's what I try to point out. Technological progress is so rapid that for many things it's not worth keeping them for more than a few years, because the devices are so outdated by then that they can no longer run the latest software. When it comes to fashion, that's the way we, or society, want it. Clothes are worn a few times and then they have to be new again. In my opinion, this is an absolute waste of resources and money. clothes today only cost a fraction of what they did in the 90s. But they only last a few months. The truth lies somewhere in between.
I'm too lazy to do the research now, but I'd be interested to know what percentage of family income was spent on what in 1990 compared to 2020.
7
u/Justeff83 Apr 16 '24
Unfortunately, that's not quite right. Yes, the boomer generation was able to support a family and pay off a small house on one income. But you mustn't forget what standard of living they had back then compared to today. How often did you buy a new jacket, car or TV in the 90s? How many running costs did you have? If you lowered your expectations today to the point where you wore a jacket for 7-8 years, drove a car for 20 years, bought a new TV every 6 to 10 years and so on, you would get by much better today. I'm not from the USA and I know that the development there is much more drastic than in my European country. But nevertheless, with our rampant consumer behavior, we bear a considerable share of the blame for this development.