This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On 3/9/2016 8:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/



Could say the same about most products made by increased automation or
robots. Should apply to cars too.

Products that have become increasingly expensive like medicine and
education not only rely on the same number of workers but even piling on
more workers. Both should be amenable to automation like computers for
teaching and medical devices for diagnostics.

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 8:32:28 AM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:
This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Only problem is there are no manufacturing workers left to buy them.

But that's OK, Trump is going to solve the loss of manufacturing jobs.
According to him and his simple mind, it's because of "currency manipulation"
by China and Mexico. He completely neglects the huge differences in wage
rates, environmental regulations, required health insurance, OSHA
regulations, cheap energy costs with China burning coal, etc. And
then we all know that because of automation, today far less labor
is required.

The other night he made another stunning display of ignorance. He
said "we have a $58 bil trade deficit with Mexico. The wall will cost
$10 bil. You think I can't make that deal?" What "deal" is that?
The $58 bil deficit is because Americans buy more goods from them than they
do from us. Which is what one expects when it's a modern super power
economy trading with a less developed country. So, what "deal" is
he even talking about? How does one trade a trade deficit for a
$10 bil wall?

| This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
| Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
| with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
| of labor back in 1959.
|

That's quite an intellectual can of worms:

* Accuracy?

It's interesting, but is it true? There are a lot
of factors hard to calculate. What exactly does
manufacturing mean in each era? How exactly
did the Fed calculate their numbers? In 1973 I
was making $1.90/hour as a drug store clerk. In
1975 I was making $5.05/hour, but that was only
because I was doing back-breaking warehouse
work, on the night shift, with a Teamsters union
payscale. Yet they say manufacturing jobs were
averaging $3.95/hour in that time period. Could
that be because far more people were unionized,
or are the numbers faulty? There's no way to know,
really.

* Bias?

Did you know that the AEI, who published this
article, are a right-wing, pro-business organization?
They call themselves a "think tank", which essentially
means a propaganda manufacturing and lobbying
operation. Their "About us" blurb sounds libertarian.
One of their "scholars" is Dick Cheney! Could they
possibly print anything that *doesn't* say everything's
hunky dorey for blue collar workers? The whole purpose
of the AEI is to publish propaganda like this in order
to mold the opinion of readers like you.

* Product comparability?

What about quality? A toaster
back then was heavy steel and lasted many years.
A toaster today is light sheet metal and burns out
quickly. Likewise with stoves. The new ones have
electric ignition, but they're little more than sheet
metal boxes.
Many of those items work better than the older
versions, but are also more cheaply made, with
shorter life spans.

* Real relation to cost of living?

Then how do we calculate other cost of living
factors into it? If this is the good old days, then
why is it that a high-paid white collar worker can't
afford a condo, while in 1973 a janitor could raise
3 kids and own a house?
People on many tropical areas can have a roof
and food while not even working. They don't need
central heat and their groceries literally grow on
trees. Their cost of living is near zero. Are they better
off than us,or are they worse off because they
don't have cars or cable TV? If there's no easy
answer to that question then what does it really
mean that I can buy cheap toasters?

* Dubious ethics?

Manufactured goods are
generally cheap, but of poor quality, and the cost
savings is mainly derived from exploitation of others.
Cheap clothes come from China or Brazil. Cheap
appliances come from Pacific Rim countries or
China. Much of that work is done with virtual
slave labor. Elimination of tarrriffs and trade restrictions
means that rich American business owners can do
business free of American legal and ethical
restrictions. (Tim Cook even has the nerve to claim
that Apple's offshoring of billions to avoid corporate
tax is "outdated" and harmful.)
NAFTA gave us more slaves in Mexico.
TPP will open up new slavery opportunities in
Asia. All of which gives us cheaper prices but a
worse economy, because jobs are leaving the US.
And what does it do to a country spiritually that
we create an economy based on slavery we don't
acknowledge?
For awhile there was the popular scam that the
US was transitioning to a "services economy". But
along with the scam of "inevitable globalization",
that idea has lost its credibility in the light of day.
The whole country can't be wealthy waiters and
waitresses, or "consultants".

* Social factors?

Another intriguing point that's partially related:
Juliet Schorr, from Harvard, did a study -- I
think it was back in the 80s -- which she based
a book on, called Overworked America. In it she
documents how the only modern appliance that
saves time is the microwave. We actually do more
work now, cleaning our houses more often, washing
our clothes unnecessarily, etc. We're uncomfortable
with the freedom these conveniences have created.
In the 50s there was an idea that modern
convenience and automation would lead to a 3-day
work week. But we didn't consider two big factors:

1) Exploitation by the rich: Higher productivity has
only led to a greater salary disparity between workers
and business owners. Most people are not benefitting.
Instead, CEOs typically make 450 times what workers
make, whereas it used to be more like 20 times. We're
turning into a banana republic.

2) Existential doubt: Most people can't handle having
4 days off every week. Many people do work or create
busyness schedules for themselves that serve little
purpose aside from giving them a sense of purpose.
We're a productivity-obsessed culture.

That exact same issue is coming around again now.
In just the past few days I've seen articles about how
AI and robotics will eliminate lots of jobs. So we face
the same question again: Do we enforce a sharing of
the wealth or do we just let the economy sink further
and let homelessness increase while jobs disappear.
I can guess what AEI "scholars" will say on that score.
They'll probably cite studies showing, essentially, that
idle hands are the devil's playground, so that any sharing
of wealth would necessarily be harmful to society.

*** (Tim Cook even has the nerve to claim
that Apple's offshoring of billions to avoid corporate
tax is "outdated" and harmful.)

That should have read that Tim Cook thinks
the tax regulations are unfair and outdated.
He portrays Apple as being into being a sleazy
tax cheat because in a fair system Apple
wouldn't need to pay tax.

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 10:17:47 AM UTC-5, Mayayana wrote:
*** (Tim Cook even has the nerve to claim
that Apple's offshoring of billions to avoid corporate
tax is "outdated" and harmful.)

That should have read that Tim Cook thinks
the tax regulations are unfair and outdated.
He portrays Apple as being into being a sleazy
tax cheat because in a fair system Apple
wouldn't need to pay tax.

Apple isn't a tax cheat. They are following the law, minimizing
their taxes within the law, just like you and most other tax payers
do. And he's right, the tax law is screwed up. We have one of
the highest corp tax rates in the world. What we need is a lower
tax rate, in which case companies like Apple would bring that
money home.

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote in


This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/

One other factor that needs to be considered is the life expectancy of
the appliance. I would guess that a modern appliance, e.g. a blender,
doesn't last nearly as long as a 1959 blender.
--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
Email list-server groups and USENET are like having all of those
newspapers delivered to your door every morning.

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 12:41:47 PM UTC-5, CRNG wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote in


This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/

One other factor that needs to be considered is the life expectancy of
the appliance. I would guess that a modern appliance, e.g. a blender,
doesn't last nearly as long as a 1959 blender.

I don't know if I want my appliances to last as long as they used to.

A 1959 blender spun a blade.

A 2016 blender can be programmed for different consistencies, food
items, etc.

Our old blender had to be started and stopped to prevent cavitation - the
blade just spinning in a void and doing no work. Our new blender starts
and stops itself to allow the food to settle back down around the blade.
The smoothie button takes one push to run a pre-programmed sequence
of starts and stops to create really good drinks.

A 1959 range had little to no insulation and not only over-heated the kitchen
but caused severe burns on the hands of 2 year old girls who used the oven
door to help them stand up on Thanksgiving morning.

A new range can be pre-programmed for temperature and cook time, can actually
monitor the food temp, not just the oven temp, and is much safer and more
energy efficient.

Who knows what the next generation of appliances will be able to do?

As long as I'm not replacing them the every year, I don't mind a shorter
lifespan considering how fast the technology gets upgraded.

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 12:41:47 PM UTC-5, CRNG wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote in


This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


engineering and technology have created machines that have reduced the amount of work needed to be done by people.

We need to revamp the economic system so that __everyone__ can benefit from this, not just those that own the macinhes.

M

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 1:06:16 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 12:41:47 PM UTC-5, CRNG wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote in


This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


engineering and technology have created machines that have reduced the amount of work needed to be done by people.

We need to revamp the economic system so that __everyone__ can benefit from this, not just those that own the macinhes.

M

Everyone is already benefitting, as evidenced by the greatly reduced
number of hours of labor required to purchase the new appliances.

On 3/9/2016 6:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

No doubt because the labor costs involved in MAKING them have
moved to "cheaper markets"?

I wonder what the same chart would look like for the Chinese market?

I'd also like to see the annualized TCO to indicate what the
REAL costs of each item happen to be. I see a LOT of stuff
binned that sure doesn't LOOK very old/worn!

On 03/09/2016 08:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/

How many times do they have to buy replacements for the 2016 appliances
because they don't last nearly as long as the 1959 ones?

Perce

On 3/9/2016 12:26 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 03/09/2016 08:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/

How many times do they have to buy replacements for the 2016 appliances because
they don't last nearly as long as the 1959 ones?

Exactly. Or, if you can keep them running, how much does it *cost*
to do so?

Washer/dryer had close to 20 years on them before SWMBO just decided
she didn't like looking at them and wanted replacements. New washer
lasted 16-18 months (in a household that does very few loads) before
needing service (which, of course, would have been out-of-warranty).

Refrigerator is 20+ years old. SWMBO also tired of looking at it.
OTOH, after seeing the prices of new, hearing about typical life
expectancy AND the washing machine experience, decided ours doesn't
look too bad after all! :

[You can buy a CAR for the price of some of these new refrigerators!]

Freezer has been in the (hot) garage for more than 20 years. It
was 20 years old when we moved in. Wanna bet we wouldn't see
half that with a new unit? And, new units aren't as easy to defrost
as this one (we can empty it, defrost it, and refill it in less than
15 minutes!)

Friend makes smoothies. He's on his third blender/juicer in probably
5 years. We juice 200+ pounds of oranges (granted, different technique)
annually (325 pounds this year) with our antique "Acme Juicerator"
(half expect to see Wile E Coyote doing an advert for them!) and have
done so for 20+ seasons.

On 3/9/2016 2:26 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 03/09/2016 08:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/

How many times do they have to buy replacements for the 2016 appliances
because they don't last nearly as long as the 1959 ones?

Perce


Impossible to make a truly accurate comparison. Last toaster I bought
was a good quality model that cost $50+, but on the next shelf they had
one for $8. In 1959 you could not find one equal to the $8 toaster made
in China (as was the expensive one)

I do recall spending $169 for a B & W 19" TV 50 years ago when I was
making about half that a week. Two weeks wages now would buy be a few
65" TVs today.

On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:47:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Last toaster I bought
was a good quality model that cost $50+, but on the next shelf they had
one for $8. In 1959 you could not find one equal to the $8 toaster made
in China (as was the expensive one)

Open a bank account in 1959 and they gave you a toaster

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 1:20:10 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 1:06:16 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 12:41:47 PM UTC-5, CRNG wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote in


This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


engineering and technology have created machines that have reduced the amount of work needed to be done by people.

We need to revamp the economic system so that __everyone__ can benefit from this, not just those that own the macinhes.

M

Everyone is already benefitting, as evidenced by the greatly reduced
number of hours of labor required to purchase the new appliances.

No, those people that have been replaced by a machine and loose thir jobs are not benefiting.

Suppose we take development to an extreme Nth degree, and machines do everything and noby has to work excrpt only one guy has to push the button to turn it on....

does he get all the money and everyone else none?

How do you divide the fruits of society if machines do all the work?
Is it Utopia or Distopia?

Mark

On 3/9/2016 5:02 PM, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:47:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Last toaster I bought
was a good quality model that cost $50+, but on the next shelf they had
one for $8. In 1959 you could not find one equal to the $8 toaster made
in China (as was the expensive one)

Open a bank account in 1959 and they gave you a toaster


There was a Johnny Carson joke about buying a toaster
(in about 1980?) and they gave you a bank.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 18:19:30 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 3/9/2016 5:02 PM, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:47:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Last toaster I bought
was a good quality model that cost $50+, but on the next shelf they had
one for $8. In 1959 you could not find one equal to the $8 toaster made
in China (as was the expensive one)

Open a bank account in 1959 and they gave you a toaster


There was a Johnny Carson joke about buying a toaster
(in about 1980?) and they gave you a bank.

Now they want you to buy the bank to open an account, no toaster.
Instead of paying you interest they want you to pay them for having
account.

On 3/9/2016 5:06 PM, wrote:


Everyone is already benefitting, as evidenced by the greatly reduced
number of hours of labor required to purchase the new appliances.

No, those people that have been replaced by a machine and loose thir jobs are not benefiting.

Suppose we take development to an extreme Nth degree, and machines do everything and noby has to work excrpt only one guy has to push the button to turn it on....

does he get all the money and everyone else none?

How do you divide the fruits of society if machines do all the work?
Is it Utopia or Distopia?

Mark



You can't push the button on the machine until somebody builds the
machine. The toaster assembler may have to get additional training to
do a new job though, just like the guys from the buggy whip factory did.

On 3/9/2016 3:06 PM, wrote:
No, those people that have been replaced by a machine and loose thir jobs
are not benefiting.

I don't think many people are being replaced by machines as compared to
being replaced by "cheaper people".

Also, a fair bit of stuff simply isn't getting done -- things that we
were accustomed to having done in decades past (witness IVR systems
that push the cost of customer support onto the customer; product
forums that expect customers to support each other -- instead of having
genuine support staff; pre-release product testing -- instead of
getting lists of bugs from folks foolish enough to be "early adopters";
etc.)

Suppose we take development to an extreme Nth degree, and machines do
everything and noby has to work excrpt only one guy has to push the button
to turn it on....

does he get all the money and everyone else none?

How do you divide the fruits of society if machines do all the work? Is it
Utopia or Distopia?

Get a job fixing machines?? :-/

Oren wrote:

Open a bank account in 1959 and they gave you a toaster

And paid 5% on passbook savings accounts. Try getting that today.

Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/

We went around on this in October 2013. As some of kind of proxy for
overall living standards, which is what AEI's Perry is implicitly
inviting readers to do, it's misleading. Liars, damn liars, and
economists.

On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 22:38:08 -0700, (Neill
Massello) wrote:

Oren wrote:

Open a bank account in 1959 and they gave you a toaster

And paid 5% on passbook savings accounts. Try getting that today.

When was the last he last time you saw that?

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 5:06:17 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 1:20:10 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 1:06:16 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 12:41:47 PM UTC-5, CRNG wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote in


This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


engineering and technology have created machines that have reduced the amount of work needed to be done by people.

We need to revamp the economic system so that __everyone__ can benefit from this, not just those that own the macinhes.

M

Everyone is already benefitting, as evidenced by the greatly reduced
number of hours of labor required to purchase the new appliances.

No, those people that have been replaced by a machine and loose thir jobs are not benefiting.


There are other jobs. And even if you're on unemployment, you're
benefitting by the cost of food, clothing, cars, almost everything
bought, being substantially lower due to automation.



Suppose we take development to an extreme Nth degree, and machines do everything and noby has to work excrpt only one guy has to push the button to turn it on....

does he get all the money and everyone else none?


Ridiculous example because there are lots of jobs that can't be done
today or anytime soon, by machine. Healthcare, service industry jobs,
designing/building the automation eqpt, etc.


How do you divide the fruits of society if machines do all the work?
Is it Utopia or Distopia?

Mark

You let the free market work it out. And before you say that isn't
available to all, there are plenty of people who started a cup cake
shop, a cleaning business, etc that are making way more than any
of those factory workers ever did.

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 9:35:26 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 3/9/2016 3:06 PM, wrote:
No, those people that have been replaced by a machine and loose thir jobs
are not benefiting.

I don't think many people are being replaced by machines as compared to
being replaced by "cheaper people".


Well, that's just wrong. There is a long history of automation
radically decreasing the number of man hours it takes to do a job.
Look at a modern 1000 acre farm for example. How many workers,
how many hours did that take at the turn of the last century,
compared to now? Digging ditches by hand before the backhoe?
Building cars before robots assembled them, painted them, etc?



Also, a fair bit of stuff simply isn't getting done -- things that we
were accustomed to having done in decades past (witness IVR systems
that push the cost of customer support onto the customer;

That is getting done and it's an excellent example of automation.
How many telephone operators were put out of jobs by the Strowger switch?
How many phone receptionists at companies were replaced by the PBX?
IVR is the latest example. Some of them work extremely well. The
electric company here for example, I can call to report an outage,
give them a voice or text number to notify me back when power is
restored, it gives me an estimate of when the power will be back
on, all by machine. Decades ago, you spoke to someone, all they
did was take the info.

It's the most basic process that has given us our high standard
of living.

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 1:50:33 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 3/9/2016 6:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

No doubt because the labor costs involved in MAKING them have
moved to "cheaper markets"?


That's a factor in some cases, sure. But the larger driving force
is that far less labor is needed today because of automation.

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 4:47:11 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 3/9/2016 2:26 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 03/09/2016 08:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

http://alturl.com/a7gqu or

http://www.aei.org/publication/monday-evening-links-6/

How many times do they have to buy replacements for the 2016 appliances
because they don't last nearly as long as the 1959 ones?

Perce


Impossible to make a truly accurate comparison. Last toaster I bought
was a good quality model that cost $50+, but on the next shelf they had
one for $8. In 1959 you could not find one equal to the $8 toaster made
in China (as was the expensive one)

I do recall spending $169 for a B & W 19" TV 50 years ago when I was
making about half that a week. Two weeks wages now would buy be a few
65" TVs today.

And I for one don't necessarily want to keep the same TV or kitchen appliance
for 50 years. Fifty years ago, a window AC cost a hundred bucks,
which would be what, $500 to $1000 in today's dollars? Now you can
buy one for $150. Nor sure how long one lasts versus the other, but
modern ones are quiet, lighter weight, look much nicer, etc. Even
if it lasts half as long, I'm happy with the value proposition.

Ed Pawlowski writes:

I do recall spending $169 for a B & W 19" TV 50 years ago when I was
making about half that a week. Two weeks wages now would buy be a few
65" TVs today.

How do you figure? 80x7.25[*] = $580. I've not seen any 65" T.V.s
for $580. The nationwide mean salary is circa $50,000 which is $2000 for
two weeks. That might be enough to buy a nice 4k 65" TV, with little left over for
living expenses.
[*] Federal minimum wage.

The toaster assembler may have to get additional training to
do a new job though, just like the guys from the buggy whip factory did.

but the machines will design and build the new ones

On 3/10/2016 10:08 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Ed Pawlowski writes:

I do recall spending $169 for a B & W 19" TV 50 years ago when I was
making about half that a week. Two weeks wages now would buy be a few
65" TVs today.

How do you figure? 80x7.25[*] = $580. I've not seen any 65" T.V.s
for $580. The nationwide mean salary is circa $50,000 which is $2000 for
two weeks. That might be enough to buy a nice 4k 65" TV, with little left over for
living expenses.

[*] Federal minimum wage.


Using the nationwide mean salary you are right. I was using my own wage
difference from then to now. You can get a 65" for about $1100. No
matter how you compare, you get a lot more TV today than you did 50
years ago, even 5 years ago.

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


Who has 11 appliances? I have 5. Stove, Refrig, Washer, Dryer,
Microwave. That's it. (Unless a TV, Stereo, Radio, Toaster, Electric
Frying pan, or Computer is considered an appliance... There are only 2
more appliances that I can think of, which I dont have. A Dishwasher and
a Freezer. What else is there..... To make 11 of them???

On 3/9/2016 8:32 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.

But today those appliances have a lifetime of 5 years and back in 1959
they might keep running for 20 to 30 years.

On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 6:58:00 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


Who has 11 appliances? I have 5. Stove, Refrig, Washer, Dryer,
Microwave. That's it. (Unless a TV, Stereo, Radio, Toaster, Electric
Frying pan, or Computer is considered an appliance... There are only 2
more appliances that I can think of, which I dont have. A Dishwasher and
a Freezer. What else is there..... To make 11 of them???

Well, since an "appliance garage" is designed to house/hide small electrics
and at least one definition of appliance reads "a device or piece of
equipment designed to perform a specific task, typically a domestic one"
the list can quite extensive.

Off the top of my head, I have at least 13:

Range
Refrigerator
Microwave
Dishwasher
Toaster Oven
Crock Pot
Stand Mixer
Drip Coffee Pot
Deep Fryer
Blender
Food Processor
Juicer
Coffee Grinder

On Friday, March 11, 2016 at 8:17:48 AM UTC-5, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 6:58:00 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


Who has 11 appliances? I have 5. Stove, Refrig, Washer, Dryer,
Microwave. That's it. (Unless a TV, Stereo, Radio, Toaster, Electric
Frying pan, or Computer is considered an appliance... There are only 2
more appliances that I can think of, which I dont have. A Dishwasher and
a Freezer. What else is there..... To make 11 of them???

Well, since an "appliance garage" is designed to house/hide small electrics
and at least one definition of appliance reads "a device or piece of
equipment designed to perform a specific task, typically a domestic one"
the list can quite extensive.

Off the top of my head, I have at least 13:

Range
Refrigerator
Microwave
Dishwasher
Toaster Oven
Crock Pot
Stand Mixer
Drip Coffee Pot
Deep Fryer
Blender
Food Processor
Juicer
Coffee Grinder

Whoops, I forgot the freezer in the garage and the fridge in the basement.

I also left the washer and dryer off of my list.

On 03/10/2016 05:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


Who has 11 appliances? I have 5. Stove, Refrig, Washer, Dryer,
Microwave. That's it. (Unless a TV, Stereo, Radio, Toaster, Electric
Frying pan, or Computer is considered an appliance... There are only 2
more appliances that I can think of, which I dont have. A Dishwasher and
a Freezer. What else is there..... To make 11 of them???


It depends of how do you define "appliance". Electric toothbrush? Toilet?

--
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate
because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can
understand." -- Bertrand Russell

On 3/11/2016 5:18 PM, Sam E wrote:
On 03/10/2016 05:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


Who has 11 appliances? I have 5. Stove, Refrig, Washer, Dryer,
Microwave. That's it. (Unless a TV, Stereo, Radio, Toaster, Electric
Frying pan, or Computer is considered an appliance... There are only 2
more appliances that I can think of, which I dont have. A Dishwasher and
a Freezer. What else is there..... To make 11 of them???

It depends of how do you define "appliance". Electric toothbrush? Toilet?

"He" obviously didn't read the article. That's the problem with trolls...

I suspect MOST people have a:
- washing machine
- dryer
- refrigerator
- stove
- vacuum cleaner
- color TV

Some may no longer have a toaster -- or, may have a toaster OVEN, instead.
Or, a blender. I don't have a coffee maker cuz I drink tea (As Fr. Guido
Sarducci would advertise: Mr Tea)

And, there may be some uncertainty over:
- dishwasher
- freezer

On Thu, 10 Mar 2016 17:57:43 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 07:32:22 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:

This is from the Carpe Diem site written by Mark J.
Perry. Manufacturing workers can now buy 11 appliances
with 152 hours of labor what used to cost them 886 hours
of labor back in 1959.


Who has 11 appliances? I have 5. Stove, Refrig, Washer, Dryer,
Microwave. That's it. (Unless a TV, Stereo, Radio, Toaster, Electric
Frying pan, or Computer is considered an appliance... There are only 2
more appliances that I can think of, which I dont have. A Dishwasher and
a Freezer. What else is there..... To make 11 of them???

Well, I have 9 of the 11. I'd leave the TV off the list. That
really
isn't an appliance in my view. That would put the 1959 hours at 758 vs.
the 2016 hours at 140. The 1959 worker had to work 5.4 times as many
hours
as the 2016 worker for about the same stuff.
Others have mentioned how much more reliable the old stuff was. Not TVs.
Tubes went out, the vertical and horizontal holds were sometimes finicky,
and remote controls are better channel changers than kids.
No microwave on the list. I thought they weren't invented until the 1960s
but found out differently. An article here http://preview.alturl.com/zb2nq
talks about a man named Tracy Spencer. He dropped out of school at 12 but
became an expert on radar tubes.
He had a candy bar melt in his pocket at work so decided to investigate.


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:06:29 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


Well, I have 9 of the 11. I'd leave the TV off the list. That
really
isn't an appliance in my view. That would put the 1959 hours at 758 vs.
the 2016 hours at 140. The 1959 worker had to work 5.4 times as many
hours
as the 2016 worker for about the same stuff.
Others have mentioned how much more reliable the old stuff was. Not TVs.
Tubes went out, the vertical and horizontal holds were sometimes finicky,
and remote controls are better channel changers than kids.
No microwave on the list. I thought they weren't invented until the 1960s
but found out differently. An article here http://preview.alturl.com/zb2nq
talks about a man named Tracy Spencer. He dropped out of school at 12 but
became an expert on radar tubes.
He had a candy bar melt in his pocket at work so decided to investigate.

I dont consider a toaster, crock pot, elec frying pan, blender, elec can
opener, and so on appliances. They're just kitchen gadgets.

I also dont consider tv, stereo, radio, or computer on that list, since
they are entertainment. And definitely not the toilet...

In my opinion, appliances are large items that run on electricity or
gas.

That would include

Stove
Refrig
Washer
Dryer,
Microwave
Dishwasher
Freezer
And maybe Air Conditioner

Of course if we include the Air Cond, we may as well add a furnace to
the list.

On Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 7:10:07 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:06:29 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


Well, I have 9 of the 11. I'd leave the TV off the list. That
really
isn't an appliance in my view. That would put the 1959 hours at 758 vs.
the 2016 hours at 140. The 1959 worker had to work 5.4 times as many
hours
as the 2016 worker for about the same stuff.
Others have mentioned how much more reliable the old stuff was. Not TVs.
Tubes went out, the vertical and horizontal holds were sometimes finicky,
and remote controls are better channel changers than kids.
No microwave on the list. I thought they weren't invented until the 1960s
but found out differently. An article here http://preview.alturl.com/zb2nq
talks about a man named Tracy Spencer. He dropped out of school at 12 but
became an expert on radar tubes.
He had a candy bar melt in his pocket at work so decided to investigate.

I dont consider a toaster, crock pot, elec frying pan, blender, elec can
opener, and so on appliances. They're just kitchen gadgets.

You may not consider them to be appliances, but most people do, including
kitchen designers. DAGS for "appliance garage" and look at the images of
what they are designed to store.

Take a look at what Target considers to be appliances:

http://www.target.com/c/home-appliances/-/N-5xtuu

Home Depot has a webpage for Small Appliances

http://www.homedepot.com/b/Appliance...s/N-5yc1vZbv48

You are not wrong by calling them "gadgets", but being a gadget
doesn't preclude them from also being appliances. This website
considers "kitchen appliances" to be a 'related phrase' in their
definition of gadget.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dict...english/gadget


I also dont consider tv, stereo, radio, or computer on that list, since
they are entertainment. And definitely not the toilet...

In my opinion, appliances are large items that run on electricity or
gas.

That would include

Stove
Refrig
Washer
Dryer,
Microwave
Dishwasher
Freezer
And maybe Air Conditioner

Of course if we include the Air Cond, we may as well add a furnace to
the list.

On Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 7:49:12 AM UTC-5, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 7:10:07 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:06:29 -0600, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


Well, I have 9 of the 11. I'd leave the TV off the list. That
really
isn't an appliance in my view. That would put the 1959 hours at 758 vs.
the 2016 hours at 140. The 1959 worker had to work 5.4 times as many
hours
as the 2016 worker for about the same stuff.
Others have mentioned how much more reliable the old stuff was. Not TVs.
Tubes went out, the vertical and horizontal holds were sometimes finicky,
and remote controls are better channel changers than kids.
No microwave on the list. I thought they weren't invented until the 1960s
but found out differently. An article here http://preview.alturl.com/zb2nq
talks about a man named Tracy Spencer. He dropped out of school at 12 but
became an expert on radar tubes.
He had a candy bar melt in his pocket at work so decided to investigate.

I dont consider a toaster, crock pot, elec frying pan, blender, elec can
opener, and so on appliances. They're just kitchen gadgets.

You may not consider them to be appliances, but most people do, including
kitchen designers. DAGS for "appliance garage" and look at the images of
what they are designed to store.

Take a look at what Target considers to be appliances:

http://www.target.com/c/home-appliances/-/N-5xtuu

Home Depot has a webpage for Small Appliances

http://www.homedepot.com/b/Appliance...s/N-5yc1vZbv48

You are not wrong by calling them "gadgets", but being a gadget
doesn't preclude them from also being appliances. This website
considers "kitchen appliances" to be a 'related phrase' in their
definition of gadget.



Appliance:
1.

A device or piece of equipment designed to perform a specific task, typically a domestic one.


It's very broad. I consider a TV, stereo, window AC, etc to be appliances.
Which is why there are shopping categories that narrow it down, like
"kitchen appliances".