This is something more lemmies should see.. I keep being told that 200 years ago, people only worked 15 hours per week, water was like beer and everything was peachy for everyone! It's... Frustrating.
this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
31 points (84.4% liked)
Optimists Unite
482 readers
3 users here now
Optimists Unite Here
We are living in an age of unprecedented wealth, with millions entering the middle class every year. Homo sapiens live longer lifespans than ever before, with better nutrition, and better medicine than ever in our history. This is also the most peaceful time in our history, with record lows in crime and wars. The developing world is surging in wealth and in the west we have more opportunity and access to information than ever.
Positive Communities of Lemmy:
c/Wholesome@reddthat.com c/UpliftingNews@lemmy.world c/LemmyBeWholesome@lemmy.world c/MotivationalMemes@reddthat.com
We chose Reddthat specifically because no downvotes are allowed. Negative comments will be removed.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
Who are you hanging out with?
I'm not sure the higher retirement age is a good thing. The rest is wonderful.
I think you might have missed that people didn't retire earlier, they straight up died in their 50's.
That's not what the graph says.
That's exactly what it says. It says "the average American died at age 51".
I mean the graph we're talking about, the one with retirement. If the retirement age was higher and you count in the data from the other graph, that makes it even worse. It means that many people worked their asses off right to their death, without being able to retire at all.
What graph? It's a meme with that wrestling guy. I only see one picture.
Take the general point: life today is a hundred times better than hundred years ago
This isn't a sharpshooter fallacy--that would mean the good things OP is noting are made "good" after they happen.
If you think this is an unfounded optimism because there are a lot more bad things (or that things have gotten worse over the last two centuries), there's an argument to be had there, but this isn't it.
I do think the bottom one is misleading. One of the reasons there's less global poverty is because the standards for what counts as being impoverished on these studies has gone down... Not living conditions going up. They just redid the studies in a way to make it look better for the stats.
It's a good thing to have less poverty but having less purely because you decided people can live on less now is misleading at best.
Nothing against OP, I just hate that specific stat every time it gets thrown around.
Hi neighbor. Thanks for the input. This is a community for optimism.