Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Just because something is higher quality does not mean it has higher subjective value. E.g. i still think i come out ahead with cheap clothes and a laptop then someone 100 years ago with higher quality clothes.



I’d rather have a house than shitty fast fashion but your mileage may vary


Probably don't want a common house from 1924 with lead paint, an indoor wooden stove for heating and an outhouse.


Also average houses from that time period were tiny, with about ~1000 sq ft of livable space. That people were expected to raise families in. My apartment (which is just for me and my cat) is bigger than that!

https://www.newser.com/story/225645/average-size-of-us-homes...


If you can find a neighbourhood that's as dangerous and unsafe as those a hundred years ago, the house would be very cheap compared to GDP per capita.


A better comparison would be this: would you rather have 3 suits that you wore everyday that cost a months wages, or 30 shirts and pants that cost a weeks wages but are lower quality.

(Also, IMO, houses today are much higher quality than in the past as soon as you account for safety)


The answer differs whether you answer it selfishly or with the greater good in mind (resource use/waste, pollution, etc)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: