BBB_Adrift

The rise of post-war industrialisation was the complete antithesis of frugality and thrift. It was pursuit of ever-increasing yields and outputs, at the expense of sustainability or long-term view.

I fear future generations will look back in horror at some of the developments; but that might be a good thing and encourage a larger degree of thrift, or at least to be more frugal in the consumption/use of resources.

Koyote

I could demonstrate that much of this is faulty – logically in some cases, empirically in others – but many of us on bf have been down this rabbit hole with you. Once you choose a position, you are no longer open to any other facts or viewpoints.

I have better things to do today.

livedarklions

Hey pot, you're a kettle!

Not really interested in the argument with you as your reaction to anyone questioning your assumptions is to lash out like this, but here's my basic point:

You are grossly understating how much societal restructuring you would need to allow any substantial drop in demand not to cause a rise in unemployment. You tried to cite an era in history when that most decidedly didn't happen while ignoring the actual trends that did occur both during and after the historical era YOU selected. You want to get into various structural reasons why the average consumer really doesn't have the flexibility to cut demand you're assuming, I'll be happy to, but it's a hell of a lot more complex than B- econ 101 level stuff. There's the whole housing market, family size, who is in and who is out of the labor market and so on.

When you post stuff like " a B- student in an introductory econ course can understand this", you are trolling for a fight while making it clear you aren't open to anything another person has to say, so I'm really not taking your characterizations of me seriously.

Maelochs

Yeah ... never a strong beginning for a post trying to logical prove one point and disprove another ..... We can simply look at how things actually work - A recession is what happens when everyone cuts back on their spending. Fewer man-hours are then required to produce all the goods and services that are consumed, and that leads to increased unemployment.[/QUOTE] Right .... we live in a consumer economy .... the best thing that can happen ot this nation is to get slammed by multiple natural disasters, because GDP goes Way up when people have to rebuild everything .... Nope, no logic there .... because the real logic is "The rich get richer ... "

Yeah, and what Koyote was saying is EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST SAID. So, yeah ... no need for logic here.

Folks ... let's all go ride our bikes.

Maelochs

Oh ... and LiveDarkLions? The Great depression (which was one in a long string going back for pretty much as long as humans have been able to count money and write history) did not have a single cause ... one could argue the First World War, the onerous reparation demands put on Germany by the Versailles Treaty, the loss of labor in France .... one could argue about leveraged stock purchases and vastly over-valued companies and the folly of get-rich-quick, pyramid-style investment schemes ... and a bunch of other stuff ... but no can ever win that argument because there is always more to say.

Claiming you know the One Cause of the Great Depression .... I will just back away slowly and not take my eyes off you until I am out of range.

Anyone with three linked neurons can see that most "modern" societies massively overproduce and try to stimulate massive over-consumption (It's Disposable! That Means it is Convenient, right? It comes in single-use packaging! You have no responsibility for the wasteland you children are about to inherit---Because We Are Freaking Rich due to your unrestrained buying, often on credit, which we make easy, because when has That ever not worked out well (see above.)) For the purpose of short-term gain for a limited pool of profit-takers. The only people who don't see it like we see the sun in the sky during the day, are the people who take those profits who don;'t need to see it because they are doing it, and the people at the lowest levels who are little better than serfs, supporting their masters.

I don't have any solutions, but I also don't deny the existence of what is plainly observable. I cannot cure cancer or most other diseases either, but I don't pretend they don't exist because of that.

As with so many other problems ... get out from behind the computer and climb into the saddle. The world won't change but you will.

Later, I have a few miles to consume.

rsbob 

As for thrift and frugality, yes and no. I will spend big bucks on something (bike) which will deliver good value over the long haul but will cheap out on jerseys and bike accessories *Garmin excepted). If I was wealthy, I would probably just do the same. Helmets, shoes, tires, bibs I spend on. Safety and comfort are paramount.

Being both thrifty and non-thrifty and I don’t see it as meanness, unless you lord it over someone. The names were changed to protect the guilty innocent.

Koyote

I believe the OP was using "mean" in the British sense, which is stingy or miserly.

By the way, a really great jersey is...really great. I hope you've tried a couple before choosing to cheap out on them.

genejockey 

If you think it's just postwar, may I introduce you to the last half of the 19th Century and the first half of the 20th? The big difference is that more people were able to share in the prosperity postwar.

There's a whole lot of cultural and psychological stuff all tied up together here. First, although the average work week did shorten considerably between the 19th and mid-20th Centuries, we seem kind of stuck at 40 hours as the generally accepted amount of time one should work every week. It's been that way since 1940. Eighty three years. Anytime there's a suggestion to shorten it, it dies a quiet death somewhere, even though it's an obvious solution to excessive unemployment (U3 and U6).

Second, there's the generally accepted belief that if you CAN work, you SHOULD work. Related to that is the tendency to define yourself in terms of your job - I'm a Scientist who rides a bike, versus a cyclist who does Science to pay the bills. So for a lot of people, especially men, losing a job is losing part of how you define yourself.

Third, we tied so many things to employment, like health insurance and retirement.

Fourth, and let's not kid ourselves here - stuff is fun. I mean, we all own bikes. Some of us own multiple bikes (Guilty, your honor!), and tools for working on them, spare tires, spare wheels, and specialized clothing for riding them (I have more pairs of bib shorts than I have long trousers, for example). Wanting more and better stuff is part of being human, IMO. Humans are the dissatisfied animal. There's something in us that isn't satisfied with what we have, or who we are, or how we do things, and tries to change it. Frugality, making do, doing without runs counter to that - not that it's not a good idea, but it tends to run counter to how we're wired, meaning that frugality takes willpower that profligacy doesn't.

Fifth, there's a tendency to rebel against being asked to share, or to cut back, or to make changes for the greater good. Some go so far as to do the exact opposite of what's asked, in order to prove something.

So, we've set up our society to require everyone who can to work, to consider working longer hours to be a sign of virtue, to consider more money and more stuff to be a worthy reward, and to look upon "excessive" leisure time, or "underemployment" as sloth, a sign of moral turpitude, and asking people to live like we're all in this together is anathema to a big chunk of society. That's the system we'll have to change.

Duo

how does one post to this politics forum. is there a secret way of joining?

phughes

I'm guessing this will tell you.

gringomojado

Bought the wife a singer ......sewing machine!
gm

phughes

I follow a guy on Instagram, @Cranktherapy who mated an old Singer sewing machine with a Schwinn exercise bike. He calls it the Schwinger.

PDKL45

This is like a reverse 6oatse, and there's a warning out on Googling that term. Some things you cannot unsee. Really.

Polaris OBark

This thread really has got me thinking.

I wonder if it would be possible to equip a keyboard with a breathalizer?

Joe Bikerider

“There has got to be”. No there doesn’t. I completely reject everything you claim.