kajarainbow (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
kajarainbow) wrote2005-01-12 04:07 pm
kajarainbow) wrote2005-01-12 04:07 pm
Some food for thought...
Basically, this pdf file describes the decrease in time required to pay for various materials. It's an interesting demonstration of the changes of 'time prices' in acquired things.
It also makes an argument that large differences in wages are necessary to spur innovation, because only the rich can afford to buy new technologies, and it's the rich's purchases of the latest devices that gives businesses enough money to remain operating and refine their designs down to cheaper and cheaper ones, until the masses can afford previously enormously expensive luxuries. Very interesting.
But its use of average (mean) wage makes me wonder. I would like to see similar comparisons using median and mode wages, to get more of an idea of how much time large sections of the population have to spend to get all that stuff. The highest wages have gone up a GREAT DEAL faster in recent history than the lowest wages, which would bias averages toward the upper ends...
Nevertheless, good points about the important role of the wealthy in spurring technological changes.
It also makes an argument that large differences in wages are necessary to spur innovation, because only the rich can afford to buy new technologies, and it's the rich's purchases of the latest devices that gives businesses enough money to remain operating and refine their designs down to cheaper and cheaper ones, until the masses can afford previously enormously expensive luxuries. Very interesting.
But its use of average (mean) wage makes me wonder. I would like to see similar comparisons using median and mode wages, to get more of an idea of how much time large sections of the population have to spend to get all that stuff. The highest wages have gone up a GREAT DEAL faster in recent history than the lowest wages, which would bias averages toward the upper ends...
Nevertheless, good points about the important role of the wealthy in spurring technological changes.
Interesting!
Also, the average wage they used was something a little over $500/week, so around maybe $13/hour. I made more than this working construction at age 17, so I think it is probably a pretty fair estimation of the common worker. Then again, construction pays well, and I lived in a massively developing area. If I chose NOT to bust my ass (and I genuinely worked hard; I could have made a good life for myself on just that track, as can a lot of people who do), and flipped burgers at a McJob somewhere, then yeah, I can see how it would be a little harder to make ends meet.
In another facet of the argument, not all areas in the US have the same economy, although the relative scale is sometimes similar. In big cities, you can get jobs that pay higher than in the middle of nowhere, but simultaneously, the cost of living is way higher as well. However, I doubt that other than basic utilities, the cost changes too much on luxury goods (I mean that in the most inclusive sense possible). So while the relative amount spend on absolute essentials remains around one-third, the amount remaining is a fair bit less, when you live in the middle of nowhere. Just a thought, not sure about the exact details, but it is something to consider.
Also, that paper is years old. I'd be curious to see the work-hour cost just since then in really high-tech areas. I mean, the work-hours for buying a DVD-R have dropped exponentially. They're a buck apiece now. It seemed like yesterday when only a select few could actually *gasp* burn DVDs.