Hacker News Reader

Comment by seltzered_ | Hacker News Reader

If you look at a chart of TV prices over 50-80 years, this has always been a trend [1]. Institutes using this as an argument for declining poverty are missing the point that while most goods have gone down in cost over the years, services (childcare) and things of value (education) have gone up substantially [2].

[1]: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-the-incredib...

[2]: Elizabeth Warren's classic "Twin Income Trap" talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A

View on HN

What sucks is that the cycle of falling prices and models being replaced is so fast that they become not worth repairing -- or impossible to repair -- within a few years.

I trashed an otherwise perfectly good 4-5 y/o 49" television last year because something on the IR receiver board failed. What leads I could find for a replacement board (a) had them listed around 50% of what a comparable replacement television cost and (b) didn't actually have any to sell me.

Upside, now even my rarely-used guest bedroom rates a fairly cheap 55" 4K smart TV. This holiday season the same money buys their 65-inch model, next year it'll probably buy a 70.

TVs keep getting so much cheaper so fast, I keep putting off purchasing a new one. I still have a 9-years-old 640p(ish) 42-inch TV mainly used to rotate through my photo collection. It's still "good enough" and I don't watch that much TV on the big screen anyway, although once my daughter gets older I'll probably finally bite the bullet and get a modern, high end TV.

If I want to watch something with high resolution and good color accuracy, my iPad has been fulfilling my needs just fine. Feels surprising to say that, considering a few years ago I was poo-pooing the iPad and people who watched tv/movies on them.

Depending on the technology used in the TV (ie plasma vs LCD) it might have quite a big power draw when running for long times. Newer TVs have usually much lower consumption, so it might take financial sense to upgrade from this perspective as well

That would not be such a big issue if we had closed recycling loop.

Recycling is fundamentally impractical because the costs of doing the recycling a part at a time overwhelm the cost of mass production of new goods.

I wish education was cheaper. All the college content I consumed is available for free now on the internet.

Our society needs to recognize that only a certain percentage of people ever want to go to college, and that is okay. No need to put people in debt and set them up for failure.

But how much cheaper is it to learn a profitable skill? In the 1980s I’d have had a much harder time learning to code. I learned essentially for free. A traditional, hand holding education is more expensive, but information is virtually free.

You picked one skill -- computer programming -- which just happens to be the one the internet is built on. It should come as no surprise that the internet is a great place to learn that for free.

The further you get from that, the worse teacher the internet is. There are many skills I've learned which are hard to find information about online, and a few which don't seem to exist on the internet at all.

Not every profession has someone who took the time to sit down and put all their knowledge on the internet for free. Some fields are just getting around to putting it in books.

I think that very well may be true, but it definitely doesn’t match my own intuition based on what I’ve seen. I have seen extensive educational videos for free online about math, art (digital, painting, etc.), music (theory, composition, orchestration, specific instruments, production, etc.), writing, electronics, 3D printing, plumbing, construction and home repair, woodworking, language learning, aviation, filmmaking (visual effects, cinematography, acting, directing, screenwriting, etc.), marketing, entrepreneurship, investing and financial advice, etc.

The difficulty is sorting out the terrible videos from the good videos.

There's plenty of content created by people who don't really know what they're doing, or who only have a rudimentary understanding.

I guess that's true of all education, but it feels like a bigger problem with free online content.

Yes, having choice creates more problems with choosing :) previously you might just have been stuck with the terrible ones.

I find anything diy on YouTube to be of greater quality the worse quality the production is.

This is true and cheese making is one of those things. However, I have learned an amazing amount about cheesemaking simply from reading wikipedia, learning chemistry from Kahn academy, reading patents, reading papers that are online. watching videos of tours of creameries on Youtube and asking questions to professional cheesemakers that happen to be available on social media. I reckon if I wanted to become a professional it would be within my reach if I was willing to put in enough effort (and had enough capital ;-) ). I doubt there are many professions that are not accessible (possibly making bamboo whisks for green tea ceremonies -- there are only 18 people in all of Japan who make them ;-) ). It's an incredible time to be alive.

For every hobby now there is a least one big watering hole that the prosumers gather into and it is full of amazing info and how to tutorials. Right now you can become good enough in any skill with two week deliberate practice.

> There are many skills I've learned which are hard to find information about online, and a few which don't seem to exist on the internet at all.

Do you have any examples? Sounds like an opportunity.

The problem today isn't access to information, it's access to time and focus. Because wages are so low and basic costs so high, it is very difficult for people who didn't manage to stay on the 1st-class career track to make way for development without jeopardizing their health, well-being, or job in the immediate future.

And yet most of those people have their consent manufactured, buying into scapegoating of slaves even worse off than them (homeless, foreigners, minorities, etc.), vote against their own interests and believe that socialism and welfare for anyone other than the very rich is as repugnant as pedophilia.

Blooms 2 Sigma problem [1] suggests that while it is cheaper to get access to the material, you’ll do better if taught by an expert tutor.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem

Wow, that effect size. I'm amazed that the implications haven't been pursued vigorously, as it's so rare to get such an effect size in a clean, non-controversial (compromised methodology) experiment. As far as I can see, there's not much controversy around this result.

I learned it from the K&R and Mapping the Amiga I checked out of the local library, and a Heathkit manual I had from somewhere.

Of course I didn't learn the programming discipline until college many years later, and it shows in my early code.

I learned to code well enough to get a job for free in the '90s and it was certainly much, much easier than it would be now.

That’s because you’re not actually paying for the education itself but access to the network of people who also can afford it plus the brand name of the institute.

I think this is called "cost disease"[1].

To your examples, however, non-university education has gone down precipitously in price. I'm teaching myself machine learning and financial trading for essentially free, with tools and resources that significantly exceed what was available to people 20 years ago. I think the most useful skill today is "learning how to learn" and I don't think it's taught very well in our public education system. I know that hiring tutors and professionals and coaches is valuable and that self-education isn't a panacea, but we're certainly in a better spot than we were 30 years ago.

Childcare in San Francisco ranges from $1,000/month to $4,000/month. Was ye olde "cheap childcare" of days passed less expensive than $1000/month adjusting for inflation? I remember old childcare centers from the 1980s had significant problems compared to the relatively posh, highly regulated, childcare centers available today. Another big problem with childcare is the childcare tax credit which is a laughably small amount. From a government revenue-maximization perspective, it seems silly to discourage dual income households from continuing to stay dual income. But maybe the CBO has figured this all out and I'm completely wrong.

I certainly agree with you that certain things have gone up significantly in price (healthcare and housing come to mind), but I think it's at the very least debatable that standards of living have gone down.

[1]Scott Alexander has a very interesting blog post on the phenomenon of "cost disease": https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost...

I doubt it captures the change from TV being central in peoples' lifes to being a sideshow to internet. The value of owning a TV in the old times was much higher than now.

I remember growing up in the 80s that there were only a handful of people in the entire community that had multiple TVs. In the 90s some teens in the upper middle class had a tv in their bedroom.

I remember buying my first tv as a married couple around 2007. We were still in undergrad and quite poor, but saved up and bought a 32” HDTV from Walmart for like $400.

Fast forward to today and you can get a 65” 4K tv from Best Buy for that same price [0]. Is it a good tv? No clue. But in 2007 a 32” tv seemed huge....

[0] https://www.bestbuy.com/site/promo/xl-tv-savings

Reply on news.ycombinator.com