I think it’s not perfect but probably the best we have.
People forgot or simply don’t realize how much worse life was just a couple of decades ago (in terms of nutrition, access to knowledge, clean water, material wealth).
People forgot or simply don’t realize how much worse life was just a couple of decades ago (in terms of nutrition, access to knowledge, clean water, material wealth).
Couple decades ago Germany had electronics industry. Now it’s gone. More industries are following.
Couple decades ago there were rather isolated Yugoslav Wars. Now it’s introduction into WW3 with active war in Ukraine and hybrid attacks everywhere in Europe.
It depends heavily on location. Indian colleague has completely different world view and is proud how India is progressing.
> Couple decades ago there were rather isolated Yugoslav Wars.
A bit of nuance, they ended in 1999, however the whole thing is still influencing Europe negatively and is not as isolated as it seems. Not just there are now seven countries instead of one to consider and negotiate with, a couple of them are utterly disfunctional. Further, two biggest chunks are deeply sunk into nationalism. Far too little effort had been made back then to try to reform the place into a functional system.
In fact, in the vast majority of cases (including North America, South America, Europe, East Asia, India & South-East Asia) progress is entirely about countries choosing how quickly they are comfortable with improvement happening. Africa and the Middle East it is a combination of policy choices and cultural problems. Arguably foreign interference - although even then policy and strategy tends to be the bigger thing over time.
This is an extremely bold claim. Always was, but especially in today's world it is. I am not saying that Modi's policies are bad, what I am trying to say is that he is basically playing the game on the easy mode. He has access to the unprecedentely dynamic and resilient global economy _and_ he has access to cheap Russian resources Europe doesn't want to buy anymore. All Modi needs to do is not do anything really stupid - the economy will perform well unless clubbed to the head.
And that is all fine, and I am genuinely happy for India. My problem is that Modi is using that easily achieved success to erode democratic institutions - and that will become a problem in the long-term, as it always historically has, everywhere.
The world has been in easy mode for 70 years now. Any government can choose to sit back and let people get wealthy. It is literally so easy that even the communists figured it out.
The electronics industries of a couple decades ago were producing stuff that are incomparable to what we have today. Taking that into account, I would say today is "better".
It always is but not everyone has the option of buying. It takes investment and not everyone's parents are wealthy.
As always, local circumstances matter.
Also, see what djtango said. It's not that simple.
I'm all for trying things for sure, but it has to be done in very small scale and over significant time scales.
― Mark Twain, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Being pedantic about how we measure progress might create the impression that it’s not about the progress but instead about being right.
In advanced western countries that is. If you compare Nigeria from 2000 to Nigeria today, sure, maybe...
Infant mortality was 10.4 per 1,000 live births in 1986 in the US. It was 5.5 I'm 2023.
Life expectancy was 74. Now it's 78.
The crime rate peaked in the US in 1991.
Life isn't perfect now. Housing needs to be a lot more affordable, for one. University costs in the US are insane, for another.
But to paint this as no progress? Come on.
Are you just saying this thinking no one will ask you to back it up with data? Care to quantify what "so much better" actually means?
Most of those apply both here in Europe and the US.
And that's without even getting into more subjective QoL stuff, from cultural production to the widespread depression and the loneliness epidemic.
A lot of people in the world are angry and one of the things that fuels this anger is the "gaslighting" that the data shows their lives are better while their lived reality is the opposite.
Don't forget that Millennials are the first generation to be poorer than their parents in a long time...
There’s now a large segment (and several generations) of society for whom the system has never worked, even if the growth of retirement accounts masks the loss of wealth and well-being.
This is simply not true. At some point, we do need to rely on data other than "lived experience," which compares one's quality of life at 22 to someone's quality of life at 50.
"Younger Americans (millennials and Gen Zers) owned $1.23 for every $1 of wealth owned by Gen Xers at the same age."
"Younger Americans (millennials and Gen Zers) owned $1.35 for every $1 of wealth owned by baby boomers at the same age."
https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2025/june/the-state-of...
Statistically it's safer than rural Oklahoma... but your lived experience in taking the subway 45 minutes every day will not paint the same safety experience that can't be found in any statistic.
The most infuriating example, to me, is the overuse of GDP. As if that should tell us everything.
But pivoting to the "but it's not my lived experience, bro" is weak.
If you made the claim that "millenials have it harder than their parent" then we're talking something where experience can be more useful.
Although anecdotally my father moved to the UK with my mother with nothing but the clothes on their backs, and by 27 my dad was able to afford his first property in London start a family, all without a uni degree and hadn't even yet finished his accountancy training. He did that without any family help and in fact was sending money home. This has always helped provide a bit of colour of how things have changed
0: your source has mean at 34 in 2025, https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2025/june/the-state-of... 1: the best I could find was median at 38 in 2022: https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2024/feb/millennia...
I'm happy to be proven wrong.
And mere decades ago, life was more or less the same, if not arguably better in many ways.
Some places like Austin, which haven't gone down the NIMBY zoning route, are still somewhat affordable.
Everybody mocked Russia for having the same gdp as Spain. As it turns out your economy is much stronger when it's focused on heavy industries, steel, mining, oil, &c. Than when it is focused on tourism and other services
One produces value, the other generates money, when shits hit the fan you need energy, the drunk brits coming in your strip clubs aren't that useful anymore
Do you think Spain would fair better than Russia against Ukraine ?
But you’re not taken into account how many men Russia is losing to maintain that level of aggression. It’s compensating its small GDP with humans.
Spain would never do that and thus fail.
How exactly is their economy "strong"? By what measure? You cannot really eat tanks, that is what made life in the Soviet Union unsatisfactory as well.
Current price of Ural oil is some 9 dollars above their breakeven costs. As the classic says, not great, not terrible.
Industry focused economies are going to continue to come under pressure due to automation. The US for example has a lot of industrial output, but shrinking industrial jobs. And that’s a good thing. Sending people into coal mines should never be a long term plan.
idk man, France's economy minister said he would bring "russia on its knees" economically, 3 years later it's still not anywhere close to being a reality, the minister isn't here anymore tho.
Put half of the sanctions on spain and it would fold in a month
On its own? Sure. (Although to be fair to Spain, they've invested heavily in solar and high-value agriculture in recent years).
But seen as part of a system with Germany and perhaps the UK (no longer part of the EU, but was better for both when they were), it's a valuable part of quality-of-life in the overall economic bloc.
Where would you rather live? Spain, easy.
Who would win in a war? Russia, easy.
Some will read this as an argument against the Spanish lifestyle. On balance I prefer to read it as an argument against war.
Really? Russia has not even done all that well against Ukraine, a much smaller economy.
What sort of war? I agree Spain could not successfully invade Russia, on the other hand Russia could not invade Spain either. No working aircraft carriers so their air force would be operating from very distant bases (even if they were allowed to pass over the countries in between), limits on ability to land large numbers of troops, etc.
> no longer part of the EU, but was better for both when they were
I do not understand why you even mention that as the EU does not have a military, NATO is relevant and the UK is in NATO.
Its a matter of opinion. I think the UK is at least as well off (growth has been similar to comparable economies like France and Germany since Brexit) without even seeing the long term benefits AND the EU is better off as the UK was a major impediment to the political integration the Euro zone needs.
Spain army's is 1/10th of Ukraine's and basically haven't been in anything close to a war in decades, so yes, really and easily lmao.
Ukraine alone produces more military drones per month than the entire EU per year btw.
They do not have a border with Russia so how could Russia get their army to Spain?
Ukraine has armed forces geared to fight a land war with Russia. How do Ukraine's air force and navy compare to Spain's?
> Ukraine alone produces more military drones per month than the entire EU per year btw.
Because they are in a war. You cannot compare fully geared up war time production to peacetime production. What was Ukraine's drone output prior to the current Russian invasion?