|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 14, 2018 11:16:32 GMT -6
Heavy vid. Really well done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 14, 2018 23:51:40 GMT -6
agreed. Shocking at times even. Very well done though.
This video for me is on the same line almost.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 15, 2018 7:50:54 GMT -6
I don't understand the video. I've watched it a few times but it doesn't make any sense to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 15, 2018 8:02:53 GMT -6
I don't understand the video. I've watched it a few times but it doesn't make any sense to me. |
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on May 15, 2018 8:26:16 GMT -6
I don't understand the video. I've watched it a few times but it doesn't make any sense to me. Yeah, that's heavy. I dig it. You definitely can't take this at face value. Gotta dig in for a deeper meaning. |
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on May 15, 2018 8:27:53 GMT -6
I don't understand the video. I've watched it a few times but it doesn't make any sense to me. ![]()  |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 15, 2018 8:58:52 GMT -6
I don't understand the video. I've watched it a few times but it doesn't make any sense to me. ![]() ?? |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 15, 2018 9:28:45 GMT -6
I don't understand the video. I've watched it a few times but it doesn't make any sense to me. Interesting stuff. Has he come out and said anything about this, or is it all just people reading into it what they believe? Seems that if he intended for folks to get out of it what they already believe, that it would be the opposite of speaking out against "The Media" since media outlets typically leave things vague for people to read into things as they desire. Or maybe that was the point.. |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 15, 2018 9:31:06 GMT -6
agreed. Shocking at times even. Very well done though. This video for me is on the same line almost. Really strong video. I guess this dude is from Worcester, MA, about 20 minutes from me. Never heard of him. Thanks for the tip. Here's another solid rap vid. Filthy bassline too. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 15, 2018 9:35:09 GMT -6
Interesting stuff. Has he come out and said anything about this, or is it all just people reading into it what they believe? Seems that if he intended for folks to get out of it what they already believe, that it would be the opposite of speaking out against "The Media" since media outlets typically leave things vague for people to read into things as they desire. Or maybe that was the point.. I would hazard a guess that he’s just being an artist and using the symbolism that speaks to him. Some of that stuff, like Death on the White Horse or the Jim Crow body movements jump out pretty strong to me. A lot of other stuff is much less obvious. I don’t know. That’s what I do when I write songs. Use the fabric of symbolism and meaning that speaks to me personally. I’d guess Glover is doing the same here. |
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 15, 2018 10:37:22 GMT -6
Interesting stuff. Has he come out and said anything about this, or is it all just people reading into it what they believe? Seems that if he intended for folks to get out of it what they already believe, that it would be the opposite of speaking out against "The Media" since media outlets typically leave things vague for people to read into things as they desire. Or maybe that was the point.. Couldn't say. But you can definitely see the stuff up front and then the stuff in the back ground makes more sense. Even just the words and the way Glover presents himself. I think there is another video of the film director explaining some of it and confirming some of the lines of thought. I'll see if i can find it. either way, even if you don't read into that deep, it is extremely powerful about several issues in the country. |
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on May 15, 2018 11:16:12 GMT -6
Ha! It's from Westworld. It's what the androids would say when presented with evidence of the "true" reality, which I found funny and ironic to the conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 15, 2018 11:38:09 GMT -6
Ha! It's from Westworld. It's what the androids would say when presented with evidence of the "true" reality, which I found funny and ironic to the conversation. Gotcha. I knew it was from westworld (great show BTW) but I didn't know what you were trying to say with it. |
|
|
|
Post by iamasound on May 23, 2018 5:43:14 GMT -6
And people ask why I don't come back to The States to raise my daughter there! Heck, five year olds still can walk to kindergarden by themselves and we can let our kids free reign to play outside without worrying about A to Z, nobody is shooting anybody in school and the cops are not freaked out and reactive. Time will tell as even Switzerland faces new challenges with immigration and border security with a right wing that would just love enact ultra conservative policies, but at least for now all is pretty good, safe and sound. Avoiding stadiums during football matches is sound advice though.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2018 7:13:32 GMT -6
And people ask why I don't come back to The States to raise my daughter there! Heck, five year olds still can walk to kindergarden by themselves and we can let our kids free reign to play outside without worrying about A to Z, nobody is shooting anybody in school and the cops are not freaked out and reactive. Time will tell as even Switzerland faces new challenges with immigration and border security with a right wing that would just love enact ultra conservative policies, but at least for now all is pretty good, safe and sound. Avoiding stadiums during football matches is sound advice though. So what makes you think that we don't do that here? The news? It's a well known that the news media has been increasingly negative and sensationalist here in the USA for the last 30 years or so. It's also a well known effect that watching negativity and violence on the news makes people think that's the norm around them and they adjust their beliefs accordingly, even though the facts of reality might be totally opposite. Like, in the USA, we have the lowest amounts of firearm violence we've had in 50 years, the lowest amounts of murders, rapes and other violent crime is also at historic lows. So are racial crimes. The lower and middle classes are shrinking because they are moving to the upper class. By most factual metrics, we are the best off we've been in decades.. But if you just go by editorials and OPeds, you'd think we're about to destroy ourselves. The USA is safer and more prosperous now than it has been in 40+ years, but would you think it so based on what you see on the news? Of course not. There's multiple reasons why and they're all very primal and psychological. One is that people retain information better if it's negative information. This is because of our instinct to avoid unsafe situations. Another is that we tend to believe those of "power" more readily than peers. This is because we're inherently animals of a social hierarchy and "leadership" has instinctively meant that person has experienced more in life and can help avoid dangerous situations. So when we view the news, we instinctively see those people as "trustworthy" and as "leadership" so what they are telling us should be trusted and believed.. Yet another is that we inherently believe negative information more than positive information. Along with the first point, this is based in instinct to avoid danger and death. Still more, we tend to believe the first person that tells us things.. If a parent says something is unsafe, we typically internalize it and it becomes part of our psyche.. Even if it's completely factually wrong. Telling your kids about your political or religious beliefs typically makes them follow them as well. When you tell them that everyone is a potential murderer or abductor or rapist, that's what they'll see everywhere. You want to see all of this in action? Try an experiment if you dare.. Tell your kid there's a monster in the closet coming to eat them. You'll only have to do it once, and then you get to enjoy years of fear and nightmares no matter how many times you tell them it's not true.. Guess what? As adults we don't grow out of that fear, it just changes to something else and instead of you telling your kid about monsters in the closet, it's the news media telling you about monsters in the world. Instead of you fearing being eaten by the closet monster, you're told to fear your neighbor, immigrants, gun owners, political opposites, people of different colors than you, etc. And all of this makes you MORE likely to listen to the news media because you "trust" them as "leadership" and the negative sensationalism toys with your fears and makes you more likely to believe what they say. |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on May 29, 2018 7:26:02 GMT -6
And people ask why I don't come back to The States to raise my daughter there! Heck, five year olds still can walk to kindergarden by themselves and we can let our kids free reign to play outside without worrying about A to Z, nobody is shooting anybody in school and the cops are not freaked out and reactive. Time will tell as even Switzerland faces new challenges with immigration and border security with a right wing that would just love enact ultra conservative policies, but at least for now all is pretty good, safe and sound. Avoiding stadiums during football matches is sound advice though. The USA is safer and more prosperous now than it has been in 40+ years, but would you think it so based on what you see on the news? Would you prefer that the media not cover these school massacres and the one's like Las Vegas? |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2018 8:17:04 GMT -6
The USA is safer and more prosperous now than it has been in 40+ years, but would you think it so based on what you see on the news? Would you prefer that the media not cover these school massacres and the one's like Las Vegas? I'd prefer they stop sensationalizing them at least. The reason there's been an uptick recently is that all the mentally ill people who desire attention and notoriety see this as their path to being famous and/or getting their cause out there. Think of how terrorists have acted, and the initial response of shock by the public, and then the demise of media coverage and therefor of public attention. They hijacked planes and took hostages and it was big news. Then it wasn't. They started shooting down the planes and it was big news. Then it wasn't. They started blowing people up with bombs and it was big news.. Then it wasn't. They started killing hostages in gruesome ways and it was big news, and then it wasn't. They started killing hostages in even more gruesome ways and it was big news, and then it wasn't.. Same for school/mass shootings. Escalation is the name of the game if you want to be on the news these days. Media sensationalism is what draws certain mindsets to do certain things. It's also good business to create something you can cover, especially if your viewers want to see it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediatization_(media) |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on May 29, 2018 12:09:00 GMT -6
^^^
I'm not sure how they've been sensationalized. My general impression is that they are so horrific that it cannot be not big news.
Terrorism is a bit different, because our government actually did something to combat it. You can't get on a plane today without layers of security. So, I think that's the reason why we don't have plane crashing into buildings, not a lack of media sensationalism. The last bombing I remember is the Boston Marathon bombing, which was 5 years ago. I think it's harder to build bombs than get a gun into a school and start shooting. I think that has a bearing on the amount of bombers we have. We invaded the Middle East and have been there in force for 17 years.
My interest in the media and violence stems from my experience watching the Vietnam War violence when I was a kid. Every day there was coverage, which I am grateful for. The government lied to the public about Vietnam starting with Truman. Without the violence coming home to America from the media, I think the war would have continued. The media helped end that war imo as the vast majority of Americans recognized the bloodshed and futility of the war and decided they didn't want their kids to die there. I was one of those that benefited from that process.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2018 13:02:36 GMT -6
^^^ I'm not sure how they've been sensationalized. My general impression is that they are so horrific that it cannot be not big news. Terrorism is a bit different, because our government actually did something to combat it. You can't get on a plane today without layers of security. So, I think that's the reason why we don't have plane crashing into buildings, not a lack of media sensationalism. The last bombing I remember is the Boston Marathon bombing, which was 5 years ago. I think it's harder to build bombs than get a gun into a school and start shooting. I think that has a bearing on the amount of bombers we have. We invaded the Middle East and have been there in force for 17 years. My interest in the media and violence stems from my experience watching the Vietnam War violence when I was a kid. Every day there was coverage, which I am grateful for. The government lied to the public about Vietnam starting with Truman. Without the violence coming home to America from the media, I think the war would have continued. The media helped end that war imo as the vast majority of Americans recognized the bloodshed and futility of the war and decided they didn't want their kids to die there. I was one of those that benefited from that process. Except that there was a clear chance for the USA to end the Vietnam war in one quick action, but it would have entailed incursions into Laos/Cambodia to bomb the VC/NVA command centers and to that end, the media would have crucified the leadership about invading sovereign countries. Our government decided to let it all ride rather than be seen in the media as invaders.. Which is funny, because they essentially lost the shiny exterior later in the war and was essentially done in by the media anyway. The media IS the most powerful entity in the USA, hands down. It can dictate how our government acts, and it shapes our everyday lives. I, for one, don't wish to give my life to the media and look at everything they say with cynicism, because they've proven so many times it's only about revenue and political control. |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on May 29, 2018 15:50:13 GMT -6
^^^ I'm not sure how they've been sensationalized. My general impression is that they are so horrific that it cannot be not big news. Terrorism is a bit different, because our government actually did something to combat it. You can't get on a plane today without layers of security. So, I think that's the reason why we don't have plane crashing into buildings, not a lack of media sensationalism. The last bombing I remember is the Boston Marathon bombing, which was 5 years ago. I think it's harder to build bombs than get a gun into a school and start shooting. I think that has a bearing on the amount of bombers we have. We invaded the Middle East and have been there in force for 17 years. My interest in the media and violence stems from my experience watching the Vietnam War violence when I was a kid. Every day there was coverage, which I am grateful for. The government lied to the public about Vietnam starting with Truman. Without the violence coming home to America from the media, I think the war would have continued. The media helped end that war imo as the vast majority of Americans recognized the bloodshed and futility of the war and decided they didn't want their kids to die there. I was one of those that benefited from that process. Except that there was a clear chance for the USA to end the Vietnam war in one quick action, but it would have entailed incursions into Laos/Cambodia to bomb the VC/NVA command centers and to that end, the media would have crucified the leadership about invading sovereign countries. Our government decided to let it all ride rather than be seen in the media as invaders.. Which is funny, because they essentially lost the shiny exterior later in the war and was essentially done in by the media anyway. The media IS the most powerful entity in the USA, hands down. It can dictate how our government acts, and it shapes our everyday lives. I, for one, don't wish to give my life to the media and look at everything they say with cynicism, because they've proven so many times it's only about revenue and political control. The fact that the NVA and Viet Cong were willing to die to the last man-which would never happen in one quick action short of a nuclear holocaust- had more to do with why the Vietnam war could never be won than Walter Cronkite reporting about it. It was dead American sons that ended the war, not the media, but I will never convince you of it. So, let's agree to disagree. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 31, 2018 13:32:08 GMT -6
And people ask why I don't come back to The States to raise my daughter there! Heck, five year olds still can walk to kindergarden by themselves and we can let our kids free reign to play outside without worrying about A to Z, nobody is shooting anybody in school and the cops are not freaked out and reactive. Time will tell as even Switzerland faces new challenges with immigration and border security with a right wing that would just love enact ultra conservative policies, but at least for now all is pretty good, safe and sound. Avoiding stadiums during football matches is sound advice though. So what makes you think that we don't do that here? The news? It's a well known that the news media has been increasingly negative and sensationalist here in the USA for the last 30 years or so. It's also a well known effect that watching negativity and violence on the news makes people think that's the norm around them and they adjust their beliefs accordingly, even though the facts of reality might be totally opposite. Like, in the USA, we have the lowest amounts of firearm violence we've had in 50 years, the lowest amounts of murders, rapes and other violent crime is also at historic lows. So are racial crimes. The lower and middle classes are shrinking because they are moving to the upper class. By most factual metrics, we are the best off we've been in decades.. But if you just go by editorials and OPeds, you'd think we're about to destroy ourselves. The USA is safer and more prosperous now than it has been in 40+ years, but would you think it so based on what you see on the news? Of course not. There's multiple reasons why and they're all very primal and psychological. One is that people retain information better if it's negative information. This is because of our instinct to avoid unsafe situations. Another is that we tend to believe those of "power" more readily than peers. This is because we're inherently animals of a social hierarchy and "leadership" has instinctively meant that person has experienced more in life and can help avoid dangerous situations. So when we view the news, we instinctively see those people as "trustworthy" and as "leadership" so what they are telling us should be trusted and believed.. Yet another is that we inherently believe negative information more than positive information. Along with the first point, this is based in instinct to avoid danger and death. Still more, we tend to believe the first person that tells us things.. If a parent says something is unsafe, we typically internalize it and it becomes part of our psyche.. Even if it's completely factually wrong. Telling your kids about your political or religious beliefs typically makes them follow them as well. When you tell them that everyone is a potential murderer or abductor or rapist, that's what they'll see everywhere. You want to see all of this in action? Try an experiment if you dare.. Tell your kid there's a monster in the closet coming to eat them. You'll only have to do it once, and then you get to enjoy years of fear and nightmares no matter how many times you tell them it's not true.. Guess what? As adults we don't grow out of that fear, it just changes to something else and instead of you telling your kid about monsters in the closet, it's the news media telling you about monsters in the world. Instead of you fearing being eaten by the closet monster, you're told to fear your neighbor, immigrants, gun owners, political opposites, people of different colors than you, etc. And all of this makes you MORE likely to listen to the news media because you "trust" them as "leadership" and the negative sensationalism toys with your fears and makes you more likely to believe what they say. There's a lot in what you say that I agree with. There's also a fair bit that I disagree with quite strongly, especially the bit abouit the lower and middle classes moving to the upper class, because it conflicts strongly with my experience. It's just that the illusion of mobility to the privileged class is very strong because of the very sort of media exposure that exaggerates things like the level of violence. The same kind of propagandizing is being used for different ends.
Saying that people are "making more money" is misleading if you don't also acknowledge that money is worth way less than it was even 10 or 20 years ago.*
I'm a radical centrist. I believe that both sides are full of it in their own ways.
Thought we didn't talk about politics - or is this sociology? It's hard to tell the difference at times, if there even is any....
* - For example, in Beautiful Booming San Francisco the tech boom has caused the average income to skyrocket, so if you use that as an index everything's hunky-dory. But the flipside is that rental prices have increased to the point where adverised rental rates are only the minimum buy in on a bidding war and techies are often crowded six people to a legal two bedroom occupancy. I was forced out of the City when my rent was TRIPLED, causing me to lose my band and a network in the music community that it had taken nearly 40 years to build. Now I'm a hour away in off-hour driving which can be two or three in commute times. And I'm still paying twice what I'd been paying before. To buy even a tiny house in greater San Francisco you have to be at least a millionaire. Properties that cost $100,000 10-15 years ago are over a mil now. Those are in areas that were ghetto back then aqnd are all yuppified now. Sure, there's a lot more "money" - but it isn't worth anything. All the artist communities that made SF such a unique and desirable place are all gone.
"Progress", right. I have a song about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 31, 2018 13:51:00 GMT -6
^^^ I'm not sure how they've been sensationalized. My general impression is that they are so horrific that it cannot be not big news. Terrorism is a bit different, because our government actually did something to combat it. You can't get on a plane today without layers of security. So, I think that's the reason why we don't have plane crashing into buildings, not a lack of media sensationalism. The last bombing I remember is the Boston Marathon bombing, which was 5 years ago. I think it's harder to build bombs than get a gun into a school and start shooting. I think that has a bearing on the amount of bombers we have. We invaded the Middle East and have been there in force for 17 years. My interest in the media and violence stems from my experience watching the Vietnam War violence when I was a kid. Every day there was coverage, which I am grateful for. The government lied to the public about Vietnam starting with Truman. Without the violence coming home to America from the media, I think the war would have continued. The media helped end that war imo as the vast majority of Americans recognized the bloodshed and futility of the war and decided they didn't want their kids to die there. I was one of those that benefited from that process. Except that there was a clear chance for the USA to end the Vietnam war in one quick action, but it would have entailed incursions into Laos/Cambodia to bomb the VC/NVA command centers and to that end, the media would have crucified the leadership about invading sovereign countries. Our government decided to let it all ride rather than be seen in the media as invaders.. Which is funny, because they essentially lost the shiny exterior later in the war and was essentially done in by the media anyway. The media IS the most powerful entity in the USA, hands down. It can dictate how our government acts, and it shapes our everyday lives. I, for one, don't wish to give my life to the media and look at everything they say with cynicism, because they've proven so many times it's only about revenue and political control. The Vietnam war was about two things - rubber plantations and heroin. We never should have been there in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 31, 2018 14:04:30 GMT -6
So what makes you think that we don't do that here? The news? It's a well known that the news media has been increasingly negative and sensationalist here in the USA for the last 30 years or so. It's also a well known effect that watching negativity and violence on the news makes people think that's the norm around them and they adjust their beliefs accordingly, even though the facts of reality might be totally opposite. Like, in the USA, we have the lowest amounts of firearm violence we've had in 50 years, the lowest amounts of murders, rapes and other violent crime is also at historic lows. So are racial crimes. The lower and middle classes are shrinking because they are moving to the upper class. By most factual metrics, we are the best off we've been in decades.. But if you just go by editorials and OPeds, you'd think we're about to destroy ourselves. The USA is safer and more prosperous now than it has been in 40+ years, but would you think it so based on what you see on the news? Of course not. There's multiple reasons why and they're all very primal and psychological. One is that people retain information better if it's negative information. This is because of our instinct to avoid unsafe situations. Another is that we tend to believe those of "power" more readily than peers. This is because we're inherently animals of a social hierarchy and "leadership" has instinctively meant that person has experienced more in life and can help avoid dangerous situations. So when we view the news, we instinctively see those people as "trustworthy" and as "leadership" so what they are telling us should be trusted and believed.. Yet another is that we inherently believe negative information more than positive information. Along with the first point, this is based in instinct to avoid danger and death. Still more, we tend to believe the first person that tells us things.. If a parent says something is unsafe, we typically internalize it and it becomes part of our psyche.. Even if it's completely factually wrong. Telling your kids about your political or religious beliefs typically makes them follow them as well. When you tell them that everyone is a potential murderer or abductor or rapist, that's what they'll see everywhere. You want to see all of this in action? Try an experiment if you dare.. Tell your kid there's a monster in the closet coming to eat them. You'll only have to do it once, and then you get to enjoy years of fear and nightmares no matter how many times you tell them it's not true.. Guess what? As adults we don't grow out of that fear, it just changes to something else and instead of you telling your kid about monsters in the closet, it's the news media telling you about monsters in the world. Instead of you fearing being eaten by the closet monster, you're told to fear your neighbor, immigrants, gun owners, political opposites, people of different colors than you, etc. And all of this makes you MORE likely to listen to the news media because you "trust" them as "leadership" and the negative sensationalism toys with your fears and makes you more likely to believe what they say. There's a lot in what you say that I agree with. There's also a fair bit that I disagree with quite strongly, especially the bit abouit the lower and middle classes moving to the upper class, because it conflicts strongly with my experience. It's just that the illusion of mobility to the privileged class is very strong because of the very sort of media exposure that exaggerates things like the level of violence. The same kind of propagandizing is being used for different ends.
Saying that people are "making more money" is misleading if you don't also acknowledge that money is worth way less than it was even 10 or 20 years ago.
I'm a radical centrist. I believe that both sides are full of it in their own ways.
Thought we didn't talk about politics - or is this sociology? It's hard to tell the difference at times, if there even is any....
I had a "discussion" with one of my more socialist friends, and was forced to go "look up" the upward mobility thing since he also claimed that it was completely false.. So not one to back down, I did go "look it up" and there's actually plenty of pol-sci papers that have shown the median of each class has inched upwards in monetary class regardless of what the vocal minority might have you believe. It's just another exploit of the lower class for media talking points. Nobody is interested in helping the lowest rise up simply because they're a useful tool in politics, which I consider media a branch of these days.. but I digress from that line of thought. I also don't believe that money is "worth" something different than it's worth at the here-and-now. What's different is our expectation of what that money can obtain. People's memories get burned into their psyche and they forget that times change. Hell, everytime I take my 94 year old grandfather out for lunch he insists on leaving a tip.. Typically 50 cents to a dollar on 20$ worth of food.. Because he still lives in the 60's in his mind and tip is like 5% to him. One of the other things he's always been fond of believing is that cars only last 50K miles like they did back in the mid century, so he used to change out his car every 50K on the nose... On that note, cars don't cost more because money is worth less, They last longer, and are therefor worth more! If a car doesn't last 150K now it's a piece of shit.. Nevermind that they generally cost more because the gov mandated more safety features, so comparing the cost of a 60's sedan with no AC or airbags to a 2010's sedan with full 5 star crash ratings and a heated steering wheel isn't the best apples-to-apples comparison people can make. There's always a rational explanation why money "doesn't go as far these days" but nobody wants to hear that we simply live in a throw-away society with overhead costs that seem minuscule at any single point in time but add up over time. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 31, 2018 14:51:43 GMT -6
There's a lot in what you say that I agree with. There's also a fair bit that I disagree with quite strongly, especially the bit abouit the lower and middle classes moving to the upper class, because it conflicts strongly with my experience. It's just that the illusion of mobility to the privileged class is very strong because of the very sort of media exposure that exaggerates things like the level of violence. The same kind of propagandizing is being used for different ends.
Saying that people are "making more money" is misleading if you don't also acknowledge that money is worth way less than it was even 10 or 20 years ago.
I'm a radical centrist. I believe that both sides are full of it in their own ways.
Thought we didn't talk about politics - or is this sociology? It's hard to tell the difference at times, if there even is any....
I had a "discussion" with one of my more socialist friends, and was forced to go "look up" the upward mobility thing since he also claimed that it was completely false.. So not one to back down, I did go "look it up" and there's actually plenty of pol-sci papers that have shown the median of each class has inched upwards in monetary class. I also don't believe that money is "worth" something different than it's worth at the here-and-now. What's different is our expectation of what that money can obtain. People's memories get burned into their psyche and they forget that times change. Hell, everytime I take my 94 year old grandfather out for lunch he insists on leaving a tip.. Typically 50 cents to a dollar on 20$ worth of food.. Because he still lives in the 60's in his mind and tip is like 5% to him. One of the other things he's always been fond of believing is that cars only last 50K miles like they did back in the mid century, so he used to change out his car every 50K on the nose... On that note, cars don't cost more because money is worth less, They last longer, and are therefor worth more! If a car doesn't last 150K now it's a piece of shit.. Nevermind that they generally cost more because the gov mandated more safety features, so comparing the cost of a 60's sedan with no AC or airbags to a 2010's sedan with full 5 star crash ratings and a heated steering wheel isn't the best apples-to-apples comparison people can make. There's always a rational explanation why money "doesn't go as far these days" but nobody wants to hear that we simply live in a throw-away society with overhead costs that seem minuscule at any single point in time but add up over time. Let's put it this way - whern I first moved into SF proper in the early '80s I could buy an absolutely killer Carnitas Super Burrito for a buck. I practically lived on them. Today a comparable burrito will run you around 10 bucks. To me that means that a buck now is worth about 10 cents then. You can argue and quote stupid "papers" by academics wih an axe to grind all you want, but my stomach and my wallet tell me that practically speaking my money is worth 1/10 of what it was then. Prices of guitars track closely. Cost of rent and real estate is worse. My rent in 1980 was $200/month. When I left San Fransisco it was six thousand.
Cars? Are you kidding me? My dad bought his '57 DeSoto Fireflight as an "executive's car" (used by a manager at the dealer) in '58 and drove it to and from our summer place in Maine, 3,300 miles from Oklahoma, every year until he retired in '70 or '71. IIRC it had well over 350,000 miles on it. He had the engine (a Hemi, 344.6 cu in, 345 HP) redone ONCE in that time. I don't know what he paid for it but I'm absolutely certain that it was a small percentage of the cost of my Prius.( EDIT: Just looked it up. It would have been about $4,000. loaded, minus his discount as an "executive car". My Prius was over 40 grand.) Power steering, power brakes, AC, power seat, push button transmission, 4 barrel carb and duals, second largest trunk ever on an American car (behind the Ford hardtop convertible, which used its trunk to store the top), Top of the line DeSoto, almost as expensive as a Chrystler Imperial. Could hold as much stuff as a modern mini-van, maybe more. Dual headlight option. A compartable car today? They don't make one,. but I guess a E class Mercedes would be about right. He kept that car until he died in the mid-80s.
Cars these days are junk that falls apart. Lotsa bells and whistles, flimsy build. They don't even make steel bumpers now, just cheap plastic - unless you have to replace one, then it's very expensive plastic. They brag about how cars are safe because they crumple to protect the passenger compartment but back then cars were steel and they didn't bend.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 31, 2018 15:54:55 GMT -6
|
|
