We are so spoiled.

johnson1010 · Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:24 pm

The other day i was looking at an empty jam jar.

It occured to me, that nobody in history had ever had a jar as good as that. No egyptian pharoh, no european king. And it was nothing but garbage to us.

What a cargo cultist wouldn't give to have a jar like that.

...

i don't even like honey...

http://www.wimp.com/junglefoods/

geo · Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:41 pm

Sorry, I'm going to take over this thread.

Check out this graph that shows the bottom 5 percent of the American income distribution is still richer than 68 percent of the world’s inhabitants. We are so spoiled indeed.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/ ... have-nots/

geo · Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:59 pm

The honey video is really cool. Despite the hard work, the honey is a great prize in terms of its easy calories. We are evolutionarily designed to gorge on fats and sugar whenever possible which is why we're so fat because these things are so readily available. What's a jar of honey cost at the grocery store? Not much.

Saffron · Sun Feb 06, 2011 9:29 pm


	geo wrote: Sorry, I'm going to take over this thread. Check out this graph that shows the bottom 5 percent of the American income distribution is still richer than 68 percent of the world’s inhabitants. We are so spoiled indeed.

This statement is true, but without being put into proper context it doesn't tell the whole story. Relative Poverty is an important concept when talking about poverty. In order to fully understand we need to know how much money it takes to buy food and housing in each of the countries compared to the US or what percent of income is spent on food and housing. I do agree Americans are spoiled, but I think we need to be careful in making comparisions of poverty and standards of living. How people feel or how happy or stressed they are because of being poor varies from place to place.

geo · Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:56 am

Saffron wrote:


	geo wrote: Check out this graph that shows the bottom 5 percent of the American income distribution is still richer than 68 percent of the world’s inhabitants. We are so spoiled indeed.

This statement is true, but without being put into proper context it doesn't tell the whole story. Relative Poverty is an important concept when talking about poverty. In order to fully understand we need to know how much money it takes to buy food and housing in each of the countries compared to the US or what percent of income is spent on food and housing. I do agree Americans are spoiled, but I think we need to be careful in making comparisions of poverty and standards of living. How people feel or how happy or stressed they are because of being poor varies from place to place.

Thanks, Saffron. Yes, I'm sure this is an oversimplification. I didn't look at the data very closely to see how wealth is measured. But as you say, even in the U.S. what constitutes a "good" salary changes pretty drastically by location. For instance, cost of living in New York City is probably much higher than where I live. I can imagine that cost of living is much more modest in many places outside the U.S. Still, I suspect Americans have a great deal of material wealth compared to the rest of the world. Probably a more meaningful statistic to look at would be health and life span.

Edit: My apologies to johnson for derailing his thread.

geo · Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:23 am

I should read these things I'm posting. This chart does, in fact, take into account the differences in cost of living.

"The household income numbers are all converted into international dollars adjusted for equal purchasing power, since the cost of goods varies from country to country. In other words, the chart adjusts for the cost of living in different countries, so we are looking at consistent living standards worldwide."

"The graph shows inequality within a country, in the context of inequality around the world."

"Were looking at the entire bottom chunk of Americans, some of whom make as much as $6,700; that may be extremely poor by American standards, but that amounts to a relatively good standard of living in India, where about a quarter of the population lives on $1 a day."

DWill · Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:34 am

It's ironic that the obesity epidemic is supposed to affect the poor disproportionately. Where severe poverty occurs, the calories aren't even available and people don't get fat, so that supports the conclusion geo is presenting. Health experts say that the poor tend to be fat because the cheapest food contains the most fats and sugars. Maybe, but I'm not convinced. Much junk food is actually expensive by the pound. I think it has something to do with lack of easy access to better food, but mostly it's a matter of culture, education, and social class.

lady of shallot · Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:55 am

Today's paper had an article about Walmart decreasing the cost of fruits/veggies but the article pointed out that that probably will not affect the popularity or actual eating of these more healthy foods.

I am a child of the depression and the way we lived and what we had would be considered very deprived in comparison to the way my grandchildren live. We were fed, clothed, housed (by my fathers employment which was less skilled than his education had prepared him for) Rarely had a car or phone (let alone a cell phone, computer, I pad etc. etc.) never a trip or meal out, no lessons, sports or other entertainment events.

However many of our children do very, very well economically. And they did it through their own efforts and those of their parents. Becoming educated and working very hard. Whenever I read about the terrible inequalities of wealth in this country I think of those people who have made fortunes for themselves and came from basically nothing economically. People like Oprah, Martha Stewart, and even the children of me and my siblings.

Back to Johnson's original post about the jam jar. I agree that a jam jar is a beautiful thing and I keep them to reuse (being a depression baby) However Johnson you are wrong about an Egyptian pharoh not having anything like that. We recently attended the King Tut exhibit and were greatly impressed by the beauty, craftsmanship, artistry, utility, ingenuity of the many items in that exhibit. I remember most the caning still in perfect condition that made the seat of a chair. That caning today would have to be done in the exact same way. Each strand individually woven!

johnson1010 · Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:54 pm

http://www.wimp.com/racetide/

some people have to work for their sea-food.

geo · Sat Feb 19, 2011 5:20 pm

Wow, that is amazing. Very claustrophobic towards the end.

Squelch · Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:41 pm

In my own experience, very few who live in poverty would expect us to be ashamed of being comfortable and well-fed.

I was in Ethopia in about 1986 and had the "opportunity" to experience some of the most extreme poverty imaginable first-hand and to taste it for myself. I don't recommend it. But although I was young I remember it very vividly. One of the things I remember most was a guy who we asked about the schools, libraries and churches the aid organisations were setting up - wouldn't they rather have food, we asked? His response was simple but eloquent: "only a fool thinks a starving man thinks only of his stomach".

lady of shallot · Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:49 pm

Were you in the peace corps?

Squelch · Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:54 am


	lady of shallot wrote: Were you in the peace corps?

I had to look up what the peace corps is - I'm not american!

No, we were there visiting friends who were working in the country and who had been there for many years.

lady of shallot · Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:19 am

Oh, sorry. I thought you were.

johnson1010 · Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:14 pm

http://www.wimp.com/menlions/

We would eat less red meat if we had to face down a pride of hungry lions at a 5-to-one disadvantage.

Unless we had balls the size of mars, like these three guys.

Forum rules

We are so spoiled. Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!