←back to thread

How to live on $432 a month in America

(shagbark.substack.com)
526 points cactusplant7374 | 2 comments | 23 May 25 16:40 UTC | HN request time: 0.02s | source
Show context
keiferski ◴[23 May 25 18:58 UTC] No.44075483[source]▶
Existing on the living standards of say, 1945, or even 1960, is very possible and allows you to make less money and presumably work on what you truly care about.

But that means you don’t get the latest iPhone, cook basic foods at home and rarely eat out, repair your own appliances, and so on. The hardest part, I think, would be dealing with the social expectations of society at large. 1960 living standards were universal in 1960, but nowadays you’re fighting the entirety of Western marketing machine.

replies(8): >>44075538 #>>44075546 #>>44075623 #>>44075650 #>>44075658 #>>44075896 #>>44077691 #>>44083661 #
jedimastert ◴[23 May 25 19:11 UTC] No.44075650[source]▶
> 1960 living standards were universal in 1960

Universal for whom?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

replies(1): >>44076017 #
keiferski ◴[23 May 25 19:50 UTC] No.44076017[source]▶
I wrote that to imply that the living standards of 1960 were normal in 1960, but wouldn’t be normal today. Don’t over-focus on the word universal and miss the point I was making.
replies(1): >>44076314 #
jedimastert ◴[23 May 25 20:23 UTC] No.44076314[source]▶
And don't miss the point that I'm making, which is that the standards of living in 1960 for some people was built on the back of exploiting others.
replies(1): >>44076368 #
1. keiferski ◴[23 May 25 20:33 UTC] No.44076368{3}[source]▶
Sigh. Again, that has nothing to do with my comment. My point was that living standards at X point in the past were normal for the time but aren’t normal for today. 1960 was a random year I picked. The point is that if one can manage to live “behind the times” materially, life is cheaper.
replies(1): >>44076840 #
2. ◴[23 May 25 21:35 UTC] No.44076840[source]▶