Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the US perhaps, had I been born 100 years ago (alias 1893) I would have been the backbone of the army and I doubt I'd make it through the devastating fighting of 1914.
How is it said? perfect cannon fodder?
Had I been luck enough to survive the first six months, I would have had to survive other 4 years head-on of the most brutal war fought ever since.
No thanks.
A century ago working conditions were worse, read "The Jungle," food was often unsafe, read the same book. Life expectancy under 50. Few people even had electric lights, not even close to the electric devices we have now. Few entertainment options, less time to enjoy them. But people probably more satisfied since they didn't know anything better.
I don't think there is any argument that living conditions are better now than 100 years ago, but the quesion is whether people were more satisfied with their lives.
Level of satisfaction is the delta between what you have and what you think you deserve or what you expected.
Back in the early 70s, I had an Air Force buddy who--when the rest of us were griping about this or that little thing--was always grinning. He was totally satisfied with being an Air Force two-striper. His response was, "Man, I got an indoor job."
He was a Cajun from a little bayou town that had a single major industry. Nearly everyone in the town worked for that company in some way. The well-to-do people had indoor jobs in the offices. The working-class people had outdoor jobs on the docks.
This guy's grandfather, father, and all his uncles had been stevedores on the docks. His father came home every day beaten to a pulp, collapsing on the sofa each night. He had gone through his entire childhood and through high school expecting that same life.
Then, inexplicably, on his senior trip he wound up in the Baton Rouge USAF recruiting office, and a few months later, he was working in an air-conditioned Air Force office, sitting at a desk working on a computer (in the early 70s), wearing a tie, going home to his wife and children fresh and clean. He had been the first person in his family to have an "indoor job," and he was pretty darned satisfied with it.
I do not think people are any happier now; however, life now is so NOT comparable to 100 years ago.
Then, people had ridiculously less, with few options in anything, and their expectations were not nearly what they are today. I believe that people were stressed in their hard lives, but people are stressed out of their minds now.
But I can say this - people were a lot more resourceful back then and knew how to survive with a lot less.
I am not sure. Though I love how convenient life is now, I hate the fact of feeling like a tool and part of a system designed by the rich and government. For example, they estimate how much money you will spend in college and how much you're willing to pay for a house, car. After certain amount of years when you're almost paid off then you have to buy a new car, fix your house. The only time you kind of feel free from the system is during retirement which the age for it goes up every year. Many times I fantasized about living like the native Americans or in the middle of nowhere so I can feel alive.
I'm still waiting for the flying cars and personal jetpacks that we were promised. Actually, in terms of "things", the more you get the more you want and people don't take care of what they have today as well as folks did 100 years ago. TV and other media work against any long term satisfaction. Products are "crafted" to break down or become obsolete.
On a personal and family level I think there is a higher level of satisfaction -- mainly on the basis of security and healthcare issues. Most of my grandmother's siblings all died from TB before they reached 30. People had huge families since there was no family planning or parents assumed they would lose a couple kids to disease. Back then there was no safety net -- people had to rely on family, friends or the church to keep them going if something went horribly wrong. People worked until they got too old and then hoped their kids could support them.
Easy....look at depression and suicide rates as indicators of QOL -Quality of Life. The 50s were golden years. Other decades has several things to offer. Our society has gone mad. If I had a dollar for every time I have hear of Jennie Bru/Bruce Jenner. Guy is crazy and that is our top news story?
Men have become Nancies. For a start.
Look at our political front runners today. Insanity....
It's virtually impossible to answer since the world of today was radically different than it was 100 years ago.
Maybe not. We may be able to draw some inference by looking at suicide rates over time.
I found this graph of suicide rates for Great Britain and Wales dating from 1861 - 2007. What the graph doesn't tell us is the how much of a difference in suicide rates are due to better interventions such as early diagnosis and treatment from depression, and 24/7 suicide prevention counseling.
The only people who are miserable in this time are the ones pining for the good ol' days. Everyone else is doing fine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
