1000 years ago the number of people on earth was a small fraction of today's number, so apparently they managed to live in a lot worse conditions with much larger slices.
Printable View
Sorry to interrupt our reading.
yep, all of them lived worse than the contemporary analogues. and the same is true for any other part of the socioeconomic curve compared to the modern day counterpart.
it is not necessary to go 1000 years ago, I picked that number because the comparison would be obvious, but if you prefer compare your own standard of living with a person on the same level in the social hierarchy say 70 years ago and you probably will notice the same.
the things you have to worry about are quite different from the things they had to worry about.
Well nobody has to worry about a change in that.
As long as the financial interest system constantly pulls the money towards a select few, it will stay as it is. For the price of occasional breakdowns of the markets to clean up with government's debts. :hmmm:
This can't be done since the US is also one of the largest countries. The other social democratic countries that do very well also are a lot smaller. Thus the comparison wouldn't work. The Netherlands is VERY well off for instance....but we're only 16 million people on a piece of land the 1/6th the size of Utah. So it's not really a fair comparison is it? Although if you would compare them per head (per person on avarage) I'm pretty sure a few could be named.
oh there are some stats here
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._the_world.gif
This one is quite remarkable.
It would be apart from the fact that "europe" is not a country. Neither is "Africa" or "Asia" And all those places are made up of both wealthy and poverty stricken countries.
Europe for instance is made up out of both Germany, and Sweden (both wealthy) and The Czech Republic and Poland (both poor)
So the average is pulled down.