Posted on 05/08/2017 8:00:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Having bestowed the presidency on a candidate who described their country as a hellhole besieged by multitudes trying to get into it, Americans need an antidote for social hypochondria. Fortunately, one has arrived from Don Boudreaux, an economist at George Mason Universitys Mercatus Center and proprietor of the indispensable blog Cafe Hayek.
He has good news: You are as rich as John D. Rockefeller. Richer, actually.
Some historians estimate that on September 29, 1916, a surge in the price of Rockefellers shares of the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey made him Americas first billionaire. Others say he never reached this milestone and that Henry Ford was the first. Never mind. If Rockefeller was the first, his billion was worth $23 billion in todays dollars. Boudreaux asks if you would accept this bargain: You can be as rich as Rockefeller was in 1916 if you consent to live in 1916.
Boudreaux says that if you had Rockefellers riches back then, you could have had a palatial home on Fifth Avenue, another overlooking the Pacific, and a private island if you wished. Of course, going to and from the coasts in your private but un-air-conditioned railroad car would be time-consuming and less than pleasant. And communicating with someone on the other coast would be a time-consuming chore.
Commercial radio did not arrive until 1920, and 1916 phonographs would lacerate 2017 sensibilities, as would 1916s silent movies. If in 1916 you wanted Thai curry, chicken vindaloo, or Vietnamese pho, you could go to the phone hanging on your wall and ask the operator (direct dialing began in the 1920s) to connect you to restaurants serving those dishes. The fact that there were no such restaurants would not bother you because in 1916 you had never heard of those dishes, so you would not know what you were missing.
If in 1916 you suffered from depression, bipolar disorder, a sexually transmitted disease, or innumerable other ailments treatable in 2017, you also would not know that you were missing antibiotics and the rest of modern pharmacology. And dont even think about getting a 1916 toothache. You can afford state-of-the-art 1916 dentures, and probably will need them. Your arthritic hips and knees? Hobble along until you cannot hobble any more, then buy a wheelchair. Birth control in 1916 will be primitive, unreliable, and not conducive to pleasure.
As a 1916 billionaire, you would be materially worse off than a 2017 middle-class American; an unhealthy 1916 billionaire would be much worse off than an unhealthy 2017 American of any means.
You could enjoy a smattering of early jazz, but rock n roll is decades distant, and Netflix and Google even more so. Your pastimes would be limited, but you could measure the passage of time on the finest Swiss watch. It, however, would be less accurate than todays Timex or smartphone.
As a 1916 billionaire, you would be materially worse off than a 2017 middle-class American; an unhealthy 1916 billionaire would be much worse off than an unhealthy 2017 American of any means. Intellectually, your 1916 range of cultural choices would be paltry compared with todays. And your moral tranquility might be disturbed by the contrast between your billionaires life and that of the normal American.
In 2015, a Bureau of Labor Statistics paper described the life of workers in 1915. More than half (52.4 percent) of the 100 million Americans were younger than 25, life expectancy at birth was 54.5 years (today, 78.8), and fewer than 5 percent of Americans were 65 or older. One in ten babies died in the first year of life (today, one in 168). A large majority of births were not in hospitals (today, fewer than 1 percent).
In 1915, only about 14 percent of people ages 1417 were in high school, an estimated 18 percent ages 25 and older had completed high school, and nearly 75 percent of women working in factories had left school before eighth grade. There were four renters for every homeowner, partly because mortgages (usually for just five to seven years) required down payments of 4050 percent of the purchase price.
Fewer than one-third of homes had electric lights. Small electric motors the first Hoover vacuum cleaner appeared in 1915 were not yet lightening housework. Iceboxes, which were the norm until after World War II, were all that 1915 had: General Motors Frigidaire debuted in 1918.
So, thank Boudreaux for making you think about this: How large would your net worth have to be to get you to swap the life you are living in hellhole America for what that money could buy in 1916?
George Will is a Pulitzer Prizewinning syndicated columnist. © 2017 Washington Post Writers Group
Who did not know these things? He’s essentially being Captain Obvious.........................
I agree- ridiculous premise.
He never mentioned music and theater either: the opera, plays, symphonies, jazz etc. And a billionaire could hire them to perform in his home or buy out the place for a night.
And telegrams were available if you had no phone.
Clearly he never watched Downton Abbey- I know it was England, but they had wealthy Americans in the story as well. They didn’t look like they were suffering much if at all IMHO.
This reads like a high school term paper; barely researched and written because he had to write something!
Otherwise titled: Why You Should Be Happy In Your Peasantry
EXACTLY my thought as I read this!!!
What the heck does George Will know about middle-class living?
He sounds like Col. Saito (Bridge on the River Kwai) -
“...be happy in your work...”
Different times, different standards. No Netflix, no tv, no radio.
But there were lots of theaters, circuses, church activities and socials, close knit families, long novels, concerts in parks, etc. There was a social life when you weren’t working. That was the generation of my parents/aunts/uncles. I looked up my relatives in the 1920 census. Most were (as Will states) boarders, renting rooms from other folks. My aunt who graduated from college in 1910 helped her siblings obtain rooms and later helped them with mortgages to buy homes since it was virtually impossible to get one from a bank during the Depression.
All of them had complaints about the hard work on farms growing up and about making a living during the Depression, but they survived.
RE: Two words:
Evelyn.
Nesbit.
His point is invalid.
____________________________
Remind us again why she is relevant to the topic at hand? All I know is she had the trial of the century.
RE: No,not this time.Yes,it’s true that this piece isn’t of vital importance but it’s interesting (to me,at least) to ponder the points made.
Some people at FR are “all or nothing” kind of thinkers. If someone disappoints them, they would never take anything that person says seriously again, even if he tells us that the Sun Rises in the East.
Thurston Howell was a billionaire before the crash. Then he was just a millionaire. (According to Lovey.)
Personally, I would have been dead at 27 (appendix) or crippled at 40 (heel spurs), or dead again at 68 (parathyroid). If through some miracle I survived those things, I would have rotten teeth and be subsisting on gruel.
Even the smallest medical issue back then could lead to death. Calvin Coolidge’s son died in 1924 at the age of 16, while his farther was President. The cause: a blister he got on his foot playing tennis became infected. Think about that...the best medical care available and he dies from a blister on his foot.
All the money in the world could not persuade me to want to go back in time.
Reminds me of the joke:
Millionaire: “I attribute my being a millionaire to my wife”
Interviewer: “What were you before that?”
Millionaire: “ A Billionaire”
Imagine the quality of life another 100 years from now, if you’re an optimist.
Thx ...
Rockefeller lived to be 98. He died in one of his several mansions—the one located right on the beach in FL. It’s still a showcase.
[Anybody who thinks Rockefeller sweltered in that mansion needs to consider the sea and land breezes. At the edge of the Atlantic they blow upwards of 22 hrs a day, every day, and are very pleasant.]
I would be the richest man if I had electricity and A/C on a hot muggy day!
I recall reading an essay on medieval times in which the author (Aldous Huxley?) opined that peasants had a healthier existence than the nobles living in castles principally because the castles were drafty and hard to heat, compared to the small shacks occupied by peasants, which were more comfortable and easier to heat. The nobles were subject to more colds and pneumonia according to this line of thinking. Make of that what you will. :D
Is fast food and TV, movies, and professional sports just replacements for bread and the circus?
We may live longer now, but are we healthier?(Both physically and morally)
Just to nit-pick, it was/is the .45 Colt/or .45 Long Colt. (Colt 45 = malt liquor)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.