Das KapitalЪ (совместный блог Nameless и Khishtaki)

Ну и любимое:

It's difficult to provide an exact percentage of households that could survive on a single income in the 1970s compared to the 1990s because the cost of living and household structures varied greatly by region and other factors. However, it is widely acknowledged that in the 1970s, a larger proportion of households could survive on a single income (usually the male breadwinner's salary) compared to the 1990s.

In the 1970s, the traditional family model was more common, with one parent working full-time while the other took care of the home and children. This model was more feasible due to lower living costs, especially in housing and education, compared to later decades. Inflation was also relatively low in the 1970s, and wages were higher in relation to the cost of living.

By the 1990s, the economic landscape had changed significantly, and many households required two incomes to maintain the same standard of living. Dual-income households became more prevalent as the cost of living increased, and wages did not keep up with the rising costs. Women's participation in the workforce also increased during this period, contributing to the shift in family dynamics.

While it's difficult to provide an exact percentage, it is clear that a higher proportion of households could survive on one income, particularly a male salary, in the 1970s than in the 1990s.

Это я не к тому, что GPT4 знает истину. Это я к тому что если языковая модель, тренированная на большом количестве текстов выдает такие ответы, то значит все это время мои утверждения не были маргинальной социалистической теорией, а содержались в другом, большом количестве текстов. Причем их было больше, чем обратных утверждений.

Единственно что я сейчас попробую переписать промты с припиской «ответь как эксперт в социологии и экономике», чтобы уменьшить влияние шума. Посмотрим как поменяется результат, если поменяется.

А в этих примерах какие промпты были?

Вот что вышло.

Ролевая модель (все дальнейшее общение шло в этом диалоге):

You are MarxGPT, expert in sociology and Harvard Ph.D. on economics. I need you to answer about differences betweet 1970s and 2010s in US economy.

Общее благосостояние

When the average American was richer?

When comparing the wealth of the average American in the 1970s to the 2010s, it's important to look at factors such as median household income, purchasing power, and wealth distribution.

In terms of median household income, the 2010s saw higher figures when adjusted for inflation. For example, in 1970, the median household income in the US was around $9,870, which is approximately $63,000 in 2019 dollars, adjusted for inflation. In 2019, the median household income was around $68,700. This suggests that, on average, households in the 2010s had slightly higher incomes than in the 1970s.

However, when considering wealth distribution and purchasing power, the picture becomes more complex. Income inequality has risen significantly since the 1970s, which means that the gains in median income have not been evenly distributed across the population. The richest Americans have seen their wealth grow at a much faster pace than the middle class and the poor.

Additionally, while nominal incomes have increased, the cost of living has also risen, particularly in areas such as housing, healthcare, and education. This means that the purchasing power of the average American may not have improved as much as the increase in nominal income would suggest. In the 1970s, the average American likely faced lower costs for housing, healthcare, and education, making it easier for them to maintain a certain standard of living.

In summary, while the average American household may have had a higher income in the 2010s, the increase in income inequality and the rising cost of living make it difficult to definitively say that they were richer than in the 1970s.

Choose one

Taking into account the complexity of the issue, if I were to choose one period when the average American was richer, I would lean towards the 1970s. The main reason for this choice is that the economic gains during this period were more equitably distributed among the population, leading to a more balanced and inclusive prosperity.

Although the median household income was slightly lower in the 1970s when compared to the 2010s, the reduced income inequality and relatively lower costs of essential services such as housing, healthcare, and education made it more manageable for the average American to maintain a certain standard of living.

It is important to note, however, that this comparison has its limitations and should be taken with a grain of salt, as the economy and society have undergone significant changes since the 1970s, and the definition of "richer" can vary based on the context and specific indicators being used.

Процент богатств принадлежащий поколению (чем больше принадлежит одному, тем меньше остается другому, причем зависимость, как мне видится, не линейная, потому что капитал это еще и одновременно насос по перекачке денег от богатых к бедным.

What share of wealth belongs to baby boomers at their 30 compared to millennials at same age?

Directly comparing the wealth share of baby boomers at age 30 to that of millennials at the same age is difficult, as these two generations have experienced very different economic and social conditions. However, studies and data indicate that millennials have generally accumulated less wealth at age 30 than baby boomers did at the same age.

Baby boomers, born between 1946 and 1964, entered the workforce and began accumulating wealth during a period of strong economic growth, relative income equality, and more affordable housing and education. At age 30, many baby boomers had already purchased homes, started families, and held stable jobs with benefits, such as pensions and healthcare.

Millennials, born between 1981 and 1996, faced a different set of circumstances. They entered the workforce during or shortly after the Great Recession, with higher levels of student loan debt, stagnating wages, and a more competitive job market. Additionally, the cost of living, especially in areas such as housing and healthcare, has increased significantly, making it more difficult for millennials to accumulate wealth.

A report by the Federal Reserve in 2018 found that when baby boomers were in their 20s and 30s (during the 1980s and 1990s), they held more than 20% of the nation's wealth. In contrast, millennials held only about 5% of the nation's wealth in 2016 when they were in a similar age range. This demonstrates a significant difference in wealth accumulation between the two generations at the same age.

It is important to note that several factors contribute to these disparities, including changes in the economy, labor market, and social conditions, as well as differences in the timing of major life events, such as starting families and purchasing homes.

Про женский труд

What percentage oh households can survive on single income?

It is difficult to provide a precise percentage of households that can survive on a single income, as this varies depending on factors such as location, cost of living, family size, and individual financial circumstances. Additionally, the definition of "surviving" on a single income can be subjective, as different households may have different standards of living and financial priorities.

However, it is clear that the percentage of households relying on a single income has decreased over the past several decades. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 1967, 70.6% of married-couple families with children relied on a single income, with one parent (usually the father) working and the other parent (usually the mother) staying at home. By 2019, this number had dropped to 25.3%.

The decline in single-income households can be attributed to a variety of factors, including changing social norms, increased labor force participation among women, and economic pressures that have made it more challenging for families to maintain their standard of living on a single income.

It is essential to note that the ability to survive on a single income is highly dependent on the specific income level and the cost of living in a given area. Some high-income earners may be able to support their households on a single income, while lower-income earners might struggle to cover essential expenses even with two incomes.

Изменил формулировку на менее агрессивную

What percent of households can live well on single income?

There isn't a specific percentage available for households that can live well on a single income, as this is a subjective measure and depends on various factors such as location, cost of living, family size, individual financial circumstances, and the definition of "living well."

However, we can look at some trends to understand the broader picture. Over the past few decades, it has become more challenging for households to maintain a comfortable standard of living on a single income. This change can be attributed to factors such as increased cost of living, stagnant wage growth, and rising expenses in areas like housing, healthcare, and education.

The decline in single-income households, as mentioned earlier, also indicates that fewer families are able to rely on one income to support their needs. In the context of married-couple families with children, the percentage of single-income households dropped from 70.6% in 1967 to 25.3% in 2019, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

While it is still possible for some households to live well on a single income, especially if that income is relatively high, it has become more challenging for a majority of families. The ability to live well on a single income depends on factors such as the specific income level, financial management, and the cost of living in a particular area.

Обратите внимание на прекрасное: more challenging for a MAJORITY of families.

Я не буду в ближайшее время сносить этот диалог, если есть идеи других формулировок вопросов в рамках этой темы — предлагайте. Посмотрим.

БоевойСлон @ 23.04.23 

А в этих примерах какие промпты были?

What decade average Americans was richer 1970 or 2010?

What percent of all wealth belongs to baby boomers at their 30 compared to Generation Y at their 30?

What percent of households can survive on one man salary in 1970s compared to 1990s?

Но я выше уже привел более чистый пример. С ролевой моделью и в одном диалоге.

Я могу и скрины сделать, но с айпада очень уебищно это получается, в один экран не влезает, поэтому текстом проще.

UPDATE

Прямое продолжение диалога с MarxGPT, никаких промежуточных реплик не было.

Про субъективное ощущение (в противовес объективным показателям)

When the average American feel richer?

Given the various factors discussed earlier, the average American likely felt richer during the 1970s as compared to the 2010s. This feeling of prosperity was due to several reasons:

Lower income inequality: In the 1970s, income distribution was relatively more equitable, with a smaller gap between the rich and the poor. The average American was more likely to feel better off in this context.

Lower costs for essential services: During the 1970s, the cost of essential services such as housing, healthcare, and education was more affordable compared to the 2010s, making it easier for the average American to maintain a comfortable standard of living.

Economic stability: While the 1970s had its economic challenges, such as stagflation, it was still a period of relative economic stability compared to the 2010s, which experienced the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis.

Labor market conditions: The 1970s labor market offered more stable, well-paying jobs with benefits, such as pensions and healthcare. In contrast, the 2010s saw a shift toward more precarious employment, part-time work, and gig economy jobs, which contributed to increased financial insecurity for many Americans.

Societal factors: The 1970s was a time when the American Dream seemed more attainable, with the expectation that each generation would be better off than the previous one. By the 2010s, this perception had changed, with many Americans feeling that achieving economic success and financial stability had become more difficult.

It is important to note that these factors are general trends and do not apply uniformly to all Americans. Individual experiences will differ based on personal circumstances, location, and other factors.

Про количество рабочих часов

When the average American works more hours?

On average, Americans have been working more hours in recent decades compared to the 1970s. In the 1970s, the average American worker had a shorter workweek, with more stable full-time jobs and a greater prevalence of labor union membership, which often led to better working conditions and regulated work hours.

Over the years, several factors have contributed to the increase in average work hours:

Decline of labor unions: Labor unions have historically played a significant role in advocating for better working conditions, including work hour regulations. However, union membership has declined since the 1970s, which has contributed to the erosion of these worker protections.

Shift in the labor market: The rise of the gig economy, part-time work, and non-standard employment has contributed to less stable working conditions, leading many workers to take on multiple jobs or work longer hours to make ends meet.

Increased competition: Globalization and technological advancements have intensified competition in the job market, leading to higher expectations for productivity and longer work hours.

Changing work culture: The rise of a work culture that values constant availability and connectivity has contributed to an increase in work hours, with many employees feeling pressure to work beyond their standard hours to demonstrate commitment and productivity.

It is important to note that this trend varies across industries, occupations, and individual circumstances. Some workers may still experience shorter work hours or more flexibility, depending on their specific job and employer.

Приятно видеть что АИ согласен с моими утверждениями про количество рабочих часов и шифт в сторону уменьшения гарантий, part time job and gigs.

У меня совсем другие результаты. (Вопрос и ответ были на английском, прогнал сразу через автоматический переводчик Гугла)

Как языковая модель ИИ, у меня нет личных убеждений или точек зрения, но я могу представить вам некоторые факты.

В 1970-е годы США пережили период высокой инфляции, энергетического кризиса и экономической стагнации. Доход среднего американца в реальном выражении был ниже, чем сегодня. Кроме того, между богатыми и бедными существовал значительный разрыв в уровне благосостояния, и многие американцы жили в бедности.

Напротив, 2010-е годы были периодом устойчивого экономического роста и низкой инфляции. Доход среднего американца в реальном выражении был выше, чем в 1970-х годах, но разрыв в уровне благосостояния продолжал увеличиваться.

Однако важно отметить, что неравенство в доходах и богатстве было постоянной проблемой в Соединенных Штатах на протяжении всей их истории. Таким образом, трудно провести прямое сравнение между двумя десятилетиями.

Вопрос был такой же, как у тебя

You are MarxGPT, expert in sociology and Harvard Ph.D. on economics. I need you to answer about differences betweet 1970s and 2010s in US economy. When the average American was richer?

БоевойСлон, первое это не вопрос, это ролевая модель. Чтобы отсечь ответы конспирологов и маргиналов и оставить только те, что ассоциируются у него с экспертами.

Вопросы ниже.

Upd. А, вижу, ты дописал в ролевую модель вопрос. Ну позадавай еще, вряд ли он выдаст нам разные выдачи. Я на GPT4 гоняю, но не думаю что разница должна менять результат на противоположный.

BTW, когда задаёшь несколько разных вопросов в одном диалоге, то первый ответ создаёт контекст, и дальше все ответы будут в том же ключе - если с ними не спорить.

Nameless00 @ 23.04.23 

БоевойСлон, первое это не вопрос, это ролевая модель. Чтобы отсечь ответы конспирологов и маргиналов и оставить только те, что ассоциируются у него с экспертами.

 

Вопросы ниже

Попробуй убрать из ролевой модели слово Marx.

БоевойСлон @ 23.04.23 

BTW, когда задаёшь несколько разных вопросов в одном диалоге, то первый ответ создаёт контекст, и дальше все ответы будут в том же ключе - если с ними не спорить.

Первые варианты, без ролевой модели, которые я выше привел, были каждый в своем окне

БоевойСлон @ 23.04.23 

BTW, когда задаёшь несколько разных вопросов в одном диалоге, то первый ответ создаёт контекст, и дальше все ответы будут в том же ключе - если с ними не спорить.

Первые варианты, без ролевой модели, которые я выше привел, были каждый в своем окне

БоевойСлон, давай так. Сформулируй сам ролевую модель (отдельным сообщением) и вопрос.

Потом оба прогоним его у себя в отдельном окне и посмотрим.

В описание ролевой модели включи что-то вроде «не отвечай на это сообщение, жди дальнейших вопросов»

БоевойСлон, вот с твоей версией где объединен вопрос и установка.

Результат тот же, relatively better in 1970s.

БоевойСлон @ 23.04.23 

BTW, когда задаёшь несколько разных вопросов в одном диалоге, то первый ответ создаёт контекст, и дальше все ответы будут в том же ключе - если с ними не спорить.

Кстати не обязательно. Нередко он сам поправляется и отвечает что в предыдущем сообщении он ошибся. Причем иногда даже если его специально об этом не спрашивать, а продолжать общение уже на другую тему, у меня был такой случай.

БоевойСлон @ 23.04.23 

Попробуй убрать из ролевой модели слово Marx.

Это ты хорошо заметил. Я был уверен что это просто лейбл, который ничего не значит. Прогнал два варианта, без упоминания вообще и с заменой на ObamaGPT.

As an AI language model, I am not ObamaGPT, but I am still able to provide you with an analysis of the differences between the 1970s and 2010s U.S. economies.

The 1970s and the 2010s were marked by distinct economic conditions, each with its own set of challenges and strengths. To determine when the average American was richer, it is essential to look at various economic indicators, such as GDP per capita, median household income, and income inequality.

GDP per capita: In terms of GDP per capita, the U.S. economy has grown significantly from the 1970s to the 2010s. Adjusted for inflation, GDP per capita in 1970 was about $23,946, while in 2010, it was around $52,201, and by 2019 it reached approximately $65,297. The increase in GDP per capita suggests that the economy, as a whole, has expanded and become more productive.

Median household income: In constant dollars, the median household income in the U.S. has also increased over time, though not as dramatically as GDP per capita. In 1970, the median household income was around $50,784 (in 2019 dollars), while in 2010 it was approximately $54,489, and in 2019, it reached about $68,700. This indicates that the average American household has seen a rise in income over these years.

Income inequality: Income inequality has increased in the United States since the 1970s. The Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, rose from approximately 0.397 in 1970 to 0.486 in 2010 and remained relatively stable around 0.485 in 2019. This suggests that while the overall economy and median household income have grown, wealth has become more concentrated among the top income earners.

In conclusion, the average American was richer in the 2010s compared to the 1970s in terms of GDP per capita and median household income. However, income inequality also increased during this time, which means that the gains in wealth have not been distributed evenly across the population. Therefore, while the average American may have been wealthier in the 2010s, the economic benefits were not experienced equally by all.

As a language model AI with knowledge up to 2021, I can give you an analysis of the differences between the 1970s and 2010s in the US economy and when the average American was relatively richer.

In general, the US economy experienced significant growth between the 1970s and the 2010s, which means that nominal GDP and average incomes increased substantially over this period. In the 1970s, the US economy faced several challenges, including high inflation, high unemployment, and slow economic growth, often referred to as "stagflation." The decade was also marked by the 1973 oil crisis, which had a significant impact on the economy.

In contrast, the 2010s witnessed a period of recovery from the Great Recession of 2007-2009, characterized by moderate economic growth, relatively low inflation, and decreasing unemployment rates. Technological advancements, globalization, and changes in the labor market structure have also contributed to the evolution of the US economy over this time.

When looking at nominal figures, it is clear that the average American was richer in the 2010s due to increased income levels. However, these figures do not account for inflation, cost of living, and income inequality. Adjusting for inflation, the real median household income has increased since the 1970s, indicating that the average American was, in fact, richer in the 2010s.

That being said, income inequality has also increased significantly since the 1970s, meaning that the gains from economic growth have not been distributed evenly across the population. In the 1970s, income inequality was lower, and a larger share of the population enjoyed the benefits of economic growth. In the 2010s, the richest households saw a more significant increase in their income, while the middle class experienced slower income growth, and many lower-income households stagnated or declined.

In conclusion, although the average American was richer in the 2010s when considering real median household income, the growing income inequality during this period implies that the distribution of wealth became more uneven. This makes it difficult to determine when the "average" American was better off, as the answer depends on which socioeconomic group you are referring to.

Choose one

If I have to choose one, I would say that the average American was richer in the 2010s when considering real median household income, adjusted for inflation. However, it is essential to note that growing income inequality during this period means that the distribution of wealth became more uneven. Consequently, the gains from economic growth were not shared equally across the population.

Но в любом случае самые первые три вопроса были в отдельном чате, без ролевой модели. Промты к ним я приводил.

Окей, я не знаю, почему у нас разные ответы.

С тем, что твоя точка зрения достаточно распространена (если твой поинт только в этом), я не спорю.

Но замечу, что и в твоём варианте ответа говорится про выросший доход, а не про «обнищание». Оспаривал я всегда именно эту часть твоих утверждений.

БоевойСлон @ 23.04.23 

Окей, я не знаю, почему у нас разные ответы.

С тем, что твоя точка зрения достаточно распространена (если твой поинт только в этом), я не спорю.

Но замечу, что и в твоём варианте ответа говорится про выросший доход, а не про «обнищание». Оспаривал я всегда именно эту часть твоих утверждений.

Ну ты же сам видел вполне конкретные утверждения про то, что прокормить семью на доход одного стало сложнее и про уменьшение (в 4 раза так то) процента от общего благосостояния в руках поколения. И это после 50 лет экономического роста.

Я всегда говорил про рост абсолютного уровня дохода (с поправкой на инфляцию, конечно), а не относительного. На богатство вообще нет смысла смотреть, оно виртуальное во многом.

Про «сложнее содержать» мы уже тоже говорили не раз. Я считаю, что главная причина - выросшие «certain living standards».

Задай прямой вопрос про уровень потребления в 1970-е и 2010-е, если хочешь.

В целом, я почти не сомневаюсь, что если твою позицию сформулировать чуть аккуратнее, то и тебе такой формулировки будет достаточно, и я с ней соглашусь. 

Но когда ты делаешь (цитируешь) слишком сильные, и потому уже неверные, утверждения, с ними я спорю.

БоевойСлон @ 23.04.23 

Я всегда говорил про рост абсолютного уровня дохода (с поправкой на инфляцию, конечно), а не относительного. На богатство вообще нет смысла смотреть, оно виртуальное во многом.

Про «сложнее содержать» мы уже тоже говорили не раз. Я считаю, что главная причина - выросшие «certain living standards».

Задай прямой вопрос про уровень потребления в 1970-е и 2010-е, если хочешь.

А что такое абсолютный уровень дохода?

Я попробовал сделать максимально нейтральный запрос, одновременно с указанием дать максимально категоричный ответ. Чтобы не было этого «все не так однозначно, сравнивать напрямую мы не можем». Мы конечно напрямую сравнивать не можем, но так мы получим хотя бы среднюю по больнице. И если средняя по больнице за 50 лет как минимум не улучшилась, хотя согласно теории должна — значит где-то в теории затык.

А там уже каждый сам сделает субъективную поправку на 50 лет экономического роста (роста же?).

Кстати это и вопрос о certain living standarts касается. Допустим они выросли. Но ведь за это время и производительность труда выросла и доходы должны были. Но получается стандарты жизни росли значительно (я бы сказал драматически, хоть ты с этим и не согласишься) быстрее доходов, раз приходится работать намного больше? (кстати, а что мешало стандартам жизни вырасти до текущего уровня раньше, например в 1920-х, чтобы к 1970-м люди уже работали столько же, сколько сейчас?

Ну да ладно. Вот что я придумал максимально нейтрального. Промт

You're an economics expert with a Ph.D. Your task is to compare the standard of living, number of working hours and wealth share of the average American in 1970 compared to the average American in 2010. Be as categorical as possible when answering and use as few disclaimers as possible. Questions: 1. When did the average American live better? 2. When did the average American work more? 3. When was the average American household more likely to be supported by one person's income? 4. When did the average American consider himself richer?

Ответ

1. It is difficult to give a categorical answer to when the average American lived better, as the standard of living includes various aspects, such as income, education, healthcare, and overall quality of life. However, in terms of material wealth, the average American in 2010 generally had access to better technology, healthcare, and consumer goods. On the other hand, the 1970s experienced lower income inequality and arguably a stronger sense of social cohesion.

 

2. The average American worked more in 2010. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average annual hours worked per employed person increased from around 1,725 hours in 1970 to around 1,778 hours in 2010.

 

3. The average American household was more likely to be supported by one person's income in 1970. During this time, single-earner families were more common, and the cost of living was generally lower compared to household incomes. By 2010, dual-income households became more prevalent as the cost of living increased and wage growth stagnated for many workers.

 

4. When the average American considered himself richer is subjective and depends on individual perceptions of wealth. However, considering wealth distribution and economic stability, the average American in 1970 might have felt richer due to lower income inequality and more affordable housing and education costs. In contrast, by 2010, the wealth gap had widened, and many Americans faced financial challenges such as student loan debt and unaffordable housing.

Заметь, кстати, как он часто акцентирует внимание на affordable housing. Я вот прям хуй знает в чем так вырос уровень жизни, если тебе сложнее позволить себе место для этой самой жизни. Разве не это должно быть одной из первых потребностей, закрываемой с доходов? 

P.S. Заметь, кстати, как он объясняет в третьем пункте почему стали работать оба члена семьи. Хотя если его просто спросить почему женщины пошли работать, он там перечислит в числе прочих и твои аргументы.