> > The previous comment should have made it obvious it was NOT within the reach
> > of the "average" American. First of all, it was over a month's pay for the
> > average American, it was equivalent to six months' groceries for a family of
> > four, and you could get a refrigerator or a washer, neither of which were
> > routine discretionary expenditures for the "average" American of that time.
> > That was during and immediately after the Korean war, when a 4-bedroom house
> > on a 1/4-acre lot cost $4600. That same house, now, in California would
> > cost you $4600 a month to rent. People's attitudes about what's important
> > enough to spend your money on have changed considerably.
> Don't you mean YOUR attitudes, Richard? Get this through your thick
> skull: YOU do NOT represent the mass thought process of humans. Time and
> again you insist on applying your OWN personal values and opinions upon
> the rest of the world when you make an assertion, and fail to realize
> there are 6 billion people out there with ideas differing from your own.
Hey, Sallam, don't forget to considere the possibility that these
5 to 6 Billions (maybe minus 0.2 Billions US citicens) might have
the same opinions as Dick - just as a possibility.
> > $300 was not an expenditure an "average" American would consider lightly in
> > 1952. That was the year I came to this country. There was an election
> > between Adlai E. Stevenson (Democrat) and Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican).
> > It was BEFORE the first test of a hydrogen bomb.
> Sure, but the point is that it could CONCEIVABLY have been afforded by
> anyone who wished to save their money for 6 months so they could collect
> the parts together to build one. Just because YOU would not have chosen
> to build one does not mean everyone else in the world would have made that
> same choice. Everyone on the planet does not share your values, contrary
> to your belief and opinion.
In fact, both of you are part right. I can only add my personal
experiance, where I put out almost 8 times of my monthly payment
(as First Private) to getn an naked Apple ][ (Even with my later,
first civilian Job it would have been almost 2.5 wages), and I had
to take a bank loan - but I did it - I _wanted_ a _big_ computer
(before that I had a selfbuild 2650 system and a KIM) - So, a
500 USD system might have been possible even in the 50s - if
realy intersted - but 500 USD was _way_ to low.
> 1/10th of the average American's yearly salary is about $3,000 these days
> (thereabouts) and I know plenty of people who would save up that amount to
> buy a righteous computer with all the trimmings in our time. So $300 out
> of a $3,600 yearly salary (or whatever) back then is not only possible but
> very do-able.
There are still differences Sallam - not only numerical - the amount
of free usable money is higher, not only in numbers than back then
(see also Alisons calculation)
> > People weren't crazy then as they are now . . . and all the loose nuts
> > hadn't yet learned to run to California.
> Whatever.
Must be true, Now I'm able to run for California
(and I'll do it again for VCF3.0 :).
Gruss
H.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Received on Fri Apr 23 1999 - 11:29:14 BST