EVERYTHING Too $$$ Now

[AxelHeyst]

"Change is needed" doesn't necessarily imply "we must revert to small bands and pretend we don't exist in civilization".

My take on what Ego said is that it's better to apply discernment and wisdom and thoughtfulness to feedback such as depression anxiety etc rather than just auto-blunt it with a six pack of IPA and a deep dish pizza (my numbing agents of choice). (The discernment etc is also critical for determining if medication *is* appropriate. I suspect I'm much less anti-medication than Ego is, but probably all of us agree that discernment and thoughtfulness ought to play a role somewhere?)

Better use the memetic/cultural/language developments over the past 5000-150000 than more archaic parts of the human brain space.

Yes of course? Let's use those things and not b33rs, blunts, and inappropriate overmedication. e.g. we seem to be biologically unsuited for chronic low level stress. When we notice it, it's probably better to make lifestyle adjustments wisely (ahem ERE) than what I did for a decade, the Racer 5's and Rotten City pizzas by the slice.

[jacob]

Not sure if the link below has the UberEats delivery fee built-in (there's a separate delivery charge added on final check-out), but the great offending Rock That Burger Menu reveals itself :

Point being that seeing this as an occasional treat or something you could make yourself [with a close to minimum wage bit of effort] is a better mind/happiness-space than seeing it as struggle or an entitlement of how everybody deserves to eat all the time.

I recommend reading:
https://www.amazon.com/Affluenza-Overco ... 609949277/
https://www.amazon.com/Luxury-Fever-Wei ... 0691146934

[suomalainen]

Are these the only ways to reduce taxable income:

Ask for a pay cut.

[jacob]

"Change is needed" doesn't necessarily imply "we must revert to small bands and pretend we don't exist in civilization".

But this is basically where relying on gut-instinct directs humans. In-group vs out-group. Fighting over status, territory, and procreation.

My take on what Ego said is that it's better to apply discernment and wisdom and thoughtfulness to feedback such as depression anxiety etc rather than just auto-blunt it with a six pack of IPA and a deep dish pizza (my numbing agents of choice). (The discernment etc is also critical for determining if medication *is* appropriate. I suspect I'm much less anti-medication than Ego is, but probably all of us agree that discernment and thoughtfulness ought to play a role somewhere?)

I'll accept that with a but ...

It means (assumes that) all humans would be able to use their gut-feeling that something feels wrong to adopt a thoughtful neo-cortex (or above) level response and coordinate a change at a civilizational level. (Hence all the talking about human ego/spiritual development.)

Yes of course? Let's use those things and not b33rs, blunts, and inappropriate overmedication. e.g. we seem to be biologically unsuited for chronic low level stress. When we notice it, it's probably better to make lifestyle adjustments wisely (ahem ERE) than what I did for a decade, the Racer 5's and Rotten City pizzas by the slice.

And insofar people can't "stop to think instead of going with their gut" ... maybe consider that other outcomes such as curbing the mismatch between impulse and reality are more likely. The general use of (over)medication may very well be the systems way of putting a brake of innate tendencies that don't fit the world humanity is [for the most part] unconsciously evolving.

[chenda]

His statement is true about everywhere on the planet outside of Asia.

Why is Asia easier ?

[AxelHeyst]

But this is basically where relying on gut-instinct directs humans. In-group vs out-group. Fighting over status, territory, and procreation.

I'm not seeing where anyone is recommending relying on gut-instinct, is the thing. Listening to and incorporating gut-instinct into one's Orientation, yes. But giving it the keys to the family sedan? Certainly not.

It means (assumes that) all humans would be able to use their gut-feeling that something feels wrong to adopt a thoughtful neo-cortex (or above) level response and coordinate a change at a civilizational level. (Hence all the talking about human ego/spiritual development.)

I don't see how cautioning against numbing agents assumes what you're saying it does. I don't think temperance is going to save the world. "Hey, folks should be cautious about reaching for the bottle as a means of self-medicating" isn't a suggested framework for effecting beneficial civilization evolution. It's just what I tell myself and my friends when I see them dipping into potentially self-destructive behavior patterns.

...The general use of (over)medication may very well be the systems way of putting a brake of innate tendencies that don't fit the world humanity is [for the most part] unconsciously evolving.

I certainly think this is true.

[theanimal]

I'll accept that with a but ...

It means (assumes that) all humans would be able to use their gut-feeling that something feels wrong to adopt a thoughtful neo-cortex (or above) level response and coordinate a change at a civilizational level. (Hence all the talking about human ego/spiritual development.)

I mean isn't that what happens? Someone makes a change in their diet/spending/stops drinking/starts exercising sees massive results for the better, then a minority becomes a mouthpiece for whatever cause they are now fighting for. "If only everyone knew what I know/did what I did..." "You can do this too, just do x, y, z" And this kind of thing doesn't happen because instead of taking action people numb themselves with their opiate of choice.

Changemongers thus have four variables to play with.

Increase dissatisfaction with present situation.
Strengthen vision of future situation.
Build a plan to get from the present to the future.
Lower the cost of the plan.
https://earlyretirementextreme.com/fou- ... hange.html

I see @Ego saying that number one is being circumvented. They are dissatisfied with their life and, instead of taking a moment to think why and contemplate other options or a new vision of a future situation, they treat the symptom.

[AxelHeyst]

I mean isn't that what happens?

It's what happens to some people, but not many, and not enough to pin one's hopes on the trajectory of civilization. (Jacob did use the phrase "all humans"...)

I think there is a mismatch of scales going on here. Jacob is talking/thinking at the Hari Seldon scale (yes?) and Ego et al are talking at... not the Hari Seldon scale.

[7Wannabe5]

"Any urge will pass if you wait 20 minutes." is certainly an observation of great utility, but I wouldn't want to be bound in monogamous contract with anybody who made it the entirety of their philosophy

That said, status-seeking is almost entirely weak need as opposed to strong want, and weak need is also associated with reactivity while strong want is more associated with responsiveness. All pleasures, no matter how cerebral they may seem on the surface, are ultimately libidinal.

[jacob]

I think there is a mismatch of scales going on here. Jacob is talking/thinking at the Hari Seldon scale (yes?) and Ego et al are talking at... not the Hari Seldon scale.

Indeed! Thanks for seeing this. I suspect that is a big part of the whole ERE1vsERE2 kerfuffle and what we should/ought talk or not talk debate on this forum is about. ERE2 concepts are about as hard to show to anyone not-ERE2-yet as ERE1 concepts were to show to anyone not-ERE1-yet was 15 years ago. ERE1 was a difference of conventions and values. ERE2 is a difference of scaling. I remain semi-optimistic about being able to change some minds and hearts wrt scaling since ditto eventually worked on concepts. ERE1 took a long time to do so. I'll give ERE2 the same time just in case it actually works.

[Frita]

I’m not sure the person earning $150k when their neighbours are on $100k is in a great emotional position either. The temptation to look down on people with less is high.

And either comparison-based calibration of self-esteem may very likely be created by spinning a narrative about others’ position while only knowing one’s own facts (assuming no self-delusion). Example: As parents age (80s now) and require more support, it has been shocking to learn the actual state of finances. One set appears the most strapped while having the largest nest egg. The highest earners still do not own their house, continue to live large, have no retirement, and financed a fancy car that neither is able to drive. The former could care less about others’ opinions while the latter erroneously assume a superior financial position.

@Ego and @AH
There are certainly a range of healthy to unhealthy choices in all aspects of life. That discernment helps to inform and fine tune the ongoing decision process. I find it concerning how addictive-prone society is becoming (our new normal?). Not only is the modeling poor for our children, caregivers with problem behaviors to addictions often are unable to adequately meet those children’s needs (even if only on an emotional level, which can be disastrous).

[Ego]

I see @Ego saying that number one is being circumvented. They are dissatisfied with their life and, instead of taking a moment to think why and contemplate other options or a new vision of a future situation, they treat the symptom.

Exactly!

The medicalization of normal human emotions and the shift to defensive medicine means that we now treat nearly everyone as if they are potentially experiencing the most extreme symptoms like those @Slevin mentioned above. Failure to do so can result in malpractice so they follow the medication regimen and avoid liability. The causes are left unresolved and get worse. We end up with an epidemic and wonder what went wrong.

I find it concerning how addictive-prone society is becoming (our new normal?). Not only is the modeling poor for our children, caregivers with problem behaviors to addictions often are unable to adequately meet those children’s needs (even if only on an emotional level, which can be disastrous).

So true. This today from Vancouver. A terrible sign of the direction we are moving.

[Jean]

this inconsistent use of weight units is really terrifying.

[C40]

Why is Asia easier ?

Some reasons:

- Extremely low labor costs
- Ingredient costs are lower because of the low labor costs
- Low labor and low cost of living results in restaurants staying in business even if the profit is really low
- Less seasonal temperature variation means more food types can be harvested numerous times per year. Ingredients are used more locally rather than shipping them long distances.
- A culture of eating out frequently helps to keep volume really high at restaurants and enables them to have really small profits on each meal sale. Even people with low incomes for the local area eat out regularly.
- Eating out can actually cost less than cooking at home. It's because of ingredient prices. The prices eating out are low enough that if you buy ingredients at a supermarket type store, it will cost you more. The only way to eat cheaper at home is to be quite good at buying food at low prices (going to the traditional markets and bargaining, or having connections with suppliers). In some Asian countries, one thing that old ladies commonly discuss with eachother is the prices they pay for foods at the market. It's a point of pride to be able to buy at the lowest prices and they will brag to eachother like "I buy these oranges for only $XX/kg, pretty good, huh"?
- Dense cities and one of the points above result in there being about 100 restaurants within 150m of my apartment.
- Extremely popular use of meal delivery services and competitive discounts resulting in delivered meal prices sometimes lower than in-store menu prices.
- Restaurants and food cultures there have evolved in times of poverty, scarcity, etc,... so they've been creative about finding ways to make food taste really good without using expensive ingredients. (and usually the methods are not less healthy, or are FAR more healthy than the ways American restaurants make food tasty)
- Simpler menus in restaurants. Many restaurants basically serve one dish, and the variety there is the type of meat added to that dish. This means 1 - you have your food served really quickly. At one place I frequent, I have my full meal on the table 20 seconds after walking in. And 2- This menu simplicity makes it possible for that one dish to be made really, REALLY well. Often the person making the food is the long-term owner, and in many cases that person has been making and selling that same exact dish every working day for the last 20 or 40 years. So the food here is literally very fast, but this food that is fast is normal - it's not unhealthy junk like most of the 'fast food' in the US.

[chenda]

@C40 - thanks.

@Ego - Is that sign real or legal ?!

[guitarplayer]

So is it a status thing?

I think the status thing, mimetic desire, is omnipresent and generally responsible for a lot of silliness. My strategy is to call it out as quickly as possible to satisfy it before silly things happen. In my own life this is done with stoicism (which is a proxy for CBT, or deficit-model-inverted CBT - other approaches available. @sky does Epicureanism). A level up would be to harness the desire to compare with the Joneses for specific purposes (-> mimetic drift).

If you make more than $50/day you are in the top 7% of world income earners. Meaning everyone in the US that has a full time minimum wage job is in the global top 7% for income. At $70k per year that would bump you even higher to in the top 1% of earners, more specifically somewhere in the realm of 0.1-0.5% of earners globally. You're not the one being prevented from eating the pie, you're the one eating it.

+1 This is so often overlooked it gives me a proverbial headache sometimes.

[ertyu]

Is that sign real or legal ?!

I'm assuming a harm reduction program - which, in spite of the hand-wringing above, is evidence based: results in less adverse social effects / costs on society as a whole. Sources can be googled.

[chenda]

I'm assuming a harm reduction program - which, in spite of the hand-wringing above, is evidence based: results in less adverse social effects / costs on society as a whole. Sources can be googled.

Yes I agree. There's a music festival I attend where you can get your drugs tested for free to check their purity. It's designed to reduce deaths as every year someone usually dies.

[Jean]

eating out in viet nam was excellent and extremly cheap, like .50 per meal.

[Seppia]

Why is Asia easier ?

Stats I remember from my food big corp I worked for 15 years ago:
Meals consumed 1 at home 2 out of home

Italy: 40/60
France: 50/50
USA: 40/60
Japan: 10/90

In Asia, people eat an overwhelming majority of their meals out of home.
This means the average restaurant/food truck/ramen bar has a LOT more foot traffic Vs its equivalent in say Europe.

This means 1 they have to rotate tables much faster 2 they can work on lower unit margins because they sell much more volume and the higher volume means a smaller per-unit impact of fixed costs (rent personnel etc)

The opposite economies of scale apply to supermarkets, making eating at home more expensive vs europe

The long short is eating out in Asia is faster and cheaper

EDIT should have seen that C40 responded before me lol