The general decline in standards today

[Bluebird Marsha]

Admittedly reading online is a problem. My eye sight has always been terrible. In the Middle Ages, I would have been shipped off to a convent. That being said, I love my Nook. It does need a light in dim light, but the "e-ink" is very readable. I don't think I want all of my books to be digital, but it does save space, and it's very convenient when I'm traveling. I don't have to load my luggage down with reading material. I'm still investigating whether I can scan my books, and load them in PDF format onto my Nook. That would be the best solution. I like to have both formats, but I don't want to pay twice. Besides, most of my stuff isn't available digitally, so it's a moot point.

I have no idea how many books I have. 200+ is my best guestimate. But I've culled the herd several times during moves. Hopefully I've found the spot to settle for a few years, so I can buy a house with space for the personal library of my fantasy. There will be a bar and a fireplace!

 

[Puzzicato]

I rub shoulders with a lot of librarians. A high percentage of the homes with children in the US (I want to say 20-30%) do not contain any reading materials- no books, no magazines, no newspapers. We're not talking just children's books either- no reading materials of any kind. It is a high risk factor for a lot of things in life- learning to read, not graduating high school, etc.

I don't know if this is true in other developed countries, but I find it really, truly disturbing. Reading literacy is one of the most basic life skills (I know, I had a lot of problems learning to read as a child). I also find it hard to believe that these homes actually have nothing to read and this isn't disturbing to the adults in the home.

The Evening Standard, one of the London newspapers, is currently running a big literacy campaign because of this situation, although the statistics of 1 in 3 not owning books are disputed. They did come out with some truly shocking examples, like a little boy bringing in a mail order catalogue when the teacher asked them to bring a book from home, because it was the only one they had.

I have approximately 200 cookbooks. I am not prepared to estimate how many other books are in the house!

 

[HungaryTom]

When discussing the collapse of a society, one runs the risk of sounding insane. There have been folks predicting the end of times since the beginning of times. This Camping fellow is a timely example.

On the other hand, the Third Reich was planned to last 1000 years. The Romans really didn't see the Germanic tribes as a threat. The Soviet Union fell on its own sword in under 100 years. The Mongol tribes very similiary came from the dust only to return to the dust. Certainly, life marched onward as long as a piece of ground remained inhabitable, but the important thing was that these civilizations didn't lose their technologies of survival. Even the modern civilizations like the Russians and Germans still had the ability to fend for themselves as society pulled itself back together. I mean to say, these people knew how to start a fire, how to make clothes, how to cook, how to survive.

By the way, I'm not at all referring to an utter collapse of the world population as a result of some massive, destructive phenomenon (although one can't rule that out, god forbid). I mean what will happen when order folds and chaos introduced?

Currently, the US Dollar is the reserve currency for the entire world. Should the dollar collapse, who do you suppose will run the lights? Without power, how might one charge their iPad? And when you quickly realize an iPad makes for a poor hand axe, where do you think the iPad is thrown? Similiarly, learning to butcher rabbits sounds ridiculous doesn't it? But how silly will it sound when you realize a degree in journalism won't help you construct a clay oven to cook?

I know it sounds like "worst-case scenario" stuff, but simply review the last 100 years. How do you suppose people survived when their entire city was bombed? How do Iraqis survive when their towns are bombed? What did the Germans do to cope with hyperinflation? What are the Congolese and Zimbabwe peoples doing to cope with hyperinflation? Look at the Wild West - some of those old gangs lived in clapboard shacks eating lizards and drinking stagnant water.

I don't propose that we should learn how to fashion hand tools out of bones, but wouldn't it be helpful if our society knew how to skin a rabbit or build a reliable fire? My argument is that our modern society is un-learning how to survive, even with modern hand tools.

I think that the US has scored a strange world record: winning the Cold War by 1989/1990 becoming the uncontested No1.. Than within 20 years America has built up its major rival China by outsourcing its production to China followed by the rest f the West, and getting indebted to China. Now the US deficit is 95% of the GDP. The US can not help the EU in settling its crisis. Now China saw the gap and their PM offered their money for Europe which is never free - influence comes along.
The USD is still the world currency since Bretton Woods but as the gold standard was dropped by the Nixon shock in 1972 and USD emission continued to roll ever since the amount clearly surpasses the size of the US economy. If the USD is going to be replaced by Bancor or other non-US currency than the ocean of dollars might cause hyperinflation and crisis.
ALAS
America will NEVER collapse. You might tremble but just as Soviet union collapsed but Russia has never stopped being huge the US of America wont collapse or shrink... You are 9+ million sq.kilometers with a population of 300+ million and the system of brain drain and being open for new impulses. Maybe the leaders will learn the lesson once for all that one never outsources production in the hands of the rival or enemy. Maybe corporate logic won't be allowed to overrule the imperial logic or (in my opinion a country of this continent-size is not a normal country it is an empire, a federal state corresponds a normal country) there are higher interests, national interest than just short-sighted theorem of efficiency.
America had already hard times; Independence war, Civil War and survived. Real Wars. People can survive a lot. See the 1 billion people who live in the 4th world from less than a dollar per day or so, or see Europe where civilian population suffered in both World Wars without receiving any survival training and survived. Or the best example: Inuit and Natives of North America survived although "history" has treated them less than favourable.

Phoenicia collapsed Lebanese are still there, Persian Empire collapsed -Iran still there, Greeks survived, Rom collapsed - Italians still there, Genghis Empire collapsed - Mongols are still there, Ottomans collapsed - Turks are still there, Germany survived 30 years war, world wars, etc. "Germanic tribes" still there, British Empire collapsed - Brits still there, just as all other European colonist nations, Soviets collapsed - Russians still there, it is only up to the respective nation and people how they survive and how big they remain ad how much their mark in the globe remains. China fell also several times into chaos got disintegrated and integrated and the Han people are still there. And they have also their future risks: aging of population, lack of environment protection, the way they treat workforce, tensions between countryside wages vs. coastline mega-city wages and living standards, the Communist Party leading capitalism, etc.
Nothing lasts forever; neither the ups nor the downs. Cheer up.

 

[Edward]

Computer device reading doesn't cut it for me -- it hurts my eyes, and I don't like the single-page-view format. When I find long articles online I want to read, the only way I can stand to do it is print them out first.

That's where a dedicated device like the Kindle, which is not backlit, comes into its own. Won't solve your issue with only being able to view one page at a time, but it won't hurt your eyes either.

Admittedly reading online is a problem. My eye sight has always been terrible. In the Middle Ages, I would have been shipped off to a convent. That being said, I love my Nook. It does need a light in dim light, but the "e-ink" is very readable. I don't think I want all of my books to be digital, but it does save space, and it's very convenient when I'm traveling. I don't have to load my luggage down with reading material. I'm still investigating whether I can scan my books, and load them in PDF format onto my Nook. That would be the best solution. I like to have both formats, but I don't want to pay twice. Besides, most of my stuff isn't available digitally, so it's a moot point.

That would be the ideal for me too - then my Kindle would be wholly a written-word equivalent of the way I use an iPod. I'd even consider paying twice if it was a minimal fee - I'm sure Amazon cold do very well indeed if, for instance, you could buy a real book and pay an extra pound to also have the Kindle version.

The Evening Standard, one of the London newspapers, is currently running a big literacy campaign because of this situation, although the statistics of 1 in 3 not owning books are disputed. They did come out with some truly shocking examples, like a little boy bringing in a mail order catalogue when the teacher asked them to bring a book from home, because it was the only one they had.

Yes, that series did read as rather alarmist, if not quite as full on as had it been run in former stablemate, the Daily Heil. Doesn't seem like long ago that the Standard was on the 'more kids than ever are reading thanks to Joanne Rowling' bandwagon. Still, I'm sure there is some truth in it. What I found interesting were the claimed statistics that in many of those households it is not poverty that causes the lack of books, as a significant number of them did have an X Box or equivalent.

It's no surprise people in general don't read as much as in the past, what with the whole range of entertainment options available. I don't personally subscribe to the school of thought that says the world is going to hell in a handbasket (I'll happily trade people reading a bit less now against the casual racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc of the fifties and earlier), but I do think it is important to encourage kids to read. In general, it seems to me that many people I come into contact with do read regularly, though that might be in part a city thing: so many people who live or at least work in London get to and around the city by public transport, that does create time to read that would otherwise be spent driving and whatnot.

 

[Puzzicato]

Yes, that series did read as rather alarmist, if not quite as full on as had it been run in former stablemate, the Daily Heil. Doesn't seem like long ago that the Standard was on the 'more kids than ever are reading thanks to Joanne Rowling' bandwagon. Still, I'm sure there is some truth in it. What I found interesting were the claimed statistics that in many of those households it is not poverty that causes the lack of books, as a significant number of them did have an X Box or equivalent.

It's no surprise people in general don't read as much as in the past, what with the whole range of entertainment options available. I don't personally subscribe to the school of thought that says the world is going to hell in a handbasket (I'll happily trade people reading a bit less now against the casual racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc of the fifties and earlier), but I do think it is important to encourage kids to read. In general, it seems to me that many people I come into contact with do read regularly, though that might be in part a city thing: so many people who live or at least work in London get to and around the city by public transport, that does create time to read that would otherwise be spent driving and whatnot.

Well now all the Harry Potter books are movies, kids don't have to read them!

I have to agree with you - commuting to work every day on public transport does show that an awful lot of people read actual books. I am seeing an increasing number of people who are watching TV shows or movies on their phones and tablets though.

 

[Undertow]

I think that the US has scored a strange world record...Cheer up.

Tom, I really enjoyed your post!

I agree with you on most of what you said, especially that the US cannot collapse, per se, because it's simply too big (although the standard of living could collapse, and that alone would seemingly paralyze entire cities in our country). But my major concern is that all of the civilizations/cultures you noted had some sense of survival even before everything collapsed, whereas my worry is that Americans have gone too far and may be unable to return.

We've discussed this issue under different headings on different threads, but we all know how unusually backwards the West seems to be when it comes to executing basic "refurbishing" tasks. For instance, sewing on a button, or mending a tear, or taking care of a suit. Well, I argue that when you complicate an already exhausting situation - like LA running out of water, or the lights getting turned off, etc. - you would witness an utter collapse. A collapse which could have been avoided if we just knew how to take care of ourselves without relying entirely on technology or slave labor (or in our case, migrant labor).

 

[AtomicEraTom]

Let's also not forget that if the US Collapses, other countries will follow suit. That's 300 million consumers and a ton of outsource jobs that will either no longer be there, or immensely reduced. It would at the very least, in my humble opinion, cause a global Depression.

 

[Pompidou]

I would argue that any changes won't occur overnight, as even though the fall of the Roman Empire, for example, is slated as occurring in 420 AD, as far as the people were concerned throughout most of the empire, life didn't change. It took centuries for the last vestiges of the Roman empire to finally die. We look back and label things dark ages and middle ages, but most of them still thought they were carrying on the Roman empire - east and west. Similarly, I don't think there's a situation that could occur (or at least, is likely to) without warning, that would leave the whole of the United States without power or water.

Looking back to the early 2000s when the North East had a powergrid failure that left widespread blackouts for quite some time, they got by pretty smoothly. We survive town destroying natural disasters fairly routinely. Short of biblical armageddon, the US is simply too big to fail in one catastrophic swoop, and so long as enough of it is intact at any given moment, there's refuge from disaster in any parts of it. The tsunami disaster in Japan shows that a technologically focused, modern, 1st world nation can survive even the total annihilation of a massive percent of its cities with no small amount of grace. Thus, I believe 110% that the US could survive long enough with no electricity to find solutions.

 

[LizzieMaine]

They used to say the same thing about the British Empire. A Briton from 1910 thrust into the 21st Century would find his nation unrecognizable.

Once again, it's important to keep in mind that every nation that has ever existed on earth has eventually fallen in one way or another. Every great civilization has eventually collapsed under its own weight. To think this one will be different is simply whistling in the dark.

 

[Puzzicato]

I don't propose that we should learn how to fashion hand tools out of bones, but wouldn't it be helpful if our society knew how to skin a rabbit or build a reliable fire? My argument is that our modern society is un-learning how to survive, even with modern hand tools.

I don't think you even need to go that far in learning to survive (although being able to make a reliable fire is fun as well as useful). My boss came to work a couple of years ago busting with pride: there had been power cuts the night before and he had managed to make dinner for himself. What did you make, says I? Well, I figured out a way of cooking spaghetti without using the microwave, he replies. I boiled it in a saucepan on the gas stove.This is a man with military training and a master's degree.

 

[mercuryfelt76]

Ok so we're not talking about the whole of USA/Britain/Australia etc falling into a giant hole. We're talking about the decline in standards, etiquette and manners. The collapse of the Roman empire was more gradual than just losing to the Germanic tribes of the north - they got complacent, lazy and fat.

The USA may be too big to fully collapse, but imagine all the electrics being knocked out by a solar flare. There's no way you could supply the entire population with food, let alone clean drinking water or any modern conveniences without electric power. IS that a decline or is that just like putting a house-broken cat in the wild. That's not decline just an infrastructure dependency - but isn't that what we wanted when we invented technology? I'm not sure apocalypse is the same as living in an uncaring society due to everyone being too concerned with their own human rights to want to help each other out.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I'm not sure apocalypse is the same as living in an uncaring society due to everyone being too concerned with their own human rights to want to help each other out.

Actually, I think that'd be the absolute definition of the collapse of civilization. When *society* is lost, civilization is meaningless. Savages with i-Phones are still savages.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

Not too long ago the Army did a study and found that half its recruits didn't even know how to change a tire. It seems that when people get a flat tire on the road these days they call AAA and have the tow truck driver change it for them. Probably in less time that it takes for the tow truck to get there they could have changed the tire themselves and been on their way.

 

[Pompidou]

They used to say the same thing about the British Empire. A Briton from 1910 thrust into the 21st Century would find his nation unrecognizable.

Once again, it's important to keep in mind that every nation that has ever existed on earth has eventually fallen in one way or another. Every great civilization has eventually collapsed under its own weight. To think this one will be different is simply whistling in the dark.

I think we agree, if the argument is simplified to: "One day, the US won't be as prosperous as it is today." We only disagree on the degree. If "fallen" is the British empire of old to the United Kingdom today, then sure, I can see that - losing bases here and there and generally being forced to retreat to our own borders. I agree. I just don't think we'll ever have living conditions reduced to survivalist/hunter-gatherer conditions. Decline is inevitable. It just won't bottom out as low as some speculate. There's a big difference between the decline of the British empire and a descent into some sort of Sub-Saharan Africa style warlord anarchy. It sounds dramatic to think one day, those who can't mend buttons will face the cold realities of natural selection, and it would certainly vindicate the self-sufficient lifestyle choice, but I just don't see it. I do see a long, continuous decline in power as the rest of the world grows at a faster pace than we do and it gets to expensive to maintain a global hegemony.

 

[Dated Guy]

My biggest complaint as well, is that reading online is so tough on the eyes. I've tried lights on, off, glasses, no glasses, can't make the computer screen not hurt my eyes.

I have only very recently been exposed to the `Kindle' ethos, and basically found it wanting. The first occasion was with a Haulage driver, reading his unit with the door open in his cab, the sunshine filtering down as he perused the many splendoured delights of the written word on his Kindle, he moved, the thing dropped, a few feet of freefall and it impacted on the ground... I later collected a small remaining shard to prove a point for a friend of mine, thinking about investing in one, he eventually purchased the thing though for his holiday reading, rather than pack a heap of books for a flight to far away places.. good idea he thought, but it got stolen in Greece......

The next opportunity to register the effect of the electronic gadget, was with a wife of a friend, she said that she wanted hers for Book Club reading, she reckoned she would be able to read a heap of tomes as she meandered her way into work each day on the train.. the downside to her reasoning was the flashing weather through the windows of the train, the screen changed to a darker hue seemingly when sunlight became overly bright, her 'reactolite' glasses couldn't cope with the change quick enough before the next shade/light scenario developed... she kept getting headaches each day the sun shone....

When all these things got considered by others in my company, the general consensus was that a Kindle was no good for swatting flies, just disturbing them for a second also, not much good in the steamy environment of a bath, plus, liable to breakage, liable to be stolen for it's 'must have' value. The cost of the thing is prohibitive if you think how many 'real' books one could buy instead with the money.... and the biggest disadvantage would be a prolonged powercut...
Still, each to his/her own methinks.... :eeek:

 

[mercuryfelt76]

I think we agree, if the argument is simplified to: "One day, the US won't be as prosperous as it is today." We only disagree on the degree. If "fallen" is the British empire of old to the United Kingdom today, then sure, I can see that - losing bases here and there and generally being forced to retreat to our own borders. I agree. I just don't think we'll ever have living conditions reduced to survivalist/hunter-gatherer conditions. Decline is inevitable. It just won't bottom out as low as some speculate. There's a big difference between the decline of the British empire and a descent into some sort of Sub-Saharan Africa style warlord anarchy. It sounds dramatic to think one day, those who can't mend buttons will face the cold realities of natural selection, and it would certainly vindicate the self-sufficient lifestyle choice, but I just don't see it. I do see a long, continuous decline in power as the rest of the world grows at a faster pace than we do and it gets to expensive to maintain a global hegemony.

I agree, I just shudder to imagine what traits natural selection will favour, come the apocalypse - or are we witnessing the beginning of the end of Altruism.

 

[Pompidou]

I agree, I just shudder to imagine what traits natural selection will favour, come the apocalypse - or are we witnessing the beginning of the end of Altruism.

There will always be altruism. What we're witnessing is the end of altruism being pushed from the top down. Good deeds aren't half as good when they're forced. Any good deed you get from here on out is sincere. I rest assured knowing that noone would bat an eye if I didn't open a door to be nice, so I look all the nicer for doing so. There is altruism - it's just sincere now - hence much less frequent.

 

[Harp]

Not too long ago the Army did a study and found that half its recruits didn't even know how to change a tire.

Jeep and truck tires are a quick study.
Changing track treads on a 109 :eeek: is real fun.

 

[Widebrim]

Jeep and truck tires are a quick study.
Changing track treads on a 109 :eeek: is real fun.

I saw it done on a 113, and wouldn't want the mission dependent upon me for their changing/repairing...

 

[sheeplady]

The cost of the thing is prohibitive if you think how many 'real' books one could buy instead with the money.... Still, each to his/her own methinks.... :eeek:

Well, how many books one could buy is based upon the cost of the books you read. The kindle version of one book I'd like to read is $4.99, the "hardcopy" version is over $100. I've got 10 or so of these books on my list, all of which the kindle version is much cheaper. The Kindle keeps looking more and more appealing. (Plus not having to haul 10 hardcover books with me for a week's travel.)

A lot of the situations you describe I was taught that you don't read books in. If my father caught me reading a book in the bathtub or bathroom (where it could get water damaged) as a child, I would have had my hide tanned. It was the same level of offense as cracking a book's spine or writing in a book with ink. Dropping a book on the ground and soiling it was also not acceptable behavior- accidental or not- as one needs to be careful with books. I was raised that book destruction was a sign of a lack of respect.

To this day I'm still horrified when I open a library book and someone wrote in it in ink, it just hits me as so wrong to write in a book with a pen (regardless of the fact that you shouldn't write in books you don't own, an even bigger offense).