What I found interesting was that, even taking inflation into account, houses and loaves of bread are about twice as expensive as they were a century ago. I can understand houses; there’s a lot more that goes into building a modern house than went into building one in 1917, plus, of course, there are more people, thus more demand for houses. But why a loaf of bread? What makes that twice as expensive?
On the upside, average wages have also gone way up (again, after adjustments for inflation).
Originally shared by Singularity Hub
How the World Has Changed From 1917 to 2017 http://suhub.co/2kKMJKP
In addition to being more complex houses today are much bigger. Not quite twice the size. Average US house square footage today is around 2,000 and in 1920 it was about 1,200. I wonder if loaves of bread are bigger too?
That could well be the case.
I know my grandmother’s loaf pans are smaller than the ones for sale now because I inherited them.
Come to that, the price of what kind of a loaf of bread? The most generic, cheapest, mass-produced white bread, or a hand-made loaf from a specialty baker? I’m guessing something in between the two, but there’s a lot of space in that gap.
Loaf of bread costs are tied to that house the farmer has to live in today. His home price has gone up just like the rest. If he could sell wheat for the same price as 100 years ago, the loaf of bread would still cost more, since wages for the baker have also increased.
Wheat farming is entirely different from what it was 100 years ago. Bushel yield per acre is at least 3x more now than it was then even in a bad year. Farmers now are about 2% of the labor force as compared to about 30% then. This is one of the big challenges of comparing historical prices – the way people live has changed enough to make comparisons difficult or at least to require some explanations.
I would bet that another relevant factor is that a lot more women made bread for their households then than now.
I don’t think that has much to do with it. Corn and wheat are both subsidized. So subsidies wouldn’t encourage growing more corn and less wheat. Plus wouldn’t the presence of subsidies in 2017 and not in 1917 make wheat (and therefore bread) cheaper, not more expensive? But its the other way.