Scanning the internet, I came across this piece inspired by CHS's piece.
The Beef Pot Pie Index:
In a recent article you referenced the ’Burrito Index’ which is quite telling. This has gotten me to think about beef and chicken pot pies…
As a young man (1969-1970)… as a member of the Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks… I worked for the Union Pacific Railroad (DC&H division). During that time I was earning about $4.50/hour which returned me about $35/day.
In those days being challenged in the kitchen my main staple was chicken and beef pot pies. These were the ’standard’ pie which weighed in around 16 ounces and made for a filling meal… not the smaller version commonly seen today which is a 7 ounce pie. I used to purchase these at the local supermarket (I believe it was a Safeway) – 10 for $1.
In this context I was able to potentially purchase 350 beef and/or chicken potpies with a day’s pay. This was a time when gold was priced at $35/ounce. So it would also be true to state not only that I was earning one ounce of gold for a day’s work but that one ounce of gold could purchase 350 beef pot pies.
It is interesting that a similar pot pie currently sells at Amazon.com for about $4.00. Doing the math 350 of these pies would run about $1,400 which is not far from the current price for an ounce of gold.
I should also note that after working for the UPRR for several years I was able to quit work and get an undergraduate degree from a state university. This did put me in debt (tuition, room and board, books, all incidentals) to the tune of $1,700 – an amount that was easily serviced in those days.
What I feel I am unable to explain… certainly to anyone who did not live through this era… is the sense of empowerment that was derived from what I can only describe as ’Prosparity.’ After a lifetime of work I earn considerably more than minimum wage… more than the average wage in this country. But with respect to gold and its ’buying power’ – I earn about 1/2 what I did as a young man in 1969.
(Source)
What's important to consider here is that right around the time this gentleman remembers that one could live on the prevailing starter wage the net energy per capita of oil was hitting its maximum in the US.
It follows, to me at least, that abundant surplus energy can more readily support a broader cross section of the population with ease as compared to a diminished amount.
If we had been cognizant of the issue, steps could have been taken to assure that what surplus existed was dedicated as efficiently as possible, and shared equitably, which would have lengthened the period of ease.
Instead we pretended no such limits or practicalities applied to us humans (Motto; "We're really clever!") and so have been broadly confused about such things as the decline of the middle class, and increasing wealth gaps.
Yes, those trends have some basis in poor policy decisions but their actual roots lie in the structural predicaments offered up by declining net energy and operating a debt-based money system.
