$400 in 1917


How much money would that be today?

reply

[deleted]


i agree its not much, but people were in dire straights back then (thus the prostitution)




reply

1917 was before the depression. the economy wasn't that bad. however, female virginity was such a highly desired commodity in a wife, that premarital sex was pretty much limited to dock girls and prostitutes. since it was extremely difficult to have sex without paying, prices were universally high.

right now, the top notch call girls might make a couple of grand for an hour, but a regular street walker will put out for 50 bucks or less. why? try going to college for a semester and NOT getting laid.

supply and demand. back then, you were paying the equivalent of high end escort prices for pretty much any girl.

reply

[deleted]

@Taylor_belongs_with_me
Don't assume that what girls find attractive are exactly the same things that men find attractive. Women don't give such a high priority to looks, like men do. To woman, a sexy personality is a much bigger turn on than sexy looks. Why do you think girls walking around in short skirts catch a lot of lustful glances but boys showing off their legs attract nothing but weird looks? Why is it that the people who buy Playboy are mostly men, and who buy Playgirl are not women but gay man? Why is it that buy romantic fiction much more than men do? (Hint: fictions describe men with sexy personality. It's their Playboy) Why do you think that, in media, the physical beauty of women is much more emphasized/exposed than that of men?

Also, "Girls don't pay attention to me because I'm not rich enough" is just an excuse that losers give to each other and themselves. Saying that feels better than accepting that you ain't got an attractive personality. But, it ain't true, it's a logical fallacy.

Imagine that you want a girlfriend, but there are no beautiful girls, only ugly ones. You would of course choose a rich ugly girl over a poor ugly girl, if there is not much difference, that you care about, between them. That won't be a real relationship, you are with her just for her money. But, when a sexy girl walks into your life, you will be much more attracted to her, and, if you can catch her attention, you'll probably leave the ugly one for the sexy one.
Same thing happens with a girl. It doesn't matter if you are rich or not, handsome or not, what matters is whether or not you have an sexy personality. If you do, you can easily get girls, not every girl (that's freaking impossible), but a lot of girls.

I'm speaking from personal experience. No one in my adult life, except my sister, has ever called me handsome. I dropped out of college 2 years ago, haven't done a job since then => hardly any money. But, since leaving college I have *beep* 5 different girls, and I still got a lot to improve upon.
Don't say "I haven't got a sexy personality and skills with women", either. You are born with only 3 skills: crying, pissing and *beep* everything else you have to learn on your own. Learning skills with women is extreme-freaking-ly difficult. But, it can be done.
So, either you continue to make stupid excuses like a loser, or you go out there and take charge of your lovelife.

AFC to PUA. That's the dream.

reply

TELL EM'!

reply

Calling others "losers" only shows you are a jerk with a high school mentality

Rasengan!

reply

Here's a link that shows the cost of everyday items in 1917 (in NJ, not New Orleans):

http://www.gti.net/mocolib1/prices/1917.html

A silk dress could be from $10-30. A new stove cost $16. A car could be $200-over 1,000. Condensed milk was 3 cans for 28 cents. A large apartment with kitchenette was $15/month.

$400 would buy a lot in those days.

reply

A rough estimate would be around $3000-$4000 in today's dollars.



There, daddy, do I get a gold star?

reply

While I realize gold prices have gone (a bit) crazy, IF you index dollars to gold as then vs. now, you may be very surprised.

In 1971 the U.S. ended the regulation of gold prices from roughly $35/oz to the current floating value (i.e. whatever the market will bear). I don't know for sure when it changed, but I believe gold was regulated at $25/oz in the early 1900's, but we will use a value that is certain, and have a LOW estimate...

(BTW, back in 1917, money included actual gold and silver coins, and paper Gold Certificates, later replaced with Silver Certificates, and later replaced with Federal Reserve Notes.)

$400 / $35/oz = 11.4 oz of gold THEN: $ 400

$1600/oz x 11.4oz = $18,240 NOW : $ 18,240 Surprised?


reply

I was going to guess around $10,000-$20,000, but let's see.

FDR devalued the dollar in relation to gold in the 1930's meaning that it would then take $35 to buy an ounce of gold whereas in the 1920's and before gold was fixed at $20/oz. So $400 in 1917 could have been exchanged for 20 ounces of gold. At today's prices that would cost $34,000.

Silver was valued at $1 per ounce back then. Today it is just under $32 per ounce. Thus $400 X 32 = $12,800

An average wage back then might have been around $500/year. Today it might be around $30,000. Thus $400 X 60 = $24,000.

A nice house might have cost around $5,000 back then. Today a similar house might cost $250,000 or more. Thus $400 X 50 = $20,000.

If we average these numbers: $34K, $12.8K, $24K, and $20K, we get $22,700.

Therefore, $400 back in 1917 could easily be worth upwards of $20,000 today.

reply

Comparison of gold prices isn't a good way to find the change in the value of the dollar, as the gold standard was abandoned in 1933. Since then, the fluctuations in the value of gold and the value of dollar have been quite different and completely independent.

Infact, in todays times, gold isn't such a special commodity anymore. Hoarding gold is no different, economically, than any other commodity. The only real use of gold, now, is as ornaments.

AFC to PUA. That's the dream.

reply

http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

$400.00 in 1917 had the same buying power as $7,446.52 in 2010.

Annual inflation over this period was 3.19%.

reply

http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

$400.00 in 1917 had the same buying power as $7,446.52 in 2010.

Annual inflation over this period was 3.19%.

Thanks, khangd2003. By the way, this has now gone up to $7,917.28 as of 2013.

reply

Can't tell if anyone's come up with it, but I looked it up during the movie. An online inflation calculator says $400 in 1917 would be over $8000 today.
Which sounds like a lot of cash to be carrying around, but the special circumstances of the evening were known to the bidders, so maybe.

reply

It would be the same as $7,393.72 in 2015.






All typos and misspellings courtesy of a public educational system.

reply

if you made $5/day in a Ford plant $400 would be 80 days pay 3 months of 6 day weeks

reply