strollin wrote:
cdevidal wrote:
...
When I was a kid we were lower-class and didn't have much money. One Christmas though I did get my very own TV: A 13" black and white, connected to cable TV. So small I had to sit less than 5 feet away to really be able to follow the details. In the family room was a 24" color set. Nice and rich. Could watch it across the room. ...
LOL! Compared to when I was a kid growing up in the 60's, your family would have been considered rich, not lower-class, since you had a color TV (24" no less), cable AND had more than 1 TV in your house.
We had a single 19" b&w with rabbit ears, got 2 channels. We were a middle-class family.
I'm sure others on here have similar backgrounds.
I am a child of the 80s, and parents were working class making only slightly over minimum wage. Having my own TV was an extravagant gift that I received when I was ten or so; My friends had a nice large color set in their bedrooms from when they were little kids. So we were behind everyone else.
How "lower-class" changed in just 20 years, eh? I think that's more owing to the number of paychecks required to pay for electronics. What might have taken 10 paychecks to buy in the 60s took only 2 in the 80s and a fraction of one paycheck today. Technology tends to get cheaper over time.
Anyway the point was, no matter the quality or detail level of the picture itself, once engrossed in the plot I tend to forget that I can't count the veins on the lead character's eyeballs.
