With a 50k salary you can afford a 125k house at the same 1300 ratio. This seems about right for a rural area but not, of course, for an urban one. Of course neither the laborer in 1300 or today is able to spend their full salary for 2.5 years straight on a dwelling. They would have to save over a much longer period of time as that 2 pounds a year has to cover food, clothing, coal etc.
Sure both Louis and the laborer didn't have central heating and the internet but Louis could afford whatever WAS available for luxury and the laborer today can afford those 'luxuries' that even royalty didn't have access to 700 years ago.
Not saying social differences aren't huge but they are influenced by perception, social norms, media, and both absoulte and relative levels of comfort/luxury. It's hard to compare directly.
My reply was very US centric and I didn't make that clear. My figures were in USD. 50k is the median household income in the US which, now that I think about it is not that useful a number for this.
It is. But still, if we think about the improvements we've had in terms of technology and compare them to the "political" changes in society (which are nil), you gotta sit down and think for a while. We're basically still stuck in 0AD.
I'm pretty sure you have a poor understanding of the "political" state of society of both the 14th and 21st centuries if you think the changes between the two are nil.
Sure both Louis and the laborer didn't have central heating and the internet but Louis could afford whatever WAS available for luxury and the laborer today can afford those 'luxuries' that even royalty didn't have access to 700 years ago.
Not saying social differences aren't huge but they are influenced by perception, social norms, media, and both absoulte and relative levels of comfort/luxury. It's hard to compare directly.