We all have lives. It is probably the only thing that we can be sure about. Because definition of life, status of limited existence and experiencing, applied literally to what we are doing. In other words, we all exist. If you wanna argue that we do not actually exist and it is all illusion or something, go ahead and do that but keep in mind that this "illusion" is the only thing you ever know of and there is nothing outside of it as far as we know. So whether you call it illusion, life or something else, we all exist. The word life applies to what we are doing better than illusion does, in my opinion at least. So I will go ahead and assume that we all have lives. Since you are reading this, you have a life too. My purpose in this writing is not to argue whether we have lives. It is to argue if they are easy or not. Therefore I will pass the discussion of whether we have lives or not completely.

Now we also could argue about definition of easy. In fact, if definition of easy was straightforward to everyone, we would not have to argue about the subject of this writing. We could just say "Ok, it is easy" or "Ok, it is hard". But, since it is not that straightforward, we can argue and think about the question a little bit more. In my opinion, the word easy means that which does not require any significant hardships to obtain or undergo. Therefore, the word itself becomes subjective. Stuff that will be easy to some will be rough to others. Because some will not "feel" any noticeable/significant hardships or challenges while doing something whereas others will do. Then the question of "Are our lives easy?" can be rewritten as "Are our existences come with significant hardships?". Answer to this question can be "Duh,of course" because everyone will have their own challenges but I wanna write about it a little more.

Compared to What?

When thinking about the question in matter, it could also be helpful to compare our lives with some others. I am not totally sold on this argument but we could still do it and maybe get some insights from it. Let me do it and see where it goes. We could compare the lives of people that lived in the past, people currently alive or people that will be alive in the future. When you look at individuals rather than groups, question becomes much more complex. You have to assess every aspect of them one by one and compare if one individual had it harder than the other. You have to have a lot of information about their location, about the time they lived in and about their mental state etc.. As a result, every individual is gonna be unique and will have some unique challenges. Instead what I am gonna be focusing will be population vs population comparison. For example how do the lives of populations that lived in 1400s fare against populations that will live in 2200s or how does population of current Ghana compare to population of current ,lets say, Swirzerland. 

Compared to Time 

I think, in general, humans tend to advance. We advance cognitively, consciousnesswise (whatever that might mean) and in other aspect, such as technology, medicine, science etc. That advancement makes our lives easier in certain ways. We live longer, we have more, easily accessible, nutritious food, we have new cures for diseases, we live in big societies that has more people in it etc. That advancement makes our lives easier in certain ways and harder in certain ways. For example, living within bigger societies means that problems can be assessed from more angles, different skillsets can be used to tackle problems and there are more job opportunities. However bigger society also means same work will be requested by more people and there will be limited number of work/resources to obtain for everyone. In other words, supply and demand both increase. Second example that I can come up with is our cognitive advancement has also both good and bad results. Again better cognition means better problem solving but It also means we will delve deeper into questions about existence, much more deeper than our ancestors did, since we know more about how things work, and potentially get more depressed/anxious as a result. Comparing the current population to future population can also lead to similar arguments. Future people will likely be more congitively advanced but there are also more potential pain associated with it, at least in my opinion. 

Compared to Geographical Location

Another comparison reference could be location. Although it is all dynamic and changing, we have to accept that there are developed and underdeveloped countries. Therefore, some locations will be better to born into than others, at least in certain aspects. That seems to be the case both countrywise and more specifically district/town/county/family wise. Developed countries, just like the time vs time comparison, will have better access to quality goods and technologies than underdeveloped ones. However, hear me out here, they are also more susceptible to certain conditions, For example, someone living in a first world country might be more susceptible to depression/anxiety versus someone in a third world country. I am not saying that is definitely the case, but simply making an argument so that we could think about it. Also, people in third/fourth world countries tend to have more children, therefore, although they do not live as long as someone born in, lets say, Germany, they might be experiencing more or at least equal levels of total wellbeing simply because there are more of them. However, they might also be experiencing more suffering as well, which is another side of the coin.

Is Comparison Even Useful Analysis At This Point?

To be honest, my purpose in comparison was not to get ultimate answers as to who had it easier. My purpose is to point out that it is all relative. Relative might mean relative to certain external situation or relative to something internal. So you could look at it from both ways. Sure we have it easier in a lot of ways, but we also have it harder. Saying "We have it much easier, people of this time/country are just weak and unappreciative" is just judgemental and incomplete analysis at best. When you find yourself doing some reactionary thinking like the one mentioned because someone complaining about something triggered you into doing so, I believe you could benefit from looking at it from both angles. You would also have to accept that people having it easier does not mean there is nothing to be improved, meaning complaints might be valid and there might be some change to be done for the better.