America under President Trump

DogOnPorch · April 7, 2017

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

The United States is not a jobs program for unemployed foreign nationals.

Canada is...lol.

OftenWrong · April 8, 2017

8 hours ago, kactus said:

In the context of technology change is the only constant. And for this reason we have reached the point of no return....

That's how "Progressives" finally and ultimately take themselves over a cliff.

Michael Hardner · April 8, 2017

22 hours ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

1) I don't understand where we are going with this software development thing. Is it the new American dream to be locked in cubicles eight hours a day "creating" new games to play while not locked in cubicles? Robotics and such are supposed to replace something like another twenty thousand human beings by 2020, what's the point?

2) The unemployed are not good for the economy.

3) Some of us love life actually doing physical things.

1) I would think office work is healthier for you than factory work, assuming you take care of your body outside work to offset the sedentary effects. What's the point? Is this the dream? The answer is that technology can replace human effort. You can dream and romanticize about 'work' but hard economics drive progress regardless of what people fantasize and mythologize about.

2) And yet, people dream about retiring, winning the lottery, not working, leisure... How do we resolve those contradictions on a macro level ? The idea of work changes and we are faced with strange ideas of welfare (1930s) unemployment insurance (1940s) and universal income (future?).

3) And you may continue to pursue that happiness, but don't expect to be paid for it, unless you add some 'new economy' spin to your labour, ie. 'craft' 'artisan' and customized labour.

Michael Hardner · April 8, 2017

15 hours ago, Argus said:

You make the erroneous assumption all change is good. It's not.

Change is neither bad, nor good... it's inevitable and if we accept that and plan for it we can get ahead of it.

Michael Hardner · April 8, 2017

6 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

That's how "Progressives" finally and ultimately take themselves over a cliff.

That's interesting and confusing to me: are you saying that change is welcomed by progressives but not conservatives ? The taxonomy of those terms would say so, and yet the conservative business world has embraced new markets, new investment, new technology. Maybe this is the beginning of a meeting of minds about the nature of 'disruption' in the marketplace and society.

Argus · April 8, 2017

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

That's interesting and confusing to me: are you saying that change is welcomed by progressives but not conservatives ? ]

Progressives, ie, liberals, are much more eager to embrace change. Conservatives tend to like what they know and trust and can rely on, and embrace change more slowly when it's been proven to be better.

Michael Hardner · April 8, 2017

I'm guilty of drifting the thread again - I"ll post this on Argus' TED talks thread (my response) as it's more on topic.

April 8, 2017

21 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I'm guilty of drifting the thread again - I"ll post this on Argus' TED talks thread (my response) as it's more on topic.

Shouldn't you get a warning point or a few days off?

OftenWrong · April 8, 2017

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

That's interesting and confusing to me: are you saying that change is welcomed by progressives but not conservatives ? The taxonomy of those terms would say so, and yet the conservative business world has embraced new markets, new investment, new technology. Maybe this is the beginning of a meeting of minds about the nature of 'disruption' in the marketplace and society.

Change when appropriate and when useful outcomes are identified is good. Not all change is good, and not all things that are "old" are useless or bad.
That place in the middle where everything is perfect and good is far more boring than you realize.

eyeball · April 9, 2017

Change is good when it's orchestrated by conservatives in other words.

Somethings never change.

Thinkinoutsidethebox · April 9, 2017

14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) I would think office work is healthier for you than factory work, assuming you take care of your body outside work to offset the sedentary effects. What's the point? Is this the dream? The answer is that technology can replace human effort. You can dream and romanticize about 'work' but hard economics drive progress regardless of what people fantasize and mythologize about.

2) And yet, people dream about retiring, winning the lottery, not working, leisure... How do we resolve those contradictions on a macro level ? The idea of work changes and we are faced with strange ideas of welfare (1930s) unemployment insurance (1940s) and universal income (future?).

3) And you may continue to pursue that happiness, but don't expect to be paid for it, unless you add some 'new economy' spin to your labour, ie. 'craft' 'artisan' and customized labour.

I the utopia you're proposing sounds great, the problem is how does that saying go? The idle mind is the devil's playground (workshop). Look around you and check the news, the opioid crisis, people getting radicalized, suicide, shootings, computer viruses, the list goes on... almost all of this the result of people with too much time on their hands. Continue replacing these individuals with technology and it's going to continue to get worse.

Factory work can be very healthy and satisfying. Some people get great satisfaction and fulfilment from it. You've never met anybody that says they hate to be indoors all the time? I got into a debate with someone over entry level jobs awhile back, the common belief is you get in, get a little experience and money and move on. Do you know or have you met anyone in entry level work who loves their job? There are people that would love to make careers of the entry level work they are in, and some do.

Yes people dream, it gives them goals to work toward, a reason to live, there are many that are forced to retire and and their lives just spiral downward after.

Ever watch the movie WALL E? I know it's just a stupid cartoon but is this where we need to be headed? It might be time to step back and take another look at where the human population is headed. Maybe we need to downside a bit, globalization, automation, factory farming, factory child care and so on is turning us into slaves of technology and ruining our planet in the process.

kactus · April 9, 2017

7 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Change when appropriate and when useful outcomes are identified is good. Not all change is good, and not all things that are "old" are useless or bad.
That place in the middle where everything is perfect and good is far more boring than you realize.

That's pretty obvious...Even a five year old kid doesn't want to get a bad outcome from a change. That's life!

I would argue the place in the middle is infact a very dangerous place to be in because making a good or bad decision is better than making no decision at all! And that's where some of the conservative thinking is stuck in the middle or what I would call that status quo. And guess what when you are in that status quo then life will make the decision for you which is far worse than a bad decision you would have made....

kactus · April 9, 2017

16 hours ago, Argus said:

Progressives, ie, liberals, are much more eager to embrace change. Conservatives tend to like what they know and trust and can rely on, and embrace change more slowly when it's been proven to be better.

There's nothing in that sentiment that I would dispute since you agree that change is ineviable.

kactus · April 9, 2017

On 08/04/2017 at 6:23 AM, OftenWrong said:

That's how "Progressives" finally and ultimately take themselves over a cliff.

That's a matter of interpretation...

Michael Hardner · April 9, 2017

8 hours ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

the utopia you're proposing sounds great

My response belongs on another thread, let's discuss there:

Michael Hardner · April 9, 2017

12 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Change when appropriate and when useful outcomes are identified is good. Not all change is good, and not all things that are "old" are useless or bad.
That place in the middle where everything is perfect and good is far more boring than you realize.

My response on an more appropriate thread:

kactus · April 10, 2017

On 07/04/2017 at 9:44 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

The United States is not a jobs program for unemployed foreign nationals.

The United States the best can do is deal with its own unemployed nationals let alone foreigners....

bush_cheney2004 · April 10, 2017

12 minutes ago, kactus said:

The United States the best can do is deal with its own unemployed nationals let alone foreigners....

Yet the foreigners still want into the United States just like they always have....more than any other nation in the world.

10,000 U.S. baby boomers are retiring each day to part time work or no employment at all.

It is estimated that 300,000 Canadians live/work in the Silicon Valley area alone.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/tech-news/silicon-valley-event-nurtures-canadian-startups/article15748210/

Edited April 10, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

SpankyMcFarland · April 12, 2017

On 2017-04-08 at 1:38 PM, Argus said:

Progressives, ie, liberals, are much more eager to embrace change. Conservatives tend to like what they know and trust and can rely on, and embrace change more slowly when it's been proven to be better.

That's not true for globalization, automation or immigration. If a buck can be made, conservatives will support change. In the US, Republicans have played a double game on immigration, protesting about it publicly and facilitating it privately for their wealthy donors. Democrats have supported it for other reasons but at least they have been more consistent.

Topaz · April 13, 2017

The news isn't that doing much on the committee meeting on Trump's wiretapping and apparently, the FBI and the NSA refuse to come back to be questioned and Stone and others who were asked to appear in close session refused they want to be questioned in open session so the public would know what they have to say. Now, the Democrats know what went on under Obama and what Obama knew, I doubt there will be too many OPEN session and the truth may not be known to the public.

kimmy · April 16, 2017

On 4/13/2017 at 4:56 AM, Topaz said:

The news isn't that doing much on the committee meeting on Trump's wiretapping

The committee isn't about wiretapping. The committee is about Russian influence in the 2016 election. You keep missing that point.

On the wiretapping issue, the latest we heard is that the FBI surveillance of Trump advisor Carter Page was 100% legal. They obtained a warrant from a judge in accordance with the rules set for by FISA (Federal International Surveillance Act). They're allowed to do wiretapping when they have warrants. Giving them a warrant to do surveillance on Carter Page is a no-brainer, because he's on the Russian payroll. So were Flynn and Manafort. As things go along we'll hear that surveillance of Flynn and Manafort (and probably others) was also done 100% legally, with FISA warrants.

The question isn't why the FBI was doing surveillance on all these Russian operatives, because the answer to that is blindingly obvious. The real question is why Trump had all these Russian operatives in his inner circle.

On 4/13/2017 at 4:56 AM, Topaz said:

the FBI and the NSA refuse to come back to be questioned

Not true.

On 4/13/2017 at 4:56 AM, Topaz said:

Now, the Democrats know what went on under Obama and what Obama knew, I doubt there will be too many OPEN session and the truth may not be known to the public.

The Democrats don't control these hearings. It's a bipartisan committee with members from both parties, but the chairman is a Republican, because the Republicans are the majority party. The chairman of the committee was Devin Nunes, but Rep. Nunes was forced to step down because he's now in the middle of an ethics probe for running off to the White House in the middle of the night to share privileged committee information with the Trump administration. Hmmm. I wonder why he'd do that?

-k

Argus · April 18, 2017

For those still mystified about how Trump could win...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-04-18/young-white-america-is-haunted-by-a-crisis-of-despair

eyeball · April 18, 2017

The mystery is why so many people keep voting over and over again for more of the same economic prescriptions that brought about the crisis of despair. Maybe it has something to do with the nature of addiction.