How does the World view America these days?

[sweepstakes]

Yeah but the problem with automation and the problem with law is the same problem with the economy: the ruling class sociopaths are pulling all the strings.

[hello spiral]

you don't have to look down your noses on the poor. They often live more fulfilling lives than the rich. They usually have relatives all over their county and are super tight. Rich, or upper middle class shut themselves out from the common experience where you can just be you and not put up some artifice of decorum. Families are spread out all over the world.  Id much rather hang with a funny redneck than some snooty self appointed intellect or someone born into the top of the class system. Always some front people put up. I hate it. 

 

Thank Mr Banky

[Zephyr_Nova]

 

completely outlaw automation

This will destroy IDM as we know it hand IDM a whole new set of parameters.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Zephyr_Nova

[auxien]

 

Science fiction has always told us that machines will rise up and replace us.  But, as I start reading articles about a "new economy" I can only picture that as AI advances, and starts to supplement even high paying jobs, like doctors and lawyers, the 20th century population will have to swallow a bitter pill and re-adjust to the 21st century economy.  We might actually end up in a world where AI and bots perform the menial and replaceable tasks that humans used to do.  Then what is the place of the college educated human being?  Some say we just become students for the rest of our lives, and be damned the traditional job based economy.  There will be huge growing pains for sure, as climate change, human tribalism, resource depletion, possibly the continued rise of radicalized Sunni Wahabiism, etc. change the face of this planet, for better or worse.

 

common sense solution: completely outlaw automation, even the forms we have right now. Boom, hundreds of millions of jobs and hundreds of millions back in the economy.

 

Star Trek vs Dune.

[Salvatorin]

 

 

completely outlaw automation

This will destroy IDM as we know it hand IDM a whole new set of parameters.

 

it will create jobs by forcing IDM artists to employ scores of people to act as steps in markov chains

[Salvatorin]

to clarify, I really just mean, as the original luddites meant, to oppose automated technology where it destroys human lives and community. In short this means opposing automation where the only people who benefit are the heads of corporations aiming to increase their profit margin. 

[cwmbrancity]

[YO303]

to clarify, I really just mean, as the original luddites meant, to oppose automated technology where it destroys human lives and community. In short this means opposing automation where the only people who benefit are the heads of corporations aiming to increase their profit margin. 

 

are you kidding me? who the fuck wants to work in a factory?

 

factory jobs are not worth keeping, give them to the robots, they won't suffer like human factory workers do

Edited November 25, 2017 by Deer

[goDel]

and here's my plan for world piece: stop fighting!

 

totally common sense this

 

also, want to stop climate change? stop driving cars!

[ignatius]

and here's my plan for world piece: stop fighting!

 

totally common sense this

 

also, want to stop climate change? stop driving cars!

 

 

already too late. predicted that by 2030 every summer in the western hemisphere will be hotter than any on record

[chenGOD]

 

and here's my plan for world piece: stop fighting!

 

totally common sense this

 

also, want to stop climate change? stop driving cars!

 

already too late. predicted that by 2030 every summer in the western hemisphere will be hotter than any on record

Capitalists unite! Mankini sales opportunities will abound!

[Hugh Mughnus]

you do NOT want to see this in a mankini

 

promise

 

 

 

 

 

 

invests thousands in mankini industry

Edited November 25, 2017 by Bulk VanderHooj

[goDel]

Images speak for themselves

:-P

[ambermonk]

Apparently Time magazine just sold out to the Koch brothers. Granted I haven't read Time in ages, but this trend is disturbing to say the least.

If net neutrality gets killed next, then all these rich assholes will have their boots to our throats. I wanna believe we can still save it, but many people are already giving up. This is making me sick.

[caze]

 

Science fiction has always told us that machines will rise up and replace us.  But, as I start reading articles about a "new economy" I can only picture that as AI advances, and starts to supplement even high paying jobs, like doctors and lawyers, the 20th century population will have to swallow a bitter pill and re-adjust to the 21st century economy.  We might actually end up in a world where AI and bots perform the menial and replaceable tasks that humans used to do.  Then what is the place of the college educated human being?  Some say we just become students for the rest of our lives, and be damned the traditional job based economy.  There will be huge growing pains for sure, as climate change, human tribalism, resource depletion, possibly the continued rise of radicalized Sunni Wahabiism, etc. change the face of this planet, for better or worse.

 

common sense solution: completely outlaw automation, even the forms we have right now. Boom, hundreds of millions of jobs and hundreds of millions back in the economy.

 

 

boom, everything costs 10 times as much, standard of living plummets. wahey!

[Salvatorin]

the only reason consumer goods are affordable are because of massive subsidization. And which people exactly does, for instance, wide scale agricultural automation...who does it benefit when our cheap produce floods the markets of the global south and contributes to rural flight and slum growth?

[caze]

No, shit is cheap because of supply chain efficiencies, automation, and other technological advances. Significant growth in the manual labour force in the US would lead to increased prices, decreased demand, and lower wages.

Much of the global south has benefited massively from free trade globalisation in recent years too, so what we need is to continue that good work and for more countries to take part.

[cichlisuite]

No, shit is cheap because of supply chain efficiencies, automation, and other technological advances. Significant growth in the manual labour force in the US would lead to increased prices, decreased demand, and lower wages.

Much of the global south has benefited massively from free trade globalisation in recent years too, so what we need is to continue that good work and for more countries to take part.

 

Nyet. Shit is cheap because of the discrepancy between socio-economical spheres where the majority of work gets done. Keeping low standards of living and preventing mining countries to develop is a sure way to keep it that way. All countries where the hard labor is done (mining resources and refinery) have no share in profit, nor they receive any sort of compensation for their natural riches (yes, including cheap workers). Do you have any idea how much corporations save when they employ 10,000 workers (slaves) from African (or Indian) villages for a fistful of dollars per week? Make a calculation how much more expensive a same labor force would be in America, or Europe. Also, human robots (assembly) in China, Taiwan, Cambodia, HongKong, etc etc.

The parts of the chain you describe are actually the more expensive part of the deal. And with numerous creative ways they try to eliminate the middle man as much as is possible (self-driving trucks, delivery drones, bigger and bigger container ships, warehouse dealership connected to internet stores.........)

[caze]

 

No, shit is cheap because of supply chain efficiencies, automation, and other technological advances. Significant growth in the manual labour force in the US would lead to increased prices, decreased demand, and lower wages.

Much of the global south has benefited massively from free trade globalisation in recent years too, so what we need is to continue that good work and for more countries to take part.

 

Nyet. Shit is cheap because of the discrepancy between socio-economical spheres where the majority of work gets done. Keeping low standards of living and preventing mining countries to develop is a sure way to keep it that way. All countries where the hard labor is done (mining resources and refinery) have no share in profit, nor they receive any sort of compensation for their natural riches (yes, including cheap workers). Do you have any idea how much corporations save when they employ 10,000 workers (slaves) from African (or Indian) villages for a fistful of dollars per week? Make a calculation how much more expensive a same labor force would be in America, or Europe. Also, human robots (assembly) in China, Taiwan, Cambodia, HongKong, etc etc.

The parts of the chain you describe are actually the more expensive part of the deal. And with numerous creative ways they try to eliminate the middle man as much as is possible (self-driving trucks, delivery drones, bigger and bigger container ships, warehouse dealership connected to internet stores.........)

 

 

да. 'supply chain efficiencies' is a catch-all, and includes the fact that we outsource a lot of our production to developing countries. you're wrong to think that living standards are kept low though, they go up in response to investment from multinational corporations, quite significantly. they are an engine for local economic growth, not just directly from the factories or whatever, but from all the required support industries and services, and also from indigenous competition, which often ends up replacing the initial multinational's directly run factory. eventually their economy develops beyond what their labour force are willing to work for, and they'll move to somewhere cheaper, and the pattern will play out again (at least until robots replace everyone).

[goDel]

completely outlaw automation? that's like saying you want to quit progress and science. i don't understand some of you cavemen. 

[BobDobalina]

ASo did anyone have Matt Lauer?  Check your tickets people!

[cwmbrancity]

 

 

No, shit is cheap because of supply chain efficiencies, automation, and other technological advances. Significant growth in the manual labour force in the US would lead to increased prices, decreased demand, and lower wages.

Much of the global south has benefited massively from free trade globalisation in recent years too, so what we need is to continue that good work and for more countries to take part.

 

Nyet. Shit is cheap because of the discrepancy between socio-economical spheres where the majority of work gets done. Keeping low standards of living and preventing mining countries to develop is a sure way to keep it that way. All countries where the hard labor is done (mining resources and refinery) have no share in profit, nor they receive any sort of compensation for their natural riches (yes, including cheap workers). Do you have any idea how much corporations save when they employ 10,000 workers (slaves) from African (or Indian) villages for a fistful of dollars per week? Make a calculation how much more expensive a same labor force would be in America, or Europe. Also, human robots (assembly) in China, Taiwan, Cambodia, HongKong, etc etc.

The parts of the chain you describe are actually the more expensive part of the deal. And with numerous creative ways they try to eliminate the middle man as much as is possible (self-driving trucks, delivery drones, bigger and bigger container ships, warehouse dealership connected to internet stores.........)

 

 

да. 'supply chain efficiencies' is a catch-all, and includes the fact that we outsource a lot of our production to developing countries. you're wrong to think that living standards are kept low though, they go up in response to investment from multinational corporations, quite significantly. they are an engine for local economic growth, not just directly from the factories or whatever, but from all the required support industries and services, and also from indigenous competition, which often ends up replacing the initial multinational's directly run factory. eventually their economy develops beyond what their labour force are willing to work for, and they'll move to somewhere cheaper, and the pattern will play out again (at least until robots replace everyone).

 

 

 

the cost of living is low in the US, mainly built on foundations of structural biases in markets, so you get more bang for yer buck & the standard of living is pretty good as a result - $100 would set u up fairly sweetly eg if you were looking for clothes & food

 

the cost of living is high by comparison in the EU, so you pay more for basics, even if the standard of living is ok - the equivalent of $100 here would get me 1 pair of daps & 1 leg's worth of a shit pair of jeans

 

how much would it take to fill up a wagon's worth of fuel state-side, compared to this side of the pond?

 

a rigged game

[cichlisuite]

да. 'supply chain efficiencies' is a catch-all, and includes the fact that we outsource a lot of our production to developing countries. you're wrong to think that living standards are kept low though, they go up in response to investment from multinational corporations, quite significantly. they are an engine for local economic growth, not just directly from the factories or whatever, but from all the required support industries and services, and also from indigenous competition, which often ends up replacing the initial multinational's directly run factory. eventually their economy develops beyond what their labour force are willing to work for, and they'll move to somewhere cheaper, and the pattern will play out again (at least until robots replace everyone).

 

That is some silver-tongue lawyer speak you got there :) I'm sorry but I don't agree. If you believe global economic strategy is just board meetings you fail to see the bigger picture. The reality is that scrap metal salvaging, mine operations, assembly line work etc, is done with the lowest possible strata of work force with no names, health and life insurance or retirement funds. They are the expendable underdogs who fight for work every morning and die in droves because of infections, etc. Like those waterfront workers from the Great Depression times, only worse. It's the exploitation of the political situation and is not in any way being improved with what you say it is. If anything, the interest is to keep it that way, and away from the westerners' eyes. The investment part you mentioned happens only after politics prepare the ground, and that is after the lobbyists ensure the proper affiliates sign to their agenda. In other words, corporations and western foreign politics exercise influence over target countries' politics to make sure that operations have a legitimate front and are clean on paper. But even that is a quite tame option of what else can be done. It is a well known fact that China, Britain and USA bought African land cheap and are keeping local despots in line. They are able to buy cheap land because of perpetuated political instability and corruption. The people with hands-on approach in this profession are called economic hitmen (not assassins per se, but clandestine corporate and political mercenaries). If by some humanist intervention such areas indeed facilitate local economic growth, the corporation moves elsewhere, of course if the operation in question can support that. But in most cases, any effect of local economic growth is nullified by those narrow, self-interest aspirations of newly-found local business tycoons. It's a neo-liberal rule book anyway.

[caze]

The way you view the world isn't borne out by the facts I'm afraid.

 

 

https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty/

[goDel]

caze, what are you doing? you're posting facts and figures instead of some ideological wall of text. only opinions matter! facts and figures are to be ignored or distrusted.

 

* secret brofist *