If the wealthcare bill passes today Trump will look like the strong man deal maker he and his rubes claim. I really hope that doesn't happen, because if he forces a vote and it fails he looks like the spoiled brat that he is.
The path to actually become a law is a lot different and difficult. The sad thing is I don't think Trump gives a damn what's in the bill, it's just about the optics. Such is the mindset of a two bit salesman.
That's the problem though, is that all his successes are just optics with no substance. He won on optics and he retains support based on optics and this ultimatum would give him a big victory regardless of the course of the bill in the future.
This is such a dilemma for me. I really don't want it to pass, but how can I be rooting for the guys who would prevent it from passing only because they want to bring in something even worse!
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
Agreed, imagine if we had prepared by investing in sustainable energy and infrastructure jobs, we would be in much better shape.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Agree on all, and I'm not arguing for a nanny-state. But I think it would be wise for the gov't to offer subsidies, rebates, credits, something for skill training. If someone chooses not to do it, nothing you can do about that.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Agree on all, and I'm not arguing for a nanny-state. But I think it would be wise for the gov't to offer subsidies, rebates, credits, something for skill training. If someone chooses not to do it, nothing you can do about that.
Maybe if we had a possible presidential candidate propose tuition beyond high school be covered by taxes?
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
And that is why I would never live in New York City, lol. 42000 childcare, damn??? I guess the definition of "average" is different for different people. If you need a 1,500,000 home to feel average...then you have an ego problem, not a financial problem.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Agree on all, and I'm not arguing for a nanny-state. But I think it would be wise for the gov't to offer subsidies, rebates, credits, something for skill training. If someone chooses not to do it, nothing you can do about that.
Maybe if we had a possible presidential candidate propose tuition beyond high school be covered by taxes?
I was actually against that proposal. I'm more in favor of specific skills rather than casting a wide net on anything that a university offers. I'd be in favor of STEM jobs, nurses, things where we have a specific need. But I'm not in favor of the gov't paying for more English, Sociology, Criminal Justice, Dance majors, etc.
I also think the cost of tuition is outrageous to say the least. My daughter is getting her acceptances back now for next year, and UVA is the cheapest school at 27k a year, which feels like a deal compared to the others that go up to 60k. I'm not in favor of tax dollars paying for any undergrad available.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Seriously! And is that really saying 32,000 per year towards student loan debt? Yeah, there are some bad decisions that come to play in that equation.
And it's BS too. No one that makes 500k a year with two kids and a mortgage pays a 40% tax rate. Bull fucking shit..
Plus all the interest on the student loan is tax deductible and I believe the child care would be as well (although I haven't paid that in over 10 years so I can't remember).
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Seriously! And is that really saying 32,000 per year towards student loan debt? Yeah, there are some bad decisions that come to play in that equation.
And it's BS too. No one that makes 500k a year with two kids and a mortgage pays a 40% tax rate. Bull fucking shit..
Plus all the interest on the student loan is tax deductible and I believe the child care would be as well (although I haven't paid that in over 10 years so I can't remember).
Plus, you don't need a car in NYC. These people need to consult with us about their budget.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Seriously! And is that really saying 32,000 per year towards student loan debt? Yeah, there are some bad decisions that come to play in that equation.
And it's BS too. No one that makes 500k a year with two kids and a mortgage pays a 40% tax rate. Bull fucking shit..
Plus all the interest on the student loan is tax deductible and I believe the child care would be as well (although I haven't paid that in over 10 years so I can't remember).
Plus, you don't need a car in NYC. These people need to consult with us about their budget.
TWO cars.. and a lot of $ in gas. Yeah the budget is conflicting on a lot of levels.
If the wealthcare bill passes today Trump will look like the strong man deal maker he and his rubes claim. I really hope that doesn't happen, because if he forces a vote and it fails he looks like the spoiled brat that he is.
The path to actually become a law is a lot different and difficult. The sad thing is I don't think Trump gives a damn what's in the bill, it's just about the optics. Such is the mindset of a two bit salesman.
That's the problem though, is that all his successes are just optics with no substance. He won on optics and he retains support based on optics and this ultimatum would give him a big victory regardless of the course of the bill in the future.
I don't know if he gets a sustained victory out of this. He will certainly try to own it as a victory but it could be shortsighted. I am no expert on the bill but it appears that the "improvements" are only marginal which means that the disaster that is Obamacare will still remain in a certain sense and that disaster will then be owned by Trump going forward. The idea that additional changes by Price followed by a future bill could create further improvements is quite unlikely to be enough. I truthfully am not sure what is the better option at this point. The freedom caucus is being delusional that they can eventually pass something else that is more conservative. That battle was lost the minute the Supreme Court ok'ed Obamacare. They are not wrong however in suggesting that the Ryan/Trump bill isn't that much better. Is doing nothing an option? How can you run on repeal and replace and then do zero? What is the alternative?
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
And that is why I would never live in New York City, lol. 42000 childcare, damn??? I guess the definition of "average" is different for different people. If you need a 1,500,000 home to feel average...then you have an ego problem, not a financial problem.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Seriously! And is that really saying 32,000 per year towards student loan debt? Yeah, there are some bad decisions that come to play in that equation.
And it's BS too. No one that makes 500k a year with two kids and a mortgage pays a 40% tax rate. Bull fucking shit..
Plus all the interest on the student loan is tax deductible and I believe the child care would be as well (although I haven't paid that in over 10 years so I can't remember).
Just as a note, the student loan interest deduction is capped at $2,500 dollars now. Which fucking sucks. We pay triple that and the cap is a big bummer.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Seriously! And is that really saying 32,000 per year towards student loan debt? Yeah, there are some bad decisions that come to play in that equation.
And it's BS too. No one that makes 500k a year with two kids and a mortgage pays a 40% tax rate. Bull fucking shit..
Plus all the interest on the student loan is tax deductible and I believe the child care would be as well (although I haven't paid that in over 10 years so I can't remember).
In Ontario it is closer to 50%...and the non-government student loans are not tax deductible.
If the wealthcare bill passes today Trump will look like the strong man deal maker he and his rubes claim. I really hope that doesn't happen, because if he forces a vote and it fails he looks like the spoiled brat that he is.
The path to actually become a law is a lot different and difficult. The sad thing is I don't think Trump gives a damn what's in the bill, it's just about the optics. Such is the mindset of a two bit salesman.
That's the problem though, is that all his successes are just optics with no substance. He won on optics and he retains support based on optics and this ultimatum would give him a big victory regardless of the course of the bill in the future.
I don't know if he gets a sustained victory out of this. He will certainly try to own it as a victory but it could be shortsighted. I am no expert on the bill but it appears that the "improvements" are only marginal which means that the disaster that is Obamacare will still remain in a certain sense and that disaster will then be owned by Trump going forward. The idea that additional changes by Price followed by a future bill could create further improvements is quite unlikely to be enough. I truthfully am not sure what is the better option at this point. The freedom caucus is being delusional that they can eventually pass something else that is more conservative. That battle was lost the minute the Supreme Court ok'ed Obamacare. They are not wrong however in suggesting that the Ryan/Trump bill isn't that much better. Is doing nothing an option? How can you run on repeal and replace and then do zero? What is the alternative?
Sustained victory? Maybe not. Maybe so. Facts aren't relevant anymore, so he can say what he wants and his core won't care. "I forced them to take the deal and then they screwed it up, not my fault. Sad."
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
A budget along these lines
And that is why I would never live in New York City, lol. 42000 childcare, damn??? I guess the definition of "average" is different for different people. If you need a 1,500,000 home to feel average...then you have an ego problem, not a financial problem.
The google says the highest average childcare for an infant in the whole state is $12,700.
No one talks about that today President Trump was meeting with Truckers and hearing their voice, why not? Listen to the audio from the latest tweet. Nothing wrong with this in fact it is very Presidential.
Truckers are shitting themselves right now. The technology is dogfart away from replacing an entire industry there. No doubt they'll get all sorts of job protections out of this meeting.
...the free market, small government party at work...
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?
Depends on how you define it I suppose. It is certainly efficiency and increased productivity. But these same arguments were made when the cotton gin was created, the assembly line, cranes invented, etc. Nothing we see is unique. Every time there is a dramatic change in technology, people are left behind. And there's always a demagogue that says he is going to stop it....and doesn't.
That's a fair comparison. As far as people being "left behind", though, does that equate to social progress? What could be done to reduce these people being left behind when a new technology takes over an industry? There is already an issue with unemployment, so what is the leveling factor between technological innovation and social progress? We talk about it being unfair that lower education individuals (such as many in the fast food industry) are being paid poorly, but does that not specifically fit into the definition of being "left behind"? I guess they should all just suck it up and find a new skill that pays better before they become irrelevant, right? Or should society bend to assist/enable those being "left behind" in industries becoming more and more automated?
I'm certainly not arguing that techno progress is social progress, by no means. But I've always felt like the miss on NAFTA, as an example, was not the actual agreement (which I generally support along with TPP (for different reasons related to China)), but that there were no plans, funds, strategy to retrain workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Free trade or technology isn't the enemy, lack of preparation is.
I think you are correct in that more future planning needs to be done instead of passing half ass deals just to get something on a political resume. Different topic, but I know plenty of individuals that do not "plan ahead" in the way of retirement, life insurance, etc and not just those that do not have the means to do so. So many people frivolously spend every dime they earn and show no sign of financial responsibility...some even with money they don't actually have (credit cards). The government as a whole does not handle finances much better. I'm all about "living for today", but that does not = be irresponsible with tomorrow.
Seriously! And is that really saying 32,000 per year towards student loan debt? Yeah, there are some bad decisions that come to play in that equation.
And it's BS too. No one that makes 500k a year with two kids and a mortgage pays a 40% tax rate. Bull fucking shit..
Plus all the interest on the student loan is tax deductible and I believe the child care would be as well (although I haven't paid that in over 10 years so I can't remember).
Just as a note, the student loan interest deduction is capped at $2,500 dollars now. Which fucking sucks. We pay triple that and the cap is a big bummer.
Wow.. that does suck. When I went to public school in FL in the 90's, undergrad credits were $30 and grad were $60. It was pretty hard to legitimately run up massive debt.
If the wealthcare bill passes today Trump will look like the strong man deal maker he and his rubes claim. I really hope that doesn't happen, because if he forces a vote and it fails he looks like the spoiled brat that he is.
The path to actually become a law is a lot different and difficult. The sad thing is I don't think Trump gives a damn what's in the bill, it's just about the optics. Such is the mindset of a two bit salesman.
That's the problem though, is that all his successes are just optics with no substance. He won on optics and he retains support based on optics and this ultimatum would give him a big victory regardless of the course of the bill in the future.
I don't know if he gets a sustained victory out of this. He will certainly try to own it as a victory but it could be shortsighted. I am no expert on the bill but it appears that the "improvements" are only marginal which means that the disaster that is Obamacare will still remain in a certain sense and that disaster will then be owned by Trump going forward. The idea that additional changes by Price followed by a future bill could create further improvements is quite unlikely to be enough. I truthfully am not sure what is the better option at this point. The freedom caucus is being delusional that they can eventually pass something else that is more conservative. That battle was lost the minute the Supreme Court ok'ed Obamacare. They are not wrong however in suggesting that the Ryan/Trump bill isn't that much better. Is doing nothing an option? How can you run on repeal and replace and then do zero? What is the alternative?
Sustained victory? Maybe not. Maybe so. Facts aren't relevant anymore, so he can say what he wants and his core won't care. "I forced them to take the deal and then they screwed it up, not my fault. Sad."
Ha. You are right that will probably be the exact tweet.
Comments
Party first, fuck everyone else.
I also think the cost of tuition is outrageous to say the least. My daughter is getting her acceptances back now for next year, and UVA is the cheapest school at 27k a year, which feels like a deal compared to the others that go up to 60k. I'm not in favor of tax dollars paying for any undergrad available.
Plus all the interest on the student loan is tax deductible and I believe the child care would be as well (although I haven't paid that in over 10 years so I can't remember).
My wife and I wouldn't spent that much on clothes in 20 years!
"I forced them to take the deal and then they screwed it up, not my fault. Sad."