Blank Discussion Topic
Options
Comments
-
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?rgambs said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.rgambs said: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.0 -
And 10,000$ in clothes for a year??? Uh yeah, you are wearing some fancy shit.
My wife and I wouldn't spent that much on clothes in 20 years!Monkey Driven, Call this Living?0 -
Toronto is quickly turning into this.PJPOWER said:
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.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these lines...PJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...0 -
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.mrussel1 said:
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..PJPOWER said:
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.pjhawks said:
move the f out of NYC then.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these lines...PJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...
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).Monkey Driven, Call this Living?0 -
In Ontario it is closer to 50%...and the non-government student loans are not tax deductible.mrussel1 said:
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..PJPOWER said:
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.pjhawks said:
move the f out of NYC then.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these lines...PJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...
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).0 -
Sustained victory? Maybe not. Maybe so. Facts aren't relevant anymore, so he can say what he wants and his core won't care.BS44325 said:
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?rgambs said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.rgambs said: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.
"I forced them to take the deal and then they screwed it up, not my fault. Sad."Monkey Driven, Call this Living?0 -
The google says the highest average childcare for an infant in the whole state is $12,700.PJPOWER said:
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.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these linesPJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...0 -
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.rgambs said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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..PJPOWER said:
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.pjhawks said:
move the f out of NYC then.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these lines...PJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...
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).0 -
Ha. You are right that will probably be the exact tweet.rgambs said:
Sustained victory? Maybe not. Maybe so. Facts aren't relevant anymore, so he can say what he wants and his core won't care.BS44325 said:
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?rgambs said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.rgambs said: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.
"I forced them to take the deal and then they screwed it up, not my fault. Sad."0 -
Any transcript of Trump speaking is practically unintelligible. The man can't even really finish a thought. It's crazy that his fans don't mind this.mfc2006 said:not sure if this has been posted yet or not......
http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/03/23/man-testified-trumps-campaign-chair-just-shot-dead/
Sure, it's a democratic page. That shouldn't matter, though.With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
Yeah, those were all bullshit numbers.Go Beavers said:
The google says the highest average childcare for an infant in the whole state is $12,700.PJPOWER said:
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.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these linesPJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...0 -
There was an article that talked about measuring people's brain responses to his speeches, basically saying that the areas of emotional response really got activated when people listened to him. This makes sense, as his supporters can't formulate why they like him based on policy, but instead based on how he makes them feel.PJ_Soul said:
Any transcript of Trump speaking is practically unintelligible. The man can't even really finish a thought. It's crazy that his fans don't mind this.mfc2006 said:not sure if this has been posted yet or not......
http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/03/23/man-testified-trumps-campaign-chair-just-shot-dead/
Sure, it's a democratic page. That shouldn't matter, though.0 -
Well, think about the shocking technological progress that has happened since the 80s. Now consider the unemployment rate during that time. It doesn't seem to me that technology is actually reducing the number of jobs available. As far as I've noticed, the only kinds of jobs that have been lost en masse over that time are all the blue collar manufacturing-related jobs and agricultural jobs. And how many of those lost jobs were because of advancing technology? Weren't most of them lost because companies sent manufacturing overseas or because farming became corporate rather than because they lost their job to a mechanical arm or something? What are the real stats I wonder? Those "left behind" more seem to be so because of the cost of living vs wages rather than technology. Jobs that used to allow less educated workers to support themselves no longer pay enough for them to do so because of the ever-expanding gap between wages and cost of living. Basically, the culprit is capitalism, not technology. Thoughts?PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...Post edited by PJ_Soul onWith all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
If that lacky Devin Nunes allows Manafort to be interviewed, it means he's gonna say nothing. We need an independent investigation.Cliffy6745 said:everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do0 -
Well once you hit a certain income deductions get phased out and you likely also get hit with the AMT.mrussel1 said:
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..PJPOWER said:
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.pjhawks said:
move the f out of NYC then.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these lines...PJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...
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).SHOW COUNT: (170) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=114, US=124, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=4, Australia=5
Mexico=1, Colombia=10 -
After seven horrible years of ObamaCare (skyrocketing premiums & deductibles, bad healthcare), this is finally your chance for a great plan!
The irony is that the Freedom Caucus, which is very pro-life and against Planned Parenthood, allows P.P. to continue if they stop this plan!0 -
My thought would be that if I was required to pay someone more, I would expect a higher education level and screen my employees a little more strictly...and who ends up being left behind there? I would also consider what technology could do to help the bottom line and whether it would be cheaper to buy a $15000 burger flipping machine than pay a burger flipper $20000/year. I also do not like jobs being sent overseas, but capitalism also encourages innovation and technological progress through competition. I would suggest incentives to keep jobs here/penalties for sending them overseas...maybe to the extent that it would not be profitable to do so.PJ_Soul said:
Well, think about the shocking technological progress that has happened since the 80s. Now consider the unemployment rate during that time. It doesn't seem to me that technology is actually reducing the number of jobs available. As far as I've noticed, the only kinds of jobs that have been lost en masse over that time are all the blue collar manufacturing-related jobs and agricultural jobs. And how many of those lost jobs were because of advancing technology? Weren't most of them lost because companies sent manufacturing overseas or because farming became corporate rather than because they lost their job to a mechanical arm or something? What are the real stats I wonder? Those "left behind" more seem to be so because of the cost of living vs wages rather than technology. Jobs that used to allow less educated workers to support themselves no longer pay enough for them to do so because of the ever-expanding gap between wages and cost of living. Basically, the culprit is capitalism, not technology. Thoughts?PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...0 -
Here's the thing.
When Obama wanted his health care plan passed, he spent a full year traveling around the country and making a case to voters. He could tell Joe Bob in Iowa, "I understand you're having a problem with XYZ. Here's how my plan would seek to address that."
He did that for a full year.
This president does not seem as invested in this health care bill, except for we just get it over with so we can move on. He's forcing them to ram-rod it through, and doesn't seem interested in what has to happen, policy-wise, to get that done. I doubt he even knows what's in it, policy-wise.
All we've heard from Trump on this is "Obamacare is a disaster" -- OK, well, tell us how? What are the problems with it, as you see it? Who is it a problem for? Lay it out.
And "This plan is going to be great" -- again, tell us how? What issues that you had with Obamacare does your bill address? If you see it's going to make my medical care better, tell me how.
Trump has done none of that, and that's partly what's killing the bill, or at least making it politically untenable. The public hates this bill. Nobody buying it, because nobody is out there selling it. Trump might be a fine negotiator behind the closed doors of the boardroom, but a huge part of being president is making a sales pitch to a skeptical public. He doesn't seem to know how to do that.Post edited by slightofjeff oneverybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do0 -
-
Some were high, some were low. My friend's kid starts kindergarten next year. 50,000 a year K-12 for most decent private schools. His daughter is two years younger. That's 100k/year soon. Not long before he moves to the burbs.PJPOWER said:
Yeah, those were all bullshit numbers.Go Beavers said:
The google says the highest average childcare for an infant in the whole state is $12,700.PJPOWER said:
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.Cliffy6745 said:
A budget along these linesPJPOWER said:
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.mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
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?mrussel1 said:
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.PJPOWER said:
Similar to the burger flipping/kiosk machines being incorporated into fast food chains due the rising costs of hiring more workers? Progress?CM189191 said:
Great. Another step backwards.PJfanwillneverleave1 said: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...
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsKZok6cXTI
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help