Seattle is kinda like Haight Asbury was in 1967. Those kids come from all over America, trying to find something better.
Who are going to buy all of these wonderful goods and services if you automate away all of the jobs foundational to the middle class that enables them to do so.
I live in a blue state that fortunately remembers the New Deal and is economically diverse enough to weather the storm when the speculative tech bubble inevitably bursts.
You are not talking to a red state Trumpster. I am an Eisenhower conservative that respects the European model of liberalism, not the insanity of American west coast liberalism. So I am more than happy to point out the failings of your utopia. I travel to Seattle often. I see the drug needles in the alleys, spaced out homeless teenagers wandering the streets like packs of wild dogs and the uncomfortable glances exchanged between the local progressive hipsters and code bro Amazonians.
European liberalism is to the left of American west coast liberalism so I'm glad you see the way now.
Btw, Eisenhower conservatives are for the history books ever since the GOP saw democrats backstabbing racists as an opportunity.
You'll eventually make the argument that two white people kissing is overt racism...
I get that average Americans want to feel self reliant, which is why they fall for every charlatan promising to bring back the good old days, if you only give him a big enough tax cut. But that ship has sailed. If you aren't automating, you are getting automated out. Now the question is do you want redistribution of a bigger pie or destitution and a smaller pie in the hands of a few?
I agree with you entirely, but you're leaving something out which supports your argument even more. Automation=increased productivity=decreased cost of goods. When the price of goods goes down, everyone gets, in effect, a raise, i.e. an increase in real wages because your dollars have more buying power. That means the "stipend" you're talking about will extend further.
I think in the future, certainly by the end of this century, half the able bodied adult population won't be working. They'll be getting basic support from the state, but goods, and even some services such as house cleaning which can be automated, will be absurdly cheap compared to today. So the standard of living for those on state support would not be fantastic, but better than it is for people on welfare today.
I agree with you entirely, but you're leaving something out which supports your argument even more. Automation=increased productivity=decreased cost of goods. When the price of goods goes down, everyone gets, in effect, a raise, i.e. an increase in real wages because your dollars have more buying power. That means the "stipend" you're talking about will extend further.
So you're saying automation will stop inflation. Wall St may differ.
So we should just let the greediest people in the solar system have their way with us & hope they'll be gentle, right?
In this case, cheaper goods = higher profits. imo
Automation results in cheaper goods, just like utilizing low wage foreign labor does. It isn't really debatable, is it?
Not quite sure where you got that from what I wrote. I support public assistance for everyone who's out of work, because the economy is not at full employment, and in the future it will be even further from full employment. The wealthy will have to be taxed much more to pay for this basic support, and for healthcare for all.
I get that people want to feel self-reliant, but this automation trend is inevitable. It isn't going to be stopped. There is no way to do that.
Not really. The west coast migration of the 60s was a social movement. What is happening in Seattle and Portland and Oakland today is affluent NIMBYists exporting their drug problems to urban centers.Seattle is kinda like Haight Asbury was in 1967. Those kids come from all over America, trying to find something better.
So you therefore agree that American liberals are not that far from KKK types on the degeneracy spectrum due to the political necessity of centrism.It's just a fact Startrooper and friends are fond of pointing out that Democrats used to be the klan's favorite back in the day, until the party did them proper with civil rights. The country's been trying to live that down ever since racists made the south solid red for their new pals. That was 50 years ago and I suspect Starbuck isn't *that* old. It's in fact why our "leftists" are far to the right of the europeans, because they need to hold a centrist coalition to counter the klan vote.
This is simply the political reality we live in, and that relationship between fiscal & racist conservatives is the inescapable underlying basis for all these american politics topic. You know just as well as the degenerates that it's not about policy but rather a quid pro quo of interests.
So you therefore agree that American liberals are not that far from KKK types on the degeneracy spectrum due to the political necessity of centrism.
Seattle, Portland, and Oakland are some of the most rapidly rising real estate markets, because affluent NIMBYists are exporting their techie kids there.Not really. The west coast migration of the 60s was a social movement. What is happening in Seattle and Portland and Oakland today is affluent NIMBYists exporting their drug problems to urban centers.
The nation’s median sale price rose 7.3 percent to $298,000 in June, Redfin reported.
Prospective Bay Area homebuyers paid a lot more. Oakland’s median sale price was $719,500, up 9.8 percent year-over-year. San Jose’s median price was an even $1,000,000, up 11.1 percent. San Francisco’s median price was $1,250,000, up 4.2 percent.
The “fastest” markets in the nation — where sales were struck most rapidly — were Denver, Colo., Portland, Ore., and Seattle, all tied at seven median days on market, followed by Grand Rapids, Mich. (eight days on market), and Boston, Mass. (nine days on market)
Not really. The west coast migration of the 60s was a social movement. What is happening in Seattle and Portland and Oakland today is affluent NIMBYists exporting their drug problems to urban centers.
Like we needed an ex Russian Spy to tell us this. The Russian's are playing chess and the US has been playing checkers since Clinton (Bush Sr. was a former head of the CIA and possessed better strategic thinking, IMHO). Now, we are paying the piper even though we had every advantage at the end of the cold war. The ONLY reason I voted for Romney was the fact they he seemed to understand that the Russian's were still our greatest strategic threat (other than that, Repubs seem stuck on voodoo economics and the destruction of the past 85 years of social progress). Terrorist's are horrible plague, but their ability to usurp the US gov't is greatly exaggerated.
If all the effing pollsters hadn't been so completely fvcking wrong about HRC's impending electoral college win - we'd all be better off now. Nate Silver, et al, can go pound sand . I wish the MMS would take more responsibility in this one area.
Blame the electorate.
Blame the pollsters? Hardly. Blame the electorate. Trump as President was an absurd idea when he announced & even more so now that he won.
Nato expansion wasn't checkers. The Russians are denied strategic advantages they once held. Putin put an end to it in both Georgia & Ukraine. When Ukraine fell into disarray, he secured the strategic Crimea for Russia. It was previously a lease deal but the Ukrainians weren't reliable partners, so he took it. When everybody complained too much, he started shit in the Donbass, all of which put him under US sanctions.
No it wasn't checkers. The policy began under Bush Sr.'s administrative. But later presidents pushed it father, faster than was wise - forcing Russia's hand. The Ukraine wasn't prepared for the transition that the Obama administration was driving. The sanctions were necessary because of a lack of strategic patience and proper preparation. Little Georgie Bush was daft when he 'saw' into Putin's soul - and Obama's lack of experience cost the Ukrainians something that sanctions cannot bring back.