"There's nothing wrong with our marketing structure. We'll keep it where it is"
--Blockbuster Video
--Myspace
--Polaroid
Sanders starting to kick some HC... whatever
- Thread starter bjwsan
- Start date
"There's nothing wrong with our marketing structure. We'll keep it where it is"
--Blockbuster Video
--Myspace
--Polaroid
This is the typical answer I encounter, but it's also the wrong one. We are entering a unique era in human history. This isn't the Luddites concern of power looms making the textile worker obsolete. We're entering an era of engineered INTELLIGENCE. This is not a remote possibility, or quaint sci-fi musings. This is the unmistakable reality that we're inevitably moving toward. For example, Nevada passed a law that allows trucks to be driven autonomously. Other states will follow suit. For now, they require a driver to be present in case of emergencies, but it won't last. Once trucks have driven millions of miles with a track record that puts even the safest drivers to shame, companies will demand that the law allow complete autonomy. The millions of jobs lost to autonomous driving systems are nowhere near made up by the industry that creates the system. But that's only the beginning, even the invention of automation systems will eventually be automated.
There is a lot of talk about how to measure productivity in this new age. By all measures, the internet has REDUCED productivity. The internet has transformed the world, and yet, it doesn't seem to have added anything to the GDP. A lot of economists and thinkers are trying to find ways to measure this added value brought upon by digital innovation in GDP calculations, but it isn't an easy task. The pattern will continue.
The problem with guaranteed income is that people need to feel useful, not simply get paid. But like I said, there are no perfect solutions. People adapting to this new reality, while able to survive, is better than letting them starve while hoping they compete.
You think this is too speculative. I don't. It doesn't matter. I'm actually not all that worried about it. Once this becomes an apparent problem, we will be forced to find a solution. Things will be okay.
Infrastructure funding needs to be improved. I agree.
This isn't realistic. All we can do is try to reduce our impact, which we have been doing. Climate change is here to stay, and mass engineering solutions, like making the ionosphere more reflective, are potential disasters waiting to happen.
Forcing inefficiency on the market due to inability to understand that capitalism and growth are the reasons for our continually improving living standards.
This is nice, but also an insignificant measure as far as the vast majority of the population is concerned. By yeah, sure. Whatever.
All right.
Again, inability to understand the proven power of the free market. I assume there are ridiculous promises about bringing back manufacturing as well?
We've discussed this before. I don't want to get into it again.
That's vague. But I can think of a number of beneficial regulations that can be enacted in that regard.
I fully support universal healthcare.
These are slogans. I don't know what can even be said about them.
If you think any politician is trustworthy you should probably be tested for a mental handicap.
The bulk of these you agree we need to do something about. And yet, we're pandering to the biggest dollar instead of doing this. Imagine that. We can disagree on some of these... there's room for that. All political promises are really just goals, or a wish list. We do it in business all the time. Line up all your problems, pick your top 5, and we'll start on those.
Instead of working on some of these, we're actually working against many of them. In the unlikely event Sanders gets in office, he'll maybe be able to actually get one or two. But with the way our congress/senate has been acting in recent memory, getting one or two is great progress.
QUOTE=Siro;1102992]There is a lot of talk about how to measure productivity in this new age. By all measures, the internet has REDUCED productivity. The internet has transformed the world, and yet, it doesn't seem to have added anything to the GDP. A lot of economists and thinkers are trying to find ways to measure this added value brought upon by digital innovation in GDP calculations, but it isn't an easy task.[/QUOTE]
This started in the early 90's but as you've said living standards keep improving regardless of our calculations saying otherwise. Economists have been stumped for over 20 years about tech improvements not translating into measurable results.
I go with the seat of the pants meter on this one. Life is obviously getting much better and easier.
I'll try to engage your deeper points later. I relate to your ideas plenty.
This started in the early 90's but as you've said living standards keep improving regardless of our calculations saying otherwise. Economists have been stumped for over 20 years about tech improvements not translating into measurable results.
I go with the seat of the pants meter on this one. Life is obviously getting much better and easier.
I'll try to engage your deeper points later. I relate to your ideas plenty.
Like I said before, Sanders' social and foreign policy views align with mine. He just loses me when he starts talking about market manipulation to make it "more fair", as that would hurt all of us. But I think that presidents, in general, have little effect on the workings of the economy, and I wouldn't be that worried if he becomes president. If he gets the Dem nomination, then I'll consider voting for him. If Clinton gets it, I'll be bored to tears.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Owners are categorically different than employees. Most managers don't need to work that long. Most of them are just being taken advantage of.
I agree, but I think we have to start somewhere and move forward gradually. I think we should cut the work day to a harder 8 hours(double time) and eventually a soft 6.(time and a half)
1) Cutting hours creates more jobs in the same pool of laborers.
2) This reduces unemployment and makes the employee more valuable.
3) Prices rise but most of that is paid by people that make more and therefore consume more.
In this way wealth is redistributed to the lower class with limited government intervention. Of course this is more effective if we address Chinese trade manipulation' labor conditions, and wages. We have the leverage though, they need our market, without it they could face another revolution.
In order to implement a base salary I think we should institute some version of the "Fair Tax". A consumption tax where every American is mailed a check to cover the sales tax someone would have to pay if they made say 30k per year. I think it sets up a system where we can overtime adjust both the rebate and the tax rate to fit our needs as we transition to a new era in labor.
Provide your numbers with links(if you don't mind). Remember that we are talking about class here so an average across all Americans won't be sufficient. Further I hope your numbers don't count the unemployed/underemployed. That's not leisure time, that is stressful. I'm honestly not trying to be sassy and would actually be very interested to look at them.
Siro, I know you think your opinion of the future of our economy and technologically-focused free market is correct, but all it is is an opinion and speculation. People have been saying for decades that technology would replace the low level worker, and it has to a small degree. But those who make this assumption forget that the free market depends on the low/mid level laborer to help drive the market. It's in the markets best interest to have a skilled, employed populous, and this will never change.
I also love the comments that "things are just fine" in America for the typical working American. This coming from rich/upper-middle/middle class white Americans makes me skeptical. There are people suffering in the richest country in the free world. Things may be fine for you and your buddies, but there are way too many suffering and if you don't think new and innovative changes are not necessary I don't know what to tell you. This **** has been acknowledged then ignored or forgotten over and over and over again.
We need to stop thinking small and innovate again.
I also love the comments that "things are just fine" in America for the typical working American. This coming from rich/upper-middle/middle class white Americans makes me skeptical. There are people suffering in the richest country in the free world. Things may be fine for you and your buddies, but there are way too many suffering and if you don't think new and innovative changes are not necessary I don't know what to tell you. This **** has been acknowledged then ignored or forgotten over and over and over again.
We need to stop thinking small and innovate again.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Co-ops are perfectly compatible with free markets. Land O' Lakes is a co-op. So is every Credit Union.
Trade Unions are also compatible with our system and way less of a move toward socialism than what you propose.
It's not a free market. China is manipulating the market and their currency and we continue to conduct "free trade" with them. Yes we need some manufacturing capacity. If for no other reason than for security. Without some manufacturing we are vulnerable. We shouldn't allow a communist regime to prop itself up by manipulating our market.