Reply With Quote
and the longer:
His take on such college jobs is one that you and I probably both agree on.
UBI/welfare - what's the difference? The battles on this board show the chasm between both sides and even though some of you hate my guts, the real problem is not the other side - it's the Chinese. People can rail and bicker about topics: universal health care, immigration, etc. but I'm more concerned about the Chinese. This high and mighty "principled" at ude of Google workers not wanting to work on military projects with America (which will help us maintain our superiority) at the same time that Google is helping China is VERY troubling to me (thankfully, it seems like it's been recently shut down). Some of you fight like the enemy are fellow Americans when our way of life/freedom/liberty will be threatened by the cost of all these "free" programs leading to economic problems and ultimately to China taking over as the planet's world power/reserve currency (in case some of you don't realize - they are spreading their tentacles all over the planet eg. building highways in Jamaica in return for tolls, hotels, influence).
The very thing (education) that would help in the future is the very thing some of you rail against (teachers' unions vs choice). Look at W VA - I cannot believe what took place - absolutely no charter schools - the threat of strike just completely shut down the legislation to introduce charter schools - something I feel would help lower income kids who don't have a choice and must attend the (often crappy) school within which boundary they live. Ds self-studied for AP Physics 1 and AP Chemistry (his school has crappy teachers in these subjects) and asked his charter school to allow him to take the AP exams. They not only allowed it - they are paying for them up front - with the understanding that if he doesn't pass the exams, he'll re-pay the fees (I didn't expect that - I'm willing to pay for them regardless). That would never happen in a public school - the bureaucracy - they wouldn't even entertain/accommodate students' initiative/drive.
I don't know what is to be done with the millions in transportation (I hear it's the #1 job in quite a lot of states), retail (Gymboree closing, Old Navy/Gap going only online, etc), fast food, etc. I've so far only given thought to what my kids are going into (selfish, I know). Sorry, for the rambling, but ds is coming home for Spring Break and Federer won his 100th le - I'm in a really good mood :-)
and the longer:
His take on such college jobs is one that you and I probably both agree on.
If you want to call UBI "welfare", I don't care. I know that word has a negative stigma to it but every society in the history of mankind that had a strong middle class had some form of welfare or another.
Not sure what any of your incoherent rambling about the Chinese has to do with anything I said.
Regarding your claim about public schools not entertaining a student's desire to take the AP exam, I call bull . I went to a public high school and it not only paid for but administered 6 different AP tests (calculus, english, biology, chemistry, spanish, french) to all of the kids who took the respective AP class. You can also apply to take an AP test if your school doesn't offer the class regardless of the cir stances, it doesn't require any "accommodation" made by the school you go to, you can work directly with CollegeBoard. I still remember when I took my AP calculus test there were 3 weird looking home schooled kids who had arranged to take the test at my school. They looked like it was the first time they'd ever seen daylight.
Did your school offer to pay for an AP test for a student who didn't take their class? That's what ds' charter school is doing - encouraging students to self-study - paying for the exam if the student passes the test. This will now be school policy - open to any student who wants to take an AP exam regardless of whether the class is offered or taken at the school - and he asked on Monday (quick decision) - Friday was the deadline to sign up for exams. And this mother who railed at why he left it so late to ask is kinda proud he was able to make his case and sell it (that's another thing - availability of administration/listening to the students).
No idea, but regardless, it costs $94 to take an AP test. A charter school's willingness to pay for a $94 AP test (keep in mind, if you're taking AP tests, then you're trying to get college credit, and if you can afford college, you can afford $94) vs. a public school that might not be willing to pay for one seems like a completely arbitrary and ridiculously insignificant point that you're only making because it's specific to your anecdotal experience.
Sure, just like laying railroad ties isn't a good career choice, or TV and VCR repair wouldn't be a career choice. In a 40 year career span, you can easily change careers 2 or 3 times to keep up with the demand. You just have to find a way to bridge your education so that it's applicable to the next one instead of going 100K in debt again for a different degree. I know engineers who became RNs because they got tired of having to go back to school to keep up with advancing technologies or be laid off. Some are now even NPs. That's a decent salary for a job that will likely not go away in the near future. But not everyone is going to be able to transition into a medical career. In 50 years no one here will still be working, most likely. Those who are working at that time have the burden of researching and selecting viable careers. If you know that 50 years from now AI and robotics will dominate the workplace, then it's not a hard ask to suggest young people do something that involves them in AI and robotics. They should be able to see the picture come into focus as years go by, because whatever lens you are using to predict that, they'll have a better one in 10 years.
I agree with generalizations being terrible when you're trying to have a discussion about these things, tbh. They're at the core of hand waving based largely on dogma.
And yes, there's extremes on socialism like there's on capitalism and any type of economic/political system, which disfigures the system itself. That doesn't mean they're the norm, and whenever you use any of these systems, that concern is always there.
We've seen all this play out in the Industrial Revolution, including the co-opting of government by oligarchy, which ended up fueling the creation of unionization.
Ocasio-chakrabrati is going to overplay her hand.
While we can never predict what road technological advancement will take over the next 50 years, I think the automation threat has been grossly overstated (I know, I'm walking back an earlier position that "feared" automation's mass displacement of workers at a disruptive scale). Why do I think this? The academic/tech industry, working through pop-sci/pop-tech journalists, are largely full of . The "reporting" of the efficacy of these technologies are little more than glorified press-releases that oversell the tech's capability to keep the VC/grant money rolling in. Here's a blogger whose opinion I highly respect (PhD in physics, computer science/machine learning expert). A couple of articles:Not sure if this is sarcastic
I'm assuming your question is based off the premise that the cost of increased income would be passed onto the customer (and thus fuel inflation). I think the answer is yes there would be inflation but not so much that it completely negates the purchasing power created by the higher wages. Even if a company increased prices to completely offset the cost of increased labor such that the same levels of profitability are maintained, the cost to the customer isn't increasing by the same percentage that wages are increasing by. Most of Walmart's expenses, for example, come from cost of goods sold. COGs are undoubtedly somewhat affected by the cost of labor in transporting/warehousing supplies (plus labor costs of walmart suppliers), but it's far from a 1:1 correlation.
I think the more worrisome and valid argument is that higher wages increase the push for automation.
People don't realize how many jobs (and not just low skill jobs, medium skill jobs too) are going to be automated in the next 50 years because of digitization, AI, etc. There's a new product that can not only make McDonalds quality burgers from scratch but can also make better quality, gourmet burgers from scratch that you typically have to go to some y overpriced restaurant that chargers $20 for a burger to get, and there's already kiosks at some restaurants where you can place the order yourself. Before you know it, walking into McDonalds will consist of entering your order into a system that can ping the burger making software to make your order and then spit it out at the pick up window, with probably 1-2 tech guys and a manager at the store just to make sure things are operating smoothly.
Automation is what we really need to be solving for imo.
https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2...minating-jobs/
https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2...e-near-future/
https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2...nal-centipede/
On this point, I remember Kevin Drumm at Mother Jones writing an alarmist article in 2016 about automation's growing threat, citing such examples as the "self-driving" beer truck that delivered 200 cases of beer. Turns out it was something of a farce. Here's a leading expert in self-driving automobiles, and he doesn't think we're anywhere near Level 5 automation:
https://blog.piekniewski.info/2018/0...ll-on-its-way/Speaking of Uber they substantially slowed their self-driving program, practically killed their self driving truck program (same one that delivered a few crates of beer in Colorado in 2016 with great fanfares, a demo that later on turned out to be completely staged), and recent rumors indicate they might be even looking to sell the unit.
https://blog.piekniewski.info/2018/1...winter-update/
I'm not suggesting we be complacent, but as he said about the self-driving truck, many of these A.I. tech showcases are usually staged with a human operator in the loop (Boston Dynamics is famous for this). These technologies need obscenely controlled conditions and a human supervisor to work even half-way decently. That said, as you implied, automation will take a more boring form with self-serving kiosks and the like.
Don't disagree. The democrats need to shut the up about racism and just focus on bread-and-butter policies (economy, healthcare, etc).
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez attacks ICE as a 'dangerous agency'
You are one sick mother er. That crazy woman is not running circles (it's circles doofus, not rings) around Donald Trump.She is a socialist wacko who has nary a clue about what she is saying and doing. Even the powers to be in the DummyRat party know she is totally out to lunch. Kid, why don't you ask your mommy to enroll you in school so you can get an education. Every post you make, you come across as someone born without any gray matter between your ears. Most likely you are one of them Antifa assholes. Anyway, like I told you before, go yourself!
Oh, and for the record, AOC, is a walking cluster . You are just too stupidly ignorant to realize it. Now, go yourself, head.
I never make an assertion that I am unprepared to back up, and always admit when I am wrong about something. That is the vast gulf between you and I.
If we can sustain a trillion dollars for the military, we can probably squeeze in free college for a few thousand people per year over the long term.
This money does not vanish into the ether. An investment in people and productivity ends up paying the economy back,j especially when you are talking about someone who might not be able to afford college otherise (differential in lifetime income is greatest there). We are talking about a rather large percentage of our economy. $3.5Tn each year.
Baby Jesus, is that you?
Depends on the marginal propensity to save, which increases as income does. The answer is no.
Non sequitur
The problem (for lack of a better term) of paid tuition is possibly the control over who learns what. If everyone qualifies, then there will be a lot of wasted money on dropouts. If you have to pass tests to qualify and then reimburse the feds if you drop out, we'd be pretty much where we are now.This money does not vanish into the ether. An investment in people and productivity ends up paying the economy back,j especially when you are talking about someone who might not be able to afford college otherise (differential in lifetime income is greatest there). We are talking about a rather large percentage of our economy. $3.5Tn each year.
Many companies will pay for your college if you get a degree in something they can use. If the feds do the same thing, you're just offering indentured servitude which, once the drama is removed, is just an arrangement to pay your debt through service. The cool thing about that is your wages don't decrease in the process, rather they increase. So should the feds pay for college and insist that you do something a board of advisors have decided they need? For example, would you be willing to work for the federal government for 2 years if they paid for your college? What about countries that require 2 years of military service? If this country required that, and as a return they paid for your school, would that make sense to you or would it remove freedoms you think you have right now (regardless if you've already served, this is a hypothetical).
Your idea includes wealth redistribution though, correct? Otherwise you're conjuring something from nothing.
http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/...tical-parties/most white racists are in the Trump party.
Start off with simple composition. The GOP is almost exclusively white, roughly 86% as of 2016, compared to 56% for Democrats.
Given a tentative assumption that white racists are equally likely to be Democrats or Trump Party, this gives us our multiplier.
We then need the raw number to multiply.
We are hindered here somewhat by the fact that not all states require specific party registration.
We can get close though.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/w...istered-voters
44M Democrats 32M Trump Party
24M white people are democrats, 27M whites are Trump Party
That gets you, all things equal and sheer raw numbers, to that conclusion.
Let's abandon that tentative assumption, and look at what data points we can out of various polls that would help us determine if one party or other is more likely to have views that can easily be described as racist.
https://www.theroot.com/how-the-repu...ism-1827779221Nearly half of the country (49 percent) believes Donald Trump is racist but 86 percent of Republicans say he is not, according to a recent Quinnipiac University poll. The same survey shows that 79 percent of Republicans approve of the way the president handles race. Other data points include:
52 percent of voters who supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election believed blacks are “less evolved” than whites, according to researchers at the Kellog School of Management.
In a 2018 YouGov poll, 59 percent of Republicans agreed: “If blacks would only try harder, they would be as well off as whites.”
The same YouGov poll revealed that 59 percent of self-identified Republicans believe blacks are treated fairly by the criminal justice system.
70 percent of Republicans agreed that increased diversity hurts whites.
Republican-appointed judges give black defendants longer jail sentences, according to a Harvard study released in May.
55 percent of white Republicans agreed “blacks have worse jobs, income and housing than white people” because “most just don’t have the motivation or willpower to pull themselves up out of poverty” according to the Washington Post’s review of data from the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center.
Nearly twice as many Republicans than Democrats (42 percent versus 24 percent) believe that blacks are lazier than whites, according to the same NORC poll.
The data seem fairly clear.
In every poll that has attempted to measure racist views, the Trump party consistently holds those view at a higher percentage than Democrats.
I can't think of any white supremicist that has run on a Democratic ticket, even in predominantly white areas. There is a reason Representative King is in the Trump Party.
The conclusion seems a reasonable one, given what we know.
You spent a lot of time and energy chasing the wrong stat.
You said most white racists are in the Trump party.
Illustrate how you know most white racists are even voters.
"my idea"? What would that be? UBI?
UBI would be wealth redistribution, yes.
Little bit more on this:
Given that inflation has been curbed back, and long term growth rates have shifted from an historical 3% to closer to 2%, that would seem to indicate that inflationary pressure overall has been reduced.
Changing demographics have fundamentally altered our economy.
Hmmm. That would simply have to be an underlying assumption to be able to use voters as a proxy.
Assume: racists tend to vote at rates proportional to the general population.
One might be able to use educational attainment as a proxy, given that education and income tend to influence voting likelihood. Considering that though, one has to also account that education tends to indicate likelihood of racism for any given individual. Care to guess which party is better educated overall?
Given polling data, which merely asks whether people lean one way or another, and not specifically whether they vote, it would the question is some what moot.
If you would prefer, I would withdraw the statement,and subs ute:
White people self-identifying as Republican are more likely to hold racist views than white, self-identified Democrats.
Trumps success was driven by racial concerns.
https://www.vox.com/iden ies/2017/...-anxiety-study
Even when controlling for partisanship, ideology, region and a host of other factors, white millennials fit Michael Tesler’s analysis, explored here. As he put it, economic anxiety isn’t driving racial resentment; rather, racial resentment is driving economic anxiety. We found, as he has in a larger population, that racial resentment is the biggest predictor of white vulnerability among white millennials. Economic variables like education, income and employment made a negligible difference.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 03-03-2019 at 11:54 AM.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
