This is exactly why Trump's promises of bringing manufacturing back to America are more likely to have a negative effect on jobs. Not that it's Trump's fault, but promising factory workers that there is some great future for them is irresponsible at best, and dangerous on some level.
There are always related ancillary jobs created and needed, ever been to an automotive production plant? I was just at the Camaro/CTS plant in Grand River, MI, and there are plenty of people also required for much work...
Yeah. The job counts might decrease in some way in some areas and in the short term. But really what happens is the jobs themselves change and are redefined in some ways. And then there is demand (and supply of of labor) for other things.
Exactly, there are always changes and retraining required, anyone who thinks they found a life-long job is fooling themselves these days. Everything is evolving and job skills and training must also continually evolve, that is the only way to thrive in these times of change.
We as a species are planning to goto Mars, now THAT is an area for jobs!
So, now we have to worry about the Mars workforce taking our jobs ? Geesh, more illegal alien issues ...
This is exactly why Trump's promises of bringing manufacturing back to America are more likely to have a negative effect on jobs. Not that it's Trump's fault, but promising factory workers that there is some great future for them is irresponsible at best, and dangerous on some level.
There are always related ancillary jobs created and needed, ever been to an automotive production plant? I was just at the Camaro/CTS plant in Grand River, MI, and there are plenty of people also required for much work...
Yeah. The job counts might decrease in some way in some areas and in the short term. But really what happens is the jobs themselves change and are redefined in some ways. And then there is demand (and supply of of labor) for other things.
Exactly, there are always changes and retraining required, anyone who thinks they found a life-long job is fooling themselves these days. Everything is evolving and job skills and training must also continually evolve, that is the only way to thrive in these times of change.
We as a species are planning to goto Mars, now THAT is an area for jobs!
Neither of your points is sustainable.
- The entire working class cannot *all* become robot repair men.
- The entire working class cannot *all* become hard scientists because of the overheard of higher education. There are millions/billions of poor, uneducated rural Chinese farmers, and it's unrealistic to expect all of them to become scientists.
Evolve or die, that is what must occur and is the way of the world -- always has been. Nobody said sustainable, the future economy is built on versatility of workforce. Nobody is talking about everyone becoming robot repair people, the future is in knowledge work, information processing and such, that is where there is tremendous growth potential plus science and engineering. If you think you we can always do what we have always done, we will never rise to become the species that we are meant to become -- traveling among the stars!
The Big 6 Banks are ready to invest $90 Trillion in Climate Change, but you voted for a moron who denies its very existence.
Right, to think that humans cause climate change vs. volcanoes and other massive scale processes like the star in our solar system is just silly. I suppose we caused climate change on Mars too, which is why there is no longer surface water? These climate change wackos want to tax carbon -- that's right we humans are all MADE of carbon, yet they want to play a carbon credit game! IT is telling that Chief Climate Change Money Maker in Waiting, Al Gore will not debate the Heartland Institute's climate change experts for many years! Lord Monckton of Brenchley, a former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, issued the debate challenge which Gore also declines. You see, it is Gore's new niche to MAKE MONEY, it's not about anything other than smoke screens and money making for him, else why would he HIDE from debates?!
On the other hand, when machines do most of the work why not bring manufacturing back? The old argument about having to pay armies of laborers U.S. Wages no longer obtains.
Robots aren't consumers or taxpayers, so there's a point where automated work becomes self-defeating economically: the increased efficiency and savings have no purpose if there aren't enough consumers or a stable society.
Might be a good time to start the conversation on Universal Basic Income.
Robots aren't consumers or taxpayers, so there's a point where automated work becomes self-defeating economically: the increased efficiency and savings have no purpose if there aren't enough consumers or a stable society.
Might be a good time to start the conversation on Universal Basic Income.
"I was born, so I must be paid."
The worst outcome of this is that people become lazy. The alternative of not being paid by default is that people die or live destitute as can be seen in poorer parts of the world. Guaranteeing a minimum standard of living is a requirement for a properly functioning society, not the end of it. It's almost what exists now but there's no incentive to sustain the system beyond encouraging people to be greedy, which encourages people to look after their own interests at the expense of everyone else.
Being paid also means being paid with fiat currency, which was at some point printed into existence and is completely artificial. All the money that exists is an artificial duplicate of all the inherent value in material goods that people need to exchange the money for. If someone grows a piece of fruit that they value at $1, in order for someone to be able to pay for that fruit, $1 had to be created out of nothing yet some people think that the $1 has some inherent value that no one is entitled to. Nobody is entitled to assign pieces of paper arbitrary values either but it happens and is needed for trading to work.
A minimum standard of living requires housing, food, sanitation, healthcare so there will always be some amount of jobs in these fields and there will always be demand for entertainment but it's still going to be the case that people can only pay for things if they have money to pay with. If not enough people can pay for things, companies can't hire people and it can very quickly result in a bad situation for everyone, even the wealthiest people.
There can't be a situation where large amounts of people are supported for doing literally nothing and similarly there can't be a situation where millions of jobs dry up and people are left to starve. There has to be a new economic model that (just like the system we have now) is man-made but is designed to be self-sustaining. I think that a start would be for governments to pay portions of salaries. Rather than just giving people money directly, they'd give people money through established businesses. This means that businesses don't have to worry so much about hiring people and people can be trained at the same time.
That's not necessarily by choice, if businesses aren't hiring then there's little other option. Average freelance incomes according to those figures would be ~$17k per year, just above minimum wage. If the government was to pay $10k/year of every worker's salary by default, that would be $1.6t per year. That's about 50% of the current spending:
Most of people's income eventually goes back to the government. Income tax first then sales tax on goods bought and income tax from businesses selling goods and so on. Low incomes will be spent almost entirely every year. Money just cycles around all the time, it shouldn't be treated like a possession but a facilitator of trade. When people treat money like a possession, they hold onto more and more and that damages the overall system. The reason that people hold onto it is out of fear that they won't be able to sustain a certain quality of life. That's not necessary, there can be a system that is designed better. It doesn't mean that there has to be an end to people being wealthy, it's about finding a better balance, a more sustainable ratio between what it means to be wealthy and what it means to be poor and this doesn't happen naturally. The natural tendency is greed, which produces what we have now with diverging incomes. The outcome of a more balanced and controlled system is simply something stable and sustainable that won't be affected by automation because it doesn't depend on the requirement of employees for a job to exist.
The Big 6 Banks are ready to invest $90 Trillion in Climate Change, but you voted for a moron who denies its very existence.
Right, to think that humans cause climate change vs. volcanoes and other massive scale processes like the star in our solar system is just silly. I suppose we caused climate change on Mars too, which is why there is no longer surface water? These climate change wackos want to tax carbon -- that's right we humans are all MADE of carbon, yet they want to play a carbon credit game! IT is telling that Chief Climate Change Money Maker in Waiting, Al Gore will not debate the Heartland Institute's climate change experts for many years! Lord Monckton of Brenchley, a former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, issued the debate challenge which Gore also declines. You see, it is Gore's new niche to MAKE MONEY, it's not about anything other than smoke screens and money making for him, else why would he HIDE from debates?!
I'm fairly certain those in impoverished areas will not have much financial ability to "re-invent" themselves (or to use the GOP lingo, "pull themselves up by the bootstraps") as you've suggested is the answer.
You are so incredibly condescending that you don't even see it, do you?
anantksundaram said: Not to sound harsh or anything, but consider getting re-trained, developing a new skill, and re-inventing yourself. The possibilities are endless. Whether you want to "choke on your own pollution" or take advantage of the "benefits of automation and productivity" is pretty much up to you in a country like the US.
Ah, yes, the nebulous "retraining" argument.
Many, many, many people simply do not have that ability, nor that luxury. If you're a mid-western truck driver displaced by automation, what "retraining" do you suggest? How about a former Detroit autoworker? Even if you can sell everything you own and pack up and move yourself and your family elsewhere.... where would you go? What new industry hiring people by the millions would you suggest retraining for, even if one could afford the time and expense?
Robotics has improved to the point where a modern car plant which once employed 6,000 people now only employs 300. Where do the other 5,700 go? Another car plant? Sorry, it's automating too. Robotics plant? Nope, sorry, the robots are building the robots.
Robot repair, maintenance? What do you think half the 300 remaining employees are doing?
Robot programming? Yep. Hundred or so people at the robot plant. Robot parts? Yep, definitely need more chips and circuits… from the fabs in China. (Which in itself is replacing workers with robots.)
Further, the one single robot plant is churning out the robots that replaced the 5,700 people at plant A, and 5,700 people at plant B, and 5,700 people at plant C. A couple of software companies employing a thousand or so people are developing the AI systems poised to displace 3.5 million truck drivers. A company with a mere hundred or so employees is busy creating automated chefs capable of flipping burgers and adding pepperonis to pizzas, thereby putting 10 million more fast food workers on the street.
And all of them are doing this, all at the same time.
Sure, go on, because all you've done is listed jobs. That doesn't explain how unemployed families are actually supposed to get educated and trained in new fields possibly in other parts of the country or world, all without collecting government dole. You didn't address Hmlongco's point that the workforce for uneducated workers will continue to get dramatically smaller. I'm all for considering free university education, but you surely can't expect the masses of displaced workers to somehow put themselves through university or trade school unassisted.
Leaving aside your oblivious liberal condescension that basically condemns people to their lot and does not seem to allow for the possibility that they can change, learn, and grow -- btw, I am not, and never have been 'GOP' (per your prior post) -- providing for employment retraining is EXACTLY the kind of thing that our tax dollars should be doing. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have really bothered in any meaningful way.
No, I don't want you to go on, because you're not getting it. People without work don't have incomes. People without incomes don't buy homes, nor do they have them painted. Auto and truck repair? Just how many millions of new people can move into that field? (Especially if the economy tightens when people stop buying and companies need to ship less?)
Farming is already on the verge of becoming fully automated. Police???? Don't make me laugh. The GOP is cutting taxes left and right, which (as we've seen in Kansas and Texas and Wisconsin) means that police and fire departments and schools are CUTTING employees, not hiring new ones.
Henry Ford figured out a long time ago that if he wanted to sell more cars, he needed to pay his employees enough money so they could buy them. We're now on the flip side of that trend, with companies bend on paying as few people as little as possible, and hoping someone else will pick up the slack.
Now loss of industrialization, shipping jobs overseas, and the trend towards ever-increasing automation are going to be the 1-2-3 punch that KO's us all.
Unless we recognize that it's coming and do something about it.
1) You don't have to buy homes to paint them. 2) Auto and truck repair, not to mention the many others I listed -- electronics, computers, elevators, not to mention jobs in health care, all of which you conveniently chose to ignore, can, indeed, lead to many millions of jobs. 3) You've apparently never seen anything other than a corporate farm. There are thousands and thousands of family farms. 4) Henry Ford was a communitarian eugenicist. "Figured out a long time ago"?! How's Ford Motor Company doing at carrying out that legacy? Why? 5) "Us all"? Speak for yourself, and those who're unable or unwilling to re-invent themselves. 6) The main thing "to be done about it" is to provide the resources and opportunities from my tax dollars so that the many millions affected by globalization, outsourcing, trade -- and if it weren't those, it would be technology -- can rebuild their capabilities in a new economy. There is no other option.
In event, neither you nor China (or Trump) are going to be able to do much about these fundamental economic forces other than to adapt. Your choice.
The Big 6 Banks are ready to invest $90 Trillion in Climate Change, but you voted for a moron who denies its very existence.
Right, to think that humans cause climate change vs. volcanoes and other massive scale processes like the star in our solar system is just silly. I suppose we caused climate change on Mars too, which is why there is no longer surface water? These climate change wackos want to tax carbon -- that's right we humans are all MADE of carbon, yet they want to play a carbon credit game! IT is telling that Chief Climate Change Money Maker in Waiting, Al Gore will not debate the Heartland Institute's climate change experts for many years! Lord Monckton of Brenchley, a former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, issued the debate challenge which Gore also declines. You see, it is Gore's new niche to MAKE MONEY, it's not about anything other than smoke screens and money making for him, else why would he HIDE from debates?!
If you don't know the science -- or even some basic facts -- it's probably best to shut up about it. Don't quote heartland.org, please. Dead giveaway that you really don't have much of a clue on this topic. And, Monckton is a rather well-known climate denier (smarter than some of the others, such as Heartland, I'll agree). Pretty much at the same level as Al Gore.
Although, now that I think about it, there is no law against being an illiterate.
What an exciting future is in store for humanity. One day we'll send self-replicating robots to other worlds (asteroids) to mine them and build bases for human occupation and colonization. See Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars, and so many other SciFi titles. Wish I could freeze myself for about 30 years to live in that era at my current still-youthful age (54). But, alas, the age we live in now is a pretty interesting one, if approached with the confident and optimistic eyes of a child and not the soulless bitterness of someone whose $15/hour job might be usurped by a more ambitious machine.
When customers learn that systems become more efficient, and all that overhead related to HR, training, on-site cafeteria, hotel, and most importantly, wages don't have to be paid, customers generally expect a price reduction.
The main point here, of course, and the problem Apple is trying to solve is strange. Apple isn't really innovating along the lines of new products; however, it is innovating it's balance sheet.
If you dig a little deeper, It's really exposes an issue with leadership not able to have people skills necessary to manage people. Showing up 3 hours late to a meeting while wearing a Hawaiian shirt and no socks is an example. Taking a family member on an excursion to visit the NYSE, and even telling Government where governement's limits should be drawn (FBI iphone case.). Telling reviewers (Consumer Reports) that an unfavorable review of their product must be wrong.
Hopefully they get to a point where they can automate entire board of directors jobs away. The only thing missed would be the "wooshing" sound of the air that traveles around the boardroom table, in a circle through one ear, and out the other to the next board member. US Businesses could learn that it's no longer worth emulating Apple as a "best practices" company.
The overall basis for this is relatively simple- as a company their products are no longer "adding value" in the way they used to.
Brexit, Trump, Italian PM resigns, etc these all point at a wake up call for the government to do something to get the economy working for the working class. When this movement goes to China it would be like a huge wildfire that even the Chinese government will have to do something to mitigate against the large populace of the unemployed.
China does not have entitlements or hand outs like Europe or America. When people lose work they will do whatever is necessary to survive. Just watch. Apple could become the poster boy in China.
This is exactly why Trump's promises of bringing manufacturing back to America are more likely to have a negative effect on jobs. Not that it's Trump's fault, but promising factory workers that there is some great future for them is irresponsible at best, and dangerous on some level.
Someday all of these Trump supporters will see his campaign was completely full of BS. All of these promises he cannot and will not keep.
And yet compared to Felony Clinton he was a paragon of virtue. So, you can be bitter all you want, but you didn't run a better candidate.
Until people start embracing capitalism, and the freedom -- eg libertarianism -- the economy will continue to decline as socialism snuffs it out.
Brexit, Trump, Italian PM resigns, etc these all point at a wake up call for the government to do something to get the economy working for the working class. When this movement goes to China it would be like a huge wildfire that even the Chinese government will have to do something to mitigate against the large populace of the unemployed.
China does not have entitlements or hand outs like Europe or America. When people lose work they will do whatever is necessary to survive. Just watch. Apple could become the poster boy in China.
Funny how the GOP has fucked the middle class up the ass for 50 years with trickle down and they just voted for more of the same crap because again because they got distracted by someone telling them someone else was stealing their lunch (the poorest, the immigrants and women) as they were setting up more large scale thievery.
The GOP plays you and all their voters like fiddles.
The US has enough money right now to retrain, better educate this middle class for future jobs (not 1950s jobs), but has consistently decided not too; that's especially the case in GOP controlled states.
The reason the US is the way it is is because of asswipes like Trump, that's the ultimate irony of this vote.
Funny how the GOP has fucked the middle class up the ass for 50 years with trickle down...
Fifty years ago was 1966/1967. That period included Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama. You can't even get your timeline right. Why should we believe anything else you say?
Furthermore, the period of greatest economic improvement during that time came during and shortly after the Reagan Years. The second was during the Clinton time after he got throttled by the Republican congress was forced to slow government spending and reduce the capital gains tax.
The US has enough money right now to retrain, better educate this middle class for future jobs (not 1950s jobs), but has consistently decided not too; that's especially the case in GOP controlled states.
What do you mean by "The US has enough money right now"? The US federal government is practically bankrupt! There's not lots of extra money laying around. But they keep spending like there's no tomorrow.
The reason the US is the way it is is because of asswipes like Trump, that's the ultimate irony of this vote.
Your analysis is deeply flawed and overly simplistic.
You have no fucking clue about anything buddy if you think the US is almost bankrupt, go back to grade school.
You didn't even address trickle down hey; how many economist think this idiocy is a good thing, the number is close to zero.
When in 4 years, Trump will have crapped out trillions of dollars of tax cut to the "middle class" (sic) (90% of those tax cuts going to the top 5% like every other of those trickle down tax cuts and done by borrowing shitloads of money) and given trillions in corporate welfare deals and entrenched monopolies left and right sucking that middle class dry (starting with telecom companies) and the debt will truly be a horror show, somehow the GOP will have all forgotten about the debt and deficit.
Funny how the GOP has fucked the middle class up the ass for 50 years with trickle down...
Fifty years ago was 1966/1967. That period included Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama. You can't even get your timeline right. Why should we believe anything else you say?
Furthermore, the period of greatest economic improvement during that time came during and shortly after the Reagan Years. The second was during the Clinton time after he got throttled by the Republican congress was forced to slow government spending and reduce the capital gains tax.
The US has enough money right now to retrain, better educate this middle class for future jobs (not 1950s jobs), but has consistently decided not too; that's especially the case in GOP controlled states.
What do you mean by "The US has enough money right now"? The US federal government is practically bankrupt! There's not lots of extra money laying around. But they keep spending like there's no tomorrow.
The reason the US is the way it is is because of asswipes like Trump, that's the ultimate irony of this vote.
Your analysis is deeply flawed and overly simplistic.
You have no fucking clue about anything buddy if you think the US is almost bankrupt, go back to grade school.
So no argument. Just an insult. How delightful. I guess we're done. Bye.
You didn't make an argument, just a crapload of unsupported assertions. At most you could argue I did the same; but no, you had to add this laughable comment about the US debt. That affirmation about the debt was a complete farce; when you say something so ridiculous that makes you a clown.
Being condescending when you just veered into clown territory makes you a button pushing troll.
So, ignore me buddy, I don't want to hear from you ever again.
If I had to guess, I'd say we will consciously and conscientiously merge our two present economic systems into some kind of creative, evolutionary benevolence based on Nature, and begin turning Earth into a garden. Ya'll are going to laugh at this, but I think Jobs's vision of Apple was uniquely directed this way, and Cook is quietly (more or less) following that vision.
I'd love to see this, but I'm half afraid that, based on current trends, that more and more wealth is going to be locked up by the top 1% and the rest of us are going to be living in a Matt Damon/Elysium-style world, begging for scraps and choking on our own pollution.
Not to launch this thread in a political direction, but Trump and the GOP seem poised to accelerate that trend, cutting taxes on the rich and corporations while in turn cutting funding and access to social services and medical care.
The benefits of automation and productivity and renewable energy can be used to benefit us all... or a very, very, very few.
Hence my comment regarding tectonic (grin) upheavals. Without good planning, things in our country could get very dramatic... and extremely messy, with no guarantees that the future we get is the one best for us all.
Not to sound harsh or anything, but consider getting re-trained, developing a new skill, and re-inventing yourself. The possibilities are endless. Whether you want to "choke on your own pollution" or take advantage of the "benefits of automation and productivity" is pretty much up to you in a country like the US.
No, the possibilities are scarce when you're in the mid 40s and the only thing available is highly skilled jobs.
and when programmers, financial analysts, doctors, etc will be replaced, will you be harsh also?
Comments
Occupy Mars!
https://web.archive.org/web/20150728015352/https://www.heartland.org/press-releases/2007/06/27/why-wont-al-gore-debate?artId=20873
https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/al-gore-sells-out
http://www.androidworld.com/monckton-response-to-gore-errors.pdf
Being paid also means being paid with fiat currency, which was at some point printed into existence and is completely artificial. All the money that exists is an artificial duplicate of all the inherent value in material goods that people need to exchange the money for. If someone grows a piece of fruit that they value at $1, in order for someone to be able to pay for that fruit, $1 had to be created out of nothing yet some people think that the $1 has some inherent value that no one is entitled to. Nobody is entitled to assign pieces of paper arbitrary values either but it happens and is needed for trading to work.
A minimum standard of living requires housing, food, sanitation, healthcare so there will always be some amount of jobs in these fields and there will always be demand for entertainment but it's still going to be the case that people can only pay for things if they have money to pay with. If not enough people can pay for things, companies can't hire people and it can very quickly result in a bad situation for everyone, even the wealthiest people.
There can't be a situation where large amounts of people are supported for doing literally nothing and similarly there can't be a situation where millions of jobs dry up and people are left to starve. There has to be a new economic model that (just like the system we have now) is man-made but is designed to be self-sustaining. I think that a start would be for governments to pay portions of salaries. Rather than just giving people money directly, they'd give people money through established businesses. This means that businesses don't have to worry so much about hiring people and people can be trained at the same time.
The US workforce is just under 160 million:
http://www.dlt.ri.gov/lmi/laus/us/usadj.htm
It says here that 35% now work freelance:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/elainepofeldt/2016/10/06/new-survey-freelance-economy-shows-rapid-growth/
That's not necessarily by choice, if businesses aren't hiring then there's little other option. Average freelance incomes according to those figures would be ~$17k per year, just above minimum wage. If the government was to pay $10k/year of every worker's salary by default, that would be $1.6t per year. That's about 50% of the current spending:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expenditures_in_the_United_States_federal_budget#/media/File:U.S._Federal_Spending.png
Most of people's income eventually goes back to the government. Income tax first then sales tax on goods bought and income tax from businesses selling goods and so on. Low incomes will be spent almost entirely every year. Money just cycles around all the time, it shouldn't be treated like a possession but a facilitator of trade. When people treat money like a possession, they hold onto more and more and that damages the overall system. The reason that people hold onto it is out of fear that they won't be able to sustain a certain quality of life. That's not necessary, there can be a system that is designed better. It doesn't mean that there has to be an end to people being wealthy, it's about finding a better balance, a more sustainable ratio between what it means to be wealthy and what it means to be poor and this doesn't happen naturally. The natural tendency is greed, which produces what we have now with diverging incomes. The outcome of a more balanced and controlled system is simply something stable and sustainable that won't be affected by automation because it doesn't depend on the requirement of employees for a job to exist.
1) You don't have to buy homes to paint them.
2) Auto and truck repair, not to mention the many others I listed -- electronics, computers, elevators, not to mention jobs in health care, all of which you conveniently chose to ignore, can, indeed, lead to many millions of jobs.
3) You've apparently never seen anything other than a corporate farm. There are thousands and thousands of family farms.
4) Henry Ford was a communitarian eugenicist. "Figured out a long time ago"?! How's Ford Motor Company doing at carrying out that legacy? Why?
5) "Us all"? Speak for yourself, and those who're unable or unwilling to re-invent themselves.
6) The main thing "to be done about it" is to provide the resources and opportunities from my tax dollars so that the many millions affected by globalization, outsourcing, trade -- and if it weren't those, it would be technology -- can rebuild their capabilities in a new economy. There is no other option.
In event, neither you nor China (or Trump) are going to be able to do much about these fundamental economic forces other than to adapt. Your choice.
Although, now that I think about it, there is no law against being an illiterate.
The main point here, of course, and the problem Apple is trying to solve is strange. Apple isn't really innovating along the lines of new products; however, it is innovating it's balance sheet.
If you dig a little deeper, It's really exposes an issue with leadership not able to have people skills necessary to manage people. Showing up 3 hours late to a meeting while wearing a Hawaiian shirt and no socks is an example. Taking a family member on an excursion to visit the NYSE, and even telling Government where governement's limits should be drawn (FBI iphone case.). Telling reviewers (Consumer Reports) that an unfavorable review of their product must be wrong.
Hopefully they get to a point where they can automate entire board of directors jobs away. The only thing missed would be the "wooshing" sound of the air that traveles around the boardroom table, in a circle through one ear, and out the other to the next board member. US Businesses could learn that it's no longer worth emulating Apple as a "best practices" company.
The overall basis for this is relatively simple- as a company their products are no longer "adding value" in the way they used to.
China does not have entitlements or hand outs like Europe or America. When people lose work they will do whatever is necessary to survive. Just watch. Apple could become the poster boy in China.
Until people start embracing capitalism, and the freedom -- eg libertarianism -- the economy will continue to decline as socialism snuffs it out.
You will have nobody but yourself to blame.
Funny how the GOP has fucked the middle class up the ass for 50 years with trickle down and they just voted for more of the same crap because again because they got distracted by someone telling them someone else was stealing their lunch (the poorest, the immigrants and women) as they were setting up more large scale thievery.
The GOP plays you and all their voters like fiddles.
The US has enough money right now to retrain, better educate this middle class for future jobs (not 1950s jobs), but has consistently decided not too; that's especially the case in GOP controlled states.
The reason the US is the way it is is because of asswipes like Trump, that's the ultimate irony of this vote.
You have no fucking clue about anything buddy if you think the US is almost bankrupt, go back to grade school.
You didn't even address trickle down hey; how many economist think this idiocy is a good thing, the number is close to zero.
When in 4 years, Trump will have crapped out trillions of dollars of tax cut to the "middle class" (sic) (90% of those tax cuts going to the top 5% like every other of those trickle down tax cuts and done by borrowing shitloads of money) and given trillions in corporate welfare deals and entrenched monopolies left and right sucking that middle class dry (starting with telecom companies) and the debt will truly be a horror show, somehow the GOP will have all forgotten about the debt and deficit.
At most you could argue I did the same; but no, you had to add this laughable comment about the US debt.
That affirmation about the debt was a complete farce; when you say something so ridiculous that makes you a clown.
Being condescending when you just veered into clown territory makes you a button pushing troll.
So, ignore me buddy, I don't want to hear from you ever again.
and when programmers, financial analysts, doctors, etc will be replaced, will you be harsh also?