- Last Active
The poor and lower middle class who have been left out of the economy for the past two decades due to globalist elites might still be worth supporting. (note: all wealth gain has gone to the top 1% in the US since the 1970s) Because our current system (and that proposed by the dems) is that it is better to not have a job than have a job that you don't want (one reason the dems voicing support the US economy losing 2 million people in the workforce due to the affordable care act), it could be an improvement to actually raise costs and reduce taxes. Consider: walmart pays their workers next to nothing because of the tacit agreement with the elite that their workers will be subsidized an additional $18 or so from our taxes in the form of earned income tax credits (for example). tl;dr: We could raise costs and lower taxes and improve the quality of life for Americans. Is it worth propping up the anti-human right Chinese govt. with our innovative technologies and growing their economy while our 99% suffer?
Bringing back some number of repetitive mindless jobs is better than the current system that puts those people who would have those jobs on the govt. dole and in jobs that pay so low that they can't support a family. This leads to societal issues because many of these people start abusing drugs and heroine. Just look at what has happened to the rust belt, the demographic crisis is similar to what happened during the black plague.
Just because the elite don't want these jobs doesn't mean they can destroy these families just to raise their incomes. (remember, these people who are a part of our society and helped build its foundation have had no gains in the wealth creation which has went entirely to the 1%).
Does the US have to settle for sacrificing the lower middle class and below to the alter of artificially low prices just to prop up the wages of those in Washington and NYC? We could vary well support our poor by giving them jobs instead of propping up the Chinese economy. If only the 1% benefit from the current system (this has been proven economically and sociologically based on quality of life metrics), why is it worth it for the 99% to keep it the same. This is why Trump is popular... He is actually saying he will fight for the poor and not the establishment (the 1%).
numenorean said:Some of the comments here are just plain sad. It would seem some people here shouldn't live in the U.S. since they would like to censor freedom of speech and eliminate the rule of law. Abortion clinics are legal. You can say whatever you want and think whatever you want, but they continue to be legal, and therefore, people have a right to find them and use them. If Siri aspires to be used for search, then the search should provide what I'm asking for: an abortion clinic. It shouldn't attempt to push someone's specific view or sense of morality upon me. It should simply deliver what I asked for like any other search engine. Someone looking for an adoption clinic would have used adoption and not abortion as their search word, or did Siri not understand the difference between the two? What would the reaction have been, had it been the other way around? It's not sad. It's not strange. It's been a legal practice since 1973, which means it's been legal and normal and happening in large numbers for a large portion, if not all of our lives. If one disagrees, one can attempt to vote it out. That's a democracy, and that's what the U.S. is supposed to be. In the meantime, people can continue to do it and search for it.
I'm glad they corrected it. It has nothing to do with belief or opinion. It's legal and people have a legal right to search for it and use it. It's not being advertised. People are looking for it, and they should be able to find it.
So, Siri, where can I abort adults?
i.e. search companies shouldn't help people find guns who search "Hey siri, please help me shoot up my high school." And in fact, google does this now with searches on suicide, ISIS, and school shootings.
Libertarian rationalists like yourself should check yourselves every so often.
tenly said:1983 said:This article was bound to trigger a bit of a shit storm in the comments section and lo and behold it has. Still a nasty but also sad subject to tackle.
People don't use "maps" to research their options for making important life choices - they use search engines like Google and Bing. Only after they've done their research and made their decision will they turn to maps to help them get to the place at which they already have an appointment.
Hahahah, hahahahah, hahahahahahahhahaha.
Okay: "Hey Siri, please help me shoot up a school."
According to tenly: "These are the nearest gun shops."
According to ethical humans: "Maybe you should check out these anti-depression hotlines first."
/wipes tears. I love libertarians. Yes, please, let's not let ethical thought creep into our utopia.
Edit: The ultimate irony of your post is that Apple was required to introduce filters for this search because planned parenthood wasn't advertising that they help with abortions enough to get them on the standard search result. lol! Oh the irony. Thanks for the laugh.