Do Republicans have a plan for unemployment caused by automation? >>MOD WARNING<<

It is so sensible to squeeze business and put people out of work. Liberal logic 101.

 

EBT cards.

 

You assume the state is responsible for this.
You're wrong.

 

I see we have another supporter of the rapists wife.

 

If your theory of the universe were correct, high tax areas like California and New York would not be the largest economies in the world with the best paying jobs

 

Bwahahahaha!

California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year study says

 

75% of US employment is based on small business, those with less than 50 employee's, in most cases with little or no automation, they can afford or is practical. Frankly, the cost currently hurting SB, other than ACA, are regulations, costing SM, just to keep on trying, then to automate that would be a benefit, but too costly. Long story short....if average wages were as they were in say 1960, the jobs then available, would have still existed. As labor cost goes up or available help, automation is employed.

 

You're not even accurate. 50% of all US workers work for 0.03% of US companies. Try again.

There's some mixed data so I'll give you a conservative estimate:

http://www.nber.org/digest/feb11/w16300.html

 

Prove this.

 

uhh... you do know how a small business is legally defined, right?

 

You do realize that I just gave you a TON of evidence that the 75% figure is completely wrong.

From the sources.

99.7% of businesses are "small business" and they employ 49.2% of all employs in America.

Which is a "wow" way of saying.

0.3% of all the other "bigger businesses" employ 50.8% of Americans.

 

Let's make the minimum wage $200 hr then everyone can live awesome.

 

It's a good question.

I am afraid, though, that the answer will be the same as the one they have for every problem: The free market.

Must be nice to not even have to think about any issues in depth because we know nothing and can't control nothing, only the free market will figure everything out by itself.

 

How, exactly, did you do that?

 

Is this progressive math?

Read this:

Now think about it a second. Okay, you'll probably have to take a lot longer than a second. I'll give you a hint. Focus on the 3/4 of small businesses that are "non employers."

I'll also plug in this little tidbit for you:

Which is a relevant fact that you left out of your 49.2% figure.

 

I was gonna say, but thanks for beating me to it.

 

So squeezing business is still a good thing in your book right? You realize that the first to go are jobs don't you?

 

I'm saying you don't know how to math. The problem is compounded by your misrepresentation of your data.

And yet, those (millions*) of folks are not included your 42.9% figure.

* It's not correct to claim a unique individual for each unique non-employer business. Nor is it correct for you to claim that non-employer businesses "keep them from being employed by OTHER businesses." A person who runs a non employer business on the side can still be employed by either a large or small business as a primary source of income.

 

Well now that the government gets all of our medical records sent to them on the population, they will find a way to start killing us all off.

 

Let's deconstruct the twist think here.

E..357 thinks that we have a problem with too many people working for large businesses because those businesses are going to automate their labor force. He then provides us data showing the trend toward large numbers of non-employer businesses in the SBE sector. A logical person might note that these two concepts might be linked.

But I don't think that's what we're dealing with here.

I suppose E's next move is to claim that these small businesses are going to automate themselves out of jobs somehow?

 

Your leader, Hillary, has no understanding of even the basics of technology, so don't give me that crap.

Something is going to have to be done for the current unskilled workers in the future. It has to be something better than the current welfare system which rots people's ambitions.

- - - Updated - - -

Much more than having that factory in China. Also, the actual factory won't be imported from China. We manufacture most of the machinery that factories in China use.

 

This isn't a government function, so why would Republicans need a plan?

 

A $67k job in California doesn't produce nearly the standard of living as a $49k job in Texas. Can you buy a house on dual median incomes in California? I know you could in Texas (or Florida).

 

Aging Danes Hope Robots Will Save Their Welfare State

 

Do you even read the articles you link to?

The article you linked said that small businesses are responsible for most job creation (not employment). The thing is different people are talking about different things, because everybody (especially you, based on other threads) are too lazy to use precise terminology.

From your article:
http://www.nber.org/digest/feb11/w16300.html