Millions of jobs to dissapear as robotics advance

Fortunately for humanity Nancy Pelosi has given us the answer. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/pelosi-obamacare-means-you-could-be-photographer-or-writer

 

Choosing to accomplish nothing, and then asking others to provide what you failed to do for yourself. It doesn't mean much to accept a risk, if you expect others to deal with the consequences.



​

 

the rich are the only ones who take risks for rewards.

so you must understand why i am willing to use lawful government force against you with my vote.

 

I do.

.​

 

wait let me rephrase that, the rich are the only ones who can take manageable risks for reward.

the poor have nothing to lose so they must take unmanageable risks for reward.

 

Only the dead have nothing to loose.



​

 

yes but it is a privilege to take manageable risks for rewards, and not many have this privilege since they will be over leveraged on any risks they take.

manageable risks mean you can afford to lose something, since the poor have nothing to lose they cannot afford to take a reasonable risk for a reasonable reward.

 

Being able to afford a particular risk or other thing is no more a privilege than being able to run fast. Society does not provide you with or restrict you from either ability.



​

 

yes to a liberal, democracy is to be used for violence and theft. If Steve jobs gets money selling phones peacefully the liberal treasonous enemy wants to steal the money violently.

 

When people think they'll get fired or lose their job for supporting a union, they don't do it.

 

From the Government.

That is simply based on your morality. Like other anarchists/libertarian, you're fine with government violence as long as its for your view of morality, which means maximizing and protecting your income and wealth.

No, I've defined what it is many times.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm a liberal and I don't think that at all.

 

then why so afraid to tell what you do think?? What does your fear teach you??

 

What? I tell what I think all the time. What are you talking about?

 

If people will get fired or lose their job for supporting a union, they shouldn't.

 

In fact 'the poor' often get ahead in a free economy and history clearly demonstrates that, repeatedly. There's just too much evidence to argue the contrary.

 

The government can pay everyone? Do you have an example of where this system has ever succeeded?

 

all??? You said: "
I'm a liberal and I don't think that at all".

I then asked what do you think and you changed the subject out of liberal fear, as always.
1+1=2

 

the free economy does not create jobs for the unskilled and uneducated, when robots take their job they will be unable to take any manageable risks for rewards without Trumps tariffs and huge wall for illegal immigrants.

if we assign the poor their own plot of land, they can become farmers who survive from growing their own organic foods.

the founding fathers wanted the poor Christian peasants who fled england and then defeated them in war for their land, to have the same divine rights of kings in which oppressed them in the old country. that can only be achieved with individual land ownership.

 

Skills and education can be varied. Intelligence and hard work count for a great deal. Also,, there has been a great deal of technology since thee industrial revolution began and the labor market hasn't changed all that much. It followed economic cycles then as it does now. We are living better lives, as a result of technology, with more leisure time also. All countries protect their borders and with all the social programs available those borders become ever more important.

I doubt too many people know very much about farming these days. They'd starve in no time.

I'm all for land ownership and it's always available to those who'll work for it. It's too bad more people didn't take advantage when the housing markets were low. Many called it a 'crisis' but in fact it was an opportunity.

 

robots and machines have taken all the jobs for 2000 years. Everyone was a farmer 2000 years ago. Today no one is
thanks to machines but employment is 95%. Do you understand?? 1+1=2

 

Just a couple of examples. There are more.

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled on Friday that Walmart violated Quebec’s labor code when it closed a store in the province that had become one of the first Walmarts in Canada to unionize.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/28/b...gally-closed-union-store-court-says.html?_r=0

Some employees believe that the stores were closed because of worker protests for higher pay.

Employees of the Pico Rivera store were among the first to hold Black Friday protests in 2012.

"This is the first store that went on strike," an employee told CBS Los Angeles. "This is the first store in demanding changes for Walmart."

http://www.businessinsider.com/wal-mart-suddenly-closes-stores-2015-4

 

You made a claim about what liberals think, and I'm a liberal and I don't t think that at all.

And then you claimed I'm afraid to tell what I do think.

When I tell folks what I think all the time.

I'm not sure what point you think you are making.

 

I asked what do you think and you changed the subject out of liberal fear, as always.

 

Canada has the secular version of Sharia Law.

 

Huh? What are you blathering about? In what post did you ask me what I think about what?