Iphone manufacturer foxconn plans to replace almost every human worker with robots

[danielpalos]

How are you going to secure our border?

You claim that the cost will be worth it; but, the right always denies and disparages that sentiment, by asking for lower taxes.

Walls, fences and armed guards, it's not rocket science.


Taxes? Do you realize that you have not addressed the harm to the rape victim(s)? I've responded to multiple points you have brought up, but you have never answered me as to your empathy for the victim, nor what you would do for her, and those she represents, nor even why you are so dismissive of her and her suffering?

All that costs money; where is going to come from? There is no positive multiplier effect from that public policy. And, you cannot eliminate crime with incorrigible, original sinners, or we would Only need, Ten religious Commandments.

A market friendly work visa generates revenue and id metrics. A wall is just a waste of money and we don't have the term, to provide for the general warfare, but the general welfare.

1. Your concern about cost is not credible in the context of a 4 trillion dollar federal budget.

2. An inability to completely eliminate crime does not distract from the benefits of NOT actively increasing violent crime and the suffering of it's victims.

3. Your point about "revenue" is moot as you refuse to compare it to the cost of your policy.

4. AND ONCE AGAIN, you refuse to answer my question(s) about your empathy for or what steps you would take OR even why you dismiss the harm suffered by the rapists victim and those many others your policy would impact negatively.

YOu are no longer engaged in debate. All your points have been addressed and you refuse to move the discussion forward by responding further.

You are merely engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

You don't have a point; you are Only begging the question and resorting to diversion.

LMAO you have got to be kidding............ the holes are getting bigger.

what holes? ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

Prohibition never works.

 

[danielpalos]

Walls, fences and armed guards, it's not rocket science.


Taxes? Do you realize that you have not addressed the harm to the rape victim(s)? I've responded to multiple points you have brought up, but you have never answered me as to your empathy for the victim, nor what you would do for her, and those she represents, nor even why you are so dismissive of her and her suffering?

All that costs money; where is going to come from? There is no positive multiplier effect from that public policy. And, you cannot eliminate crime with incorrigible, original sinners, or we would Only need, Ten religious Commandments.

A market friendly work visa generates revenue and id metrics. A wall is just a waste of money and we don't have the term, to provide for the general warfare, but the general welfare.

1. Your concern about cost is not credible in the context of a 4 trillion dollar federal budget.

2. An inability to completely eliminate crime does not distract from the benefits of NOT actively increasing violent crime and the suffering of it's victims.

3. Your point about "revenue" is moot as you refuse to compare it to the cost of your policy.

4. AND ONCE AGAIN, you refuse to answer my question(s) about your empathy for or what steps you would take OR even why you dismiss the harm suffered by the rapists victim and those many others your policy would impact negatively.

YOu are no longer engaged in debate. All your points have been addressed and you refuse to move the discussion forward by responding further.

You are merely engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

You don't have a point; you are Only begging the question and resorting to diversion.

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

A privatized prison system with stock traded on Wall Street and corporate lobbying has a vested interest in higher rates of crime, in criminalizing more and more behavior, and in high recidivism rates. Just good for business. And in a post industrial society with diminishing living wage jobs, the system can turn $40-50K/year/head, and convict lease out labor to corporate power.

My how far we've come, and then gone back.

"steal from the poor to give to the rich"? how institutional of the right wing. King's Foresters jobs must pay pretty well.

 

[danielpalos]

How are you going to secure our border?

You claim that the cost will be worth it; but, the right always denies and disparages that sentiment, by asking for lower taxes.

Walls, fences and armed guards, it's not rocket science.


Taxes? Do you realize that you have not addressed the harm to the rape victim(s)? I've responded to multiple points you have brought up, but you have never answered me as to your empathy for the victim, nor what you would do for her, and those she represents, nor even why you are so dismissive of her and her suffering?

All that costs money; where is going to come from? There is no positive multiplier effect from that public policy. And, you cannot eliminate crime with incorrigible, original sinners, or we would Only need, Ten religious Commandments.

A market friendly work visa generates revenue and id metrics. A wall is just a waste of money and we don't have the term, to provide for the general warfare, but the general welfare.

1. Your concern about cost is not credible in the context of a 4 trillion dollar federal budget.

2. An inability to completely eliminate crime does not distract from the benefits of NOT actively increasing violent crime and the suffering of it's victims.

3. Your point about "revenue" is moot as you refuse to compare it to the cost of your policy.

4. AND ONCE AGAIN, you refuse to answer my question(s) about your empathy for or what steps you would take OR even why you dismiss the harm suffered by the rapists victim and those many others your policy would impact negatively.

YOu are no longer engaged in debate. All your points have been addressed and you refuse to move the discussion forward by responding further.

You are merely engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

You don't have a point; you are Only begging the question and resorting to diversion.

Repeat after me, anything can be hacked

Repeat after me, anything can be hacked - TechRepublic

Prohibition never works; Only the right wing prefers to repeat historical mistakes and claim they are not really like that, afterward.

 

[danielpalos]

How much is a War on Illegals going to cost?

Look, this has nothing to do with being rational and coherent. This is about providing and reinforcing scapegoat groups as a target for public frustrations. The power structure needs to keep the masses pointed at each other.

spend and finance, and blame the poor for using too many social services, i got it.

 

[danielpalos]

When Trump entered the race he said he was going to fine certain mega corporations in order to pay for removing trespassers.

is there plenty litigation in your crystal ball?

 

[danielpalos]

Absolutely!!! That will never happen using the systems rules, such as the vote.

The leaders were completely united behind Hillary, from the Bushes to the Kennedys to the international Left.

And they got their asses handed to them.

Briexit is also shaking them.

Change is in the air.

Why are you so afraid of change?

I was born in 1943, during a time of results of radical change. Change that cost over 50 million people their lives. And scarred the lives of billions more. Leaders were installed that saw the world in terms of sick ideologies. And people blindly followed them. These same people committed horrors that a decade earlier they would have hung people for. The orange clown and his followers very much remind me of the people of that period.

Nonsense.


The Godwin panic mongering of the Left was simply an amplification of their normal propaganda technique of smearing their enemies.

That you choose to be a willing dupe of that, is all on you.

But you can't expect anyone not a fellow far lefty to pretend to take you seriously.


The policies issues are about deporting surplus labor to improve jobs and wages for Americans, to bring back jobs, to improve jobs and wages for Americans, and to NOT fuck with Russia, making Americans safer.


That is what Trump's presidency will be about. The question is can the Establishment stop him, or will the people win and get what they want.

Goldman Sachs and Wall Street will prevail like they always do under our ruse of representative democracy, the people are always satisfied with distractions and screaming at each other. And I would look for an expansion of military conflict on the planet, the world's bankers always do well with that when all else fails.

And if it does NOT happen, that demonstrates that the People are in charge and the Trump is the agent of Change.

sounded more like pander, to some on the left.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Come on people! Technology does not destroy jobs. It alters the workforce to be sure, but it has never been proven that it destroys jobs. In fact, it has been proven that technology increases workforce wages. Is there not a single economist on this site to explain this? The cotton gin did the work of 200 men, and created 1000's of higher paying jobs in the production of cotton and products made from cotton. For all of you chicken littles, read this- it was written in 1905, and is still true today.

The Effect of Labor-Saving Devices Upon Wages on JSTOR

 

[Fenton Lum]

"However, the invention also had the by-product of increasing the number of slaves needed to pick the cotton thereby strengthening the arguments for continuing slavery. Cotton as a cash crop became so important that it was known as King Cotton and affected politics up until the Civil War."

The Importance of the Cotton Gin to American History

 

[Correll]

Walls, fences and armed guards, it's not rocket science.


Taxes? Do you realize that you have not addressed the harm to the rape victim(s)? I've responded to multiple points you have brought up, but you have never answered me as to your empathy for the victim, nor what you would do for her, and those she represents, nor even why you are so dismissive of her and her suffering?

All that costs money; where is going to come from? There is no positive multiplier effect from that public policy. And, you cannot eliminate crime with incorrigible, original sinners, or we would Only need, Ten religious Commandments.

A market friendly work visa generates revenue and id metrics. A wall is just a waste of money and we don't have the term, to provide for the general warfare, but the general welfare.

1. Your concern about cost is not credible in the context of a 4 trillion dollar federal budget.

2. An inability to completely eliminate crime does not distract from the benefits of NOT actively increasing violent crime and the suffering of it's victims.

3. Your point about "revenue" is moot as you refuse to compare it to the cost of your policy.

4. AND ONCE AGAIN, you refuse to answer my question(s) about your empathy for or what steps you would take OR even why you dismiss the harm suffered by the rapists victim and those many others your policy would impact negatively.

YOu are no longer engaged in debate. All your points have been addressed and you refuse to move the discussion forward by responding further.

You are merely engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

You don't have a point; you are Only begging the question and resorting to diversion.

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

all you have is, "proof by association".

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

 

[Correll]

The leaders were completely united behind Hillary, from the Bushes to the Kennedys to the international Left.

And they got their asses handed to them.

Briexit is also shaking them.

Change is in the air.

Why are you so afraid of change?

I was born in 1943, during a time of results of radical change. Change that cost over 50 million people their lives. And scarred the lives of billions more. Leaders were installed that saw the world in terms of sick ideologies. And people blindly followed them. These same people committed horrors that a decade earlier they would have hung people for. The orange clown and his followers very much remind me of the people of that period.

Nonsense.


The Godwin panic mongering of the Left was simply an amplification of their normal propaganda technique of smearing their enemies.

That you choose to be a willing dupe of that, is all on you.

But you can't expect anyone not a fellow far lefty to pretend to take you seriously.


The policies issues are about deporting surplus labor to improve jobs and wages for Americans, to bring back jobs, to improve jobs and wages for Americans, and to NOT fuck with Russia, making Americans safer.


That is what Trump's presidency will be about. The question is can the Establishment stop him, or will the people win and get what they want.

Goldman Sachs and Wall Street will prevail like they always do under our ruse of representative democracy, the people are always satisfied with distractions and screaming at each other. And I would look for an expansion of military conflict on the planet, the world's bankers always do well with that when all else fails.

And if it does NOT happen, that demonstrates that the People are in charge and the Trump is the agent of Change.

sounded more like pander, to some on the left.

Their poor listening skills is not my problem.

 

[rdean]

I don't see how anyone can buy into your partisanshit, but lord knows they do.

The Chinese are partisan?

 

[Fenton Lum]

I don't see how anyone can buy into your partisanshit, but lord knows they do.

The Chinese are partisan?

He's Chinese?

 

[rdean]

The SAME Republcians who deny automation are the exact same ones that believe Trump's idea of going back to pad and pencil is a "good" idea.

 

[rdean]

I don't see how anyone can buy into your partisanshit, but lord knows they do.

The Chinese are partisan?

He's Chinese?

So automation is Chinese? Or partisan?

 

[danielpalos]

"However, the invention also had the by-product of increasing the number of slaves needed to pick the cotton thereby strengthening the arguments for continuing slavery. Cotton as a cash crop became so important that it was known as King Cotton and affected politics up until the Civil War."

The Importance of the Cotton Gin to American History

Increasing the cost of labor can help speed up automation. it is why we need unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis; so artificial persons can work hard and pay our taxes for us.

 

[GHook93]

There will be jobs for folks to program and repair such robots.

True, but one has to be blind not to see this revolution is different than other revolutions. More jobs will go than stay.

See farming for example. We produce far more food than in the 1800s, but farmers make up 1% of the work force. The family farm is about dead.

We are starting to see automated cars, within 10 years there won't be any human taxi (or uber drivers), chauffeurs, bus drivers, pilots, conductors etc.

Fast food joynts will see the same decline. Instead of a dozen or so workers in each location there will probably be a manager and 2 workers, most cleaning people, problem solvers and someone to fill the automated cooking machines.

It won't just be blue collar, white will get hit also. CPAs will get outsources to AI accountants. Same could happen with lawyers also.

In the coming decades we will see a shortage in jobs and a exploding population l.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[danielpalos]

All that costs money; where is going to come from? There is no positive multiplier effect from that public policy. And, you cannot eliminate crime with incorrigible, original sinners, or we would Only need, Ten religious Commandments.

A market friendly work visa generates revenue and id metrics. A wall is just a waste of money and we don't have the term, to provide for the general warfare, but the general welfare.

1. Your concern about cost is not credible in the context of a 4 trillion dollar federal budget.

2. An inability to completely eliminate crime does not distract from the benefits of NOT actively increasing violent crime and the suffering of it's victims.

3. Your point about "revenue" is moot as you refuse to compare it to the cost of your policy.

4. AND ONCE AGAIN, you refuse to answer my question(s) about your empathy for or what steps you would take OR even why you dismiss the harm suffered by the rapists victim and those many others your policy would impact negatively.

YOu are no longer engaged in debate. All your points have been addressed and you refuse to move the discussion forward by responding further.

You are merely engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

You don't have a point; you are Only begging the question and resorting to diversion.

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

all you have is, "proof by association".

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

Establishing federal id metrics helps law enforcement.

 

[danielpalos]

I was born in 1943, during a time of results of radical change. Change that cost over 50 million people their lives. And scarred the lives of billions more. Leaders were installed that saw the world in terms of sick ideologies. And people blindly followed them. These same people committed horrors that a decade earlier they would have hung people for. The orange clown and his followers very much remind me of the people of that period.

Nonsense.


The Godwin panic mongering of the Left was simply an amplification of their normal propaganda technique of smearing their enemies.

That you choose to be a willing dupe of that, is all on you.

But you can't expect anyone not a fellow far lefty to pretend to take you seriously.


The policies issues are about deporting surplus labor to improve jobs and wages for Americans, to bring back jobs, to improve jobs and wages for Americans, and to NOT fuck with Russia, making Americans safer.


That is what Trump's presidency will be about. The question is can the Establishment stop him, or will the people win and get what they want.

Goldman Sachs and Wall Street will prevail like they always do under our ruse of representative democracy, the people are always satisfied with distractions and screaming at each other. And I would look for an expansion of military conflict on the planet, the world's bankers always do well with that when all else fails.

And if it does NOT happen, that demonstrates that the People are in charge and the Trump is the agent of Change.

sounded more like pander, to some on the left.

Their poor listening skills is not my problem.

it still seems like pander, every time there is a flip-flop in the "force".

 

[Fenton Lum]

1. Your concern about cost is not credible in the context of a 4 trillion dollar federal budget.

2. An inability to completely eliminate crime does not distract from the benefits of NOT actively increasing violent crime and the suffering of it's victims.

3. Your point about "revenue" is moot as you refuse to compare it to the cost of your policy.

4. AND ONCE AGAIN, you refuse to answer my question(s) about your empathy for or what steps you would take OR even why you dismiss the harm suffered by the rapists victim and those many others your policy would impact negatively.

YOu are no longer engaged in debate. All your points have been addressed and you refuse to move the discussion forward by responding further.

You are merely engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

You don't have a point; you are Only begging the question and resorting to diversion.

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

all you have is, "proof by association".

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

Establishing federal id metrics helps law enforcement.

... and the privatized prison convict leasing system.

 

[danielpalos]

ID helps prevent crime. A federal ID helps States with their jurisdictional issues.

You don't have a point; you are Only begging the question and resorting to diversion.

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

all you have is, "proof by association".

The Logic of NOT actively increasing crime vs preventing crime after increasing it, has been presented to you.

You have failed to address that.

You are now engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

This is why lefties generally do not engage in serious debate. Because their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.


Your choice here is to change your position or to become increasingly dishonest.

Establishing federal id metrics helps law enforcement.

... and the privatized prison convict leasing system.

I don't believe in for-profit forms of social justice. It should be, "not for profit".

Seems to much like punishing ourselves with lucre, for enabling a profit motive for capitalists to engender the "hellish conditions of warfare on Earth" instead of a more market friendly, Commune of Heaven on Earth.