Will Republicans end social security?

[Cougarbear]

Agreed that profit sharing or bonuses only happen when profits are available. Bad times means no bonus for anyone.

Imaging if you, the CEO were forced to pay out bonuses anyway.

 

[kyzr]

Imaging if you, the CEO were forced to pay out bonuses anyway.

Why would anyone be "forced" to pay bonuses? Like NATO, a bonus for one is the same bonus for all. Profit sharing means sharing profits.

 

[Red Front]

1. Correct, publicly traded companies should have profit sharing and limits on management pay packages like in Japan. There won't be any crash, like Gordon Gekko said, besides "greed is good"....."all we have are VPs sending useless emails back and forth all day..."

2. I'm not talking about "socialism". My son's plant was bought by a European company, they implemented profit sharing and limits on management pay. It was like night and day, the workers are motivated and very happy. Hope you didn't think I dreamed up those benefits. Here is one more chart that might help you understand why the 1% own 90% of everything...that is bullshit. We are headed for oligarchs if we don't do something. We middle class people deserve a bigger piece of the pie, its not socialism, its basic fairness.
View attachment 803926


3. This sentence makes no sense to me:


WTF are you whining about?

It becomes socialism by necessity as technology advances, further automating production.

 

[kyzr]

It becomes socialism by necessity as technology advances, further automating production.

I object to the "Elysium" (movie) type of future where the 1% are godlike living an extravagant lifestyle while the masses live in squalor.
Yet with only a 62% or so "participation rate" there needs to be better training for available jobs.
For a service based economy people need money to spend, otherwise only the 1% buy things.
I don't call it socialism as much as economic planning for the future, including free community college and UBI while attending to learn a new job skill.

 

[Red Front]

I object to the "Elysium" (movie) type of future where the 1% are godlike living an extravagant lifestyle while the masses live in squalor.
Yet with only a 62% or so "participation rate" there needs to be better training for available jobs.
For a service based economy people need money to spend, otherwise only the 1% buy things.
I don't call it socialism as much as economic planning for the future, including free community college and UBI while attending to learn a new job skill.

I object to the "Elysium" (movie) type of future where the 1% are godlike living an extravagant lifestyle while the masses live in squalor.

That's a great film and it depicts exactly what will happen if only the rich own the robots and artificial intelligence, and the working-class become dependents of the state via a "UBI" (Universal Basic Income). Technology will eventually render wage labor superfluous, if not impossible.

Yet with only a 62% or so "participation rate" there needs to be better training for available jobs.

Robots (especially intelligent robots/AI), can do EVERYTHING. Literally. They can even evaluate a CT-scan for cancer. AI can do paralegal work, it can handle customer service, can drive 18-wheelers on the highway and in the city. Intelligent, autonomous machines, can mine for raw materials, transport the ore to a processing plant, do all of the processing of the materials, and then load everything on a self-driving truck and deliver the materials to a factory...etc.

Capitalism might try to delay the use of this technology in an attempt to "save capitalism" (maybe by hiring cheap Mexican labor) but that's a short-term futile "fix" and temporary delay of the inevitable collision with the wall that capitalism is quickly driving itself into. Without exaggeration, we're looking at over a hundred million unemployed people in America.

Estimates are between 40% to as high as 80% of all jobs being replaced with intelligent autonomous machines, within the next twenty to thirty years. We had our Great Depression in the 1930s, with only 23% unemployment, so you can imagine the catastrophic effects that 40% (not to speak of 80%) unemployment will have on our economy. We were on the brink of having a second civil war in the 1930s, and it was FDR's New Deal and WW2 that, fortunately, set us on a different course.

Not everyone in America who loses their job at Walmart or even their career as a paralegal, due to advanced artificial intelligence and robotics, will be able to become a technician. Not everyone has the intelligence or temperament to be in IT or a "robot-mechanic". More, there are simply not enough IT jobs to replace the tens of millions of jobs that are going to be lost by automation. If that wasn't concerning enough, all of this intelligent automation technology will eventually, repair itself. Even IT jobs are going to go the way of the dodo. Hello?

None of this is a problem for socialism. We want to eliminate human labor as much as possible. Getting rid of the human drudgery that comes with production, with all of its hazards, is a blessing for communists. We love the idea of automating production to the fullest extent. It's the capitalists and their capitalism that are up the creek without a paddle, not us.

For a service based economy people need money to spend, otherwise only the 1% buy things. I don't call it socialism as much as economic planning for the future, including free community college and UBI while attending to learn a new job skill.

Hehehe "I don't call it socialism as much as economic planning for the future" lol. Sure, why not? Call it whatever you want. Communists will even call it that too, if it makes it easier for you to transition from capitalism to socialism.

However, the so-called "UBI" will just make everyone poor, maintaining capitalists in control of the robots (the means of production). It's a type of perpetual, monthly government bailout for the ruling class. It's capitalism on life support:

Capitalism needs a market, and that entails having paying consumers. Paying consumers pay for goods and services with their wages. If technology replaces most jobs, then there aren't enough paying consumers. Without customers, your business will collapse, hence as a billionaire or member of the wealthy elite, you convince your cronies in government to essentially artificially create paying customers for you, by sending everyone in America, a UBI (a government check).

Once people become worthless to capitalists, they will be consigned to the compost heap. The current wealthy ruling elites will see the masses of worthless mouths to feed as a liability. What happens if these worthless peasants get any weird ideas?

​

"Hey, why do we allow a few people in our society to own all of the intelligent robots, autonomous machines, factories, mines..etc, providing them with a life of extreme abundance and godlike powers and liberties, while we the public at large is living in poverty, relying on government handouts, without any control over the productive enterprise..?"

Those who are now of the wealthy privileged class, aren't going to relinquish their power without a fight. They're going to hold on to their special social status, wealth, and political power, till the bitter end, whatever that end might be. Elysium is a window into the future (it's prophetic):

​

What we see in Elysium, is the type of techno-feudalism that we're going to find ourselves in. Either we get wise and establish a democratic socialist government, that appropriates the means of production to the public, making all production non-profit and owned by the working-class (the public at large) or only the current ruling class is going to own everything. They will kill us, with pandemics, drugs, crime, mass incarceration, wars..etc. They'll find ways to get rid of the worthless peasants. I prefer democratic socialism to techno-feudalism.

WE CAN TURN THE EARTH INTO "ELYSIUM", WHERE EVERYONE LIVES WELL.​

PS: Compare what I wrote myself, above, with those posts that you complimented me on for my excellent writing skills. You'll find more grammatical errors and personality, and passion in what I just wrote above. Why? Think. Why were the other posts so darn perfect and the above isn't? I'm not a bad writer, but I'm not as good as those other posts. Why? Think. I'll let you figure it out.

 

[kyzr]

I object to the "Elysium" (movie) type of future where the 1% are godlike living an extravagant lifestyle while the masses live in squalor.

That's a great film and it depicts exactly what will happen if only the rich own the robots and artificial intelligence, and the working-class become dependents of the state via a "UBI" (Universal Basic Income). Technology will eventually render wage labor superfluous, if not impossible.

Yet with only a 62% or so "participation rate" there needs to be better training for available jobs.

Robots (especially intelligent robots/AI), can do EVERYTHING. Literally. They can even evaluate a CT-scan for cancer. AI can do paralegal work, it can handle customer service, can drive 18-wheelers on the highway and in the city. Intelligent, autonomous machines, can mine for raw materials, transport the ore to a processing plant, do all of the processing of the materials, and then load everything on a self-driving truck and deliver the materials to a factory...etc.

Capitalism might try to delay the use of this technology in an attempt to "save capitalism" (maybe by hiring cheap Mexican labor) but that's a short-term futile "fix" and temporary delay of the inevitable collision with the wall that capitalism is quickly driving itself into. Without exaggeration, we're looking at over a hundred million unemployed people in America.

Estimates are between 40% to as high as 80% of all jobs being replaced with intelligent autonomous machines, within the next twenty to thirty years. We had our Great Depression in the 1930s, with only 23% unemployment, so you can imagine the catastrophic effects that 40% (not to speak of 80%) unemployment will have on our economy. We were on the brink of having a second civil war in the 1930s, and it was FDR's New Deal and WW2 that, fortunately, set us on a different course.

Not everyone in America who loses their job at Walmart or even their career as a paralegal, due to advanced artificial intelligence and robotics, will be able to find another job or even be able to become a technician. Not everyone has the intelligence or temperament to be in IT or a "robot-mechanic". More, there are simply not enough IT jobs to replace the tens of millions of jobs that are going to be lost by automation. If that wasn't concerning enough, all of this intelligent automation technology will eventually, repair itself. Hello?

None of this is a problem for socialism. We want to eliminate human labor as much as possible. Getting rid of the human drudgery that comes with production, with all of its hazards, is a blessing for communists. We love the idea of automating production to the fullest extent. It's the capitalists and their capitalism that are up the creek without a paddle, not us.

For a service based economy people need money to spend, otherwise only the 1% buy things. I don't call it socialism as much as economic planning for the future, including free community college and UBI while attending to learn a new job skill.

Hehehe "I don't call it socialism as much as economic planning for the future" lol. Sure, why not? Call it whatever you want. We'll even call it that too, if it makes it easier for you to transition from capitalism to socialism.

However, the so-called "UBI" will just make everyone poor, maintaining capitalists in control of the robots (the means of production). It's a type of perpetual, monthly government bailout for the ruling class. It's capitalism on life support:

Capitalism needs a market, and that entails having paying consumers. Paying consumers pay for goods and services with their wages. If technology replaces most jobs, then there aren't enough paying consumers. Without customers, your business will collapse, hence as a billionaire or member of the wealthy elite, you convince your cronies in government to essentially artificially create paying customers for you, by sending everyone in America, a UBI (a government check).

Once people become worthless to capitalists, they will be consigned to the compost heap. The current wealthy ruling elites will see the masses of worthless mouths to feed as a liability. What happens if these worthless peasants get any weird ideas?

"Hey, why do we allow a few people in our society to own all of the intelligent robots, autonomous machines, factories, mines..etc, providing them with a life of extreme abundance and godlike powers and liberties, while we the public at large is living in poverty, relying on government handouts, without any control over the productive enterprise..?"

Those who are now of the wealthy privileged class, aren't going to relinquish their power without a fight. They're going to hold on to their special social status, wealth, and political power, till the bitter end, whatever that end might be. Elysium is a window into the future (it's prophetic):

​

What we see in Elysium, is the type of techno-feudalism that we're going to find ourselves in. Either we get wise and establish a democratic socialist government, that appropriates the means of production to the public, making all production non-profit and owned by the working-class (the public at large) or only the current ruling class is going to own everything. They will kill us, with pandemics, drugs, crime, mass incarceration, wars..etc. They'll find ways to get rid of the worthless peasants. I prefer democratic socialism to techno-feudalism/Elysium.

PS: Compare what I wrote myself, above, with those posts that you complimented me on for my excellent writing skills. You'll find more grammatical errors and personality, and passion in what I just wrote above. Why? Think. Why were the other posts so darn perfect and the above isn't? I'm not a bad writer, but I'm not as good as those other posts. Why? Think. I'll let you figure it out.

1. You are a gifted writer. I don't see any grammatical errors in what you write. So I suppose your earlier posts were copy/paste from Stephanie, et.al.?

2. I can see an Elysium type of self-contained world if the billionaires of the world unite to build a space station with the Earth being barely livable due to climate change and pollution and overcrowding, and/or gated communities guarded by robots. Anyway, the "masses" would struggle for existence. Human reproduction would probably only be allowed by special permit, so people would be sterilized at birth. Just a prediction.

3. Distilling down the discussion on participation rate, averaging out your 40%-80% of all jobs to be replaced by AI, lets use 60% for discussion. Within the next 30-years we would need to either raise taxes enough to cover UBI for everyone who is unemployed, or artificially reduce the AI replacement of jobs by a new tax on every job replaced by AI. That seems counter to capitalism. So lets go with the UBI option. So how does the math work? What tax rates on corporations and the wealthy would cover subsistence for the masses? Would there be free healthcare? Free prescription drugs? Free housing? High crime rates? Many new prisons? The future looks very gloomy with AI and robots.
Then again, could the movie "Matrix" or "Terminator" happen if AI gets smart and sees humans as unnecessary polluters?

Would humans eventually be hunted/terminated?

....or would humans be forced to live in a virtual reality "Matrix" created by AI?

 

[Cougarbear]

It becomes socialism by necessity as technology advances, further automating productio

Why would anyone be "forced" to pay bonuses? Like NATO, a bonus for one is the same bonus for all. Profit sharing means sharing profits.

Weren’t you the one who wanted it like Japan and forced every year on all corporations?

 

[kyzr]

Weren’t you the one who wanted it like Japan and forced every year on all corporations?

Nope. I wanted limits on executive pay like in Japan. I also want profit sharing for all employees.

wtf language are you typing. the translator is turning it to nonsense.

 

[Red Front]

1. You are a gifted writer. I don't see any grammatical errors in what you write. So I suppose your earlier posts were copy/paste from Stephanie, et.al.?

2. I can see an Elysium type of self-contained world if the billionaires of the world unite to build a space station with the Earth being barely livable due to climate change and pollution and overcrowding, and/or gated communities guarded by robots. Anyway, the "masses" would struggle for existence. Human reproduction would probably only be allowed by special permit, so people would be sterilized at birth. Just a prediction.

3. Distilling down the discussion on participation rate, averaging out your 40%-80% of all jobs to be replaced by AI, lets use 60% for discussion. Within the next 30-years we would need to either raise taxes enough to cover UBI for everyone who is unemployed, or artificially reduce the AI replacement of jobs by a new tax on every job replaced by AI. That seems counter to capitalism. So lets go with the UBI option. So how does the math work? What tax rates on corporations and the wealthy would cover subsistence for the masses? Would there be free healthcare? Free prescription drugs? Free housing? High crime rates? Many new prisons? The future looks very gloomy with AI and robots.
Then again, could the movie "Matrix" or "Terminator" happen if AI gets smart and sees humans as unnecessary polluters?

Would humans eventually be hunted/terminated?

....or would humans be forced to live in a virtual reality "Matrix" created by AI?

1. You are a gifted writer. I don't see any grammatical errors in what you write. So I suppose your earlier posts were copy/paste from Stephanie, et.al.?

No sir. It's ChatGPT4 i.e. artificial intelligence. Ghostwriters are out of a job.

When you and other "adversaries" of mine (you're quite civil), write a post that would take me a considerable amount of time and effort to "debunk", I turn to my AI/"My Robot" writer. I copy and paste what you wrote into the AI, and I "prompt" it, to write me a response. It's not 100% perfect. I have to edit a bit, adding a few of my own words, but nonetheless, it cuts my research and writing time by 75% or more. This technology is powerful and yet it's only in its infancy. Imagine where we will be in five years, ten years, with this technology.

2. I can see an Elysium type of self-contained world if the billionaires of the world unite to build a space station with the Earth being barely livable due to climate change and pollution and overcrowding, and/or gated communities guarded by robots. Anyway, the "masses" would struggle for existence. Human reproduction would probably only be allowed by special permit, so people would be sterilized at birth. Just a prediction.

There are people like me, called "socialists", who won't allow that to happen without a fight. We would take up arms and die fighting before we allow that to happen. It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

3. Distilling down the discussion on participation rate, averaging out your 40%-80% of all jobs to be replaced by AI, lets use 60% for discussion. Within the next 30-years we would need to either raise taxes enough to cover UBI for everyone who is unemployed, or artificially reduce the AI replacement of jobs by a new tax on every job replaced by AI. That seems counter to capitalism. So lets go with the UBI option. So how does the math work? What tax rates on corporations and the wealthy would cover subsistence for the masses? Would there be free healthcare? Free prescription drugs? Free housing? High crime rates? Many new prisons? The future looks very gloomy with AI and robots.
Then again, could the movie "Matrix" or "Terminator" happen if AI gets smart and sees humans as unnecessary polluters?

There's a much better way. The problem is that your mind is fixed on capitalism, and despite your intelligence, which is quite sharp, you're just emotionally unable to come to terms with the self-evident fact that socialism is the natural successor of capitalism. You're suffering from a bad case of cognitive dissonance.

We don't have to go through a period of extreme austerity or fight another civil war. The way we can resolve the problem of advanced automation and AI is by building new material, social and ideological infrastructure that will support a non-profit, centrally planned, high-tech, automated, marketless economy. The US federal government working closely with state and local authorities will employ millions of Americans to create automated mines, transport hubs, intelligent highways, factories, distribution centers, nuclear plants, and so forth, that will produce and deliver all of the products and services that we now consume and rely on.

The US government will nationalize all of the major centers of economic power. Industries that are vital to our country's infrastructure, like energy (big oil, nuclear plants), all remaining utilities, mines, finance (banking institutions), and several other heavy industries will be publicly owned and operated.

Rather than a UBI welfare check (which the billionaires love, because it turns everyone into their dependents via state welfare, and still in need of what the wealthy elites are selling), our government will just employ everyone who doesn't have a job, in order to build the infrastructure that will replace capitalism (for-profit production).

The transition from capitalist, for-profit production to a fully or mostly automated non-profit system of production, will take a few years, but eventually, we can organize society in such a way that everyone has everything that they have now and more. No one will be homeless, everyone will have housing, food, healthcare, education, employment, a rich family and social life..etc. If you already have a house, you will keep it. Everyone who is now paying a mortgage to a bank will keep their current residence, without having to pay anyone another penny.

The shift from capitalism to high-tech socialism will take a few years, but once it occurs, the sky is the limit as far as using intelligent robots and other technology to automate production. There will be a central planning department in the US government that will establish the infrastructure for performing all of the accounting and logistics required to manufacture all of the products and services that the public demands and consumes. Human labor will consist mostly of working 20 hours weekly, mostly supervising the system, and working with robots, on different projects. In return, people will get paid for their work, with access to an abundance of products and services.

​

It's more complicated than what I just briefly described, but it is better than techno-feudalism. We all own the technology and means of production, together, as a community.

 

[kyzr]

1. You are a gifted writer. I don't see any grammatical errors in what you write. So I suppose your earlier posts were copy/paste from Stephanie, et.al.?
No sir. It's ChatGPT4 i.e. artificial intelligence. Ghostwriters are out of a job.
When you and other "adversaries" of mine (you're quite civil), write a post that would take me a considerable amount of time and effort to "debunk", I turn to my AI/"My Robot" writer. I copy and paste what you wrote into the AI, and I "prompt" it, to write me a response. It's not 100% perfect. I have to edit a bit, adding a few of my own words, but nonetheless, it cuts my research and writing time by 75% or more. This technology is powerful and yet it's only in its infancy. Imagine where we will be in five years, ten years, with this technology.
2. I can see an Elysium type of self-contained world if the billionaires of the world unite to build a space station with the Earth being barely livable due to climate change and pollution and overcrowding, and/or gated communities guarded by robots. Anyway, the "masses" would struggle for existence. Human reproduction would probably only be allowed by special permit, so people would be sterilized at birth. Just a prediction.
There are people like me, called "socialists", who won't allow that to happen without a fight. We would take up arms and die fighting before we allow that to happen. It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
3. Distilling down the discussion on participation rate, averaging out your 40%-80% of all jobs to be replaced by AI, lets use 60% for discussion. Within the next 30-years we would need to either raise taxes enough to cover UBI for everyone who is unemployed, or artificially reduce the AI replacement of jobs by a new tax on every job replaced by AI. That seems counter to capitalism. So lets go with the UBI option. So how does the math work? What tax rates on corporations and the wealthy would cover subsistence for the masses? Would there be free healthcare? Free prescription drugs? Free housing? High crime rates? Many new prisons? The future looks very gloomy with AI and robots.
Then again, could the movie "Matrix" or "Terminator" happen if AI gets smart and sees humans as unnecessary polluters?
There's a much better way. The problem is that your mind is fixed on capitalism, and despite your intelligence, which is quite sharp, you're just emotionally unable to come to terms with the self-evident fact that socialism is the natural successor of capitalism. You're suffering from a bad case of cognitive dissonance.
We don't have to go through a period of extreme austerity or fight another civil war. The way we can resolve the problem of advanced automation and AI is by building new material, social and ideological infrastructure that will support a non-profit, centrally planned, high-tech, automated, marketless economy. The US federal government working closely with state and local authorities will employ millions of Americans to create automated mines, transport hubs, intelligent highways, factories, distribution centers, nuclear plants, and so forth, that will produce and deliver all of the products and services that we now consume and rely on.

The US government will nationalize all of the major centers of economic power. Industries that are vital to our country's infrastructure, like energy (big oil, nuclear plants), all remaining utilities, mines, finance (banking institutions), and several other heavy industries will be publicly owned and operated.

Rather than a UBI welfare check (which the billionaires love, because it turns everyone into their dependents via state welfare, and still in need of what the wealthy elites are selling), our government will just employ everyone who doesn't have a job, in order to build the infrastructure that will replace capitalism (for-profit production).

The transition from capitalist, for-profit production to a fully or mostly automated non-profit system of production, will take a few years, but eventually, we can organize society in such a way that everyone has everything that they have now and more. No one will be homeless, everyone will have housing, food, healthcare, education, employment, a rich family and social life..etc. If you already have a house, you will keep it. Everyone who is now paying a mortgage to a bank will keep their current residence, without having to pay anyone another penny.

The shift from capitalism to high-tech socialism will take a few years, but once it occurs, the sky is the limit as far as using intelligent robots and other technology to automate production. There will be a central planning department in the US government that will establish the infrastructure for performing all of the accounting and logistics required to manufacture all of the products and services that the public demands and consumes. Human labor will consist mostly of working 20 hours weekly, mostly supervising the system, and working with robots, on different projects. In return, people will get paid for their work, with access to an abundance of products and services.

It's more complicated than what I just briefly described, but it is better than techno-feudalism. We all own the technology and means of production, together, as a community.

1. ChatGPT! OMG. Someone needs to tell congress and the WH to ask ChatGPT how to solve the fiscal mess we're in. I'd be curious if its answers would make sense. Even a 75% answer is better than the nonsense we're hearing from the DC clowns.

2. Fighting the oligarch's Terminators. ~2040?

3. Socialism can't solve the problem of overpopulation. Is there enough arable land to support the projected over-population?
How can we manage overpopulation?
You want to put all your faith in the "government" to provide. I do NOT TRUST the government. I've seen Lois Lerner (IRS), the FBI, the CIA, the EPA, and the deep state in-action. You never mentioned the political implications of your socialist paradise. Politics won't go away. Politicians will never agree to socialism if it takes from the wealthy. In case you haven't noticed, politics runs on money. The wealthy buy pols and the pols do what the wealthy tell them to do. So IMHO the Elisium option looks much more probable than your government run AI utopia for the masses.

 

[Hector12]

The Republican donor class of rich businessmen, business executives, landlords, and investors would love to eliminate Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for additional tax cuts. They have portfolios worth millions of dollars each, so they do not need Social Security and Medicare.

The Republican Party is united by race, but divided by class. This is not usually a problem, because for most people most of the time loyalties of race, nation, and ethnicity are stronger than loyalties of class.

Nevertheless, the majority of Republican voters, probably the vast majority, are working class whites who do not make enough money to save for retirement, or they are retired working class whites, for whom Social Security and Medicare are lifelines.

A Republican plan to eliminate Social Security and Medicare, or reduce funding for both would drive a wedge right through the GOP.

During the Reagan administration, David Stockman, was President Reagan's Director of the Office of Management and Budget from 1981 to 1985. Unlike Reagan, who was stupid enough to think it was possible to cut taxes, raise military spending, and balance the budget without touching Social Security and Medicare, Stockman knew that Social Security and Medicare would need to be cut deeply, and that is what he wanted to do. He finally realized that it was not possible, because most Republican voters depended on those programs, and did not want them to be reduced. Current surveys indicate that most Americans would like for them to be better funded.

 

[Red Front]

1. ChatGPT! OMG. Someone needs to tell congress and the WH to ask ChatGPT how to solve the fiscal mess we're in. I'd be curious if its answers would make sense. Even a 75% answer is better than the nonsense we're hearing from the DC clowns.

2. Fighting the oligarch's Terminators. ~2040?

3. Socialism can't solve the problem of overpopulation. Is there enough arable land to support the projected over-population?
How can we manage overpopulation?
You want to put all your faith in the "government" to provide. I do NOT TRUST the government. I've seen Lois Lerner (IRS), the FBI, the CIA, the EPA, and the deep state in-action. You never mentioned the political implications of your socialist paradise. Politics won't go away. Politicians will never agree to socialism if it takes from the wealthy. In case you haven't noticed, politics runs on money. The wealthy buy pols and the pols do what the wealthy tell them to do. So IMHO the Elisium option looks much more probable than your government run AI utopia for the masses.

3. Socialism can't solve the problem of overpopulation. Is there enough arable land to support the projected over-population? How can we manage overpopulation?

We don't really have an over-population problem, what we have is a distribution problem. We have the space and resources, for a much larger population. If you notice, most people live on the surface of the planet, on land. We don't have much of a human presence underground, in mountains, at sea, on the surface of the water, or underwater. We can also live in space:

Each one of those floating colony pods extends underwater as far down as 500 ft and can support a community of 25 thousand people.

You want to put all your faith in the "government" to provide.

Really? You have to be smarter than that. So what's the alternative? Societal chaos? Becoming slaves of the capitalist lords who own all of the robots? At least with our government, we can vote people into office, unlike in private corporations where we have zero input as to how the company is run and what its policies are. The robots, factories, i.e. "the means of production", is legally ours. We just own it collectively, as a community. No one person or company owns all of the robots and resources. We all own it.

What will do all of the accounting and central planning is technology (sensors and computers), managed by our local, state, and federal governments. Eventually, the individual consumer will have the technology to produce everything for themselves, using advanced nanotech. We won't need the government to organize and centrally plan production for us, because we will plan production personally, using nanotechnology.

That's about 100 years, maybe 200 years away.​

I do NOT TRUST the government.

Do you trust the billionaires who corrupt our government, with their armies of lobbyists and think tanks? You don't trust the people you elect into a democratic socialist government, but you trust private corporations that only want to profit? Make money, often at everyone else's expense, politically and otherwise.

I've seen Lois Lerner (IRS), the FBI, the CIA, the EPA, and the deep state in-action.

Take money out of politics and you solve 90% of the problem with the government.

You never mentioned the political implications of your socialist paradise.

That's an exaggeration. Maybe not paradise, just much better than techno-feudalism. Those who accuse us of being naive "utopians", seem to prefer dystopia. Shoot for utopia and get something below that, which is nonetheless, pretty good. Better than being slaves of billionaires, who don't hold elections. When was the last time Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk, held an election for their employees? Never.

At least in a democratic socialist society, our leaders are accountable to us. Especially in American socialism where all of us are armed with combat rifles, just like Karl Marx taught. The working class should never be disarmed. So our democratic socialist government will be under the heel of worker- councils. Anyone can join a worker-council and cast their vote. If a delegate is incompetent or corrupt we call him/her back.

Politics won't go away. Politicians will never agree to socialism if it takes from the wealthy.

The civil unrest, and specter of economic collapse, will force the authorities to adopt democratic socialism.

In case you haven't noticed, politics runs on money. The wealthy buy pols and the pols do what the wealthy tell them to do. So IMHO the Elisium option looks much more probable than your government-run AI utopia for the masses.

Your pessimism is a bit disingenuous. So only the billionaires can have Elysium while the "stupid working class" can't? How do you figure? Only the wealthy can live in paradise, not everybody else. We can organize society in such a way, that we eliminate scarcity, employing the latest technology. It won't be perfect or "utopia", but it will be better than the alternative, namely, techno-feudalism/slavery/death. I don't believe the working-class or middle-class are stupid and the wealthy are supposedly "smart" and morally superior. If they can create an Elysium for themselves, why can't we organize an Elysium for the working class?

 

[kyzr]

The Republican donor class of rich businessmen, business executives, landlords, and investors would love to eliminate Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for additional tax cuts. They have portfolios worth millions of dollars each, so they do not need Social Security and Medicare.

The Republican Party is united by race, but divided by class. This is not usually a problem, because for most people most of the time loyalties of race, nation, and ethnicity are stronger than loyalties of class.

Nevertheless, the majority of Republican voters, probably the vast majority, are working class whites who do not make enough money to save for retirement, or they are retired working class whites, for whom Social Security and Medicare are lifelines.

A Republican plan to eliminate Social Security and Medicare, or reduce funding for both would drive a wedge right through the GOP.

During the Reagan administration, David Stockman, was President Reagan's Director of the Office of Management and Budget from 1981 to 1985. Unlike Reagan, who was stupid enough to think it was possible to cut taxes, raise military spending, and balance the budget without touching Social Security and Medicare, Stockman knew that Social Security and Medicare would need to be cut deeply, and that is what he wanted to do. He finally realized that it was not possible, because most Republican voters depended on those programs, and did not want them to be reduced. Current surveys indicate that most Americans would like for them to be better funded.

If you recall during the State of the Union speech Republicans committed to preserve Social Security and Medicare.

 

[themirrorthief]

there will be zero money for anything if idiot biden keeps funding this insane war with russia...fuck the UKraine...just a bunch of HItlers leftovers

 

[kyzr]

3. Socialism can't solve the problem of overpopulation. Is there enough arable land to support the projected over-population? How can we manage overpopulation?

We don't really have an over-population problem, what we have is a distribution problem. We have the space and resources, for a much larger population. If you notice, most people live on the surface of the planet, on land. We don't have much of a human presence underground, in mountains, at sea, on the surface of the water, or underwater. We can also live in space: Each one of those floating colony pods extends underwater as far down as 500 ft and can support a community of 25 thousand people.

You want to put all your faith in the "government" to provide.

Really? You have to be smarter than that. So what's the alternative? Societal chaos? Becoming slaves of the capitalist lords who own all of the robots? At least with our government, we can vote people into office, unlike in private corporations where we have zero input as to how the company is run and what its policies are. The robots, factories, i.e. "the means of production", is legally ours. We just own it collectively, as a community. No one person or company owns all of the robots and resources. We all own it.

What will do all of the accounting and central planning is technology (sensors and computers), managed by our local, state, and federal governments. Eventually, the individual consumer will have the technology to produce everything for themselves, using advanced nanotech. We won't need the government to organize and centrally plan production for us, because we will plan production personally, using nanotechnology.

​

I do NOT TRUST the government.

Do you trust the billionaires who corrupt our government, with their armies of lobbyists and think tanks? You don't trust the people you elect into a democratic socialist government, but you trust private corporations that only want to profit? Make money, often at everyone else's expense, politically and otherwise.

I've seen Lois Lerner (IRS), the FBI, the CIA, the EPA, and the deep state in-action.

Take money out of politics and you solve 90% of the problem with the government.

You never mentioned the political implications of your socialist paradise.

That's an exaggeration. Maybe not paradise, just much better than techno-feudalism. Those who accuse us of being naive "utopians", seem to prefer dystopia. Shoot for utopia and get something below that, which is nonetheless, pretty good. Better than being slaves of billionaires, who don't hold elections. When was the last time Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk, held an election for their employees? Never.

At least in a democratic socialist society, our leaders are accountable to us. Especially in American socialism where all of us are armed with combat rifles, just like Karl Marx taught. The working class should never be disarmed. So our democratic socialist government will be under the heel of worker- councils. Anyone can join a worker-council and cast their vote. If a delegate is incompetent or corrupt we call him/her back.

Politics won't go away. Politicians will never agree to socialism if it takes from the wealthy.

The civil unrest, and specter of economic collapse, will force the authorities to adopt democratic socialism.

In case you haven't noticed, politics runs on money. The wealthy buy pols and the pols do what the wealthy tell them to do. So IMHO the Elisium option looks much more probable than your government-run AI utopia for the masses.

Your pessimism is a bit disingenuous. So only the billionaires can have Elysium while the "stupid working class" can't? How do you figure? Only the wealthy can live in paradise, not everybody else. We can organize society in such a way, that we eliminate scarcity, employing the latest technology. It won't be perfect or "utopia", but it will be better than the alternative, namely, techno-feudalism/slavery/death. I don't believe the working-class or middle-class are stupid and the wealthy are supposedly "smart" and morally superior. If they can create an Elysium for themselves, why can't we organize an Elysium for the working class?

1. Your sea pods, or even a space based Elysium means that humans would be living like sardines. We agree that arable land would need to be preserved for growing food, probably managed by AI and robots. Manure would be like "spice" on Dune. This future presupposes that severe climate change and a nuclear war won't happen. Then again, Nostradamus predicted that humans would move to another star at some point, so there is no point in "gloom and doom".

2. We've seen in 2020 that the government can't be trusted not to interfere in elections. Democrats can't be trusted, and billionaires can't be trusted, google "zuckerbucks". I don't know where that leaves us, but we're required to carry on like good soldiers. I hope your vision of the future happens, because my vision is dark. Then again I'll be in the Twilight Zone by then. Good Luck!

3. It's not my field to predict resources vs population growth going forward, including international implications, such as India and China. Its a daunting challenge, and you seem really optimistic, so I hope you are correct. My short-term goal is to have the DC clowns fix Social Security and Medicare.

 

[Staidhup]

This entire issue is nonsense. If and when the social security earned income cap is lifted and done away with social security would be solvent. The problem is the Dimbo’s and their special interest puppet masters that won’t allow it.

 

[lennypartiv]

The Republican donor class of rich businessmen, business executives, landlords, and investors would love to eliminate Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for additional tax cuts. They have portfolios worth millions of dollars each, so they do not need Social Security and Medicare

Everybody loves tax cuts. If ending social security and medicare means more tax cuts, let's go for it.

 

[sealybobo]

Everybody loves tax cuts. If ending social security and medicare means more tax cuts, let's go for it.

Dumbest thing I've ever heard. How much did Trump's tax cuts make you? And did you save that money? No you did not. They would LOVE to give you a little tax break now and end social security. You have to be the dumbest sonofabitch.

According to the Fed's 2022 Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households survey released Monday, some 37% of Americans lack enough money to cover a $400 emergency expense, up from 32% in 2021.

This is who SS is for idiot. Yea sure you and I could survive without it. Maybe even do a little better without it. But 37% of America would be fucked.

Is that what you mean by making America great again? Back when 40% of America couldn't ever retire with dignity? Gramma and Grampa had to move in with their kids? Reverse mortgages?

Boy you Republicans want to make sure the masses die penniless and pass on nothing to our kids.

And actually, just because 63% of us can come up with $400 doesn't mean all 63% of us are saving enough to retire. So your way would most likely fuck over 50% or even 60% of us.

For example, what percent of us make over $100K? 18%? I suspect your way would be bad for 82% of us but great for the top 12%

 

[kyzr]

Everybody loves tax cuts. If ending social security and medicare means more tax cuts, let's go for it.

We paid into SS & Medicare our entire working lives. They are entitlements that cannot be cut. Suck it up AH.

 

[kyzr]

Dumbest thing I've ever heard. How much did Trump's tax cuts make you? And did you save that money? No you did not. They would LOVE to give you a little tax break now and end social security. You have to be the dumbest sonofabitch.
According to the Fed's 2022 Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households survey released Monday, some 37% of Americans lack enough money to cover a $400 emergency expense, up from 32% in 2021.
This is who SS is for idiot. Yea sure you and I could survive without it. Maybe even do a little better without it. But 37% of America would be fucked.
Is that what you mean by making America great again? Back when 40% of America couldn't ever retire with dignity? Gramma and Grampa had to move in with their kids? Reverse mortgages?
Boy you Republicans want to make sure the masses die penniless and pass on nothing to our kids.
And actually, just because 63% of us can come up with $400 doesn't mean all 63% of us are saving enough to retire. So your way would most likely fuck over 50% or even 60% of us.
For example, what percent of us make over $100K? 18%? I suspect your way would be bad for 82% of us but great for the top 12%

Republicans committed to saving SS & Medicare at the State of the Union speech.
We paid into SS & Medicare, they are NOT like Welfare and Medicaid.
They are NOT charity, they are benefits we paid for.
"Republicans" don't want to cut SS & Medicare, the 1% want to cut them.
I don't see democrats beating drums to fix them either.
Maybe the rich dems don't want them fixed?