I'm poor. I deserve nice stuff like everyone else

[1prophet]

What this whole song & dance about education shows is nearly everybody's willingness to play into false memes.

Why does better education mean more jobs when it doesn't mean that at all? It just means employers will hike qualifications.

What's happening is that the need for human labor is decreasing all the time, particularly in this country. The enormous & increasing productivity per worker proves that. So we're left in a moralistic bind between the need for everybody to work (as in Jamestown) and the reality of automated production. We don't need for everybody to work all the time. What we need is a different way to look at it and to distribute goods & services to a growing number of people whose efforts in the workplace essentially aren't needed in the profit motive scheme of things. If we can't, then demand for such things will actually decrease providing even fewer employment opportunities.

We won't get that from the moralizations & insecurities of those fortunate enough to be employed. Beggar they neighbor won't work any better at the domestic level than it does internationally.

That is a feel good bullshit lie, robots didn't replace workers and cause the economic disparity that we have today, globalization through free trade agreements in which corporations can use foreign workers to bypass the environmental, labor, and safety regulations as well as much lower wages that "true liberals" and unions warned us about over thirty years ago is the root cause.

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/the-avenue/posts/2015/04/29-robots-manufacturing-jobs-andes-muro

Don’t blame the robots for lost manufacturing jobs

In a recent blog we described new research by George Graetz and Guy Michaels that shows the impact of automation technology in productivity statistics. So now there is good evidence that robots are a driver of economic growth.

However, this new evidence poses a question: Has productivity growth from robots come at the cost of manufacturing jobs?

Between 1993 and 2007 (the timeframe studied by Graetz and Micheals) the United States increased the number of robots per hour worked by 237 percent. During the same period the U.S. economy shed 2.2 million manufacturing jobs. Assuming the two trends are linked doesn’t seem farfetched.

Of course, correlation is not causation, and there is no shortage of alternative explanations for the decline in U.S. manufacturing. Globalization, offshoring, and skills gaps are just three frequently cited causes. Moreover, some researchers, like MIT’s David Autor, have argued that workers are benefiting from working alongside robots.
\
So is there a relationship between job loss and the use of industrial robots?
The substantial variation of the degree to which countries deploy robots should provide clues. If robots are a substitute for human workers, then one would expect the countries with much higher investment rates in automation technology to have experienced greater employment loss in their manufacturing sectors. Germany deploys over three times as many robots per hour worked than the United States, largely due to Germany’s robust automotive industry, which is by far the most robot-intensive industry (with over 10 times more robots per worker than the average industry). Sweden has 60 percent more robots per hour worked than the United States thanks to its highly technical metal and chemical industries.

Source: Graetz and Michaels, “Robots at Work.”​

Yet the evidence suggests there is essentially no relationship between the change in manufacturing employment and robot use. Despite the installation of far more robots between 1993 and 2007, Germany lost just 19 percent of its manufacturing jobs between 1996 and 2012 compared to a 33 percent drop in the United States. (We introduce a three-year time lag to allow for robots to influence the labor market and continued with the most recent data, 2012). Korea, France, and Italy also lost fewer manufacturing jobs than the United States even as they introduced more industrial robots. On the other hand, countries like the United Kingdom and Australia invested less in robots but saw faster declines in their manufacturing sectors.

Source: Graetz and Michaels and authors’ analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data.​

Another way to look at this is to ask: How many jobs would each economy have lost if the decline in manufacturing employment was proportional to the increase in robots?

By this metric the United States should have lost one-third more manufacturing jobs than it actually did and Germany should have lost 50 percent more, while the United Kingdom lost five times more than it should have. The lesson is that the net impacts of automation on employment in manufacturing are not simple, and at least during the time frame studied here they cannot be said to have caused job losses.

Source: Graetz and Michaels and authors’ analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data.​

Industrial robots are a disruptive technology, and as disruptive technologies take hold some workers benefit while others are hurt. But to suggest, as some in popular media have, that the use of robots is a causal factor in the decline of American manufacturing employment is factually wrong and misses a broader point. As the productivity figures suggest, robots are increasingly essential to the competitiveness of a country’s manufacturing sector. The fact that countries like Germany, Sweden, and Korea are deploying automation technology at a much faster rate than the United States points to serious competitive challenges—and further debate about the use and impacts of automation.

​

 

[mysticjbyrd]

Automation has only recently started netting more lost jobs, than it produced.

Jhnnnn is completely clueless as usual.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I have a friend who is "working poor". He had been on various forms of disability and assistance for some time, and finally got a job (part-time, working in the food-service industry) several years ago.

To be honest, the way things are in this state, they really stack the deck against you, if you're on assistance, and try to make it off by working.

He lost his state-provided health insurance, and I don't think he works enough hours to qualify for insurance coverage at his job.

He can't work more than so many hours, otherwise he'll lose his disability check altogether.

 

[Jhhnn]

Automation has only recently started netting more lost jobs, than it produced.

Jhnnnn is completely clueless as usual.

Mere assertion.

 

[sportage]

There is a little movie out now available for purchase or rent.
THE BIG SHORT.
The ending of the film addresses this trend to demonize and blame the poor which is so typical republican ideology.
The 2008 housing market crashed because of the poor.
Stocks crashed because of the poor.
Everything wrong with government because of the poor.
Jobs lost and 401K's tanked because of those damn poor folks buying houses they couldn't afford.

If this is your idea of how it works to be poor, you need to run out and rent or buy THE BIG SHORT.
DO IT NOW!!!
Besides setting your mind straight over this republican delusion of bashing and blaming poor people for all our woes, this film is also quite good and very entertaining.

 

[Jhhnn]

That is a feel good bullshit lie, robots didn't replace workers and cause the economic disparity that we have today, globalization through free trade agreements in which corporations can use foreign workers to bypass the environmental, labor, and safety regulations as well as much lower wages that "true liberals" and unions warned us about over thirty years ago is the root cause.

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/the-avenue/posts/2015/04/29-robots-manufacturing-jobs-andes-muro

Don’t blame the robots for lost manufacturing jobs

​

Please. I don't deny any of that. I said that manufacturing is only part of the picture.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

Mere assertion.

No, that's a fact.

______________________________________

On a side note, I just saw an aa in youtube comments suggest that AA's shouldn't have to work in this country ever again.

 

[Jhhnn]

No, that's a fact.

______________________________________

On a side note, I just saw an aa in youtube comments suggest that AA's shouldn't have to work in this country ever again.

A fact substantiated by thin air & a dog whistle slur against black people.

How quaint.

 

[Lash444]

There is a little movie out now available for purchase or rent.
THE BIG SHORT.
The ending of the film addresses this trend to demonize and blame the poor which is so typical republican ideology.
The 2008 housing market crashed because of the poor.
Stocks crashed because of the poor.
Everything wrong with government because of the poor.
Jobs lost and 401K's tanked because of those damn poor folks buying houses they couldn't afford.

If this is your idea of how it works to be poor, you need to run out and rent or buy THE BIG SHORT.
DO IT NOW!!!
Besides setting your mind straight over this republican delusion of bashing and blaming poor people for all our woes, this film is also quite good and very entertaining.

It is indeed a very good movie.

What is amazing is that no matter how much money the top makes, people don't quite get it. How is it, that when the rich pay a ton of money to skew politics in a way to benefit themselves, somehow people blame the poor for issues. How does that conclusion come about in a functioning individuals brain.

You honestly believe that as American businesses rake in record profits, and stagnant wages for 40 years, that during all this time of bought and paid for politics that somehow its the poor guy that is dragging everyone else down. How dumb do you honestly have to be to believe that?

 

[mysticjbyrd]

A fact substantiated by thin air & a dog whistle slur against black people.

How quaint.

It would take you all of two seconds to look this up, assuming you cared to inform yourself.

How is that a slur, I am just saying people like the op is talking about do exist.

 

[elitejp]

Sounds like entitlement! You feel entitled to the full success, despite the fact the only thing you did on your own was fail.

Tell the truth, your partner was a close relative that bailed you out, right?

I absolutely want it all for myself that's why I wrote I want it all. But you didn't read very well that because I also wrote I need to be thankful rather than feel entitled.

No he is a business lender who looks for investment opportunities. He's not the first place you want to go to as his desired return on investment will generally be higher than avg.

What I was doing before is the same as what I'm doing now. Sometimes businesses need a bit of time. He lucked out that he got in when he did. Because his investment has been paid back in full and he's making a steady profit that's higher than any market that he could have invested in.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

It is indeed a very good movie.

What is amazing is that no matter how much money the top makes, people don't quite get it. How is it, that when the rich pay a ton of money to skew politics in a way to benefit themselves, somehow people blame the poor for issues. How does that conclusion come about in a functioning individuals brain.

You honestly believe that as American businesses rake in record profits, and stagnant wages for 40 years, that during all this time of bought and paid for politics that somehow its the poor guy that is dragging everyone else down. How dumb do you honestly have to be to believe that?

It's basic psychology. Studies show that people tend to blame the people below them, rather the people above them.

 

[Jhhnn]

It would take you all of two seconds to look this up, assuming you cared to inform yourself.

How is that a slur, I am just saying people like the op is talking about do exist.

It's your assertion & your burden of proof. If you had any you'd have offered it up in the first place.

Just becuse you love the Donald doesn't mean you can get away with acting like him.

 

[CZroe]

I caught people with this mentality today. They were stealing kids Polo because Faded Glory or whatever Wal-Mart sells isn't good enough for their kids.

I also literally *just* got finished watching a video where someone named Trevon in Miami-Dade was shot during a home invasion and the relatives of the were saying that "people need to look at it from the perspective of someone from the hood. How else is he supposed to have good clothes to go to school?" That's almost word-for-word but I can't find the video now. If you want to search, they also said "she ain't have to shoot him" and "I don't care about her rights. What she did was way beyond the law." "He was very big on education."

Edit:
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2016/03/11/teen-burglary-suspect-killed-homeowner/

 

[mysticjbyrd]

It's your assertion & your burden of proof. If you had any you'd have offered it up in the first place.

Just becuse you love the Donald doesn't mean you can get away with acting like him.

http://www.theguardian.com/business...ore-jobs-than-destroyed-140-years-data-census

 

[MongGrel]

http://www.theguardian.com/business...ore-jobs-than-destroyed-140-years-data-census

why do you bother at this point ?

Have you ever operated a CNC machine in your life, or have a clue about how to program one ?

I seriously doubt it.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

why do you bother at this point ?

Have you ever operated a CNC machine in your life, or have a clue about how to program one ?

I seriously doubt it.

I thought your emoticon special snowflake trolling ass was going to bed.

You, were better off just replying with emoticons, you are just removing doubt.

 

[MongGrel]

I though your emoticon special snowflake trolling ass was going to bed.

You, were better off just replying with emoticons, you are just removing doubt.

Doubt about what ?

Calling me names like you're in kindergarten still isn't going to make you look any brighter.

 

[Rakehellion]

Everyone I've ever seen that considers themselves "poor" (which is relative, considering I consider "poor" to be living on the streets or unable to feed themselves, which likely isn't the topic of discussion from everyone else here) are having to go through the oh-so-harsh realities of having an iPhone 5 instead of an iPhone 6s. Oh noes!

So you're saying you've met multiple people who literally bought iPhones instead of food. Complete bullshit.

 

[elitejp]

Mystic made a good point in my post when he said it was a close relative that helped me financially. It got me thinking again on the lines which I have thought on before. Why not just let the family take care of their own poor?
I know this is simplifying it a bit but either two things will happen after some time. Either that poor person will receive the help needed to get back to the point where he can support his own or the family will kick him to the curb because they see he will never change.

I was just reading an article talking about how the poor were using govt given money to buy alcohol and go to gents clubs etc. Well i always take news articles with a grain of salt as they were indicating this activity was on the rise. But i do like reading the comments. So a welfare worker or whatever they are called chimed in and he said that it happens all the time and they are just to turn a blind eye to it.

My point being that family would keep a better eye on their money. But when its just the govt taxing the rich and giving it away to the poor they really dont care how it is spent.

 

[elitejp]

So you're saying you've met multiple people who literally bought iPhones instead of food. Complete bullshit.

most people arent that poor that its a choice of buying a phone or putting food on the table. But many do argue that its their right to have both.

 

[Rakehellion]

Why not just let the family take care of their own poor?

Their family members are probably also poor.
They may not even have family.

It it were as simple as asking dad for a few thousand to get by until next month, I'm sure they'd have just done that instead of applying for assistance.

I know this is simplifying it a bit

An understatement.

 

[elitejp]

Their family members are probably also poor.
They may not even have family.

It it were as simple as asking dad for a few thousand to get by until next month, I'm sure they'd have just done that instead of applying for assistance.



An understatement.

Of course they have family. Its just the family wants nothing to do with them.
They probably started out asking family for money (unless they were too stubborn) but family got tired of bailing them out so now they are on lifelong assistance.

 

[elitejp]

Anyways the poor have options for getting out of poverty. Whether or not they use or abuse those options is up to them. But they shouldnt be a burden to society nor should they be ungrateful.

 

[CZroe]

Everyone I've ever seen that considers themselves "poor" (...) are having to go through the oh-so-harsh realities of having an iPhone 5 instead of an iPhone 6s. Oh noes!

So you're saying you've met multiple people who literally bought iPhones instead of food. Complete bullshit.

No. He literally said exactly the opposite. He says that inability to feed themselves and keep a roof over their head is what he considers the "poor" but everyone he knows who considers themselves "poor," by their own definition, is much better off than that. *woosh*