True lies

[nitro]

Good article, but I disagree with "economic growth is what we actually need". Imo we need productivity growth, and we need a redistribution (I'm not saying how) of ownership of that productivity growth. Economic growth and productivity have a relationship of course, but differ in at least one important way: economic growth alone will lead to more environmental decay.

The problem is, in the limit, more productivity growth means robots (I actually mean cybernetic being), and robots will put more humans out of traditional work. I can easily see 75% unemployment by 2075.

I agree that if you have some sort of UBI, with robots, it can work.

 

[jimmiebarton]

more people competing for less resources. what's the solution?

obvious to me we need to limit child birth. you get two kids, and 4.1 robots no more

 

[Ricter]

The problem is, in the limit, more productivity growth means robots (I actually mean cybernetic being), and robots will put more humans out of traditional work. I can easily see 75% unemployment by 2075.

I agree that if you have some sort of UBI, with robots, it can work.

The problem you mention is why I added "redistribution of ownership". We want (or think we do, a topic for some other time) more robots doing our work and increasing our leisure, but the ownership of those robots has to be fairly distributed.

 

[nitro]

...but the ownership of those robots has to be fairly distributed.

Good luck with that.

I wonder what Marx would write today when the means of production is robots. There is something witty in there somewhere.

 

[gwb-trading]

I agree that it is imperative that we control the borders, just like any other nation does. That is not what I meant to get across.

As far as US vs Canada travel, I think both Mexicans and Canadians can get a NEXUS card:

https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs/nexus

But I admit I am confused because I have seen Canadians travel directly into the US and not go out of the international terminal at Ohare.

NEXUS only applies to Canada and the U.S.

 

[nitro]

NEXUS only applies to Canada and the U.S.

It must be this rule then that applies and explains what I see:

For Canadian and Mexican Citizens

Visas for Canadian and Mexican NAFTA Professional Workers

The nonimmigrant NAFTA Professional (TN) visa allows citizens of Canada and Mexico, as NAFTA professionals, to work in the United States in prearranged business activities for U.S. or foreign employers. Permanent residents of Canada and Mexico are not able to apply for TN visas to work as NAFTA professionals. Select TN NAFTA Professionals on the USCIS website to learn more about TN nonimmigrant status.

Traveling on a TN or L1 Visa from Canada? Optimize Your Processing at Designated Ports of Entry

In September 2014, U.S. Customs and Border Protection designated ports of entry (POEs) for optimized processing of first-time Canadian applicants for admission in the TN or L-1 categories. Designating POEs for optimized processing ensures a more efficient approach to processing the high volume of TN and L1 applicants.

L1 Intracompany Transferee Petitions for Canadian Citizens under NAFTA
CBP Standards for Accepting and Adjudicating I-129 Petitions for L1 Intracompany Transferee Petitions for Canadian Citizens under NAFTA

VisaScreen®: Visa Credentials Assessment

Section 343 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (the IIRIRA) of 1996 requires specific health care professionals to complete a screening program before they can receive either a permanent or temporary occupational visa, including Trade NAFTA status.


https://www.cbp.gov/travel/canadian-and-mexican-citizens

 

[CaptainObvious]

The problem that the left has with Trump is not his willingness to point out all the problems, the left eagerly does this themselves. What they hate is that he's actually proposing plans to put in place that address theses issues. It's not even that they disagree with his plans, it's the actual implementation of a plan, any plan. It might work and then what?We can talk, and talk, and talk some more, form committees, allocate money, take it all to the never ending campaign trail and rant and rave, but to actually do something. No f'n way.

 

[nitro]

The problem that the left has with Trump is not his willingness to point out all the problems, the left eagerly does this themselves. What they hate is that he's actually proposing plans to put in place that address theses issues. It's not even that they disagree with his plans, it's the actual implementation of a plan, any plan. It might work and then what?We can talk, and talk, and talk some more, form committees, allocate money, take it all to the never ending campaign trail and rant and rave, but to actually do something. No f'n way.

Nothing to do with left and right - even a large part of his own chosen constituency can't stand the guy. The real problem is that lots of people don't like him, and that is going to hurt in the final vote.

You can argue that they don't like him because what he is proposing is change and change is hard. But I argue that what people object to is everything that is so eloquently stated in the article that started this thread, and that he mixes correct cogent points with nearly psychotic statements. It is too much for the normal person to try to disambiguate.

The reasonable people will point to the fact that Trump definitely has some very precise and correct points. But it is all lost in the ugly personality.

 

[nitro]

It is funny, look at this thread. The Trump supporters insist on taking the conversation about Trump, instead of the issues and concerns that people have about the guy as it relates to a Trump presidency.

It is as if they are living his misogynistic personality vicariously. Everything is about Trump, not issues. Or maybe they are just employed by the guy.

Love me or hate me, but don't ignore me, is Trumps motto. Free press.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Nothing to do with left and right - even a large part of his own chosen constituency can't stand the guy. The real problem is that lots of people don't like him, and that is going to hurt in the final vote.

You can argue that they don't like him because what he is proposing is change and change is hard. But I argue that what people object to is everything that is so eloquently stated in the article that started this thread, and that he mixes correct cogent points with nearly psychotic statements. It is too much for the normal person to try to disambiguate.

The reasonable people will point to the fact that Trump is definitely has some very precise and correct points. But it is all lost in the ugly personality.

Like you said, change is hard and those resistant to change will see the advocates of change as ugly. We've had nearly 8 years of the pretty smile. Isn't working on multiple fronts. Ugly is up next. No scalpel, but a wrecking ball. The political pendulum always over corrects.