Just own the damn robots

This is going to be a rant, so apologies.

This is a pretty crappy read. Lacks real data and also unwillingness to look outside of the tech bubble, seriously what serious AI work is apple or Netflix doing? Its as if the author started with the conclusion and wrote up whole thing to justify it. For large parts most of the tech people at Google/FB are involved in getting more people click and buys ads. And Amazon are involved in getting people to buy more stuff and reduce the costs of handling and shipping them. So, if the logical conclusion that many visionaries in these thread are saying is true that 90% will be useless then these companies will have nobody to serve and will collapse before we reach that point anyways. Secondly, let's believe this is true then if an economic system which does not benefit majority deserves to be overthrown by any means even violent and rise of trump is a step in right direction. Third, if the tech companies are so smart then how were they caught with their pants down when a foreign power used their own infrastructure and technology to help elect a leader that they ostensibly opposed. Finally, the fundamental reason for the current stock boom is simply liquidity and lack of asset classes outside of stocks which give meaningful growth. This is not just limited to fang or usa but seen in many stock markets. I actively invest and trade in India where the markets are hitting new highs and the only reason right now for this is that in most places it is very hard to get a good return plus there is excess institutional & industrial capital since they are not optimistic of the growth and thus not investing in augmenting capacities or production. So investing in stock market seems the only alternative. One of the reasons for this liquidity is central banks around the world have been pumping money. This will end when the excess liquidity is pulled out from the global financial system.

Not everyone lives in an area where a 30y mortgage is cheaper than rent. Even those that claim to may not have the math right (not accounting for maintenance, taxes, increases in utilities).

I live in the midwest, where housing is supposed to be cheap, and the renting v. buying equation heavily favors renting when factoring in commute times. Since I'm a working professional, I'm limited to living in "working professional" neighborhoods if I want to live The total savings of renting for me is solidly $12,000+ a year, in addition to saved commuting time.

I worked as a barman. A skilled barman can pour two pints simultaneously and take a new order from the next customer, but I believe with machine assistance this could be greatly increased. I could easily imagine replacing a staff of say 5, with 1 or 2 workers. Large order for 10 pints, 3 cocktails and 7 shots? A staff member presses a button, and the correctly sized, just cleaned glass pop out of a slot coming from the automated dishwasher, and the pints and other drinks are poured to perfection, every time. The barman checks the order is correct, accepts payment, gives change if its in cash, cleans the tables and changes the barrels when it's quiet. You could get a hell of a lot more work done with a small number of low paid staff and machines that can pour endless drinks at once. So while you don't eliminate all the staff, you can drastically reduce the headcount and greatly increase productivity, at least in theory.

Those that find rent cheaper than a 30y mortgage also may not have all the math right.

They may be looking at instantaneous rent prices, not accounting for rental increases over 30 years (while the mortgage will remain relatively flatlined, modulo ups and downs in interest).

When I started my mortgage in 2010, it was a bit more expensive than renting in my area. Not so any more. Comparable places now rent for hundreds of dollars more per month than what I pay in total.

Mortgages have some flexibilities in them. What landlord offers "skip a payment"? Haha.

One little thing that isn't a matter of all that much money is that renters often live without home insurance, quite unnecessarily. Even if you live in someone's home which has homeowner insurance, the policy doesn't cover the personal belongings of renters; if the place is destroyed, you lose everything in it with no compensation, unless you have your own policy. It costs like a couple hundred bucks a year.

Under my mattress!

Kidding. A combination of TFSA max out, RRSP max out, rolling GIC, RESP.

I doubt I'm min-maxing my savings ideally, but I'm generally interested in infinitesimal risk solutions I don't have to think about more than once a quarter or so.

I've only been in the workforce for 4 years. Married for 1. Was planning on a house so I valued liquidity. But you're right, I need to do the mature, responsible thing and actually do some financial planning. I just really hate money and want to not think about it.