America Is Missing The New Labor Economy – Robotics Part 1

Post by germinalphrase » Tue, Mar 11, 2025, 9:54 PM UTC

Joel_Mckay wrote: post #98

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can eventually automate our economy by buying software and hardware from China. By electing Trump, we basically missed the chance to lead on anything, and instead decided to engage full time in trade and culture wars that aren't really going to yield anything. But as long as the work gets done, even if in China, we should be able to enjoy it.

Indeed, no one sane will invest in building factory systems on US soil under a Kakistocracy. Robot platforms are already a difficult business model in the private sector. With the exception of robot vacuums the market just isn't viable in the US yet. Best of luck =3

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Mar 11, 2025, 10:00 PM UTC

HPsquared wrote: post #144

ambicapter wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plight of the poor is not an economic problem it is purely a political one. Progress in technology isn't really a root cause of poverty, rather a proximate cause with the root cause being "because the fruits of technology are not adequately shared by government policy", a policy issue. Tax the billionaires and do what government is supposed to do (use that money to protect the safety of their people), it won't ma…

Economics is inherently political. The original (and more descriptive) term for the subject is "political economy".

Post by thuanao » Tue, Mar 11, 2025, 10:04 PM UTC

flyinglizard wrote: post #146

watwut wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could also ... try not to make war. Just an idea. Pretty offputting actually to see someone supporting expansion being upvoted.

No one is trying to make war, but naturally China is looking at changing the order of things, at least regionally. To make that happen it needs USA to move out, and create its own coalition of countries around the area.

Post by tzs » Tue, Mar 11, 2025, 10:07 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #64

ryandrake wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most participants in mature markets know approximately what percentage of the public's wallet they can grab. Obviously it's not 100% for any of them, but they all know what they can get away with. My guess is that if UBI added $1,000/mo to everyone's income, landlords would respond by raising rent by about $400-$500 or so, grocery stores would raise their prices by a percentage of that new income, and so on for all b…

> My guess is that if UBI added $1,000/mo to everyone's income Aside from whether the prediction is realistic under this assumption, UBI under any realistic financing scheme doesn't do that . It replaces (and potentially increases the net benefit of) means-tested welfare at the bottom end of the income distribution and spreads the clawback from a set of relatively sharp cliffs that occur between working poor and midd…

Post by watwut » Tue, Mar 11, 2025, 10:10 PM UTC

flyinglizard wrote: post #146

watwut wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could also ... try not to make war. Just an idea. Pretty offputting actually to see someone supporting expansion being upvoted.

No one is trying to make war, but naturally China is looking at changing the order of things, at least regionally. To make that happen it needs USA to move out, and create its own coalition of countries around the area.