241–250 of 288 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Median income doesn't tell much if you don't factor in the cost of living. My salary sucks compared to what I would earn in America, but when I factor in things like free healthcare, daycare and higher level education, I'm better off here.
What countries offer free daycare? I know there are a few in Europe. It's not super common, so I'm curious to know where
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but in absolute terms public sector workers constitute a very small share of the population, while receiving a large share of public spending Uh... Just no? Public spending? That's défense, health care, entitlements etcetera etcetera I'll actually back it up with some numbers too: > That’s 1% of gross domestic product, and almost 5% of total federal spending. The government payroll for other developed countries is…
If we use BEA/FRED "compensation of employees" (wages + benefits), the payroll picture is: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A4076C0A144NBEA All US government employees (federal + state + local): $2.409T in 2023. US nominal GDP in 2023: $27.812T. So government compensation = ~8.7% of GDP (2.409 / 27.812). Breakdown (2023): Federal government compensation: $634.9B (~2.3% of GDP). State + local compensation: $1.7846T…
Out of a total number of employed people of ~160M that's 1 in 8 employees. If you're calling 1 in 8 'a small share' the we just disagree there.
As to the $400 statistic, let me just point out that this
> That leads to those who qualify for many social programs, i.e. low-income earners, to put aside a relatively small portion of their income for savings.
Is very much an opinion, not a fact.
Maybe there's also that for the low income earners there isn't any money left after paying for housing, food and such. And I'm not even talking about health insurance.
[1]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/204535/number-of-governm...
Is it me or does this seem like naked corruption at its worst? These tech CEOs hang out at the White House and donate to superfluous causes and suddenly the executive is protecting their interests. This does nothing to protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes.
You don’t seem to appreciate: they paid for the ballroom. They have a right to set policy. That’s how an oligarchy works
The rest of the world has always called it corruption.
Question number one. Is dominance really a necessary part of a country's existence? Can't you just have peaceful relations and supportive relationships with other countries to live in harmony, when artificial intelligence brings benefits to all countries, not just the USA? Can't you build on the technological foundations that have been laid to create sustainable development for your society? The desire for more. To h…
"I can picture a world without fear, without hate. I can picture us conquering that world, because they'd never expect it."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they rule in his favor more often than not. They gave him freaking immunity for any crimes he may commit. This alone enables him to disregard the law without any fear of repercussions.
> This alone enables him to disregard the law without any fear of repercussions. That does not apply to his lackeys though (unless there's a preemptive pardon). If (!) there's a change in the President eventually, there needs to be a reckoning for everyone that didn't push back on instructions/orders (including all the folks down the line who are blowing up (alleged) drug boats).
Is it me or does this seem like naked corruption at its worst? These tech CEOs hang out at the White House and donate to superfluous causes and suddenly the executive is protecting their interests. This does nothing to protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes.
> This does nothing to protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes. Where did you get the idea that banning new technology that could eliminate jobs is even remotely an American value? Going back to the Industrial Revolution the United States has been 100% gas pedal all the time on innovation and disruption, which has in turn created millions of jobs that di…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This does nothing to protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes. Where did you get the idea that banning new technology that could eliminate jobs is even remotely an American value? Going back to the Industrial Revolution the United States has been 100% gas pedal all the time on innovation and disruption, which has in turn created millions of jobs that di…
The case against this EO is not “banning new technology”. It’s not allowing the federal government to ban any state regulation. And states having the power to make their own rules is maybe the most American value.
Is it me or does this seem like naked corruption at its worst? These tech CEOs hang out at the White House and donate to superfluous causes and suddenly the executive is protecting their interests. This does nothing to protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes.
> This does nothing to protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes. Where did you get the idea that banning new technology that could eliminate jobs is even remotely an American value? Going back to the Industrial Revolution the United States has been 100% gas pedal all the time on innovation and disruption, which has in turn created millions of jobs that di…
Arguably true, but it's also been way ahead of the pack (people tend to forget this) on protection for organized labor, social safety net entitlements, and regulation of harmful industrial safety and environmental externalities.
This statement is awfully one-sided.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like anyone making this argument hasn't studied how those regulations happened. They ALL happened AFTER people got hurt. That's how we do things here. We always have. It's kind of messed up, but the alternative is a bunch of rules on things that wouldn't be a real problem.
Who got hurt before the US banned the export of cryptography?
> shall, in consultation with the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto It's funny to me that they categorise AI and crypto together like this, two technologies that have nothing to do with each other (other than both being favoured by grifters).
No, they're different in that regard as well; AI actually does have a bit of "there" there.