I also found your opening post to be less than sincere. Trying to act like it's socialism vs the pursuit of happiness... as if they are mutually exclusive. Sounded like a troll to me.
I'm concerned with making good on our obligations, part of which involve a multi trillion dollar debt that requires payment. To date, I think we're bound in interest payments and nothing more, all while we increase the debt itself. These are bills our kids will be responsible for, so it's kind of a really important issue. As far as republicans being our heroes in this debt repayment, I think that's more than a little snide in your suggestion, but hey ... The debt ceiling may not be a ceiling at all for some people. I wouldn't know, I do know it's difficult to make good on a debt when we continue to accrue debt by not having one.
I'm sure, but have you read the fine print in the terms and conditions section of our social funding programs? We'll be leaving an inheritance to our children one day. What that inheritance involves is anyone's guess, but as of now it appears they will inherit a multi trillion dollar debt. I like capitalism and less debt, but then I don't like the thought of my kid being responsible for my lack of sense in terms of fiscal responsibility.
They aren't heroes, the point is they only bring it up the national debt as a problem when they aren't in power. Republicans administrations increase the debt as much or more than the democrats.
Would it make you feel better if I claimed a different party? My position would still be the same. Independent? Green? Libertarian? I could always switch back to Democrat. The party itself not the issue. It goes beyond a single political party.
Effort typically equates to reward in the workplace, in communities, in households, etc. Did you misunderstand the notion of effort or reward?
Agreed. However, the solution to this particular problem is more party-based, since one party raises the debt far more than the other.
The notion that you "grew up under a system" in which all people--including women, Blacks, the poor, et al--are rewarded equitably and fairly for "honest effort and achievement", or even afforded opportunities to attempt such, is utterly ridiculous.
With obvious particulars attached in reference to equally rewarded, I'll agree with your sentiments. This does not negate the effort reward system I grew up under. Even as a white male I didn't receive an equal share of reward either, but I still grew up under that system, which many have been fighting for equal effort reward payout since I was a young boy, including my white single mother raising two kids. At 52 I am not unaware of the inequality in this nation, but this does not negate the fact that I grew up under a effort reward system.
The solution to this particular problem would be a bipartisan effort. Edit: I would love to live long enough to witness a bipartisan effort in the political arena (,)
They all raise the debt (deficit spending) almost all the time. Whether one party raises it a greater percentage or not depends on your time frame and it also depends on how much distinction to give to one or the other party raising the deficit spending rate. The party in power during wars, economic recessions and natural problems (Covid) is more important than making it about a party. Democrats spend and want to raise taxes on everyone other than their voters. The Republicans want smaller government and tend to spend more on the military and vote for lower taxes. The larger problem to address is spending and once that has been achieved small increases in taxes could be considered, otherwise it's pointless. The US isn't going to have a "small" government regardless of who is in power but it can easily be smaller. The other major problem is just that the parties don't compromise to the degree necessary to have effective government. At the moment more of that blame goes to the Republicans but even that isn't as straightforward as it can appear. There used to be a news commentary program called (I think) "The Beltway Boys" and it included reasonable people and discussions from both sides of the aisles. You don't see that anymore. News is now driven by its entertainment value and that is why the solutions seem so "simple". The real issue isn't to vote for Democrats because they raise the deficit less than the Republicans. The issue isn't as simple, IMO, as both parties are irresponsible but the Democrats raise the deficit less so vote for them. That doesn't address the real issues or lead to any solutions.
Why should you be concerned with the debt obligations to lenders who are unconcerned? As long as we are repaying as required, what's wrong with debt? Most people hold debt, as it allows one to enjoy the benefits of future income now rather than just in the future. I think the debt ceiling is unconstitutional, we should be thinking about cost when we legislate spending bills. I believe that a pure capitalist system without a strong social welfare program creates massive inequality and social instability. The problems in the USA with homelessness and poverty are a side effect of the capitalist system. It's not a bug, it's a feature. On the other hand, a totally equal communistic system stifles individual ambition and creativity. People should be rewarded for their efforts and ideas. Democracy should be part of any governing system, the inverse is dictatorship and abuse of power.
Robots aren't going to become skilled technicians any time soon, adaptable to multipurpose maintenance and repair (including for themselves), roving around as needed (in that capacity) in various job environments at large. But machine intelligence in general is going to eat into some banal white collar tasks. Again, it's not going to be that completely rosy slash snobbish picture submitted in the former decade of "Ha, ha -- it's you beast of burden type proles that have to worry about being replaced." Even Outer Party member Winston Smith's job at the Ministry of Truth could be potentially at risk, since there's an iterative aspect to his work of rewriting history. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/22/ai-jobs-policies EXCERPT: AI can automate tasks such as data entry and administrative operations, which puts jobs that involve repetitive data input and basic decision-making at risk. Interestingly, the banking and financial industries, which are generally seen as white-collar jobs, may see a decrease in demand for data analysts and risk assessors as AI systems become more efficient at handling large amounts of data. Manufacturing and logistics jobs seem an obvious target for AI, as automation is used more and more to save on costs. Jobs in transportation, assembly-line activities and repetitive manual work can be automated to some extent. However, the technology still has limitations which require regular maintenance and a balance between AI/robots and human workers. [...] In the healthcare industry, AI has been used to aid medical diagnostics, radiology interpretation and patient monitoring. However, while AI can help healthcare professionals with data analysis, imaging and decision-making, current AI is limited in performing difficult tasks that require fine hand-eye coordination, and the physical execution of such tasks is still reliant on human capabilities. Robots don't have to sleep and take off for holidays, funerals, vacations, and other human disruptions of labor. The potential unemployed of tomorrow could take up the option of becoming neo-slave owners, purchasing robot workers and farming them out to both companies and projects at large, with it being the responsibility of the owners to keep their automatons properly functioning. But the question then emerges of: Will that political ripple descended from the French Revolution and Marxist traditions rise to crusade against that new form of oppression, to champion the rights of smart machines? Lots of scholarly arguments have already been published about that well ahead of time. (Note that by mentioning the history of collectivist thought and its current evolving response to this looming area of interest, we thereby also maintain a thin connection to the original theme of this thread.) I expect human versus robot rights to be something akin to the rift arising between the TERFs and the rest of the left community. Wherein the former radical feminists feel betrayed (after decades or centuries of struggle) that the status of "woman" can now be potentially claimed and assumed by anyone, just by asserting such (not even having to adopt outer appearances and mannerisms reflecting it). As if "being female" wasn't disparaged enough in the past, now it is casually rendered into a superficial and easily procured identity.[1] Virtually nothing more than the irrelevant affectation that postgenderism (or its hypernym category) regards it [and malehood] as -- or desires down the road that human differences in general become (i.e., achieving radical homogeneity is that school of thought's solution to inequality). - - - footnote --- [1] A surgical transition certainly isn't "easy", but post-ops shouldn't be the focus of that ire to begin with. _
Then you have set up a false dichotomy. Your issue isn't with socialism vs capitalism, since both have proven to be quite capable of running up excess debt. You want a responsible government. People should start with voting for responsible candidates, rather than these clowns that are only interested in owning the other side and generating headlines.
I don't worry about the lenders, I worry about the kids who will be obligated to repay a debt not their own. Beyond this are the conditions attached to the funds borrowed. Not just consumer debt, but consumer debt plays a major role. Typically speaking, other entities end up buying that debt and that's where the conditions become tricky in the consumer debt arena. On a national level and a very big piece of the multi trillion dollar debt pie, are other conditions, which the majority of citizens are largely unaware of. Democracy and freedom are great ideals, but without a truer freedom to practice democracy we by default inherit less freedom, as will our kids. How do I propose repayment? I haven't a clue, but it'll very likely involve bi partisan cooperation, as well as citizen willingness. Homelessness is a product of many things, one of which is listed as drug abuse, others are mental illness, domestic violence, prescription drug dependence, and lack of ability to keep and/ or perform at acceptable levels. Beyond these are the covid aspects as of late, which have done much of the crippling across the board.
There's a lot of fear based uncertainties in your post. Robots already perform many surgical type moves needed for manufacturing. Programing and maintenance is required, which is great for united states citizens who could fill those positions. Banking and ai without human involvement seems very risky business, given programing ability to hack and/ or steal minute portions, which could very well end up as trillions upon trillions of lost funds. Human involvement is tricky too and based on trustworthiness and/ or moral integrity and backbone. Beyond this, and as gender goes, I'm attracted to certain body types and chemistry. I prefer the obvious as opposed to unknowing ifs, which not only cause a great deal of confusion, but also anger and violence often enough by the unaware who end up on the duped end of the gender uncertainty coin to shun it. The future can be hopeful still, but we have a few things to work out to help secure it.
A false dichotomy? I thought I made my stance clear. Educated involvement in our election processes, part of which could be achieved by free higher education offered by employers. I think civics should be a required course and ongoing involvement encouraged.
We were all born obligated to pay the debt of our parents. Our children will be obligated to pay our debts. Their children will pay the debt of their parents. Seems pretty equitable, and has been working for ~150 years or so. There is, of course, great value in not making that debt too large - and indeed keeping it about the same over time in terms of real dollars vs. GDP.
Yep. In addition, republicans tend to spend more while lowering taxes. That is a recipe for disaster. Democrats love to spend as well - but at least they are a bit more responsible about it, and raise taxes to match.
