Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Re: robots
I heard that Richard Gatling believed his machine gun invention would allow one soldier to do the work of many, thus reducing the size of armies and sparing a larger portion of the population from the horrors of war. For the most part, it did not play out this way.
There isn't a limit to the allowable productivity of the industrial sector anymore than there was a limit to the allowable power of armies. New inventions can be disruptive as they shift around the demand, but in the long run it tends to balance out. Even though our population has increased many times over since the start of the industrial revolution and our technology has increased immeasurably, we aren't significantly worse off in terms of employment.
edited 8th Dec '12 4:23:43 PM by Topazan
Re: NSA surveillance - I am Jack's total lack of surprise. I am also not overly concerned. I'm one of those people who welcomes the idea of a global information society.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Glenn Beck, Vince Vaughn to launch reality TV show
edited 8th Dec '12 4:47:12 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Excuse me? What? What? When the hell did I say "the amount of stuff robots produce will remain constant." That's the exact opposite of what I'm saying.
A reduction in price is equivalent to an increase in utility for the same price.
Here's the thing: If production costs decrease, prices also decrease, but you can't just assume that this is a 1 to 1 ratio. If the reason cost decreases is because capital is better than labor, then that increases the bargaining power of capital holders, and weakens the bargaining power of laborers.
If you consider a thought experiment where one person owns a godly robot that can make anything, then prices fall to 0 if and only if he demands they fall to zero. It's about who controls the means of production.
Boehner: 'There’s no progress to report' because White House 'wasted another week'
Okay, that's clearly the plan. Wait them out and then undo the damage to social programs in future bills.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.@43209 - Ok, maybe I misunderstood you, sorry. I think you are alluding to a problem that exists, but I don't think that increasing technology will make it that much worse.
I'm a Georgist, personally. Regarding your scenario, I would say that if the owner of the super robot refuses to part with the produce of the robot under reasonable terms, the rest of us will just ignore him and continue producing things the old fashioned way, maybe make some of those robots ourselves. None of us would be forced to associate with him. He'd better hope that the robot is self-maintaining, because no one will help him unless he offers something of value in return.
The main reason our poor cannot go their own way is that we allow rich people to dominate land and natural resources. Land, not capital, keeps labor dependent on the rich. Labor can produce capital, but there's only so much of the land it needs to live.
So, I don't agree that increasing technology will put labor in a weaker bargaining position, partly because its current position can't get any weaker. The only thing capital can do is offer better incentives, it's land that holds our livelihood by the throat.
Senator McConnell: Obama Unwilling To Compromise
Welp, Mc Connell, all I have to say it doesn't feel so good when it's not you doing all the political blocking, does it?
Pelosi jabs DeMint on his way out
Pelosi criticized the resigning South Carolina lawmaker and other GOP senators for voting Tuesday against Senate ratification of a United Nations treaty on rights for the disabled.
“For them [De Mint and other treaty opponents] to slap the face of our veterans, of people with disabilities, of families with children with disabilities, that was one of the saddest days,” Pelosi said in the Capitol, taking care to avoid De Mint's name. “So anyone who was a party to that, well, I wish them well wherever they are going, and hope that we can have more of our values represented [by his replacement].”
Joe Walsh still fiery at final town hall meeting
edited 8th Dec '12 7:00:39 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016
Politicians cannot count. Why should this surprise you?
As for what he actually said, bull-fucking-shit.
edit: A friend showed me this.
◊ It really puts things in perspective even if it's a little outdated.
edited 8th Dec '12 7:19:24 PM by Kostya
What If he meant we were stronger during the depression then now.
Still Stupid and Straw Man beyond belief, but he could have implied it on purpose.
I'm baaaaaaack

First link: link goes to another article, and I don't see what's new anyway. Wouldn't Sanders have thought that already?