No one can push back on AI anymore than anyone could have pushed back on electricity or the automobile or the printing press. AI and automation are here and they're coming for your jobs. It will be a technological revolution like we've never seen. These aren't tools that do things better; they're going to be machines more intelligent than humans, that do everything better -- including building newer and better machines. Stop bringing in millions of more people to compete for what will be a dwindling number of jobs. |
Of course we could push back on it, you fool. Step one is to stop allowing AI companies to freely train on the intellectual property of others. And as for AI doing anything better, let alone everything? Thanks for the laugh! |
Sounds like you’re finally seeing the purpose of UBI! Oh wait, you’re too dumb. You think that a handful of corrupt individuals artificially controlling all of the resources is equivalent to natural, inevitable scarcity. |
UBI may indeed be something we need to implement as more jobs are taken over by AI/robotics. I think most people are open to that idea. My hope is that the productivity gains from AI/robotics will enable us to implement a sustainable UBI if need be. But here again, UBI (Universal Basic Income) is, in essence, "giving free stuff to people thrown out of work by AI/automation." If you think that letting millions more people into the country to be given UBI-handouts is a sustainable idea, I'd love to understand that logic. The last thing we need is to be importing millions more foreigners who will be looking for the "free stuff" UBI that we aren't even sure we can handle for the American population as it exists today. In short, it will be an immense challenge to sort out UBI for the current American population of ~350 million. Adding more soon-to-be-unemployed people only makes the situation worse. Sadly, I'm reminded why it's often so pointless to try to have these discussions in good faith: "It's amazing how much leftist discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible." |
|
“Making a grim future only ever-so-slightly less grim by letting in fewer people to compete in the post-apocalyptic Hunger Games economic war” does not sound like happiness.
Serious question: is the closest thing some of the PPs can get to a vision of happiness simply “slightly less misery?” |
Right back atcha. You’re like a hamster on a wheel, refusing to engage with anything beyond your tightly held conviction that the borders are wide open and millions upon millions of immigrants are flooding into the country to get those sweet sweet handouts. The fact is, immigrants pay more in taxes the system than they take out. Most have permission to work in the US and generate billions in tax revenue. For example, the Cato Institute did a 30 year study and found that without immigrants, US public debt would be at least double the 2023 level. Nobody’s advocating for throwing open the borders and letting in 500 million more people. You’ve created a straw man. |
+1 Apparently scarcity aka billionaires owning everything and the rest of us fighting over the crumbs is just the Way Of The World that we shouldn’t try to fix. Any time people try to better their lives by following opportunities and moving elsewhere, they need to be beaten back with sticks (and then told they’re losers and unsuccessful jealous people, like the rich-people cheerleader upthread). Why focus on the fact that we’re only getting crumbs, when you can complain about how many people are fighting over them? |