Chief Justice JOHN ROBERTS / S C O T U S

[KCFlyer]

And, I think you, me, and everyone else might cutback on the "sure as hell is hot" prognostications that are stated in "put your money here" terms--at least until November the 4th. I'm not betting the mortgage payment on ANY election outcome--even a Donald Trump wins President and Bernie Sanders wins Vice-President. (Doesn't that combination give you a headache?) I am the first to admit that I said on this forum (and others) that Donald Trump didn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of winning in 2016.

I would like to believe that particular outcome is guaranteed for 2020, but life and a lot of people in the United States just don't seem to put much store in reality and/or facts. We have residents of West Virginia still believing that Trump is going to re-open the coal mines despite the fact that there is no market for coal because most of the world is tired of soot covered buildings and children with lung diseases from coal fired heating and manufacturing. Go to Budapest, Hungary and see what a truly clean city looks like. I was astounded when I was there year before last. Not only were the buildings clean, you didn't see any trash on the streets unless you were following a group of American tourists down the street.

We have people who still believe that not only is Donald going to build them a wall but also that said wall will keep illegal immigrants out of the country. And on, and on, and on. Now tell me that you can guarantee that Donald Trump will not be re-elected. As I said in one of the threads last week...I'm still reeling from the fact that the statement, "Donald Trump is President of the United States," is true. What we can do is make sure that every single one of our Commie, Liberal, Democrat(beatcha to it Insp4) fellow travelers votes on November 4. Democrats are famous for staying home on election day because they didn't like who the party nominated--even a bad nomination for dog catcher can get us to roll over and stay in bed on election day.

Or....it could be that we reside in one of those flyover states and our vote for president would never count anyways. Hillary got 35% of the vote. In order for a Democratic challenger to win the electoral vote in my state, Democrats need to get 133,000 voters to vote for them. The last democrat to win the electoral vote in Kanas was LBJ.

 

[jimntx]

Jim, I'll reply to you because at least you have some sort of comprehension as to what is going on. Having said that, let me ask this simple question. In your opinion, what Democrat candidate do you feel can beat Donald Trump in the up and coming election? Because, this will be not an issue as to who well vote for Trump, but who can you get to vote for someone running against him!

Sorry, Insp4, I just saw this post of yours asking me the burning question of the new decade. My answer...I haven't the vaguest idea. You are asking the guy who was watching the 2016 Republican convention on TV and when the Presidential nomination went to Donald Trump, I called a friend of mine and said, "Well, the Republicans have just elected the first female President (Hillary)!"

I know who I would have liked seeing get the Democratic Pres. and Vice-Pres nominations, but neither of my candidates is still in the race. Typical. Evidently my support is the Kiss of Death.

 

[Insp4]

Sorry, Insp4, I just saw this post of yours asking me the burning question of the new decade. My answer...I haven't the vaguest idea. You are asking the guy who was watching the 2016 Republican convention on TV and when the Presidential nomination went to Donald Trump, I called a friend of mine and said, "Well, the Republicans have just elected the first female President (Hillary)!"

I know who I would have liked seeing get the Democratic Pres. and Vice-Pres nominations, but neither of my candidates is still in the race. Typical. Evidently my support is the Kiss of Death.

Well, as crazy as it might seem, it looks like Crazy Burny may get the nomination! ....If that were to happen, I'm wondering if Bears and K.C. would be as enthusiastic in backing them as they are about opposing Trump?

 

[jimntx]

Well, as crazy as it might seem, it looks like Crazy Burny may get the nomination! ....If that were to happen, I'm wondering if Bears and K.C. would be as enthusiastic in backing them as they are about opposing Trump?

Don't think so. As many followers as he has and the money he has raised, I still think that when push comes to shove the public will vote for a younger person. I'm not even sure that Joe B would be the candidate. As wild as it seems, Buttegieg may become the front-runner--especially if Bernie has another health episode.

 

[KCFlyer]

Don't think so. As many followers as he has and the money he has raised, I still think that when push comes to shove the public will vote for a younger person. I'm not even sure that Joe B would be the candidate. As wild as it seems, Buttegieg may become the front-runner--especially if Bernie has another health episode.

What about Yang?

 

[Kev3188]

Don't think so. As many followers as he has and the money he has raised, I still think that when push comes to shove the public will vote for a younger person.

+1

As a Gen X'er, I'm looking to vote for someone that doesn't look like one of my grandparents.

What about Yang?

He's got more support than I think people realize.

 

[jimntx]

What about Yang?

I'll be honest with you. Yang does not yet register in my elderly brain as a candidate. I need more information about him. But, Bloomberg and Steyer (despite their personal fortunes to spend however they like) also do not seen like viable candidates to me. There's something "not right" about coming into a political race after some of the candidates have been eliminated. It's like they have something to hide that they think will not have time to emerge before the election. (And, we have quite enough of hidden information to deal with that affects already declared candidates, thank you.)

If he had come into the race sooner, I would have been very interested in Tom Steyer.

 

[KCFlyer]

I'll be honest with you. Yang does not yet register in my elderly brain as a candidate. I need more information about him. But, Bloomberg and Steyer (despite their personal fortunes to spend however they like) also do not seen like viable candidates to me. There's something "not right" about coming into a political race after some of the candidates have been eliminated. It's like they have something to hide that they think will not have time to emerge before the election. (And, we have quite enough of hidden information to deal with that affects already declared candidates, thank you.)

If he had come into the race sooner, I would have been very interested in Tom Steyer.

Thanks. My son-in-law (a millenial) is very interested in Yang as he is the only candidate on either side that addresses the fact that jobs are being automated away...and looks at what future generations will do for a living.

 

[jimntx]

So what is Yang's solution to the job automation problem? There is no doubt that jobs--particularly assembly type jobs--will continue to be eliminated as IT continues to become more sophisticated. And, a machine that can run 24 hours/day without stopping does not require vacation time, insurance benefits or a pension. The cost figures are not in favor of the living assembler.

I was in Best Buy last week and they had stacks of Smart TVs on clearance post-Christmas sales. I could not believe the prices. Samsung 65 inch screens with ability to stream any and all sources, such as Netflix, Youtube, etc. and all for $255!!!!! There is no way they could afford to sell at those prices with a human assembler at every step. Of course these had some out of date technology. The latest and greatest QLED (whatever in the hell that means) TVs ranged in price from $1200 to $1500.

 

[KCFlyer]

So what is Yang's solution to the job automation problem? There is no doubt that jobs--particularly assembly type jobs--will continue to be eliminated as IT continues to become more sophisticated. And, a machine that can run 24 hours/day without stopping does not require vacation time, insurance benefits or a pension. The cost figures are not in favor of the living assembler.

I was in Best Buy last week and they had stacks of Smart TVs on clearance post-Christmas sales. I could not believe the prices. Samsung 65 inch screens with ability to stream any and all sources, such as Netflix, Youtube, etc. and all for $255!!!!! There is no way they could afford to sell at those prices with a human assembler at every step. Of course these had some out of date technology. The latest and greatest QLED (whatever in the hell that means) TVs ranged in price from $1200 to $1500.

That's one reason for the basic income. We are most likely going to move to a much more entrepreneurial economy. The basic income is to allow people to subsist while they work on their ideas. Sounds a little far-fetched, but robots are building cars..artificial intelligence is working customer service desks, cars and trucks are on the verge of becoming self driving, computers are programming other computers. In due time they might be able to use artificial intelligence to replace investment bankers. But all the other candidates on both sides will talk "jobs, jobs, jobs". But they have no ideas about what those jobs will be. Sure....it's not going to happen in the next couple of years, but a millennial has about 30 or 40 years ahead of them before they can think of retirement. If our "long term view" is just the next 5 years, we will find ourselves behind the 8 ball.

And I know the general response will be "typical millenial...wants to be paid to do nothing". The only thing I can say to that is - In my 62 years I've never found anyone who was satisfied with $12k per year.

 

[delldude]

That's one reason for the basic income. We are most likely going to move to a much more entrepreneurial economy. The basic income is to allow people to subsist while they work on their ideas. Sounds a little far-fetched, but robots are building cars..artificial intelligence is working customer service desks, cars and trucks are on the verge of becoming self driving, computers are programming other computers. In due time they might be able to use artificial intelligence to replace investment bankers. But all the other candidates on both sides will talk "jobs, jobs, jobs". But they have no ideas about what those jobs will be. Sure....it's not going to happen in the next couple of years, but a millennial has about 30 or 40 years ahead of them before they can think of retirement. If our "long term view" is just the next 5 years, we will find ourselves behind the 8 ball.

And I know the general response will be "typical millenial...wants to be paid to do nothing". The only thing I can say to that is - In my 62 years I've never found anyone who was satisfied with $12k per year.

Know or have met quite a number who 'got over' and subsist on $700 a month SSI, Food Stamps ($200 a head), Medicaid, Liheap, subsidized housing. And now a basic income....LOL

 

[KCFlyer]

Know or have met quite a number who 'got over' and subsist on $700 a month SSI, Food Stamps ($200 a head), Medicaid, Liheap, subsidized housing. And now a basic income....LOL

Do they outnumber the ones who work? When jobs are automated away, what is any candidate suggesting to address that?

 

[jimntx]

Do you mean candidates other than Yang? If so, I think the answer is none. I haven't heard it put forth as an issue by either side. I agree that "waiting to see what happens" is not a smart strategy. That would result in a huge government handout program just to keep the unemployed from starving to death (a la the programs of the Great Depression).

Attention:Anti-Big Government Politicians! Start practicing swallowing your bombastic statements when the rescue program ends up being larger than the ACA. Your craw may not be able to get all of them in one swallow. Won't it be fun when a Republican President has to sign the rescue program into law?

 

[KCFlyer]

Won't it be fun when a Republican President has to sign the rescue program into law?

A Republican won't. They will gladly sit back as millions starve and boast that the number of people on food stamps is at an all time low.

 

[delldude]

Do you mean candidates other than Yang? If so, I think the answer is none. I haven't heard it put forth as an issue by either side. I agree that "waiting to see what happens" is not a smart strategy. That would result in a huge government handout program just to keep the unemployed from starving to death (a la the programs of the Great Depression).

Attention:Anti-Big Government Politicians! Start practicing swallowing your bombastic statements when the rescue program ends up being larger than the ACA. Your craw may not be able to get all of them in one swallow. Won't it be fun when a Republican President has to sign the rescue program into law?

Guess you didn't realize what the long term extended unemployment and dropping asset tests for food stamps was all about. didn't see any long lines at the soup kitchens during the most recent depression, 'er I mean recession under Obama, did you?