全ての 12 コメント

[–]Palomides-Mod: Geoliberatarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Another good article from the Economic Policy Institute. I highly recommend the materials coming from there. It's a very Keynesian approach to achieving full employment.

Basic Income and Full Employment are two means to the same end which is everyone having the capacity to participate in the economy. A lot of these suggestions can go along with a universal basic income and some won't be necessary.

This is the most important point on deregulation that sums up my general view on the matter:

There is no solid basis for believing that deregulation will lead to greater productivity growth or that doing so will lead to wage growth. Deregulation of finance certainly was a major factor in the financial crisis and relaxing Dodd–Frank rules will only make our economy more susceptible to crisis.

[–]idapitbwidiuatabip 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (10子コメント)

Full employment won't ever happen because jobs are disappearing as automation takes over, and the pool of qualified applicants is only increasing.

[–]Palomides-Mod: Geoliberatarian[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Okay, that's your opinion and I agree with it, but that is no reason to downvote the submission. Do you have a specific point that you would like to bring up regarding the content of the article or are you just against the headline?

[–]idapitbwidiuatabip 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (8子コメント)

I'm downvoting it because I don't think it's appropriate for Basic Income. It completely ignores the realities of automation and technology replacing the workforce.

It's a dead end, so I'm downvoting it. If others think that somehow the entire adult population can be employed when a fraction of the jobs exist, then they can upvote it.

It's moot. That's my specific point, and I brought it up and put it very succinctly in my original comment.

[–]Palomides-Mod: Geoliberatarian[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Have you read the content of the article?

[–]idapitbwidiuatabip 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I read enough of it. Not the whole thing, but journalism isn't designed in a way where it's essential to read the whole article. It was saying enough that I disagreed with and felt was irrelevant for me to downvote it.

The fact is, this article and everything its talking about is gonna be irrelevant in a matter of years. Technology moves a helluva lot faster than government and bureaucracy. I don't support any silly job creation initiatives. It's a temporary fix that distracts from the much larger issue, and diverts funds, resources, and thought from more workable solutions that take into account the reality of automation.

Why are you taking it so personally?

[–]Palomides-Mod: Geoliberatarian[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (5子コメント)

There's 13 critiques of the current direction of policy in the United States which is being promoted by the GOP towards the end of the article. Broadly speaking, there are two solutions to this problem full employment and basic income.

I suspected you didn't read the article because you didn't mention anything about these 13 critiques.

[–][削除されました]  (3子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]Palomides-Mod: Geoliberatarian[S,M] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Broke rule 1. No personal attacks.

    [–]idapitbwidiuatabip 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    What personal attacks? I didn't attack you at all. I'm telling you to relax, because you're blowing this out of proportion.

    Putting on your mod cap doesn't disprove this, either. Reposting my comment, unedited, because I didn't have any personal attacks. I said the word fuck and told you to deal with the fact that I downvoted your post and even bothered to tell you why.

    [–]idapitbwidiuatabip 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    What personal attacks? I didn't attack you at all. I'm telling you to relax, because you're blowing this out of proportion.

    Putting on your mod cap doesn't disprove this, either. Reposting my comment, unedited, because I didn't have any personal attacks. I said the word fuck and told you to deal with the fact that I downvoted your post and even bothered to tell you why.

    [–]idapitbwidiuatabip 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I glanced through a few of them. I don't have to mention them by name in my response, you aren't some teacher quizzing me. Fucking relax, dude.

    The point is, full employment is impossible in light of technology. Suspect I didn't read it all you want, but the fact remains that it's moot, and I'm downvoting it and will continue to downvote similar stuff that I feel goes down a dead end.

    I've been very articulate about why I didn't like this post, and you need to lighten up. I saw and read enough the content you posted and feel that it's irrelevant at best, counterproductive at worst. This isn't a case of me downvoting without reading.

    Deal with it. Stop taking Reddit so personally.