• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

PPCLI Guy said:
Or....reduce the amount of humans. #viruscull
Click to expand...

Funny enough, in my first university Macroeconomics class, the teacher told us: "If the government asks you to propose solutions to increase the GDP per capita of the country, you have to tell them they can either increase GDP or reduce the number of capita. It's not your job to decide which is moral and which is not".
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Funny enough, in my first university Macroeconomics class, the teacher told us: "If the government asks you to propose solutions to increase the GDP per capita of the country, you have to tell them they can either increase GDP or reduce the number of capita. It's not your job to decide which is moral and which is not".
Click to expand...
Like the NDP approach to 2% spending on Defence. Adopt policies that will shrink the economy......
 
HavokFour said:
W-what? Are you telling me American's are the ones paying his tariffs?!

Patrick Stewart Reaction GIF
Click to expand...
but i was assured that foreign countries were paying them?
 
PPCLI Guy said:
Or....reduce the amount of humans. #viruscull
Click to expand...
Taken seriously, the number of people is predicted to shortly peak and then start declining. More automation will be desirable, and should improve productivity and eventually shorten conventional working time, with undetermined effects on birth rates. There will probably be a floor, above zero, under birth rates. If improved lives do not get birth rates back up above replacement, we go extinct, but I suspect the desire to have children is suppressed by the amount of working time needed to sustain a family. I would expect to find some region within which the world population at least approximately stabilizes, or resumes increasing.

A system of differential equations to be solved, if someone wanted to observe (measure) the system and model it.

The labour shortage created by the Black Plague improved the lives of the surviving peasants.

Canada already has labour shortages, particularly in public services, unless all the ads unions in BC are running on TV are bullshit. (In some cases, given statutory requirements, labour shortages are certainly real.)
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Which, at some point, should bring back the Henry Ford great discovery when he concluded and decided that he should pay his employees a higher than average wage: If you mass produce something for the people, you have to make sure the greatest mass of people have money to buy it.

If robots and AI take over producing the worlds good but cause unemployment of most people in the world, their mass producing anything ain't gonna make them rich: it's gonna cause mass revolutions.
Click to expand...
UBI and a 1950s tax structure might be our only way outta this.
 
PrairieFella said:
UBI and a 1950s tax structure might be our only way outta this.
Click to expand...
UBI is a counter-incentive to putting in the effort to find work and stick at it.

"The way out" is usually something that spontaneously emerges despite government efforts to force it in a particular direction.
 
Brad Sallows said:
UBI is a counter-incentive to putting in the effort to find work and stick at it.

"The way out" is usually something that spontaneously emerges despite government efforts to force it in a particular direction.
Click to expand...
If AI gets to the point where its proponents envision it going, governments wont have a choice. 20-30% unemployment anyone? Great way to start a revolution.
 
PrairieFella said:
If AI gets to the point where its proponents envision it going, governments wont have a choice. 20-30% unemployment anyone? Great way to start a revolution.
Click to expand...
Less point worrying about that cliff than worrying about the next economic downturn hitting everyone in the middle of their current spending sprees in what is, mostly, a decently-performing economy.
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Funny enough, in my first university Macroeconomics class, the teacher told us: "If the government asks you to propose solutions to increase the GDP per capita of the country, you have to tell them they can either increase GDP or reduce the number of capita. It's not your job to decide which is moral and which is not".
Click to expand...

“I could end the deficit in five minutes. You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP all sitting members of congress are ineligible for reelection.”

― Warren Buffet
 
daftandbarmy said:
“I could end the deficit in five minutes. You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP all sitting members of congress are ineligible for reelection.”

― Warren Buffet
Click to expand...
You would have to tie up almost every navy ship, confine troops to their barracks, stand down units, ground most USAF aircraft, stop all further military contracts.
Cancel thousands of infrastructure projects. It would be basically like the recent shutdown, but longer and worse.
 
Colin Parkinson said:
You would have to tie up almost every navy ship, confine troops to their barracks, stand down units, ground most USAF aircraft, stop all further military contracts.
Cancel thousands of infrastructure projects. It would be basically like the recent shutdown, but longer and worse.
Click to expand...
If it's done overnight, yes. Not if done gradually. And it doesn't take long to see effect. All that's needed is a healthy difference between revenues and program spending (which, aside from short one to two year real crisis periods and their aftermaths, is a choice) for a few years.
 
HavokFour said:
Near unanimous vote, only 1 against. People smell blood in the water.
Click to expand...
I can guess that if there's any blood, it'll be as I've held all along - people other than Trump.

Larry Summers appears to be the first, albeit light, casualty of this round.
 
PrairieFella said:
Trump is in the files guy, theres nothing partisan about it.
Click to expand...
Just curious how you make this statement, maybe he is, lots of folks will be, but have you seen the files? If not then why would you state something as a fact, and not an opinion?

The art and class of debate sinks lower and lower....
 
Bruce Monkhouse said:
Just curious how you make this statement, maybe he is, lots of folks will be, but have you seen the files? If not then why would you state something as a fact, and not an opinion?

The art and class of debate sinks lower and lower....
Click to expand...
Trump has already been mentioned 1500 times in the files.

Stands to reason he will be named more times.

This again doesn't mean he did anything, but to state that he will be mentioned further is simply looking at the available evidence and coming to a logical conclusion.
 
Bruce Monkhouse said:
Just curious how you make this statement, maybe he is, lots of folks will be, but have you seen the files? If not then why would you state something as a fact, and not an opinion?

The art and class of debate sinks lower and lower....
Click to expand...
given that he's referenced ~1500 times in the documents the House Oversight Committee has released, I think it's a safe bet that he'll appear in the files that the DOJ has.
 
Bruce Monkhouse said:
Just curious how you make this statement, maybe he is, lots of folks will be, but have you seen the files? If not then why would you state something as a fact, and not an opinion?
Click to expand...
In the files that have been released so far he's been mentioned dozens upon dozens of times. Have you read them?
Bruce Monkhouse said:
The art and class of debate sinks lower and lower....
Click to expand...
Not sure why youre slinging mud needlessly. No nees to be sanctimonious, just look at the files that have been released so far. Nothing to debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top