Are jobs obsolete?

First topic message reminder :

Are jobs obsolete?

By Douglas Rushkoff
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/09/07/rushkoff.jobs.obsolete/index.html?iref=obnetwork

"Our problem is not that we don't have enough stuff -- it's that we don't have enough ways for people to work and prove that they deserve this stuff."

"We start by accepting that food and shelter are basic human rights. The work we do -- the value we create -- is for the rest of what we want: the stuff that makes life fun, meaningful, and purposeful."

"For the time being, as we contend with what appears to be a global economic slowdown by destroying food and demolishing homes, we might want to stop thinking about jobs as the main aspect of our lives that we want to save. They may be a means, but they are not the ends."

---------
Douglas Rushkoff points out that the jobs game has changed and we can conclude that there will not be enough jobs to allow people to earn a living in the system as it is. We have reached a point of transition when the old economic models no longer allow the majority of the population to work for a living. The musical chairs game for getting a job is going to get to the point where dozens of people will be qualified for one job, but only one person will get hired. What will the dozens of people without a job do to survive? It is a brave new world.

SteveR wrote:I'm sorry, but that is just flat-out wrong. The only way to pay for free stuff, beyond what is given as charity, must be forced out of someone - there's no other way. The government does not create wealth - it extracts it from its citizens. Taxes are very much forced - they certainly aren't voluntary.

I can't believe I'm about to be trolled into saying this yet again, but you pay the government to use it's resources. You are not forced, as I have said before, if you don't want to pay the government's taxes, feel free to leave the country and pay taxes somewhere else. Or else, I don't know, buy your own island or something if you can afford it, and don't pay any taxes, don't help anybody out, it's whatever you want in that case.

I don't recall the exact numbers, but something like 20% of the top earners pay 80% of the income taxes.

Now you're just spouting the rhetoric at me, but I'll bite because I'm a glutton for punishment. Key word INCOME taxes. What about payroll taxes? What about the taxes on things that everybody needs, like gas for their car, or utility taxes? Just because you're rich doesn't mean your car suddenly gets half the mileage and you have to buy more gas. Just because you're rich doesn't mean your meter spins twice as fast for the same usage. Since people of every class need these things, they disproportionately affect the poor, because the utility of the money spent is greater for a poor person than a rich one.

"When robbing Peter to pay Paul, you'll always have the support of Paul." - Unknown

Except I'm Peter and Paul has my support. Does Paul have yours?

"Do you think emergency services are unnecessary? Do you think emergency services should be provided only to taxpayers? Things like police, ambulances, etc?"

I actually don't have a clear answer on that - I would say "I don't know." Police and a court system, as per the Constitution, are needed to enforce the rule of law.

But history clearly shows that a limited government is best. A strong government creates concentrations of power that attract the sociopaths (i.e. politicians) and foster corruption. For example, if power were spread out among the states instead of focused in Washington (like it was designed), then lobbyists wouldn't have one-stop shopping and there would be less corruption.

When power is spread out and pushed down to the local levels, it's much easier to make our leaders accountable, because they live among us and have to deal with us.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson

"feel free to leave the country and pay taxes somewhere else."

A US citizen is required to pay tax on all worldwide income, no matter where he resides. Leaving the country does not remove this burden.

SteveR wrote:A US citizen is required to pay tax on all worldwide income, no matter where he resides. Leaving the country does not remove this burden.

If someone is not paying taxes, then they shouldn't be a citizen. How they work out not being a citizen anymore is up to them, because I have no idea how to do it, nor do I want to.

The thing is, you look at taxes as undesirable and a burden. I look at taxes as something I pay as a duty to my country. You may think me a fool for that, if so that's your opinion. I like to think of it as being patriotic.

SteveR wrote:"Do you think emergency services are unnecessary? Do you think emergency services should be provided only to taxpayers? Things like police, ambulances, etc?"

I actually don't have a clear answer on that - I would say "I don't know." Police and a court system, as per the Constitution, are needed to enforce the rule of law.

Lots of people would die if we didn't provide them with these services, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree with this?

"Lots of people would die if we didn't provide them with these services, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree with this?"

Those, for me, are in the category of "I don't know." The thing is you have to look at both sides of it.

For example, I would much rather keep the portion of my property taxes that go to schools and instead spend it on a private provider in the free market, where the schools have to compete for my business, bad teachers are fired, and politicians and govt bureaucrats are not making the rules.

"The thing is, you look at taxes as undesirable and a burden. I look at taxes as something I pay as a duty to my country. You may think me a fool for that, if so that's your opinion"

Yes, I do think it is foolish to hand hard-earned money over to politicians, who are the absolute scum of the earth - sociopathic deceivers and manipulators who don't care the tiniest bit about the people they are supposed to be serving.

A good description of high taxes: the forced extraction of labor from one person, for the benefit of another. That also happens to be a good description of slavery.

SteveR wrote:For example, I would much rather keep the portion of my property taxes that go to schools and instead spend it on a private provider in the free market, where the schools have to compete for my business, bad teachers are fired, and politicians and govt bureaucrats are not making the rules.

But if it was done that way, you'd have to pay directly to the school. Most poor people could not afford that, so am I correct in assuming what you are arguing for is children not receiving an education unless their parents can afford it?

You say you want to go to a private provider, I say a private provider is going to be for-profit. Those profits taken out are dollars that could have been spent on the very thing they're providing. Gotta pay those CEO's somehow.

SteveR wrote:"Lots of people would die if we didn't provide them with these services, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree with this?"

Those, for me, are in the category of "I don't know."

If you don't know the answer to this, how can you know that the answer to whether people should be allowed to go hungry if they don't have money is "yes."

You can apply the same line to both arguments:

Lots of people would die if we did not provide emergency services, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree?

Your response: "I don't know."

Lots of people would die if we did not provide them food and shelter, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree?

Your response: "Disagree."

Do you see the disconnect?

SteveR wrote:"The thing is, you look at taxes as undesirable and a burden. I look at taxes as something I pay as a duty to my country. You may think me a fool for that, if so that's your opinion"

Yes, I do think it is foolish to hand hard-earned money over to politicians, who are the absolute scum of the earth - sociopathic deceivers and manipulators who don't care the tiniest bit about the people they are supposed to be serving.

I'm not handing it over to politicians, I'm handing it over to the government. And yeah, you know what, I'll give you that: it really sucks when the politicians who allocate the money spend it on nonsense. On the other hand, from the sounds of it, you and I would disagree on exactly what "nonsense" is. Regardless, don't give up on the government, give up on the politicians.

This will be the last comment that I make in this asinine argument.

SteveR of course you would rather not pay taxes for schools and instead send your kids to a private school. Your children and your well being are the only thing that matters in your world. Who cares about other people's children right? This is greed, absolute greed. You have shown yourself through your comments to be a greedy individual. You ARE a greedy person. I hope your children grow up different.

You talk about paying taxes and violently coerced you are into paying them and how wrong that sounds and how it's not a good society if you do that. You don't seem to care about the violence inflicted on the poor every single in this country. That's ok though, because you are not poor are you?
I have shown you, through numerous examples, that collectivist societies can and have worked. You ignore all of my examples.

I cannot imagine someone being unemployed and having these opinions and any amount of intelligence at the same time. I am making the guess that you are not unemployed and just came here to see how stupid the socialists on unemployment were.

I have given you many examples that you constantly ignore just to tell us how you pay too much in taxes.


YOU are what's wrong with our country. It's people like you that cause us to die, literally, because we can't get any more aid. Who cares about them, just give it to me right?

It's attitudes like yours that took Al's life. I know you don't who Al is but it wouldn't matter if you did.

A lot of us are dying sir, and it is people like you who are causing it to happen.

You are scum, and one day the tables will be turned on you.

Then you and people like you will know what true violence and coercion is.

Goodnight and goodbye,

Thanks, lendme, my thoughts exactly...

"Regardless, don't give up on the government, give up on the politicians."

I don't see much difference between the two. Politicians are the leaders who pass out their orders to the high-level bureaucrats - and the rest in govt are the minions who do what they're told. Govt is completely controlled by politicians, who are the scum of the earth.

Hey, LendMe, thanks for all the personal attacks and the little threat - those are the keys to a productive discussion.

SteveR wrote:"Regardless, don't give up on the government, give up on the politicians."

I don't see much difference between the two. Politicians are the leaders who pass out their orders to the high-level bureaucrats - and the rest in govt are the minions who do what they're told. Govt is completely controlled by politicians, who are the scum of the earth.

My point was that you can vote out the politicians. If Americans just would band together and vote out bought politicians, we'd be good to go. New ones get bought? Vote them out, too. Keep doing it until the people buying them out realize it's no longer worth the money.

It's that or campaign finance reform, but honestly, nobody should expect that to happen anytime soon.

I am interested to see what you have to say to my other points, though. Fingers crossed that you are busy typing out a response.

"My point was that you can vote out the politicians. If Americans just would band together and vote out bought politicians, we'd be good to go. New ones get bought? Vote them out, too. Keep doing it until the people buying them out realize it's no longer worth the money."

I think that's a good idea. Sadly, the masses are gullible sheep who keep falling for their lies. How do people like you and I convince the masses to vote out the bought politicians? Most people think the Team B guy is the devil himself and that the Team A guy will fix everything, when in reality both A and B are two slightly different shades of the same old crap.

Goodnight all...

ranbrow123 wrote:

SteveR wrote:"Lots of people would die if we didn't provide them with these services, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree with this?"

Those, for me, are in the category of "I don't know."

If you don't know the answer to this, how can you know that the answer to whether people should be allowed to go hungry if they don't have money is "yes."

You can apply the same line to both arguments:

Lots of people would die if we did not provide emergency services, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree?

Your response: "I don't know."

Lots of people would die if we did not provide them food and shelter, therefore I'd argue that it's a necessity to provide them. Do you agree or disagree?

Your response: "Disagree."

Do you see the disconnect?

SteveR, I noticed your goodnight, but if you see this sometime, I'd really like you to address this point. Thanks.

SteveR wrote:Hey, LendMe, thanks for all the personal attacks and the little threat - those are the keys to a productive discussion.

DesperateInRI wrote:

SteveR wrote:Hey, LendMe, thanks for all the personal attacks and the little threat - those are the keys to a productive discussion.

I'll second, third and fourth that......

27 posts and 23 of them ARE on this thread.

ITA with lendme - thank you for posting so eloquently what the majority of us feel.

I don't get these Libertarians who don't want to pay taxes. Paying taxes is the cost of being a member of a society - ANY society. I am single and do not have children. It doesn't bother me in the least that my tax dollars go to funding schools. We, as a society, need educated individuals in order to prosper as a whole.

And this poppycock about the colonialists not wanting to pay taxes is absurd. They didn't want to pay taxes TO BRITAIN because they weren't being represented in Parliament and most of the taxes they paid were being sent to England - not being used in the colonies. They probably would have been happy to pay taxes if they had representation in Parliament and tax money was being used in the colonies - and if that had happened, we'd still be British and flying the Union Jack in public places.

Damn I wish we were still British. If so I would be able to go to a doctor instead of hoping I dont die.

JIM could have his surgery without having to worry about going bankrupt (again). Sorry, JIM there is humor in everything.

But these tea party idiots know nothing about history or the constitution they just know what they want. The first line on their pay checks that's all they care about.

The odd thing is that most of them seem to be on medicare. That's the most ironic thing I've seen since the day I saw a truck full of tires pulled over to the side of the road with a flat tire.

Most likely this guy was just a paid troll or an buttwipe either way I'm done with him. Notice he hasn't been back today. He doesn't work on Sundays.

Taxes benefit the whole. Sharing benefits the whole.

Even in smurf village lazy smurf was still fed even though he probably didn't contribute as much as handy smurf.



My point was not whether he was right or wring but whether it was moral to force a child to starve so your child can eat.

It is immoral to do so and absolute evil, if evil exists.

My husband likes what you have to say. He says you are a pretty sharp guy, lendme!