Politics

[pkt77242]

Also when talking about technology and loss of jobs.

Will Automation Take Our Jobs? - Scientific American

Last fall economist Carl Benedikt Frey and information engineer Michael A. Osborne, both at the University of Oxford, published a study estimating the probability that 702 occupations would soon be computerized out of existence. Their findings were startling. Advances in data mining, machine vision, artificial intelligence and other technologies could, they argued, put 47 percent of American jobs at high risk of being automated in the years ahead. Loan officers, tax preparers, cashiers, locomotive engineers, paralegals, roofers, taxi drivers and even animal breeders are all in danger of going the way of the switchboard operator.

Whether or not you buy Frey and Osborne's analysis, it is undeniable that something strange is happening in the U.S. labor market. Since the end of the Great Recession, job creation has not kept up with population growth. Corporate profits have doubled since 2000, yet median household income (adjusted for inflation) dropped from $55,986 to $51,017. At the same time, after-tax corporate profits as a share of gross domestic product increased from around 5 to 11 percent, while compensation of employees as a share of GDP dropped from around 47 to 43 percent. Somehow businesses are making more profit with fewer workers.

Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, both business researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, call this divergence the “great decoupling.” In their view, presented in their recent book The Second Machine Age, it is a historic shift.

The conventional economic wisdom has long been that as long as productivity is increasing, all is well. Technological innovations foster higher productivity, which leads to higher incomes and greater well-being for all. And for most of the 20th century productivity and incomes did rise in parallel. But in recent decades the two began to diverge. Productivity kept increasing while incomes—which is to say, the welfare of individual workers—stagnated or dropped.

Brynjolfsson and McAfee argue that technological advances are destroying jobs, particularly low-skill jobs, faster than they are creating them. They cite research showing that so-called routine jobs (bank teller, machine operator, dressmaker) began to fade in the 1980s, when computers first made their presence known, but that the rate has accelerated: between 2001 and 2011, 11 percent of routine jobs disappeared.


Plenty of economists disagree, but it is hard to referee this debate, in part because of a lack of data. Our understanding of the relation between technological advances and employment is limited by outdated metrics. At a roundtable discussion on technology and work convened this year by the European Union, the IRL School at Cornell University and the Conference Board (a business research association), a roomful of economists and financiers repeatedly emphasized how many basic economic variables are measured either poorly or not at all. Is productivity declining? Or are we simply measuring it wrong? Experts differ. What kinds of workers are being sidelined, and why? Could they get new jobs with the right retraining? Again, we do not know.

In 2013 Brynjolfsson told Scientific American that the first step in reckoning with the impact of automation on employment is to diagnose it correctly—“to understand why the economy is changing and why people aren't doing as well as they used to.” If productivity is no longer a good proxy for a vigorous economy, then we need a new way to measure economic health. In a 2009 report economists Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University, Amartya Sen of Harvard University and Jean-Paul Fitoussi of the Paris Institute of Political Studies made a similar case, writing that “the time is ripe for our measurement system to shift emphasis from measuring economic production to measuring people's well-being.” An IRL School report last year called for statistical agencies to capture more and better data on job market churn—data that could help us learn which job losses stem from automation.

Without such data, we will never properly understand how technology is changing the nature of work in the 21st century—and what, if anything, should be done about it. As one participant in this year's roundtable put it, “Even if this is just another industrial revolution, people underestimate how wrenching that is. If it is, what are the changes to the rules of labor markets and businesses that should be made this time? We made a lot last time. What is the elimination of child labor this time? What is the eight-hour workday this time?”

Bold added by me.

 

[pkt77242]

Cack, I also find it interesting that Graham wants money for S.C. but didn't want it for Hurricane Sandy. This is my problem with some "conservatives" that they want to be fiscally responsible until it comes to something that affects them.

 

[pkt77242]

"Great Recession" was like the Great Depression?

Depression vs Recession

Length of Economic Contraction
43 months versus 18 months

Drop in Industrial Production
51.7% versus 14.9%

Peak Unemployment Rate
24.8% versus 9.9%

Change in CPI
-27.2% versus +1.5%

Number of Bank Failures
9096 (50% of banks) versus 57 (0.6% of banks)

Drop in Dow Jones Industrial Average
89.2% versus 53.8%

How much of this is because of the actions taken by the government? I can tell you for sure that we would have had significantly more bank failures if the government wasn't so aggressive (which also helped unemployment rates stay lower), and I think that the government's response helped prop up the DJIA as well.

So what you are really saying is "Thank you government for taking action to prevent this from becoming another great depression", right?

 

[pkt77242]

The Good Old Days (myth)

1950s
Average American Home - 983 SF with 3.5 residents - 55% home ownership
Tech - 10% own televisions at average (infl adj) cost of $2100, 60% own landline telephones, 0% Air conditioning, 0% computers (obvious to most)
Income/Education - $11,000 average earnings (2008 dollars), 41% high school graduation rate, 8% college graduation rate
Quality of Life - 68 years life expectancy, 50% of seniors in poverty, 75% of African-Americans in poverty, ZERO years average retirement

2013
Average Home - 2349 SF with 2.5 residents, 80% home ownership
Technology - 95% own TVs at $500 average cost, 90% cell phones, 90% A/C, 75% have computers
Income/Education - $44,000 average earnings, 88% high school grad rate, 31% college grad rate
Quality of Life - 78 years life expectancy, 9% seniors in poverty, 27% African American poverty, 12 years average retirement

Depends on your definition of poverty, the government sets it at 11,800 or so per person. Try living on that a year. Our FPL is so ridiculously low that it is laughable. In truth in 2013 about half of people on medicare had income of less than $23,500.

 

[Cackalacky]

Cack, I also find it interesting that Graham wants money for S.C. but didn't want it for Hurricane Sandy. This is my problem with some "conservatives" that they want to be fiscally responsible until it comes to something that affects them.

That's the way it is for most of them. I do not have a problem generalizing that.... far too much evidence against them to deny. From toe tapping in bathrooms of family values guys to corruption among fiscally responsible christians.... It really is that they refuse to do anything that does not directly affect them. The same people who are "right to lifer's" are avid pro gun nuts and would generously give an infant bootstraps once their eyes open outside the womb. People who want little government actively promote big government in women's vaginas. People who are family values conservatives are actively ripping their own families apart doing the exact things they want to stop other people doing and want to use the government to do it. As bad as they think liberals are for doing the same things, we at least don't hide behind our hypocrisy.

 

[phgreek]

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/08/gops-mccarthy-dropping-out-of-race-for-house-speaker-reports.html

...Fine with me. If you don't want to put the gloves on and play at the level of Harry and Nancy...GTFO. I want someone to mirror their conduct, and one up it. Tired of the high road chatter and 0 results...

 

[RDU Irish]

Depends on your definition of poverty, the government sets it at 11,800 or so per person. Try living on that a year. Our FPL is so ridiculously low that it is laughable. In truth in 2013 about half of people on medicare had income of less than $23,500.

The 43% of the world population living on less than $2/day respectfully disagree, $32/day is an exponential improvement over the true poor of this world and might shed some light on how our "poor" are able to weigh 400 pounds with air conditioning, dish washer, washer and dryer, microwave, cable TV, Xbox and cell phone. Not saying that is the norm but the fact it is possible to be classified as "poor" with these amenities covered is kind of insulting to half of the world.

 

[connor_in]

Stephen Hayes shows how Hillary promoted Blumenthal business interests in Libya twitchy.com

Back in May, the New York Times reported about longtime Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal’s interest in Libya:


Mr. Gowdy’s chief interest, according to people briefed on the inquiry, is a series of memos that Mr. Blumenthal — who was not an employee of the State Department — wrote to Mrs. Clinton about events unfolding in Libya before and after the death of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. According to emails obtained by The New York Times, Mrs. Clinton, who was secretary of state at the time, took Mr. Blumenthal’s advice seriously, forwarding his memos to senior diplomatic officials in Libya and Washington and at times asking them to respond. Mrs. Clinton continued to pass around his memos even after other senior diplomats concluded that Mr. Blumenthal’s assessments were often unreliable.

What motivated Sidney Blumenthal’s interest in Libya that had him in frequent contact with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Breaking: <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Benghazi?src=hash">#Benghazi</a> Cmte says new documents show Sidney Blumenthal was seeking business in Libya & at least once Hillary Clinton helped him.</p>— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) <a href="https://twitter.com/stephenfhayes/status/652139992920166401">October 8, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Ya don’t say!


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Trey Gowdy says "clear decision" by State Dept to "withhold" damaging info on Hillary Clinton/Blumenthal from <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Benghazi?src=hash">#Benghazi</a> cmte & American ppl.</p>— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) <a href="https://twitter.com/stephenfhayes/status/652140755209687040">October 8, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">More from <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Benghazi?src=hash">#Benghazi</a> Cmte: HRC was not only soliciting info from Blumenthal, contrary to her claims, she was promoting his business interests</p>— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) <a href="https://twitter.com/stephenfhayes/status/652141279376052224">October 8, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Here is the 13-page letter from Trey Gowdy to Elijah Cummings detailing new information on HRC/Blumenthal. <a href="https://t.co/DoOKxSH3i6">https://t.co/DoOKxSH3i6</a></p>— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) <a href="https://twitter.com/stephenfhayes/status/652141840326520832">October 8, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It gets worse:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">In one unsecure email from Blumenthal to Clinton, he appears to name a top CIA source in Libya. (Committee redacted this info). <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Benghazi?src=hash">#Benghazi</a></p>— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) <a href="https://twitter.com/stephenfhayes/status/652142318749773824">October 8, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It’s becoming even clearer why the FBI’s investigation remains in full swing.

 

[Wild Bill]

My point is that some of them tried and got on SSDI, is because they couldn't find jobs which drove the unemployment rate down (which makes it a factor in the unemployment rate being so low which you used as proof that automation wasn't stealing jobs). What is making it harder for people to find jobs? Well there is a couple of things, employers are making due with less employees, and increasing technology has made it possible to do so in many cases. When people get laid off and can't find a job, they do things like apply for SSDI (especially when their unemployment gets close to running out), especially if they are close to retirement. Whether that is right or wrong is a different question. Again, there is no doubt that automation is taking jobs more and more jobs (well except by you).

Even if we assume the affect of automation, as a whole, is a net loss of jobs (I agree it may, just not sure to what extent), is it really something that can be controlled? Probably not. Employers are going to find ways to decrease costs, especially labor costs. Government regulation will not stop them. In my estimation, an increase in government regulation, specifically with respect to how they handle their employees, will only increase the amount of automation we see going forward.

I believe a greater focus being placed on better preparing the next generation of workers for the workplace and eliminating policies that incentivize not working would go a long way in reducing unemployment. Some people lack the skill necessary, in many instances, to earn a higher wage than that which would just be given to them if they didn't work. It should not be a surprise to anyone that these people choose government handouts over a day of work. Who in the hell wouldn't in their position? But if those same people had the skills to compete for a higher paying job, they'd be far less likely to accept a lesser paying welfare check. I'm not suggesting this is societies fault and they are not responsible, in part, for their own lack of skills needed to survive financially. What I'm suggesting is that there are complete failures in parenting and public education that need to be addressed. Congress could do their part by making smart changes to the tax code and entitlement system. The underlying policy of everything should be to encourage/incentivize work while still providing a reasonable safety net.

 

[pkt77242]

The 43% of the world population living on less than $2/day respectfully disagree, $32/day is an exponential improvement over the true poor of this world and might shed some light on how our "poor" are able to weigh 400 pounds with air conditioning, dish washer, washer and dryer, microwave, cable TV, Xbox and cell phone. Not saying that is the norm but the fact it is possible to be classified as "poor" with these amenities covered is kind of insulting to half of the world.

While I agree some of our poor aren't anywhere as near as poor the world over, there is also a distinct difference in the cost of living from the U.S. then from some countries in Africa. Again you are letting the fact that some poor people have it not so bad blind you from the fact that many of our senior citizens live in poverty. Think about it. Lets say an older man has an income of $12K a year in retirement. They have to pay rent, utilities, food, healthcare (deductibles), etc. Living on that 12K a year is not easy in the U.S. especially depending on where you live. 12K goes almost no where in the L.A. area, and even in places like Phoenix it is not easy.

 

[RDU Irish]

While I agree some of our poor aren't anywhere as near as poor the world over, there is also a distinct difference in the cost of living from the U.S. then from some countries in Africa. Again you are letting the fact that some poor people have it not so bad blind you from the fact that many of our senior citizens live in poverty. Think about it. Lets say an older man has an income of $12K a year in retirement. They have to pay rent, utilities, food, healthcare (deductibles), etc. Living on that 12K a year is not easy in the U.S. especially depending on where you live. 12K goes almost no where in the L.A. area, and even in places like Phoenix it is not easy.

In fairness, you claim "many of our senior citizens live in poverty" you do not say it is better or worse than in times past. Was 1950 better or worse than today in your opinion? You seem offended by my statistics that show an 80% reduction in senior poverty and a 66% drop in African American poverty. Or how about the AVERAGE earnings of 1950 being right at today's poverty line? By and large we are four times better off today than sixty years ago. If not now... when, if not here...where? Stop feeling sorry for the state of the world and go get your own instead of telling everyone else what they should really be doing with theirs.

And if someone is dumb enough to try and live in LA on $12k/year that is on them. GTFO! Should government be required to support people in expensive areas more than they support people in inexpensive areas? Try getting out of your precious city and realize there are a lot of beautiful parts of this country where you can live for a pittance of what it takes in the most heavily populated areas. For people living on fixed incomes, it would be the wisest "investment" they could make.

 

[RDU Irish]

Someone should go in a time machine and prevent the first farmers from putting all of those hunters and gatherers out of business. Extrapolate that point and it is amazing we don't have 110% unemployment.

 

[GoIrish41]

Why Some Men Earn Less Than They Did 40 Years Ago : NPR

 

[NDohio]

That's the way it is for most of them. I do not have a problem generalizing that.... far too much evidence against them to deny. From toe tapping in bathrooms of family values guys to corruption among fiscally responsible christians.... It really is that they refuse to do anything that does not directly affect them. The same people who are "right to lifer's" are avid pro gun nuts and would generously give an infant bootstraps once their eyes open outside the womb. People who want little government actively promote big government in women's vaginas. People who are family values conservatives are actively ripping their own families apart doing the exact things they want to stop other people doing and want to use the government to do it. As bad as they think liberals are for doing the same things, we at least don't hide behind our hypocrisy.

Ya know, it really sucks that this is how you see republicans today. I would love to argue with you, but I can't.

I do think there is a fairly large number of people that are similar to myself that do believe in a smaller government yet give(time and money) to organizations that help those that are in need regardless of how it affects me. I believe the gov. doesn't do a very good of job taking care of those in need, the gov. is woefully inefficient and it is much easier to take advantage of the their programs because there is no relationship between the organization(gov) and those that are receiving aid.

Yes I am pro-life, but in all instances(NO to death penalty); but, please do get the government out of the abortion business; have never owned a gun, and would love to see tighter restrictions on how to purchase one; I am a man without a candidate or a party...

 

[Cackalacky]

Ya know, it really sucks that this is how you see republicans today. I would love to argue with you, but I can't.

I do think there is a fairly large number of people that are similar to myself that do believe in a smaller government yet give(time and money) to organizations that help those that are in need regardless of how it affects me. I believe the gov. doesn't do a very good of job taking care of those in need, the gov. is woefully inefficient and it is much easier to take advantage of the their programs because there is no relationship between the organization(gov) and those that are receiving aid.

Yes I am pro-life, but in all instances(NO to death penalty); but, please do get the government out of the abortion business; have never owned a gun, and would love to see tighter restrictions on how to purchase one; I am a man without a candidate or a party...

I think you are saying you don't want to argue with me and if so that is fine. But its not just me that sees it like this. I am definitely not alone. It is the Republican image they have cultivated through their actions (I was more talking about Politicans like Graham at first). The Republican party truly has no identity right now as it is in complete turmoil politically. It also currently has no coherent platform. It has two philosophically inconsistent bases (ecomonic and religious) that at their core are dissonant morally and intellectually and the funadamentalists of both bases are warring with each other.

You are saying you are a man without a party or a candidate with those positions. I can see why.

 

[Corry]

Someone should go in a time machine and prevent the first farmers from putting all of those hunters and gatherers out of business. Extrapolate that point and it is amazing we don't have 110% unemployment.

Steven Hawkins in his AMA today disagrees with your premise.

[–]Prof-Stephen-HawkingStephen Hawking 3284 points 9 hours ago
I'm rather late to the question-asking party, but I'll ask anyway and hope. Have you thought about the possibility of technological unemployment, where we develop automated processes that ultimately cause large unemployment by performing jobs faster and/or cheaper than people can perform them? Some compare this thought to the thoughts of the Luddites, whose revolt was caused in part by perceived technological unemployment over 100 years ago. In particular, do you foresee a world where people work less because so much work is automated? Do you think people will always either find work or manufacture more work to be done? Thank you for your time and your contributions. I’ve found research to be a largely social endeavor, and you've been an inspiration to so many.

Answer:
If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality.

 

[pkt77242]

In fairness, you claim "many of our senior citizens live in poverty" you do not say it is better or worse than in times past. Was 1950 better or worse than today in your opinion? You seem offended by my statistics that show an 80% reduction in senior poverty and a 66% drop in African American poverty. Or how about the AVERAGE earnings of 1950 being right at today's poverty line? By and large we are four times better off today than sixty years ago. If not now... when, if not here...where? Stop feeling sorry for the state of the world and go get your own instead of telling everyone else what they should really be doing with theirs.

And if someone is dumb enough to try and live in LA on $12k/year that is on them. GTFO! Should government be required to support people in expensive areas more than they support people in inexpensive areas? Try getting out of your precious city and realize there are a lot of beautiful parts of this country where you can live for a pittance of what it takes in the most heavily populated areas. For people living on fixed incomes, it would be the wisest "investment" they could make.

The problem with your wage argument is that things are more expensive now than they were then.
For example median house price in 1950 was about $7500 which is about $80,000 now.
Average car cost then about $1500, which equates to about $15000 now.
Average income in 1950 was about $3300 which comes to about 33,000 a year now.

So lets get this straight. While we make more in inflation adjusted dollars now than then (33,000 to 50,000)
Average new car price is more than double (15,000 to 33000)
Home Prices more than doubled (80,000 to 190,000)

So really we aren't making more, in fact we are falling behind because the cost of everything is rising faster than rise in pay. That goes especially for the poverty line which as increased at inflation ($1540 in 1965 when it started to about $12K now). Well most things that people need to purchase. Another great example is rent which averaged $42 in 1950 which is about $420 in current dollars. Well now the median rent is $800. So again, the idea that people have moved out from under the poverty line, might be true but a closer look at the numbers behind it show that they aren't really better off. Many major costs have increased at twice inflation while the FPL has only increased at inflation. So while more people show as being out from below the poverty line, the truth is that the poverty line hasn't increased at the pace that everything else has.

As to moving old people away from where they live, yes it can be cheaper but if you are moving someone away from their family and their support system, it can also be detrimental as well.

ETA: I do think that it has gotten better since 1950, I just don't think that the numbers you are posting are overstating the change.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

In the past on here I've referred to London as Londonistan, as Mohammed is now the most popular name for newborn males in the UK. Looks like Germany is right behind them, and the government is seizing private property to convert the property into migrant centers. Absolutely unreal.

Europe: Seizing Homes to House Muslim Migrants | Pamela Geller

Story this author used taken from Die Welt newspaper in Germany.

Germany Now Expects Up To 1.5 Million Migrants In 2015

 

[NDohio]

I think you are saying you don't want to argue with me and if so that is fine. But its not just me that sees it like this. I am definitely not alone. It is the Republican image they have cultivated through their actions (I was more talking about Politicans like Graham at first). The Republican party truly has no identity right now as it is in complete turmoil politically. It also currently has no coherent platform. It has two philosophically inconsistent bases (ecomonic and religious) that at their core are dissonant morally and intellectually and the funadamentalists of both bases are warring with each other.

You are saying you are a man without a party or a candidate with those positions. I can see why.

Sorry, I was on the way out the door and didn't state that well. I am saying I would love to be able to fight for the party that my family and I have been a part of for a long time, but I can't. The GOP sucks right now. I also don't fit into the democratic party, the tea party, the libertarian party, etc.

 

[Cackalacky]

Sorry, I was on the way out the door and didn't state that well. I am saying I would love to be able to fight for the party that my family and I have been a part of for a long time, but I can't. The GOP sucks right now. I also don't fit into the democratic party, the tea party, the libertarian party, etc.

Ahhh that did cross the back of my mind. I definitely misunderstood. I also feel that way too. I don't think either of the major party platforms adequately represent me or my family. That does suck.

 

[Cackalacky]

Right on cue.... New rumors circulating that McCarthy has been carrying on an affair with a NC republican representative.

 

[phgreek]

Right on cue.... New rumors circulating that McCarthy has been carrying on an affair with a NC republican representative.

Govt IP Edited Wikipedia To Accuse Kevin McCarthy of Affair | Mediaite

Not familiar with this source, but if the IP address is accurate...I'm not shocked at all someone in this Federal Government would engage as such...probably a former IRS or HHS employee...But hey, lets keep stuffing data about everyone on servers because DC can be trusted...hehehe, YEA!

 

[pkt77242]

Govt IP Edited Wikipedia To Accuse Kevin McCarthy of Affair | Mediaite

Not familiar with this source, but if the IP address is accurate...I'm not shocked at all someone in this Federal Government would engage as such...probably a former IRS or HHS employee...But hey, lets keep stuffing data about everyone on servers because DC can be trusted...hehehe, YEA!

Or more likely it is an aide to a congressman(woman).

 

[phgreek]

Or more likely it is an aide to a congressman(woman).

...could be, but whats an aid doing on a DHS network??

 

[pkt77242]

...could be, but whats an aid doing on a DHS network??

True (though maybe hiding their tracks though more likely it is a less intelligent person). Maybe a liaison officer between DHS and Congress? It would give them access to the DHS server and probably the knowledge of what is going on in Congress.

 

[pkt77242]

In the past on here I've referred to London as Londonistan, as Mohammed is now the most popular name for newborn males in the UK. Looks like Germany is right behind them, and the government is seizing private property to convert the property into migrant centers. Absolutely unreal.

Europe: Seizing Homes to House Muslim Migrants | Pamela Geller

Story this author used taken from Die Welt newspaper in Germany.

Germany Now Expects Up To 1.5 Million Migrants In 2015

Do you have even a slightly reputable source to back this up? I can't find any news organization/website carrying it outside of crazy right wing sites. Plus Pamela Gellar is far from a trusted source.

2nd, I was under the impression that there are some Christian migrants as well. Why does the headline only say Muslim Migrants? Does it have anything to do with the fact that Pamela Geller is very anti-muslim?

 

[phgreek]

True (though maybe hiding their tracks though more likely it is a less intelligent person). Maybe a liaison officer between DHS and Congress? It would give them access to the DHS server and probably the knowledge of what is going on in Congress.

Sure...anything is possible I guess. A person could take control of a computer on a DHS domain remotely, but crap like that is VERY controlled (well in DoD)...like only admin types can do that. Government networks I know of tend to force people to retain the IP of their home Network, and that IP is allowed to access resources across firewalls by permission etc.

...If said person did something crazy, and mimicked a DHS IP...thats a criminal act.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Do you have even a slightly reputable source to back this up? I can't find any news organization/website carrying it outside of crazy right wing sites. Plus Pamela Gellar is far from a trusted source.

2nd, I was under the impression that there are some Christian migrants as well. Why does the headline only say Muslim Migrants? Does it have anything to do with the fact that Pamela Geller is very anti-muslim?

I'm convinced you don't even read white I write. You just like to argue with whatever I post. The article Pamela Gellar wrote, as I noted in the first post, was based on information from the GERMAN NEWSPAPER Die Welt.

 

[RDU Irish]

The problem with your wage argument is that things are more expensive now than they were then.
For example median house price in 1950 was about $7500 which is about $80,000 now.
Average car cost then about $1500, which equates to about $15000 now.
Average income in 1950 was about $3300 which comes to about 33,000 a year now.

So lets get this straight. While we make more in inflation adjusted dollars now than then (33,000 to 50,000)
Average new car price is more than double (15,000 to 33000)
Home Prices more than doubled (80,000 to 190,000)

So really we aren't making more, in fact we are falling behind because the cost of everything is rising faster than rise in pay. That goes especially for the poverty line which as increased at inflation ($1540 in 1965 when it started to about $12K now). Well most things that people need to purchase. Another great example is rent which averaged $42 in 1950 which is about $420 in current dollars. Well now the median rent is $800. So again, the idea that people have moved out from under the poverty line, might be true but a closer look at the numbers behind it show that they aren't really better off. Many major costs have increased at twice inflation while the FPL has only increased at inflation. So while more people show as being out from below the poverty line, the truth is that the poverty line hasn't increased at the pace that everything else has.

As to moving old people away from where they live, yes it can be cheaper but if you are moving someone away from their family and their support system, it can also be detrimental as well.

ETA: I do think that it has gotten better since 1950, I just don't think that the numbers you are posting are overstating the change.

Thank you for refuting my sourced statistics with your feelings.

Working with a 60 year old couple a few months ago discussing this exact standard of living topic. They are both cancer survivors looking forward to 30 year retirement. 20 years ago they would both be dead, let alone 1950. You aren't going to convince me society is moving backwards for the last century and I am obviously not going to convince you otherwise.

 

[RDU Irish]

I'm convinced you don't even read white I write. You just like to argue with whatever I post. The article Pamela Gellar wrote, as I noted in the first post, was based on information from the GERMAN NEWSPAPER Die Welt.

Just blind emotional denial of anything that does not fly with his mental framework. Not sure what else I would expect in a "Politics" thread.