• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ever wonder why it took so long?

Lovebug said:
Have you seen some of the robots who work at Walmart? You really have to get their attention to see if they are alive. I stood in an aisle for about 10 mins, just for jokes, and the guy moved a handful of items back and forth to look busy. Some of the workers have no clue that they are in the customers' way, even managers who seem to think they are more important than patrons, not to mention cashiers who act like we bother them with our mere existence.
Of course WM isn't the only store with that problem. What the heck happened to customer service?
If robots can do better, then by all means, bring them on. May be the lazy bums learn a lesson.
I can't stand people who think they don't have to perform or bring their lousy mood into the workplace.
Click to expand...

You gave an anecdote...and basing one's opinion on an anecdote leads to broad-brush assumptions, which is a logical fallacy.
 
Cephus said:
It's what happens when you have a liberal society where people think they deserve jobs, they don't have to earn them.
Click to expand...

In general liberals tend to think in a collective aspect and the big picture. I will give a silly example because right now I can't formulate it better, but I hope to help get the point, such as the society have the duty to give all jobs in order to have a healthy and well function society. So they don't see the hire for a job as a individual duty but a social responsibility.

While conservatives look on the individual aspect, that nobody is responsible to get anybody hired but the individual, and individuals are responsible for society by each one taking care of themselves in order to society well function, and society is not responsible to anyone.

Again, I could not explain better right now but I believe you get what I mean.

Esther the case, if technology continuous to develop soon not many jobs will be left and there is not that the collective society or individual can do, unless if extremists ruins everything and we go backwards, which depending on the case may not be a bad idea. But I am positive about the automation.
 
Last edited:
Glen Contrarian said:
It's already been noted that America's low workforce participation rate is contrasted by the steadiness of our production - and that the reason for this is the automation of the workplace. Even Wal-Mart is about to roll out robots to do night-time shelf stocking. How many jobs will that cost?

This is why it ticks me off whenever I see someone complaining about immigrants (legal and otherwise) taking our jobs - sure, that happens...but the elephant in the room is automation.
Click to expand...

Except that nobody is complaining about immigrants getting jobs in America. Illegal immigrants is another matter. Let's keep the discussion intellectually honest. Okay?
 
C R O I X said:
In general liberals tend to think in a collective aspect and the big picture. I will give a silly example because right now I can't formulate it better, but I hope to help get the point, such as the society have the duty to give all jobs in order to have a healthy and well function society. So they don't see the hire for a job as a individual duty but a social responsibility.

While conservatives look on the individual aspect, that nobody is responsible to get anybody hired but the individual, and individuals are responsible for society by each one taking care of themselves in order to society well function, and society is not responsible to anyone.

Again, I could not explain better right now but I believe you get what I mean.

Esther the case, if technology continuous to develop soon not many jobs will be left and there is not that the collective society or individual can do, unless if extremists ruins everything and we go backwards, which depending on the case may not be a bad idea. But I am positive about the automation.
Click to expand...

Collectivism sucks, period. We do not have a duty to give anyone anything. Everyone has to earn their own way. As technology improves, then yes, the low-wage, low-skill jobs for the uneducated will go away. That means people need to improve. They need to be responsible for their own improvement. But liberalism, and I don't necessarily mean classical liberalism here, but the far regressive left, want to hide in their safe spaces and have everything given to them for free while they get their gender studies degrees and find they have no actual worthwhile skills in the real world.

Screw them.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Except that nobody is complaining about immigrants getting jobs in America. Illegal immigrants is another matter. Let's keep the discussion intellectually honest. Okay?
Click to expand...

Yeah, good luck on that.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Except that nobody is complaining about immigrants getting jobs in America. Illegal immigrants is another matter. Let's keep the discussion intellectually honest. Okay?
Click to expand...

Riiiiiiiight. Which is why Trump wanted his immigration ban from several different nations, hm?

And when you say that "nobody is complaining about immigrants getting jobs in America"...there's this guy named Trump - you may have heard of him. What did he have to say about LEGAL immigrants?

Donald Trump on Thursday warned Republicans against passing comprehensive immigration reform, saying immigrants will vote en masse for Democrats and are stealing Americans' jobs.

"Of those 11 million potential voters, which will go to 30 million in the not too distant future, you will not get any of those votes," Trump told the conservative gathering known as CPAC in suburban Washington.

Trump added: "You better be smart. They’re taking your jobs. You better be careful."

And then there's this guy named Jeff Sessions - you mighta heard of him too. Here's what he said:

"We bring in too many people from abroad too fast," Sessions said. "If there's a job available in the United States ... Americans should have a chance at the job before you bring in a foreign worker to take a job."

And then there's this from The American Conservative:

Finally, we should remember that many of the most militant and ideologically fervent grassroots activists within conservative ranks are vehemently anti-immigration, often largely on racial grounds, and sometimes focus on that one issue to the exclusion of most others. For them, the very realistic prospect of dramatically cutting the numbers of America’s huge undocumented population, reducing future illegal immigration to a mere trickle, and even perhaps encouraging a substantial fraction of our legal immigrants to return home would be tremendously attractive, and they might make life very uncomfortable for any Republican politician who opposed this plan without providing a realistic alternative in its place.

Sooooo...nobody gripes about legal immigrants - except for the guy y'all elected to be your president (and his AG). And nobody wants to stop immigration...except for those grassroots-activist conservatives who do.

Got it.
 
Cephus said:
Collectivism sucks, period. We do not have a duty to give anyone anything. Everyone has to earn their own way. As technology improves, then yes, the low-wage, low-skill jobs for the uneducated will go away. That means people need to improve. They need to be responsible for their own improvement. But liberalism, and I don't necessarily mean classical liberalism here, but the far regressive left, want to hide in their safe spaces and have everything given to them for free while they get their gender studies degrees and find they have no actual worthwhile skills in the real world.

Screw them.
Click to expand...
Automation is not only extinguishing unskilled jobs but a lot of skilled jobs too. To be skilled will not help when there is no room to hire all the skilled people.

My point wasn't to make judgment about who is right or better and who is wrong or worse, but just to distinct the different kind of perspective of both groups. Both are wrong in their isolated views in my opinion.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Riiiiiiiight. Which is why Trump wanted his immigration ban from several different nations, hm?

And when you say that "nobody is complaining about immigrants getting jobs in America"...there's this guy named Trump - you may have heard of him. What did he have to say about LEGAL immigrants?

Donald Trump on Thursday warned Republicans against passing comprehensive immigration reform, saying immigrants will vote en masse for Democrats and are stealing Americans' jobs.

"Of those 11 million potential voters, which will go to 30 million in the not too distant future, you will not get any of those votes," Trump told the conservative gathering known as CPAC in suburban Washington.

Trump added: "You better be smart. They’re taking your jobs. You better be careful."

And then there's this guy named Jeff Sessions - you mighta heard of him too. Here's what he said:

"We bring in too many people from abroad too fast," Sessions said. "If there's a job available in the United States ... Americans should have a chance at the job before you bring in a foreign worker to take a job."

And then there's this from The American Conservative:

Finally, we should remember that many of the most militant and ideologically fervent grassroots activists within conservative ranks are vehemently anti-immigration, often largely on racial grounds, and sometimes focus on that one issue to the exclusion of most others. For them, the very realistic prospect of dramatically cutting the numbers of America’s huge undocumented population, reducing future illegal immigration to a mere trickle, and even perhaps encouraging a substantial fraction of our legal immigrants to return home would be tremendously attractive, and they might make life very uncomfortable for any Republican politician who opposed this plan without providing a realistic alternative in its place.

Sooooo...nobody gripes about legal immigrants - except for the guy y'all elected to be your president (and his AG). And nobody wants to stop immigration...except for those grassroots-activist conservatives who do.

Got it.
Click to expand...

I'll just comment on your first point and ignore the rant. Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton all had similar bans on primarily muslim nations who sponsored terrorism. As a matter of fact, most if not all of the nations on Trump's "temporary" ban were from Obama's list.
 
C R O I X said:
Automation is not only extinguishing unskilled jobs but a lot of skilled jobs too. To be skilled will not help when there is no room to hire all the skilled people.

My point wasn't to make judgment about who is right or better and who is wrong or worse, but just to distinct the different kind of perspective of both groups. Both are wrong in their isolated views in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Then those skills need to be applied elsewhere. When cars came along, it eventually wiped out the wagon wheel maker. Those people had to adapt and apply their skills in other fields. This is how reality works. Maybe people ought to figure it out.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Riiiiiiiight. Which is why Trump wanted his immigration ban from several different nations, hm?

And when you say that "nobody is complaining about immigrants getting jobs in America"...there's this guy named Trump - you may have heard of him. What did he have to say about LEGAL immigrants?

Donald Trump on Thursday warned Republicans against passing comprehensive immigration reform, saying immigrants will vote en masse for Democrats and are stealing Americans' jobs.

"Of those 11 million potential voters, which will go to 30 million in the not too distant future, you will not get any of those votes," Trump told the conservative gathering known as CPAC in suburban Washington.

Trump added: "You better be smart. They’re taking your jobs. You better be careful."

And then there's this guy named Jeff Sessions - you mighta heard of him too. Here's what he said:

"We bring in too many people from abroad too fast," Sessions said. "If there's a job available in the United States ... Americans should have a chance at the job before you bring in a foreign worker to take a job."

And then there's this from The American Conservative:

Finally, we should remember that many of the most militant and ideologically fervent grassroots activists within conservative ranks are vehemently anti-immigration, often largely on racial grounds, and sometimes focus on that one issue to the exclusion of most others. For them, the very realistic prospect of dramatically cutting the numbers of America’s huge undocumented population, reducing future illegal immigration to a mere trickle, and even perhaps encouraging a substantial fraction of our legal immigrants to return home would be tremendously attractive, and they might make life very uncomfortable for any Republican politician who opposed this plan without providing a realistic alternative in its place.

Sooooo...nobody gripes about legal immigrants - except for the guy y'all elected to be your president (and his AG). And nobody wants to stop immigration...except for those grassroots-activist conservatives who do.

Got it.
Click to expand...
I don't see any be problem with it. There probably are to many legal foreigners taking jobs. Wages might go up with less competition for certain jobs.

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
 
Cephus said:
Then those skills need to be applied elsewhere. When cars came along, it eventually wiped out the wagon wheel maker. Those people had to adapt and apply their skills in other fields. This is how reality works. Maybe people ought to figure it out.
Click to expand...

While in the past skilled jobs was replaced for new kind of skilled jobs, so all that people had to do is to learn the new skilled job, this time is different. Automation is replacing far more skilled jobs than creating new kind of killed job. It means that soon we will not have enough jobs (skilled and not skilled) to hire every skilled and not skilled workers, no matter the field.
 
C R O I X said:
While in the past skilled jobs was replaced for new kind of skilled jobs, so all that people had to do is to learn the new skilled job, this time is different. Automation is replacing far more skilled jobs than creating new kind of killed job. It means that soon we will not have enough jobs (skilled and not skilled) to hire every skilled and not skilled workers, no matter the field.
Click to expand...

Then maybe we need fewer people.
 
Dirt Sands said:
I don't see any be problem with it. There probably are to many legal foreigners taking jobs. Wages might go up with less competition for certain jobs.

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You mean like the 70 foreign workers just hired to work at Mar-a-Lago? Just sayin....
 
Cephus said:
Then maybe we need fewer people.
Click to expand...

Or an other kind of society/system. Systems always change because society has changed. And society always change because technology has changed.

With not enough people many of the services and goods we take for granted today will not be offered. Like public transport and industrial scale production.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I'll just comment on your first point and ignore the rant. Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton all had similar bans on primarily muslim nations who sponsored terrorism. As a matter of fact, most if not all of the nations on Trump's "temporary" ban were from Obama's list.
Click to expand...

References, please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom