The Secret Service pretty much hates Hillary

[Spirit]

I'm not sure I agree that the distrust of Hillary by those on the left is based on the constant messaging that she is untrustworthy by a news channel dedicated to that messaging

I mean, how many people really watch the Young Turks?

[Vegas Halo Fan]

As far as the assessment of Hillary in the original post, I heard something essentially identical from people assigned to the security detail when Bill was in the White House.

[ten ocho recon scout]

17 hours ago, Tank said:

i have a buddy who was a sheriff in victorville. said they used to describe them as wearing a helmet or being an anteater. 

i'm guessing she has an anteater.

Lol, almost used the term anteater in my original post

Great minds, tank

[wopphil]

I would happily vote for a democrat that isn't fiscally brain dead and doesn't want to demonize people who work hard and make money. Bernie certainly isn't that politician, and I don't think Hillary is either. 

For me, it's almost entirely about the economy. I want to hear good ideas about policies which will facilitate job and wage growth, not the crap about wealth redistribution and big government programs that Bernie is spewing. 

[Blarg]

Forced minimum wage hikes are neither wage or job growth policies. More restaurants are pushing the on the table ordering and payment kiosks that reduces waiters to simply servers and that will reduce the incentive to tip, which is the larger part of their wages. So in one move the Democrats have destroyed the mainstay of a profession that employs a lot of people and now not only will employ less, their net income is reduced. Yay progress.

[Make Angels Great Again]

News for you, automation is going to kill jobs and it doesn't have anything to do with any policies.

 

A computer doesn't charge by the hour.

[nate]

You are so naive

[HaloMagic]

28 minutes ago, nate said:

You are so naive

I don't think AFL is wrong here. As computers and technology have become more affordable more companies have taken to adapting them to reduce costs. I don't see anything wrong with this. It certainly puts everyone in a situation where they have re-discover what is required to succeed or even just exist in a new and fast-progressing world but to act as if we shouldn't be working towards a fully automated economy and world because of what it is doing to job growth is silly. We have to think to find out how to work around the technology that has taken jobs and invent new jobs that technology hasn't yet caught on to. We've been doing this for millennia. There is no reason why it can't continue. And I don't doing that it will. It is in everyone's best interests. If everyone is poor than there is no one to pay the rich. I know the touch don't want that. 

 

We can't fear automation or the effect it has in our economy. I don't  necessarily think we should enact policies that force the march towards automation but I equally don't think we should have any that slow that march for the sake of 'economic stability.' The world has to learn to adapt.

[Make Angels Great Again]

3 hours ago, nate said:

You are so naive

What the hell did I say that's naive? Your stubbornness is unparalleled.

Edited May 15, 2016 by Make Angels Great Again

[wopphil]

6 hours ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

News for you, automation is going to kill jobs and it doesn't have anything to do with any policies.

 

A computer doesn't charge by the hour.

I think you are wrong here AFL, at least to some degree. It's basic economics. As labor costs go up and technology costs go down, automation makes more sense. And doing things like drastically increasing the minimum wage only expedites the process. 

[Make Angels Great Again]

No, i believe this is common sense. Minimum wage has nothing to do with it because automation drastically reduces costs regardless.

 

Exhibit A: driverless cars. Truckers will cease to exist, along with taxi drivers. As soon as it's viable I guarantee you companies will be flocking to it.

[arch stanton]

It was only a matter of time before automation in food industry got cheaper than labor. It was inevitable.

[Blarg]

There is one of these in the Mall nearby. You just grab what you want as it passes by.

[Spirit]

When I was in town a couple weeks ago for my mom's memorial service, I went to the In-N-Out in Lake Forest.  (You're welcome, Strandling).  There were two huge groups of people there.  The people behind the counter making the food and getting orders out, and the group of people in front of the counter ordering food.  

I know that INO pays their employees more than other fast food places, but it was still clear that this place was printing money.  I don't think you'd ever see a time when INO would replace the army of people behind the counter with robots.  It just doesn't seem to be in their DNA.  

The only reason I bring this up is:  I just want to brag to @nate that I went to INO.

 

Sooo ... carry on. 

 

 

 

[nate]

14 hours ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

What the hell did I say that's naive? Your stubbornness is unparalleled.

People value having another person there for customer service reasons.  Companies only move to automation of customer service related jobs when they are forced to because it leads to poorer service which is bad for them.

[Jay]

I thought this was going to be about the Secret Service and Hillary.

[Make Angels Great Again]

Just your typical AW thread.