It's the ATM's stupid!

[osoab]

What an assbag. Video at link, I can't get to embed.

Obama: ATM's to Blame for High Unemployment (http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/06/14/obama-atms-to-blame-for-high-unemployment/)



President Obama explained to NBC News that the reason companies aren’t hiring is not because of his policies, it’s because the economy is so automated. … “There are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don’t go to a bank teller, or you go to the airport and you’re using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate.

[Ares]

And people said George W. Bush was an idiot (not disputing that he is) but Obummer isn't really a "step up" in the intelligence department.

[mamboni]

What an assbag. Video at link, I can't get to embed.

Obama: ATM's to Blame for High Unemployment (http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/06/14/obama-atms-to-blame-for-high-unemployment/)

Obama is an embaressment - the idiot really doesn't get it. Worse than being a Marxist-Socialist, Obama is a Marxist-Socialist Luddite!!!!::)

[ximmy]

Obama doesn't have a brain.. everything said by his mouth is fed to him by his superiors. Apparently they are planning to take him out of office...
1. add a few stupid words
2. mix well
3. enjoy

Obama: One Term As President Would 'Be Fine' With My Family
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama says his wife and daughters aren't "invested" in him being president and would have been fine had he decided against running for re-election. But he says they believe in what he's doing for the country.

Asked about his family's reaction to his wanting another term, Obama said: "Michelle and the kids are wonderful in that if I said, `You know, guys, I want to do something different,' They'd be fine. They're not invested in daddy being president or my husband being president."

He says first lady Michelle Obama would be the first one to encourage him to do something "a little less stressful" if she no longer thought that what they were doing was worthwhile for the country. Obama's interview aired Tuesday on NBC's "Today" show.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/14/obama-one-term-president_n_876591.html

[madfranks]

I had a similar discussion with an ex-coworker of mine regarding my industry and how technology is allowing more work to be done with fewer workers. I'm an architect, and I said that due to these amazing computer programs nowadays that a guy with my skillset and ability can do the work that 20 years ago would have required a team of 5-7 people. She said that was why there were so many unemployed architects today, and we should be striving to employ more people to do the work, not less. So I retorted that we ought to ditch the computers and internet, and go back to hand drafting and looking up materials in the old paper catalogs, then we'd have to employ dozens more people.

[mamboni]

Obama doesn't have a brain.. everything said by his mouth is fed to him by his superiors. Apparently they are planning to take him out of office...
1. add a few stupid words
2. mix well
3. enjoy

Obama: One Term As President Would 'Be Fine' With My Family
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama says his wife and daughters aren't "invested" in him being president and would have been fine had he decided against running for re-election. But he says they believe in what he's doing for the country.

Asked about his family's reaction to his wanting another term, Obama said: "Michelle and the kids are wonderful in that if I said, `You know, guys, I want to do something different,' They'd be fine. They're not invested in daddy being president or my husband being president."

He says first lady Michelle Obama would be the first one to encourage him to do something "a little less stressful" if she no longer thought that what they were doing was worthwhile for the country. Obama's interview aired Tuesday on NBC's "Today" show.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/14/obama-one-term-president_n_876591.html

We can't go back to antiquated methods simply to employ people. This is what they do in India to quell the populace. The real problem is that those who own the means of [more efficient] production insist on outsourcing what labor needs they have to third world countries. Over all, when industries automate and become efficient, all benefit from the lower prices for superior goods. But, automation has created a severe imbalance: surplus productivity and surplus labor. This is going to be a major problem worldwide for years to come and there is no simple solution. The political solution is distasteful: wealth redistribution.

[osoab]

I had a similar discussion with an ex-coworker of mine regarding my industry and how technology is allowing more work to be done with fewer workers. I'm an architect, and I said that due to these amazing computer programs nowadays that a guy with my skillset and ability can do the work that 20 years ago would have required a team of 5-7 people. She said that was why there were so many unemployed architects today, and we should be striving to employ more people to do the work, not less. So I retorted that we ought to ditch the computers and internet, and go back to hand drafting and looking up materials in the old paper catalogs, then we'd have to employ dozens more people.


It also doesn't help with the glut of CRE and regular old homes. If it wasn't for .gov projects most would have been out of business in 09.

[vacuum]

We can't go back to antiquated methods simply to employ people. This is what they do in India to quell the populace. The real problem is that those who own the means of [more efficient] production insist on outsourcing what labor needs they have to third world countries. Over all, when industries automate and become efficient, all benefit from the lower prices for superior goods. But, automation has created a severe imbalance: surplus productivity and surplus labor. This is going to be a major problem worldwide for years to come and there is no simple solution. The political solution is distasteful: wealth redistribution.

This is an interesting problem that I've thought about. Why is it that we've so vastly improved in technology and the efficiency of a given worker, yet as a whole we have no more free time in our day than people have had throughout history?

You state that it is because of outsourcing, but I think its far more fundamental than that. Here's my theory: As we get more efficient and it takes fewer workers to do the same thing, the net result is that people have more free time - this usually translates to individual empowerment. However, due to human nature, this free time and empowerment is many times used for destructive purposes. An individual can not only produce 10x what someone previously could, but he can also destroy 10x more as well.

So the net result is that the overhead of controlling us (size of government) grows proportional to our efficiency. We will never be in a situation where 80% of our time is free, because more and more bureaucracy will be developed and must be financially supported to keep everyone in line. Not to mention government will naturally seek to grow if allowed. So we're all perpetual slaves because of our collective degeneracy. This isn't something technology can change, what has to happen is for society to be composed of superior individuals.

[ShortJohnSilver]

For Obama, ATM = "Automated Teleprompter Machine" ...

[Neuro]

Everyone should get richer in a world where more is produced with less effort. However the biggest winners are nit the industrialists who traditionally have been able to cash in on productivity increases. Instead it is bankers that suck the industries dry, through high frequency trading on the stock market, enormous profits on commodities and currency manipulation, and the continuos devaluation of fiat money. Further government through taxes and fees to support an ever growing bureaucrazy and control apparatus and wars.

[madfranks]

This is an interesting problem that I've thought about. Why is it that we've so vastly improved in technology and the efficiency of a given worker, yet as a whole we have no more free time in our day than people have had throughout history?

You state that it is because of outsourcing, but I think its far more fundamental than that. Here's my theory: As we get more efficient and it takes fewer workers to do the same thing, the net result is that people have more free time - this usually translates to individual empowerment. However, due to human nature, this free time and empowerment is many times used for destructive purposes. An individual can not only produce 10x what someone previously could, but he can also destroy 10x more as well.

So the net result is that the overhead of controlling us (size of government) grows proportional to our efficiency. We will never be in a situation where 80% of our time is free, because more and more bureaucracy will be developed and must be financially supported to keep everyone in line. Not to mention government will naturally seek to grow if allowed. So we're all perpetual slaves because of our collective degeneracy. This isn't something technology can change, what has to happen is for society to be composed of superior individuals.

I disagree with your premise that the more efficient we become, the more free time we have. Look up the economic concept called "division of labor", because it is because of this that we are living in as advanced a society as we are. Let me give an example, again from my profession, architecture. Centuries ago, the architect was the sole designer in every aspect of a building; from its aesthetic look to its structure to its lighting to its ventilation to its plumbing access and surroundings. With the increase in technology, specialization has developed to the point that today we have specialized structural engineers, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, civil engineers, landscape architects and design architects. The net result of this improvement in technology and efficiency is not a lot more free time, it's modern buildings with advanced heating, cooling, lighting, plumbing, structure and design not ever seen before in the history of the world. You can apply the concept of division of labor to any industry and see how it's developed because of this.

[AndreaGail]

I had a similar discussion with an ex-coworker of mine regarding my industry and how technology is allowing more work to be done with fewer workers. I'm an architect, and I said that due to these amazing computer programs nowadays that a guy with my skillset and ability can do the work that 20 years ago would have required a team of 5-7 people. She said that was why there were so many unemployed architects today, and we should be striving to employ more people to do the work, not less. So I retorted that we ought to ditch the computers and internet, and go back to hand drafting and looking up materials in the old paper catalogs, then we'd have to employ dozens more people.

Thats the same reason I'll always get checked out by a cashier, withdraw through a teller, etc