It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nationalizing part of the stock exchange can balance the economy

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Nationalize the robots. Each robot made is given a single stake owner aside from the corporation that buys it and maintains it. Every dollar that robot makes gives 5 % to an individual. When the robot is replaced or if the corporation goes out of business the person is then assigned a new robot.




posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You didnt answer my question and I am not using luddite rhetoric.

Am I trying to sabotage technology in order to preserve my job?

No. We are ALREADY at a place where a vast majority of the worlds population doesnt have to work.


edit on 5-2-2018 by toysforadults because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Fools
Nationalize the robots. Each robot made is given a single stake owner aside from the corporation that buys it and maintains it. Every dollar that robot makes gives 5 % to an individual. When the robot is replaced or if the corporation goes out of business the person is then assigned a new robot.


You wouldn't need nationalization to achieve that.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
You didnt answer my question and I am not using luddite rhetoric.


No changes, especially yours.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Great argument. I see your point and concede.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
Great argument. I see your point and concede.


I knew you would since the Original Post is based on hysteria.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: toysforadults
Great argument. I see your point and concede.


I knew you would since the Original Post is based on hysteria.


I really appreciate the value you have added to the thread. Thank you!



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
I really appreciate the value you have added to the thread. Thank you!


I knew you would, someone needs to talk you down from that ledge you're on.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Because obviously the topic of automation affecting the workforce is just stupid right? Why even discuss it.

MIT



But many economists argue that automation bears much more blame than globalization for the decline of jobs in the region’s manufacturing sector and the gutting of its middle class. Indeed, in his farewell speech to thousands in a packed convention hall in Chicago, President Obama warned: “The next wave of economic dislocations won’t come from overseas. It will come from the relentless pace of automation that makes a lot of good middle-class jobs obsolete.”


That's ok though, you skill is so incredible that no one else on the planet could achieve it and nothing will affect you. Let's not even talk about it.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
Because obviously the topic of automation affecting the workforce is just stupid right? Why even discuss it.

MIT


Funny that your sourcee's first line is this...


Artificial intelligence could dramatically improve the economy and aspects of everyday life...


Kinda hard to dramatically improve the economy whilst simultaneously killing it.


That's ok though, you skill is so incredible that no one else on the planet could achieve it and nothing will affect you. Let's not even talk about it.


As a matter of fact it is and it wont, you can ask the people on here that actually know me in real life if I'm full of it or not.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




but we need to invent ways to make sure everyone benefits.


Funny you left out half of the first sentence, guess it didn't fit your narrative did it?



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
Funny you left out half of the first sentence, guess it didn't fit your narrative did it?


I did it intentionally so you could quote it and I could remind you that: inventing isn't the same as your taking idea.





edit on 5-2-2018 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

care to propose an idea?

also my idea isn't taking as previously states it's purchasing

vastly different ideologies but good try on trying to control the narrative
edit on 5-2-2018 by toysforadults because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
care to propose an idea?


No, not my job.


also my idea isn't taking as previously states it's purchasing


Just because you don't understand basic economics and how the market functions doesn't mean your scheme wasn't a government money grab as pointed out by many others.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

what exactly is it that I don't understand how the market functions?

oh let me guess, it's above you to actually pinpoint what you are saying with a quote and offer a concise explanation right?
edit on 5-2-2018 by toysforadults because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
what exactly is it that I don't understand how the market functions?


That taking 30% of something by creating 30% extra something adversely impacts the price of that something.

Oh, and actually letting the government do it is the height of dopey ideas.






edit on 5-2-2018 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




Just because you don't understand basic economics and how the market functions doesn't mean your scheme wasn't a government money grab as pointed out by many others.


You are not fulling explaining what's happening this discussion correctly in an attempt to make my point of view look like a socialist money grab from honest hard working business owners.

How about this, who has more risk in a situation the financier or the worker?

I'm going to assume your position is that the person financing the operation has more risk involved.

Bank Bailout



e United States Secretary of the Treasury to spend up to $700 billion to purchase distressed assets


So I bailed out the banks and took the financial risk in this situation but it's unreasonable for me to expect a return in value?

Guess there is no real consistency in ideology anymore.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
You are not fulling explaining what's happening this discussion correctly in an attempt to make my point of view look like a socialist money grab from honest hard working business owners.


I don't have to make it look that way, it is that way.
If you were to take Economics 101 you'd flunk.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




That taking 30% of something by creating 30% extra something adversely impacts the price of that something.


I highlight the part of your text where you are purposely misleading the argument by using the wrong lexicon to explain what I am talking about.

You need to replace the word taking with the word purchasing such as in having a stake in.

But go on continue to misrepresent my argument and try to paint it as a socialist utopian ideology.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Why not respond to my entire post? Why only respond to the part of the post that you can twist to again fit your narrative??



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join