And yet we have billion dollar industries built around watching people play ball.

My friend who is a handyman has a 6 month waiting list of jobs people want him to do. The house cleaners around here all have waiting lists. So do the daycares. There is work and plenty of it. They just require personal responsibility and initiative instead of just waiting for the boss to tell you want to do. Don't want your job to be automated? Be useful and adaptive. Add value beyond the machine.

My entire job is automating tasks that people do. Just because I automate a job, doesn't mean a person gets fired. It means the people responsible for those tasks become responsible for more/different tasks. Which I then automate. The net result is more is accomplished.

ATMs resulted in an explosion of the number of bank tellers needed because suddenly there were more things that 'needed' to be done. The realization that a person doesn't have to do a task, means that we can re-task that person. If you cannot be re-tasked, then you have a problem and it isn't that I just automated your job.

We create new and different jobs. 100 years ago computer programmer wasn't a thing. Now it is. The US agriculture industry died and was replaced by a manufacturing industry. Manufacturing is being replaced by service. As we start to eliminate service jobs, we will replace them. Perhaps artists will be profitable?

Secretarial work has been dieing out as well and those admins have been moving into different positions. Same with travel agents. Now we have wedding and party planners.

There are industries with a shortage of people. The economy is changing. People need to adapt. There is plenty of work. You just have to be willing to do it.

John Adams said "I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study Mathematicks and Philosophy. My sons ought to study Mathematicks and Philosophy, Geography, natural History, Naval Architecture, navigation, Commerce and Agriculture, in order to give their Children a right to study Painting, Poetry, Musick, Architecture, Statuary, Tapestry and Porcelaine."

We do not want to hand our children our jobs.

The CHILDREN! Think of the CHILDREN! How heartless can you be?

This. We had an employee we had to hand hold and scrutinize everything. One team even went so far to create a special branch just for them. They were convinced they were perfect and everyone else was racist/sexist/egotistical/out to get them. They were absolutely convinced they walked on water and the problem with everyone else.

Truth was, their work sucked. They didn't listen to instructions. They didn't do what they were told to do and instead always did something "better".

Tell that to people running server farms.

100 years ago when we needed an entire room with it's own power plant to add two numbers, not everyone had computers. Now the computer in your toaster is more powerful than that computer from 100 years ago. The cost to own and operate something is directly related to how many people can own and operate it and how often it will get used.

Now that would be discriminating by national origin and is illegal. Even defense contractors can't do that. We cannot say "we only hire U.S. citizens". We have to say something along the lines of "the roles non-U.S. citizens can fill is limited".

It also has to do with a lot of doctors pushing cesareans. A natural birth is risky. It also happens at 2AM, takes an indeterminate amount of time, and might end in an emergency C-section if things go wrong.

Take too long pushing? The doctors want to cut you open. When I had my first kid there were two doctors in the room due to it being near a shift change. The doctor that had been up all night was telling me she wanted to cut me open. The doctor that had just walked in the door said "She's fine, the baby's fine... let her push." Second doctor then sat down in a chair in his kakies and drank his coffee until the baby fell out.

Consider this, if 25% of the population voted for Hillary Clinton (~60 million), that also means that 75% of the population did not vote for her. They either voted for Trump, Johnson, Stein, or stayed home. 75% of the adult population rejected her. Trump votes compared to Clinton votes is a narrow margin. Clinton compared to "Not Clinton" is a horrendous loss. Don't ask why people voted for Trump. Ask why people didn't vote for Clinton.

Isn't that what the Kings and Queens of feudal Europe used to say about the serfs? The peasantry is too stupid and lazy to help themselves so we must take care of them?

You don't find it all arrogant to speak down to the unwashed masses and dismiss such large swatches of the populace as beyond help? Really? And you wonder why they don't vote the way you want them to.

But that brings down the states that would otherwise be at the top of the curve. You are purposefully holding back the high performers. That's why everyone hated No Child Left Behind. Instead of bringing the lower end up, those programs have historically brought the upper end down. Yes, it reduces the gap and makes things more "equal", but I don't want to be that kind of equal.

Federal programs are large, bulky, and come up with one size fits all solutions that do not allow for deviation. They tell teachers what to teach and how to teach based on metrics and we all know how awesome metrics have been working out. No Child Left Behind got teachers and schools teaching to pass tests, not educate students. Common core barbarized math and gutted art and literature. Can we please just skip the next bad federal education idea and let the local communities and states sort it out?

Not only do state's rights advocates not trust the federal government to make the right decisions, they also happen to have the constitution on their side. The US is NOT a unified, single state. It is a federation of states and it is full of people who do not like to be dictated to by the federal government.

Please see the Tenth Amendment - Reserved Powers. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

A federal system relies on the assumption that the federal government is smart enough to know what's best for everyone and that just because it works in California it is a good idea in Ohio.

The advocates for state wide programs don't trust the federal government to make the right decisions. Look at common core and how well that is working out. Allowing states to be unique will allow some states to excel. Yes some will do poorly, but as a whole the states should be looking around and picking the programs that work, trying things out, and moving forward. A centralized, federal approach means we all excel or fail as a group.

Tons. You have any idea how much money is in education? Charter school board members around here have 7 figure salaries. Those people know how to raise money. And, no it's not about *spending* money on educating students, its all about *raising* money. Not for profit doesn't mean the board isn't extremely well paid.

So under what scenario can a baker not bake a cake?

I applaud your consistency. Most people only want to protect groups they agree with. So how far do you go in determining what business a business owner is allowed to turn away and for what reasons? Why are the customer's rights more important than the business owners?

So... do you actually believe there are 60 million (25% of the US adult population) "delusional" people who can't find jobs? If so, what does that say about the current state of America and how well these "highly educated elite" have been running things?

When the recession hit my husband chose to go to grad school. He couldn't find a job where we live so he went back to school. When we had kids, he chose to become a stay at home dad. It would have been too expensive to pay for child care.

To say that going back to school or becoming a stay at home parent is "changing society" and has nothing to do with the economy is a bald faced lie. Those decisions are directly correlated to the economy. Gad school admissions stats are directly tied to unemployment. Our friends with stay at home parents have similar reasons to us: child care costs more than the one parent would earn so they stay home. My sister in law seriously considered quitting her job for a while due to the costs of child care. She was barely breaking even. My sons preschool teacher just quit so she could stay home and take care of a relative. People remove themselves from the workforce because the cost of working is more than the pay.

And the repercussions of that decision to be a stay at home parent are incredibly far reaching. When the kids all go to school, what then? After you've been out of the workforce for 10+ years?

In case you were wondering, full time (5 days a week 8-5) care at one of the day cares near me is ~$600 a week. $2400 a month. $28,800 a year. If you have two kids that's $57,600 a year. Staying home with the kids is very much an economic decision, not a societal one.

I personally don't understand why a business would turn someone away due to the color of their skin or who they want to bang where. Money is money is money. People who discriminate like that are assholes and deserve to be boycotted.

However, the Supreme Court has ruled that freedom of association is an integral part of the first amendment. You also have the right to believe in flying spaghetti monsters. And I have the right to tell you I think you are dumb for believing in flying spaghetti monsters. If we don't like each other, we are the right to not associate with each other. If you tell me to go away and I show up at your house in the middle of the night, you can have me arrested.

If I prevent you from shopping at my store because I don't like you or your lifestyle, I'm wrong. Isn't it also wrong to force someone to allow people to shop at their store?

Freedom of religion and freedom of expression also means that the KKK gets to parade down the street and have a website. It means that people you strongly disagree with and believe are morally wrong have the right to run shops and churches and live their lives. It means gay people can walk down the street hand in hand and bakers can tell them they are living in sin and going to hell. It means you can stand in front of the bakery waving a rainbow flag. If you remember store owners telling people their skin was the wrong color, you also remember when it was unpopular to say non-whites deserved equal rights. But we let those unpopular views be expressed and got the civil rights movement. We let gay rights activists speak out against the majority.

If you want bakers to bake cakes for gay weddings, do you also want bakers to bake cakes for the KKK? Who gets to decide which cakes MUST be baked and which are reasonable to refuse? A Walmart employee refused to bake a cake for a cop's retirement party a few months ago because cop cakes are apparently racist. Should that employee go to jail? The Walmart fined?

There is a difference between criminalizing, fining, and forcing conformity and criticizing a view you find reprehensible.