I usually just point to the widespread European opposition to genetically engineered crops for that one. At least our creationists aren't opposing lifesaving technology and actively destroying scientific research. As a plant scientist, I have to say I view Europe as a fairly hostile place for science. Europeans have absolutely no room to act as if Americans are the only ones with the problem of opposition to science when that sort of attitude is so prevalent in their own backyard.

Agents don't care if you are good, only that you make money. There are a lot of mediocre actors that make their agents a lot of money.

Then why did you use it as an example?

If the developer is good? yes.

But to become A list, they needed an agent.

Come on man. UBER isn't even a stock. The so-called 'valuation' is somebody's pipe dream that hasn't been exposed to the marketplace.

ALSO there will ALWAYS be stocks that are over hyped and overvalued. Cherry picking individual issues and using them to characterize the market is a fools game.

March 10 2000 the NASDAQ hit 5132.

Now the NASDAQ is still well below the 2000 high on an inflation corrected basis. Even more so considering the burgeoning size of the tech economy over 15 years.

Maybe there is an argument that things are overwrought, especially in Vulture Capitalist Fantasy Land. But bubble? Nah.

except automation is getting to the point where the new job will be automated from the get go.

This is supported by a lot of data.
The easiest to grok is the decrease in jobs, but the increase in GDP. creating more, with less. Easy to look up.

Oh good ol hornwumpus. WHen you argument fails, always falling back on the tried and true ad hom.

"Or do you not understand the concept of "Artificial Intelligence"?"

actually, you don't understand that term.

It doesn't men self aware. YOU can have specialty AIs that make decision in the fields of expertise and that's it.

You might want to move past the 1950's version of AI.

There are Chess AI's that are better then almost everyone on the planet. WHen was the last times chess AI demanded a Union?

" $7.26/hour income to sit and play games."

Thats disingenuous. It's mot like the get 7.26 an hour because they have no option.

Except the 2 dollars will spiral down, like wages always do when there isn't a minimum.

"ou decide that is too expensive, and replace the employee with an answering machine."
well then, raise your rates. If you industry can't handle you raising your rates, well then the answering machine is good enough after all. Meaning the value add of it being a actual human is too low to bother.

We put that 'burden'* on industry because thats where the money is.
Maybe we should just tax at 90% all profit earned over a billion dollars?
Society and economics ONLY work well together when money is moving.

It's not like that money isn't going to come back to the corporation again.
Income is important for industry to grow on the market.

*as if striving for a balances and healthy society is some sort of burden...

So?

ANother use for the free time would be for you to actually learn government economics.

The second assumes that productivity gains will continue without the incentive of paid work.

That would be robots. Automation has no need to be paid work.

unemployment is holding steady at about 23%. By the same methodology, unemployment was 25% during the great depression.

that's incorrect.

Unemployment, BY DEFINITION is the number of people who are out of work, but are looking for work. To twist it like you did is, at best disingenuous.

Do not use unemployment in any way as an overall indicator of people who don't have work; because for that you need to know intent and motivation.
You're way has no way to extract out the people who wouldn't be working no matter what the economy is like.

"If the government went back to enforcing a lower work week by removing exempt status for anyone who wasn't actually an owner or a supervisor who hires/fires/gives raises/can control working hours, unemployment would drop enormously and the abuse might stop."

Absolutely correct.