This is very true. We would already be in sharp decline if we had freely available contraception, but there is a strong segment of the population that would ban it outright if they could, including some politicians who were in the running for president this last election.

Essentially. I'd imagine they'd let us starve to death, and anyone who wasn't happy with that could embrace a hail of lead.

And then the elites put themselves into gated communities with automated turrets set to kill anything that moves within range.

The part that a lot of people did not understand was that it was a marginal tax rate increase. That means that if you made $200,001 in a year, only $1 would be taxed at the hire rate given a $200,000 cutoff. People seemed to think that once you went into a higher tax bracket, ALL you income would be taxed at the high rate. What that all boils down to is that only the very rich would feel the tax increase.

This "misunderstanding" was being pushed intentionally to scare people. It's been debunked many, many times, but keeps coming back because it's an easily understood (though completely incorrect) way to make people scared of taxes.

If you cared enough, you could keep track of each of their new releases and warn your friends ahead of time of all the nonsense that went on with previous releases. That would probably hurt them a bit.

Cost of living is going up everywhere you can hire programmers. It's not a race to the bottom (Bangalore is more expensive than many American cities now), it just takes a generation or two to level out.

Great! I'll just wait a few generations, and I'll be rolling in money!

Or the people who own everything decide they don't need us anymore, use their automation power to buy up all the land over a period of time until we have no where to live, and they simply dedicate all their robotic power to themselves as we sit outside their gated communities (with automated turrets shooting at anything that moves) starving to death.

Simple! People who are already doing this exact job will be willing to change companies for no increase in salary!

I mean, that's a reasonable assumption, right?

Colleges and universities are the wrong place to look to, as he says he's looking for "b) strong knowledge of the technology ecosystem for the technology in question and c) proven experience building products w/ the technology".

He's basically looking for someone who has already been doing the job they're advertising for.

This is the big problem. Companies got spoiled by the downturn (especially right after the dot com bust) where they could hire very experienced people for pennies on the dollar, and expect to be able to do so indefinitely without training anyone new.

Well, they can incarcerate you without convicting you.

A court can order your execution, I'd imagine they can order the deletion of an online account.

Exactly. The *AA and their government goons have never cared about process. Same when you get arrested under false pretenses, the establishment gets off with a 'sorry' while in the mean time you lost your job, lost relationships and regardless of conviction you have a record that keeps influencing whether or not you'll get hired in the future and whether or not you keep getting re-arrested and strip searched for simply existing.

I vehemently disagree!

They almost never say "sorry".

Because then they wouldn't have control over the workers.

I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!

That's a chemical substance, not expression. It does not run afoul of the first amendment.