People actually pay people to fold laundry for them. Perhaps you should get out of your bubble. They also pay people to mow their lawn. Yes, I can paint my bedroom myself. But I would rather spend that time playing with my kids instead of yelling at them to not dump the paint on their heads. So I pay someone who has the ability to focus on the task at hand.
Carpenter, electrician, plumber... All these things need done. When my sink starts dumping water into my basement, I *could* fix it myself. Or I can call my handyman and he'll fix it. Just because *you* have never looked for one, doesn't mean they aren't around or that other people don't value them. My office mate is so happy I gave her my guy's name because now shit around her house is getting fixed.
We just paid a guy to bring lunch to the office. Because while we could go out ourselves, we didn't want to.
Stop being so demeaning to the people that make life easy. They do important work.
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.
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.
they can certainly specify that they want all contractors to be citizens of the US.
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.
No, just a large enough portion to push him over the edge.
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.
As for how the elite has been running things, no political group has any idea how to help these people, since in many cases they won't even help themselves.
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.
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?
A rock store eventually closed down; they were taking too much for granite.