Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Timcast"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
I think most jobs can be re-tooled pretty easily for social distance. I can see all kinds of new jobs opening up, like professional shopping, where one person does multiple orders at once, cutting the contagion by factors of 2, 3 or 4. And I think it's actually more efficient, because it's one person in an efficient vehicle making one slightly extended trip, while everybody else's car stays home. Also niches in education are going to open up, left and right, and teachers across the country are getting crash courses in distance learning. People are going to start WANTING the online experience for education, and there will be teaching jobs left and right. And education will get a TON CHEAPER. The teachers used to BE the school, and NOW it's the ADMINISTRATORS. You can make a teacher pretty rich by hiring them, directly. They don't have to charge much to out-compete what legacy institutions are doing.
1
-
1
-
@killcat1971 : Neo-Luddism r'ars its ugly head in yet ANOTHER generation! Automation doesn't eliminate good jobs. It opens up NEW jobs. Every time automation saves a little bit of money for someone, the whole society gets a little richer. More people can afford to hire an artist for that basement mural they always wanted. I think that as the complexities of this world mount, there will be niches opening up for full-time jobs where all you do is handle the grocery shopping and organize the bills. Someone who knows how to play the credit-card game can save a household thousands of dollars, by shifting debt to the new credit card, using it's 1st-year-no-interest for one year, and open up another card in a year or two.
There're all kinds of services like that. And who knows what's to come? Maybe they come up with anti-grav back packs and everybody wants a nice landing pad built out in their back yard. Landing-pad builders would then be a thing, employing the same people who used to do wood-frame house construction, before IT went kaput! Thing is, the steady march of progress continues despite all our efforts to mess things up and meddle in 10-variable questions with 1-variable understanding.
We don't need to artificially ACCELERATE automation by artificially propping up minimum wage. Minimum wage - like ALL libtard feel-good policies - is an ATTACK on people trying to work their way out of poverty. Libtards always hurt the ones they love, buying their devotion with crumbs. For votes.
Libtards see one person in trouble and it's nothing to them to punish all those who are on the ragged edge of being in trouble in order to help that one person who randomly came to their attention and became their focus and sole purpose in life, entitling them to the hard-earned money in your pocket. Your business is BARELY profitable? Well, here are a bunch of extra costs some libtard decided you would have to pay, so the libtard could point to the person he helped. Too bad if your business goes under. We helped the guy we set out to help, and DAMN THE TORPEDOS! FULL SPEED AHEAD! Because we're righter than rightie.
The guy who's BARELY paying her (SWIDT?) bills gets destroyed by a 20% increase in energy prices. Everything costs more, especially heating and cooling her home. That "green legislation" that everybody cheered just pushed another 20 million, barely-gettin'-by working poor below the poverty line. Didn't think about THAT added cost. And from the progressive's point of view, if they never hear about or see that person they hurt, then life goes on and they can still feel proud of themselves, because they can go straight to the government for proof that they're doing something for the people they say they care about.
The consequences of progressivism are diffuse and the benefits obvious. You can put that guy's face on t.v. that you helped. But nobody's talking about the accumulating weight of small hardships visited on everyone by helping just the one with everybody's money.
Most of the time, the average citizen just tightens their belt and soldiers on. Especially the BEST people who are just on hard times. Those are the people that libtards despise and seek to destroy at every opportunity, usually in the name of helping them, but it can also be to "save the planet" or "kill evil Iraqis," and "it's a cost we will gladly pay!" when they've got all THEIR bills on auto-pay and their checking account just grows every month until they have enough to buy another expensive toy. They'll sacrifice the delivery date on their Ferrari, but they don't think about the guy who's postponing new shoes for her kid, who's outgrown the pair he's wearing, now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Uh. 10 bucks an hour is 400 a week times 4.333333333..... weeks per month is about $1730 per month, which is closer to $2,000 than $1,000. Other than piss-poor arithmetic, you make some decent points. $1000 a month for everybody means 3 or 4 people can share a house and play all day. Or just sell arts and crafts or something else that's not sustainable without an infusion of cash from taxpayers.
Most people want more than that, but many of those people will find it difficult to get off their asses and do much about it, because vague discontent doesn't generally rise to the threshold of the kind of desperation it takes to work your way out of your situation. Not all people are like that, but my brother is. He's generally bummed at what he can't have, but it never rose to the level of his having to bite the bullet and CHANGE his situation. Full belly, lots of sci-fi to read and watch on DVD, warm place, warm bed, roof over his head. He's pretty content, most of the time. I had more strikes against me, and he's probably smarter than I am, but in my stupidity, I worked a LOT of 60-80-hour weeks, supporting myself and earning math and geology degrees.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Life is tradeoffs.
If she had gotten married straight out of high school or college, she'd probably still be dissatisfied, but for different reasons. "Is this it? Cooking and cleaning, day after day, for kids who just take, take, take, and an unloving husband with a beer belly, who hasn't excited me for 10 years? I feel so trapped!"
This video looks pretty performative to me. What's she doing in a very unflattering evening gown, with a very unflattering hairdo, unflattering (Marilyn Manson) makeup, and wearing her mother's jewelry? That particular get-up and styling is for a 1940s movie star, and she ain't no movie star. She's an average-looking woman.
She should have no problem finding a man at 33, if she's willing to let her hair down, put on some jeans, and head out to the dirt races, or a baseball game. Maybe volunteer at a local charity or two. Good men show up in those places, too. They're where the best singles of marriageable age would be most likely to go.
You want to signal to the other sex that you have your shit together and can meet someone else more than half way? Volunteer at the food drive! Pitch in at habitat for humanity! Don't keep putting yourself in meat-market settings in pick-me mode.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1