*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[wufwugy]

Sheilas and blokes, we have a new GOAT

https://i.imgur.com/b3etAkI.gifv

[spoonitnow]

Sheilas and blokes, we have a new GOAT

https://i.imgur.com/b3etAkI.gifv

Excellent.

[spoonitnow]

[BananaStand]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/16...sex-abuse.html

Can someone tell me how Twitter is still in business?? I've read enough stories about people losing their entire livelihood after one distasteful tweet to know that nothing good can ever come from posting on Twitter.

[spoonitnow]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/16...sex-abuse.html

Can someone tell me how Twitter is still in business?? I've read enough stories about people losing their entire livelihood after one distasteful tweet to know that nothing good can ever come from posting on Twitter.

They most likely will not be in business in another 5-6 years. They have been on the downswing financially for quite a while.

[wufwugy]

They most likely will not be in business in another 5-6 years. They have been on the downswing financially for quite a while.

But then who will protect all the accounts dedicated to pedophilia and terrorism while deleting the accounts that challenge the ctrl-left and del-media?

[spoonitnow]

But then who will protect all the accounts dedicated to pedophilia and terrorism while deleting the accounts that challenge the ctrl-left and del-media?

I’m sure some other shithole will pop up.

[wufwugy]

I’m sure some other shithole will pop up.

[BananaStand]

The results of Trump's physical are in...

Jackson says he ended up testing Trump's cognitive ability at the president's request.

Jackson says he's seen the president every day, sometimes several times a day, during the presidency and had "absolutely no concerns about his cognitive ability."

This is expected to bring about a 0% decrease in democrat challenges to Trump's sanity.

[spoonitnow]

The results of Trump's physical are in...





This is expected to bring about a 0% decrease in democrat challenges to Trump's sanity.

My favorite part of this is "at the president's request."

[wufwugy]

Antagonists thinking you are insane when you are actually sane is a powerful position to be in.

[oskar]

[spoonitnow]

San Francisco is a confirmed shithole.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/15/sa...efecation-map/

There is an ongoing debate currently going on in the country about what locations can be classified as shitholes. The debate sprung from a report that Donald Trump referred to some third world countries as “shitholes” in a meeting with lawmakers last week.


While the debate might rage on as to what constitutes a “shithole” of a country, one thing is not up for debate: the American city of San Francisco is a shithole.


We know this thanks to an interactive map created in 2014 called Human Wasteland.


The map charts all of the locations for human excrement “incidents” reported to the San Francisco police during a given month. The interactive map shows precise locations of the incidents by marking them with poop emojis

[wufwugy]

Now that's smart

[BananaStand]

I'm gonna do a Trump impression here and parrot what I just saw on Fox & Friends.

Suppose you're an 18 year old looking to work an entry level job to pay for college. The market wage is $11/hour, and McDonalds is more than happy to offer you $11 per hour. That should be the end of it.

Instead, you have these pussies marching with signs demanding $15 per hour instead of working for $11.

The irony is....if they win, as they have in many libtard US cities.....then the job goes away entirely. It's trivially easy for McDonalds to just replace these entry level workers with iPads.

[spoonitnow]

I'm gonna do a Trump impression here and parrot what I just saw on Fox & Friends.

Suppose you're an 18 year old looking to work an entry level job to pay for college. The market wage is $11/hour, and McDonalds is more than happy to offer you $11 per hour. That should be the end of it.

Instead, you have these pussies marching with signs demanding $15 per hour instead of working for $11.

The irony is....if they win, as they have in many libtard US cities.....then the job goes away entirely. It's trivially easy for McDonalds to just replace these entry level workers with iPads.

I'm of the opinion that the above is common sense, and it completely boggles my mind how many people cannot see that.

However, there are also plenty on the left who believe that the above is exactly how it's supposed to be with the caveat that the government should provide them with a basic income once those jobs are gone. As best I can tell, the idea is that working for less than $15/hour (or whatever they come up with at the time) is somehow inhumane and that they are owed a living wage, regardless of whether or not they actually work, simply by virtue of being human.

Where should this money come from? According to them, it should come from those who make a lot more money. If we just taxed the rich even more, then there would be plenty of money to just hand out to people who aren't working thanks to job loss from minimum wage hikes, etc.

Along similar lines, even if minimum wage stayed the same, there's going to come a time when automation starts taking a lot of jobs. The trucking industry is a big one in the United States that's at risk, and it's an enormous issue in terms of the number of jobs that are going to become obsolete all at one time. This is going to be a serious problem because there aren't going to be nearly enough new jobs to replace those that are going away, and the jobs that are going to appear are going to require a higher level of skill, intelligence and overall ability than the jobs that are being replaced.

This is a real issue that is going to need to be addressed in some way because we're going to end up with a large class of people without employment thanks to automation. Unfortunately for the left, the solution can't just be to tax the fuck out of people who are higher up on the food chain, but they're so stuck on that idea (especially with regards to the more short-term issue of the minimum wage) that they can't see that.

Not understanding simple economics or incentives does not help the situation.

So we're potentially facing a really tricky situation where we're going to have millions of people without work or the ability to find work, even if they want to work, simply because there will be such a diminished demand for the labor. That means that the cost of human labor will go down (as always happens when supply > demand), and that cost will certainly fall below whatever minimum wage is at the time. That means that it will become illegal for millions of people who want to work to actually work.

And then we're really going to be fucked.

[wufwugy]

This is a real issue that is going to need to be addressed in some way because we're going to end up with a large class of people without employment thanks to automation.

If that was to happen, it would mean that humans no longer have a comparative advantage over machines. In that case, it may be that jobs are the last thing we should worry about since it would likely mean AI would be more advanced than humans. Your premise would also mean that humans aren't consuming.

The hypothetical scenario in the zeitgeist today cannot happen because it is a contradiction in terms. It can't be that business owners get wealthy by using machines and consumers need subsidization in order to consume the products that make the business owners wealthy.

Unfortunately for the left, the solution can't just be to tax the fuck out of people who are higher up on the food chain, but they're so stuck on that idea (especially with regards to the more short-term issue of the minimum wage) that they can't see that.

The "solution" to tax and redistribute doesn't even address a real problem, and the tax would just result in a net negative due to efficiency loss at best. This scenario, which is the contemporary narrative, cannot happen: automation makes business owners better off and consumers need subsidies in order to buy what makes business owners better off.

[oskar]

If that was to happen, it would mean that humans no longer have a comparative advantage over machines. In that case, it may be that jobs are the last thing we should worry about since it would likely mean AI would be more advanced than humans.

AI is more advanced than humans in many sectors. It is much worse than humans in many others. But that really doesn't matter. When I say AI or automation, I don't talk about a general AI, I just mean the level of AI necessary to do certain specialized tasks.

I know what you're getting at. It's not like the money vanishes, but it will go to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population. It will be the current situation exacerbated. If you want a visual, look at Mumbai.

[wufwugy]

I know what you're getting at. It's not like the money vanishes, but it will go to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population. It will be the current situation exacerbated. If you want a visual, look at Mumbai.

Where does the money that business owners gain come from?

What about Mumbai is related?

[wufwugy]

If that was to happen, it would mean that humans no longer have a comparative advantage over machines.

I should rephrase this. A comparative advantage is something you have with yourself. It's where you are better at one activity than you are another activity. Comparative advantages relate to each other. That's why countries trade. Even if one country can make more of two different goods than another country, they each specialize in their comparative advantages and end up with more total resources by doing so.

[MadMojoMonkey]

What's your endgame, spoon? I mean... assuming all production can be automated at some point, and that no manual labor will be needed in any industry, only skilled labor.

Given a society that overproduces basic resources with effective cost per person so low that only a tiny % (if any) of the population is needed to maintain that production, then what?

What does that look like? Do people keep seeking out new, ultimately trivial (from a healthy survival POV), jobs for themselves?

[BananaStand]

What's your endgame, spoon?

My name's not spoon, but I'm chiming in anyway. Short answer: there is no endgame.

I mean... assuming all production can be automated at some point, and that no manual labor will be needed in any industry, only skilled labor.

Given a society that overproduces basic resources with effective cost per person so low that only a tiny % (if any) of the population is needed to maintain that production, then what?

Education becomes more important. Hopefully you'll be retired by then.

What does that look like?

It looks exactly like it does right now.

If the economy demands more skilled labor than manual labor, then the workforce will evolve to compensate. it's been happening forever, why would you expect it to stop?

[MadMojoMonkey]

[...]

I have no interest in anything you've ever said on this forum, and I find your presence here to be toxic to intelligent discourse.

If not for my strict belief in freedom of expression, I'd have banned you months ago. You belong on reddit, not FTR.

[BananaStand]

I have no interest in anything you've ever said on this forum,

100% untrue

[Poopadoop]

100% untrue

Lol, he doesn't dispute that he's a toxic idiot, he just disputes that he's not an interesting toxic idiot.

Well played.

[wufwugy]

What's your endgame, spoon? I mean... assuming all production can be automated at some point, and that no manual labor will be needed in any industry, only skilled labor.

Given a society that overproduces basic resources with effective cost per person so low that only a tiny % (if any) of the population is needed to maintain that production, then what?

What does that look like? Do people keep seeking out new, ultimately trivial (from a healthy survival POV), jobs for themselves?

I can tell you're thinking about this.

We can't predict the future details, but the past has shown us that as resource allocation becomes more efficient, people gain more resources and get creative about using their comparative advantages. An example of the latter is how it's because of efficiency gains of machines that the service sector even exists. Another example, how many people are employed in the software/hardware creation of computer technology? Well, there would be zero if not for efficiency gains (and related sector job declines) made by machines in respective sectors. Even what a teacher does depends on a lot of efficiency gains created by machines that came with associated job declines. Over time, the changes in jobs (and consumer wealth) has been net gain by a lot.

[oskar]

Even if you abolish minimum wages, it's not going to fix the underlying problem. People are just not going to work for the wages you'd have to settle for if you want to compete with a touch screen at McDonalds or a self driving truck, because that wouldn't be $11 an hour. Try a week.
It's a difficult subject because on the surface laissez faire capitalism looks really convincing. You earn money, and that's your money. Why would anyone have the right to take that away from you? Well, it's complicated.

[BananaStand]

Even if you abolish minimum wages, it's not going to fix the underlying problem. People are just not going to work for the wages you'd have to settle for if you want to compete with a touch screen at McDonalds or a self driving truck, because that wouldn't be $11 an hour. Try a week.
It's a difficult subject because on the surface laissez faire capitalism looks really convincing. You earn money, and that's your money. Why would anyone have the right to take that away from you? Well, it's complicated.

You've just touched on why all the paranoia about greedy corporations is overblown.

McDonalds could have installed touchscreen order kiosks years ago. They didn't. Why? Because the market wage allowed them to hire a person, and still sell their product at a competitive price. And in that situation, a human being is always preferable to a machine. Creating jobs, employing people, connecting with the community and generating personal success stories increases their goodwill, and that has a value.

But when the government fucks with the market via a massive minimum wage hike ($15 is a fucking lot), now you've removed McDonald's abilitty to continue to sell it's products at competitive prices. The government has inserted a cost that is larger than the value of goodwill.

[wufwugy]

Even if you abolish minimum wages, it's not going to fix the underlying problem. People are just not going to work for the wages you'd have to settle for if you want to compete with a touch screen at McDonalds or a self driving truck, because that wouldn't be $11 an hour. Try a week.

This scenario details some quite sizable efficiency gains. Where are those gains going?

[BananaStand]

This scenario details some quite sizable efficiency gains. Where are those gains going?

Greedy corporations wuf. Duh

[oskar]

Automation has always happened but never at the scale it's happening at today. You can't try to look at the past when you are going to have machines that will be capable of doing virtually every single job humans are doing today. And that's not just driving, warehouse work and miscellaneous manual labor. Stock traders are being replaced by machines. Surgeons are already largely working with robotics. One highly specialized surgeon can do the job of 10 surgeons by working around the globe through a screen. It probably won't be that long until you can replace that one guy with a machine. It's not like there will be less jobs. There will be no jobs. And that should be a great thing! But I don't see how it's going to work without some type of redistribution system like universal income.

[wufwugy]

Automation has always happened but never at the scale it's happening at today. You can't try to look at the past when you are going to have machines that will be capable of doing virtually every single job humans are doing today. And that's not just driving, warehouse work and miscellaneous manual labor. Stock traders are being replaced by machines. Surgeons are already largely working with robotics. One highly specialized surgeon can do the job of 10 surgeons by working around the globe through a screen. It probably won't be that long until you can replace that one guy with a machine. It's not like there will be less jobs. There will be no jobs. And that should be a great thing! But I don't see how it's going to work without some type of redistribution system like universal income.

What is the evidence the change is different now?

If there are no jobs because of efficiency gains, does that mean that consumers and producers alike would have all the resources they ever wanted (or that AI Skynet'd us)?

[spoonitnow]

What does that look like?

Star Trek.

This scenario, which is the contemporary narrative, cannot happen: automation makes business owners better off and consumers need subsidies in order to buy what makes business owners better off.

Yep.

[wufwugy]

Yep.

To make it more clear

This scenario, which is the contemporary narrative, cannot happen: automation makes business owners better off and consumers need subsidies from the business owners in order to buy what makes those business owners better off.

It's about as real as the perpetual motion machine.

Or 2 + 2 = 5

[spoonitnow]

To make it more clear



It's about as real as the perpetual motion machine.

Or 2 + 2 = 5

No see, you don't understand. We'll just take the money from the rich. They have more than they need as it is, and knowing that their money will be taken will just make them want to produce more and more.

[wufwugy]

No see, you don't understand. We'll just take the money from the rich. They have more than they need as it is, and knowing that their money will be taken will just make them want to produce more and more.

Simpson's did it!

1:40 - 2:00

[BananaStand]

naaaahh, every dude in a tie is just another Gordon Gecko. Tax that bitch

[BananaStand]

In your face Barry!!!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...73134655987716

[wufwugy]

In your face Barry!!!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...73134655987716

First comment is he's a racist.

And they wonder why we're winning.

[spoonitnow]

First comment is he's a racist.

And they wonder why we're winning.

lol I saw that and thought the exact same thing.

[BananaStand]

Where are the fake news awards????

[wufwugy]

Where are the fake news awards????

Is that tonight?

[BananaStand]

Is that tonight?

supposed to be

[spoonitnow]

supposed to be

OH SHIT.

[BananaStand]

Where are the fake news awards????

https://gop.com/the-highly-anticipat...e-news-awards/

Still haven't seen them though. Must be a busy site.

The site is temporarily offline, we are working to bring it back up. Please try back later.

[wufwugy]

https://gop.com/the-highly-anticipat...e-news-awards/

Still haven't seen them though. Must be a busy site.

Compile the best examples of Fake News in one good-looking and user-friendly source that patriots will send their friends? Just Very Stable Genius things.

[spoonitnow]

Compile the best examples of Fake News in one good-looking and user-friendly source that patriots will send their friends? Just Very Stable Genius things.

It's, like, very smart.

[BananaStand]

Still can't get the site to load, but just saw the top 5 listed on TV.

#1 is NY Times columnist Krugman claiming on election day that "the US economy will never recover"

Football spiked.

[spoonitnow]

Still can't get the site to load, but just saw the top 5 listed on TV.

#1 is NY Times columnist Krugman claiming on election day that "the US economy will never recover"

Football spiked.

roflmao

[wufwugy]

Still can't get the site to load, but just saw the top 5 listed on TV.

#1 is NY Times columnist Krugman claiming on election day that "the US economy will never recover"

Football spiked.

The man is a true embarrassment.

He is decent at economics when he discusses things without any semblance of politics. But bring in the politics and holy fuck he loses it.

[wufwugy]

To put Krugman in contrast, right after the election news, my very close friend who did not like Trump told me "I hope you're right about that." He was referring to me telling him before the election that after Trump wins, the economy will do markedly better. I have this superpower of paying attention to what's in economics textbooks. Krugman has the superpower of watching how many copies of his PhD it takes to clog the toilet.

[wufwugy]

[Jack Sawyer]

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...th-care-289542

The Trump administration on Thursday will announce an overhaul of the HHS civil rights office as part of a broader plan to protect health workers who don't want to perform abortions, treat transgender patients seeking to transition or provide other services for which they have religious or moral objections.

Under a proposed rule — which has been closely guarded at HHS and is now under review by the White House — the civil rights office would be empowered to further shield these workers and punish organizations that don’t allow them to express their religious and moral objections, according to sources on and off the Hill. That would be a significant shift for the office, which currently focuses on enforcing federal civil rights and health care privacy laws.

#sharia I mean #MAGA

[BananaStand]

#sharia I mean #MAGA

this is so backwards I don't even know where to start.

Forcing workers to perform tasks that they find gruesome, morally reprehensible, and most importantly, religiously offensive...IN A COUNTRY THAT PROTECTS FREEDOM OF RELIGION....would be the most sharia-like thing I can think of.

[spoonitnow]

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...th-care-289542




#sharia I mean #MAGA

Forcing people to sell commodities they own that they do not want to sell is the opposite of freedom.

[MadMojoMonkey]

No one is forced into any profession.

If you were hired to do X and you take the job, then claim your religious beliefs preclude you from doing X, that's ridiculous.

[spoonitnow]

No one is forced into any profession.

If you were hired to do X and you take the job, then claim your religious beliefs preclude you from doing X, that's ridiculous.

No, that's not ridiculous. People can choose not to sell their services for any reason they choose. That's called freedom.

When the government forces them to sell their services when they do not want to, that is called tyranny.

[Jack Sawyer]

No one is forced into any profession.

If you were hired to do X and you take the job, then claim your religious beliefs preclude you from doing X, that's ridiculous.

TY mojo

I thought I was the crazy one

If your religion would preclude you from selling donuts, why would you work at a donut shop?

[spoonitnow]

TY mojo

I thought I was the crazy one

If your religion would preclude you from selling donuts, why would you work at a donut shop?

By this rationale, people who do not work on Sunday due to religious reasons should not work anywhere.

[BananaStand]

For the record, I generally side against people who claim religion as means to discriminate.

If you bake cakes, then bake cakes. If a gay couple wants a cake, who cares. All you're doing is baking a cake. Which is your job. You aren't being gay, you aren't endorsing gay-ness, you aren't offending god. All you're doing is baking a cake. Just like you do for everybody else who likes cake. So bake the damn cake and shut the fuck up.

But this goes beyond that. You're asking someone to crush the skull of a fetus and vacuum it's carcass into the garbage. How is the difference not obvious?

Baking a cake is not an act of gay-ness, so you can't claim anti-gay religious beliefs in order to avoid baking the cake.

But performing an abortion IS an act contrary religious beliefs. Huge difference. And the first amendment protects people's religious freedoms such that they shouldn't ever have to choose between keeping their job, and keeping their faith.

[BananaStand]

I thought I was the crazy one

You are

[spoonitnow]

[BananaStand]

No one is forced into any profession.

If you were hired to do X and you take the job, then claim your religious beliefs preclude you from doing X, that's ridiculous.

Ridiculous oversimplification.

Doctors and nurses perform a myriad of tasks. Categorizing their job as "x" is shallow and naive.

If they find one of those tasks morally reprehensible....does that mean they can't be doctors or nurses?? Only pro-choice people can work in the medical profession??

[spoonitnow]

Ridiculous oversimplification.

Doctors and nurses perform a myriad of tasks. Categorizing their job as "x" is shallow and naive.

If they find one of those tasks morally reprehensible....does that mean they can't be doctors or nurses?? Only pro-choice people can work in the medical profession??

I don't think you have to even make the argument as specific as finding a task morally reprehensible.

Suppose you have some apples. You traded an apple for $1 with some people. That does not mean you should be forced to trade an apple for $1 with me.

[BananaStand]

Suppose you have some apples. You traded an apple for $1 with some people. That does not mean you should be forced to trade an apple for $1 with me.

I've been charged more for a pedicure just because I'm a man.

Totally legal.

Total bullshit, but totally legal.

[spoonitnow]

I've been charged more for a pedicure just because I'm a man.

Totally legal.

Total bullshit, but totally legal.

I'm completely fine with being on the receiving end of that. I have the choice of going somewhere else for services, etc.

[wufwugy]

The choice to not do something you don't want to do is an important component of how resources are more efficiently allocated towards people's preferences. This is essentially because of how cost and quantity change and how other people respond to the change.

People's preferences include all people. Those preferences are not just what one subset of people think other people should prefer. If the claim is that initiating force on doctors to perform abortions is better for society, the claim is wrong because that which betters society is that which better addresses the preferences of those that make up the society, and the doctor is one of those that make up the society. In a society with freedom of choice, when the doctor doesn't do the abortion, the price and quantity in the market change slightly and the incentives for others to perhaps be more likely to want to then do the abortion change. Over time the level of abortions would reach the level that the people of the society want them to be according to the most sophisticated way of measuring what they value and according to the relevant constraints.

[spoonitnow]

[wufwugy]

[spoonitnow]

Liberals: "No he's not!"

[BananaStand]

Liberals: "No he's not!"The doctor is unqualified, unintelligent, and a liar!!...except for all the good stuff he said about Obama...that was legit.

Fixed

[spoonitnow]

Fixed

Mah Russia

[a500lbgorilla]

Mah Russia

More square is that Trumpers demands people see him as perfect and declare him so in turn.

30/30. I saw the test and was sweatin some of the questions. I'm sure you weren't though, as you're so great too.

[spoonitnow]

All illegal immigrants are criminals.

[BananaStand]

Kristen Gillibrand before the looming government shutdown in 2013

“This is much more like what I deal with [my 5 year old son] in the morning when he says he wants to say, ‘I want candy for breakfast.’ It’s really a tantrum; it’s a tea party tantrum. ‘You either give me my way, or we’re going to shut down government.’”

Kristen Gillibrand now...

“Protecting Dreamers is a moral imperative. I will not vote for a spending bill that doesn’t treat Dreamers fairly,”