And where will they go? By the time my fish and chips arrive from Bangladesh I expect my meal to be mighty cold. Or if you mean manufacturing jobs, then what you're suggesting is that we should try and compete with countries that have even lower living standards and wages in a race to the bottom. No thank you. I'll gladly let my assembly line job go to a Bot. Meanwhile I'll re-train to do something useful that can't be easily off-shored.
Why??? No one except you is talking about guns being banned. That would be illegal. Banning certain types of guns, however, is not illegal. We have done it before, we should do it again.
"According to the FBI, across the United States in 2018, there were: 1,515 deaths by knives or cutting instruments, 443 people were killed with hammers/clubs/other blunt objects, 672 people were killed from fists/feet/’personal weapons’ compared to the 297 killed by (any) rifles." Rifles... Handguns in the same year? 14.000 (about 40k in 2017), 6/10 were suicides? the 40% of that is 5600, still higher than hammers, knives, fists all togheter.
When I see statements such as this, I always want to know what you are proposing as an alternative. And please don't say "go back to gold standard." You've got to be smarter than that.
those will all go to bots. It’s already happening - self checkout, self ordering, waiterless restaurants. maybe domestic servants servants will come back en Vogue.
Debunked DimBart story a year and a half ago. Try again According to the most recently updated (as of 2018) FBI data for 2016, the year referenced in the Breitbart article, 10,372 of the 15,318 murders in the United States were committed with firearms. Handguns were the most common type of firearm used in 6,762 cases. In 2,891 cases, the type of gun was not reported to the FBI or was listed as “other” while in 1,853 instances, the weapon was not identified or was listed as “other.” https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/four-times-more-stabbed-than-rifles-any-kind/
What's so bizarre about this statement is the way it flies in the face of reality! We have plenty of deficits but the growth rate of wealth among the already wealthy is accelerating. If deficit spending is a scheme for the confiscation of wealth, it is a mighty ineffective one. What Greenspan was referring to, I think, was that deficits above a certain point relative to productivity tend to fuel inflation. This effectively confiscates wealth from those wealthy few who keep their riches all in cash under a mattress, or buried in a fruit jar in the backyard. But inflation does indeed hurt those who have little or no disposable income and whose salaries or wages do not keep up with inflation. Since roughly 1980 this would apply to the bottom half of what we generally refer to as the "Middle Class". These folks real wages and salaries have declined over time due to inflation...
That's right. And there is going to the loads of new jobs in other areas openong up because to the booming economy. Of course there may be a little pain in the transition period. But hang on to your hat because you're going to experience a tremendous boom in the domestic economy, unless Moscow Mitch can derail it somehow. He's trying.