Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)

1. You want over 1/3 of the population to retire?

Reply to CK_John (Original post)

Sun May 3, 2015, 11:03 AM

May 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The only solution to the jobs problem is to halt automation! So who going to support that [View all] CK_John May 2015 OP

You want over 1/3 of the population to retire? Buzz Clik May 2015 #1

If your over 50, you will not be force to take SocSec, but it is a needed security net for CK_John May 2015 #3

How do you pay for it. Travis_0004 May 2015 #38

Well I quit working before I was 50 back in 2002 tech3149 May 2015 #40

The solution is to bring up this question as a nation, and have a talk about it: Nay May 2015 #2

Also a candidate needs to educate the voters to the process, they only propose programs CK_John May 2015 #6

Perfect response! tech3149 May 2015 #44

Halt automation?? Sinistrous May 2015 #4

A guaranteed minimum income would solve it. immoderate May 2015 #5

How so, if every job is automated? CK_John May 2015 #7

You won't depend on a job for income. immoderate May 2015 #11

Sharing the profits technology yields would be a start n/t leftstreet May 2015 #8

Sharing with who? CK_John May 2015 #10

You. Agschmid May 2015 #16

Halting automation would only work if we halted trade sufrommich May 2015 #9

The OP questioned who would take a position to halt automation??? Assumed answer nobody. CK_John May 2015 #12

Sorry, I misunderstood. nt sufrommich May 2015 #13

I think that's a false dilemma: Automation or no automation Populist_Prole May 2015 #14

All stats report on the increase in productivity (buzz word for automation)en CK_John May 2015 #15

Actually the MacJobs pay pretty well... Agschmid May 2015 #17

Lulz Jesus Malverde May 2015 #18

I don't think it's the "only solution". Trillo May 2015 #19

Your premise is flawed tkmorris May 2015 #20

I'm sorry, but that's just silly. MineralMan May 2015 #21

Reread the OP, I do not halt automation. CK_John May 2015 #22

I know that. I gave the reasons why MineralMan May 2015 #23

You keep flogging this turd. Ain't never going to happen. Throd May 2015 #24

Ridicule or awareness Jesus Malverde May 2015 #25

Ridicule. You can't stop automation. Throd May 2015 #26

I said it's unstoppable. Jesus Malverde May 2015 #27

Lower Social Security eligibility to 50 is not a realistic solution. Throd May 2015 #29

maybe not realistic Jesus Malverde May 2015 #30

They will be working elsewhere in the industry. Throd May 2015 #32

yep... or not Jesus Malverde May 2015 #33

Of course there will casualties. There always are. Throd May 2015 #36

. Jesus Malverde May 2015 #37

And halt computer use too! FLPanhandle May 2015 #28

Maybe one answer to automation... katsy May 2015 #31

Excellent suggestion and one worthy of consideration. Jesus Malverde May 2015 #34

"Only"? kentuck May 2015 #35

We need to change the focus from the system to the people daredtowork May 2015 #39

I'll say it one more time: hunter May 2015 #41

When you say 'halt automation', do you mean everything should be made by hand? pampango May 2015 #42

Automation in an era of declining population is a magnificent opportunity for a leap in wellbeing. Hortensis May 2015 #43