President Obama's warning about automation.

[JCanete]

21. Tariffs have failed for who, when, how? How were they implemented and what was their intention?

Trump's motivations and how he would abuse a tariff system has nothing to do with what I'm saying. Of course his implementation will be shitty. Again, protectionism could be that encouraging carrot. Offering free trade for nations that can meet certain standards...maybe even helping them to meet those standards, would be good for us and for them.

Actually, what's funny is that according to some sources, that was supposed to be our stick built into the TPP..raising tariffs if nation's violated certain labor and environmental laws, so its kind of strange that we're on the sides we are if you don't even believe that's effective. I'm on the side of the issue I'm on because I don't believe according to what I've read, that it would have been used judiciously,nor does it seem that many of these standards would have even been enforceable. I guess, given that you don't think we should "bully" other governments into behaving, you could be on the other side for the same reason...that it has no teeth...but then you can't use that weak language as a selling point of the agreement. . On the other hand, it sounds like it has a lot of teeth when it comes to protecting the interests of investors and corporations.

I agree about automation being ignored in our mainstream politics, but our candidates could have brought it up. Nobody wants to, and that extends to Sanders, who does mention it in passing now, but didn't do in on the campaign trail. It may be that they all think its a bridge too far. They would have to be the messengers of doom before being the bringers of hope, and that's a little tricky with our public, that so often just wants assurance they can believe in.. But the other issue is that if we talk about this assured future that's coming on like a freight train, then we also have to start talking about wealth re-redistribution back into the commons, and if you are comfortable with the status-quo and you aren't interested in going that progressive, this is not an issue you even want to have to address, because its solution takes us into very socialist territory, whether conservative economists have suggested some of these ideas in the past or not.

I am glad a billion people have been taken out of extreme poverty due to outsourcing and the industrialization of third world nations, but you cannot take that fact out of the context of the bigger picture, which includes pollution, environmental degradation, and Global Warming.

By China's own numbers, pollution alone kills 1.5 million people in that nation every year. Climate change is going to cost a shit load more in damage and lives than that.

As to consumers depending on cheap goods from Costco and Walmart, they depend on those cheap goods because we outsourced away the jobs and what has replaced them is predominantly service industry related...selling ourselves the crap that's killing us. I'm sorry, but the problem doesn't get to take credit as the solution. While I agree, outsourcing is going to have less and less to do with displacement and wage stagnation, I don't see how you could possibly say it hasn't affected us over the last 30 years.

That said, When it comes to third-world countries and their own infrastructures and future, well I'll just reiterate, why are we so sick as a society that the only way to help people is to exploit them and their environment? We could do so much better. Being locked into that as good, or even sane, is concerning. Sure, respecting the realities of the moment is something we must do, but we have to be very cognizant of the long term costs when we weigh the net value of our current paradigm.