Archangel1313

Two sides of the same coin.

Of course you can. Just look at how the MAGA movement has taken over the Republican party. It started during Obama's term, with the Tea Party movement. One-by-one, they primaried the old-school moderate Republicans, and eventually held majority control over their party's policy decisions. Once they had that, the remaining moderates either chose to fall in line, or were forced to retire.

That's how democracy works. Revolution is just an excuse to kill people for their political beliefs, when you're too lazy to convince them to change their minds.

That's a very fair point.

Then their losses are on them...not the voters.

Except that white folks aren't "excluded" from anything. You would have to be an idiot to think that white people aren't already receiving the full benefit of everything that society has to offer. This doesn't need to be "advertised". it's simply a fact.

"I will succeed, where they could not."

Regardless, if Carney doesn’t break this unambiguous election promise, that’s not a cause for celebration or congratulations. He could’ve passed a bill to protect supply management - was asked directly to do so - and he intentionally didn’t do it.

Then what's this.

I love these "nearly half" declarations of support the media likes to gin up.

So..."less than half", then?

It's not the voters fault. If you split the Democratic vote, you will only get a permanent Republican government. And that doesn't help anyone.

Politicians like Mamdani are the only way forward. We need more people like him to run for local government like this, and move their way up from there...making way for more like them to take their places, as they go. You can't change things at the top, without laying the foundation for that change, first.

No leopards ate this man's face. I guarantee you, he will suffer no negative consequences for screwing his constituents over. In fact, he will most likely be rewarded for it.

If AI can replace so many people that there aren't jobs for them all, wouldn't that also mean AI is producing enough to sustain those people, jobs or not?

Unfortunately, that isn't what's happening. AI isn't "producing" anything that people need to survive. It's just replacing people. We aren't seeing any net gains to society that would be able to support so many people no longer being needed in the workforce.

If they were training AI to produce food, build housing or anything that people actually need more of right now, I would say you are absolutely correct to assume that people would be just fine with this transition. But that's not what they're using AI for.

Optimistically, AI could and definitely should be used for those things...and the logical conclusion would be to implement a form of UBI so that we can all benefit from this. But do you honestly see that happening?

I don't. And I think that's what OP is also seeing. We aren't ready, as a species, to make that transition yet. There isn't even the slightest intention on behalf of our current leadership, of providing for an entire population of jobless people. They will ultimately be left to fend for themselves. And as it stands right now, society isn't equipped to function with that kind of excess population.

I have a very hard time believing that all of a sudden, this clown gives a shit about "debt slaves". There is no way he's complaining about us peons having to pay for all this spending.

He sure as fuck didn't care how his funding cuts were going to affect the peasant class when he was gleefully setting fire to all our social safety nets...so what the hell is he even talking about?