376
Trump Suffers Jobs Numbers Disaster After Firing Stats Chief
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
376 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25529 readers
1780 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They're gonna spin it into AIs great success.
Yeah the only way I feel automation/AI is a success story is if we started a tally and said 50,000 jobs were replaced by robots because they are more efficient. So every person in the U.S. will be sent a check for $7. (Median wage x jobs replaced / population). So every job replaced built a universal base income.
Basically making it, if it is more productive for our society as a whole to automate this position, then the whole of society benefits as well as the company. Eventually when 100, 200, 300 million jobs have been replaced people would be getting a base income of $13,500/$27,000/$40,000 a year.
Sets the stage for the fact that if automation is more productive, then workers should only need to work less hours.
For example farm work has decreased from 40% of the work force to 1.3% of the workforce in the U.S. from 1900 to now. Assuming they got paid less the median farm worker is around $36,000 a year right now (it's really higher, but I'm cutting out management positions and such). So if we just looked at farms alone. Every person in the U.S. should get an annual check for $13,932 every year to offset jobs lost.
Would we "advance" slower, maybe.. maybe not. Someone having 30% of their time freed up may make some invent things faster, but really there isn't anything we need to be making to advance right now. Slowing everything down and sending people outside to enjoy the world around them would likely make people care more about preserving the world around them. Want less plastic in the Ocean, preserve more Ocean bottoms/species even if it is so they can have more diverse food to eat later on.
One thing is for sure, stress would go down, happiness should go up as life wouldn't be go go go. Vacations would be more common. More wanting to be able to walk/bike/hike/swim and places to hang out. More wants of entertainment really.... Sorry for rambling