[ExI] ai and job loss

[spike]

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of Adrian Tymes
...

>...Temporary, migrant workers aren't what people mean by "immigration" or
"diversity"...

Indeed?  So if migrant workers are temporary, then that is not a good kind
of diversity or a good kind of immigration?  That sounds to me like the best
kind: temporary immigration for a specific purpose is legal.  It would help
the locals because they could see an alternative way of living.

>...And if the workers were just there for the project, then they'd have to
have accepted whatever living conditions were available, with no time or
materials to spend improving them, knowing that they would move on
afterward...

Not necessarily.  Plenty of third world slums have no running water or
electricity.  Import workers would figure out a way to deal with that,
particularly if it is a billion dollar project.  Those cannot be built in a
week or even a month.  It is easy to imagine single construction workers
living in structures once occupied by a big family.  Once that guy moves in,
you have less overcrowding, at least temporarily.


>...Yes, but the people the government represents are still up a creek
regardless of how the government tries to justify it...

It was those people who voted these crooks into power.  If they couldn't
vote, then their problem goes deeper than unequal distribution of wealth.
They suffer unequal distribution of democracy.

>...(And it wasn't a donation to family charities.  It was a check - or
maybe cash - straight to the relevant departments.)...

Ja, there are plenty of places in the world where they assume government is
paid for by people who expect something in return.  This is the reason why
US politicians must have no family charity, for even if the politician is
perfectly honest, it will be viewed as otherwise by those in countries where
access is bought.

>>...He tried to hide the fact that he and his family were actually living
there, for years...

> What's wrong with that?  Wouldn't you do likewise?  I would.

>...Only if I thought that my living there would not garner community
support.  You were saying his neighbors would like him; if he thought
otherwise, he might have reason to...

Criminals live among the honest people.  If a guy is living in the middle of
a bad neighborhood where the people like him, there will still be criminals
looking to kidnap his family.  Stealth wealth is not just advisable but
necessary.


...
>>... Social Security and Medicare are not welfare; they are entitlements.
The fed does not have the authority to withhold that based on sanctuary
cities.

>...The suggestions are that they do it anyway, legal or not, authority or
not...

Well there ya go.  If the government defaults on Social Security to one
particular state, the non-deplorables can impeach the president for not
inforcing the law.  During the process, Californians can withhold their
income tax payments.  The Fed will not go long without California's tax
revenue.  The Federal government's authority is based on law.  If they
violate it, they have no legal authority.

>> Ja, the fact that the masses are starving in Mumbai is not the rich guy's
fault and he can do little to fix it.

>....Sure he can.  For instance, he could have not intervened and allowed
the school to be set up there...

He had the option of taking his money anywhere in the world.  He could have
set up a compound next to Mark Zuckerburg in an enclave like Palo Alto where
there are often two or three billionaires in line ahead of you at the local
Starbucks.  Instead he set up camp in Mumbai.  Rich people need to live
somewhere.  If he wants to buy my entire street and turn it into a
mega-mansion, I am open to suggestion.  If he wants to buy the entire street
next to mine, tear down the houses and build a huge castle, OK, welcome to
the neighborhood.  But Mumbai needs that more than we do.

spike