A
Alleviating the grind of being poor
- Thread starter Rockfish1
- Start date
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
They will be able to change jobs, learn new and marketable skills.
But it's just a fact that the more technology advances, the larger % of people won't be able to do that, regardless of how driven or lazy they are.
Brad, completely agree, having a high IQ doesn't necessarily mean that you possess the skill set to say move from the industrial economy to the knowledge economy.
Asked a billionaire who made his money in real estate development if he used computer programs to help him invest. He relied, "When the thought of using a computer crosses my mind, I lie down on a couch until the thought passes". Obviously he made his money at a time when the knowledge economy requirements of today didn't exist.
Remind me if I forget. I will work on getting you an answer that’s not a short blurb while I am driving and working.
I’ll give you a couple examples quickly. When Mexican immigrants first moved into our community, they worked awful jobs processing turkeys for Purdue Farms. The Mexicans have evolved from that. Last month I noticed a Mexican Roofing Company replacing the roof on all the church buildings next door to my office. Many now have well paying jobs with business clients of mine. Haitians have now moved in and taken the Perdue Farms jobs.
Many of our local construction businesses have workers easily making $50,000 to $80,000. Businesses like Graber Post Buildings and Daviess County Metal Sales contract out labor on their construction projects. We have numerous clients who have formed small LLCs that provide the labor. In most cases it’s 4/6 members equally dividing the profits.
We have many clients who have an hourly job and a side business they’re running out of their homes. It’s not unusual for those businesses to become full time. I remember how a client who makes small mini storage buildings starting years ago. Both partners had day jobs. The business kept growing and they agonized with the decision to quit their jobs. When they finally quit, their business exploded. They now have a Rent-To-Own entity to finance mini barns when needed.
Many opportunities for those willing and able.
I took college algebra 11 times.
Melania is a lawyer?Yet
They're going to 100% be able to, cough, build rapport.
I think the knowledge economy can be a burden for indecisive people and for those who don’t have a good understanding of relevance or cause and effect.
Success will always come down to thinking and how you apply what you know.
Sounds like we have some agreement. Thanks for the measured response.
#2; The department of Education could be illiminated in total. That would help Some barriers to school choice....as well as getting the Fed influence out of school system. If student loans are in DOE, block grants to states, let them manage.
#3 day care ......if you eliminate giveaways where people have to work...it is must. It already exists to some degree
#4 is already in last bipartisan bill passed. And yes urban areas. But we already have rural transit in rural areas.
#5 possibly.
I would put way more $ into above as I would increase money for mentally ill treatment. But anything to help people succeed and not be dependent.
To pay for that, besides slashing giveaways, I would also cut ALL Govt medical for all except disabled & seniors. I would also have the Govt continually follow up on disabled to insure need.
Last edited:
Had a fraternity brother who never passed his agriculture chemical course which was a requirement for his AG degree.
Went on to become a VP for one of the country's largest agricultural chemistry firms.
Doubt he would be as successful in today's economy.
I tried everything. Juco. A different juco in the hood. Nothing would fly. Finally the AD who loved me summoned me to his office and I was informed that I’d been approved for a substitute course. It was essentially rudimentary origami. I made creatures out of paper - by myself. Woot Woot. Worked for me
CoH, think you will agree.
The more experience you have, the more you know what can be applied to thinking through and solving a problem (winning a case). Also the more you know about what not to do (failure) helps to avoid taking the wrong course..
Disagree on the DOE. Federalism means there's a central government and students from coast to coast need to hit a standard. But would agree some of their function is, at a minimum, duplicative of state agencies or, at worst, in contradiction to their mission (although that's probably the other way around more often). Regardless, there has to be a national standard. The DOE should set that.
Agree on day care. Day care and transportation keep more poor and lower income from work than laziness and drugs combined.
Mass transit should be the result of demand. It will come once fueling (with a petrol product or electicity) a vehicle costs $.50/mile but the best transit grows organically (though we should allow space for it).
Disagree bigly on Medicare/Medicaid programs. Pinnacle of human achievement in my mind. They are just run like shit.
That was the 3rd try. And I was a sophomore at that point in a class full of freshman.
We have elected school boards and State Depts of education. DOE is 100% wasted money. You know it is only for control via how money is dolled out with strings attached, not standards. So have to agree to disagree there..
Disagree with Govt involvement into healthcare. Just require businesses to provide coverage.....as you say Govt running things is ALWAYS poorly done and extremely wasteful. Private not as wasteful, better mgmt. (Note again disabled & mentally ill would have Govt coverage & Govt standards on health care enable every worker to get & keep a policy.) Able bodied people flat out need to work. Yes retired still get govt medical, but raise age to 67.
Probably needs its own thread...haha. I don't think private health insurance is efficient. It is incredibly wasteful as are our 5 star hotel looking hospitals.
We're going to have to have a come to Jesus moment on healthcare but, we're Americans so we'll put it off as long as humanly possible. Which is probably too late.
Passed Calculus with a "C" thanks to a female classmate. Yes, a girl back in the days when girls were not supposed to be good at math.
She started each session by saying, "Now this is really easy". My mind would say to itself, "Yeah, that is easy for you to say".
Took all kinds of math courses thinking I could improve. My GPA told another story.
Did use a lot of math in my business career, so some of my struggles to learn math did have a payoff. Learning to develope computer programs with math built in really helped.
Last edited:
No way can AI write a good legal brief. It could probably say what existing law is, but it can only do that by stringing together routine and familiar word patterns found in cases.. But those kinds of briefs are not using persuasion.
Good briefs use persuasion and arguing how the law should overruled, expanded, or changed. AI cannot do that. AI might be able to help a human, but AI couldn’t complete the job.
If you ask AI whether cutting off healthy body parts of a 12 year old should be considered child abuse, it can only repeat the prejudices the humans allowed it to consider. That argument might be made in court within a few years and that will require a human being.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Need more deets on the girl. Did she dress like a librarian?
I certainly agree. I think these are examples of applying knowledge and experience to existing issues and circumstances. That is a separate skill from simply accumulating more knowledge.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I think you're going to be surprised in a few years (maybe months).
In your list of things lawyers do, you forgot arguing how this particular fact pattern is governed by a particular law. It will be able to do that. And it will pull not just from cases, but from every brief ever written and digitally recorded somewhere.
AI is going to essentially replace associates' working on that first draft of a brief and allow senior lawyers to write a really good brief all on their own.
Can’t agree. First of all, if some cases are good, that doesn't mean more cases are better. AI will certainly speed up the process just as tech has already sped up the process of research and writing. And it will eliminate some jobs just as tech already has done. But AI can never create changes in law without a human guiding it. I also think AI will always be weak in persuasion and arguing using analogies.
Legal writing is coloring by numbers. AI will master the form and have access to every single piece of information. You are overestimating lawyers and underestimating AI.
Lol. In my practice, if a situation called for painting by numbers, the project got shipped to a paralegal.
Not everyone can be a computer programmer. If AI can really do everything that people think it might, we are looking at a neo-feudalist society. Most people are poor and exist at the largesse of their lord and there is a certain small subset of the population that exists somewhere in between based on their ability to garner money for their "talent". The value of the trades goes down when you have a bunch of tradesman so you either just go through life as a farmer of your lord's land (a consumer of the products that the owner class's AI produces for you) and live a basic subsistence with about 80% of everyone else or you find a way to market something that people are willing to pay for. Even that has issues though as AI can create art, music, books, etc. When combined with a machine it can also create carvings, custom furniture, clothing, etc.
At that point I believe you also have to disarm the populace because there is a not insignificant percentage of the population that will have the RATM thought process of "f--- the g-ride, I want the machines that are making them." I am a conservative and I would be willing to eat the rich at that point.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
At that point, socialism might work. Or it might be needed.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
The current LLMs might not be able to do this, true, but an actual AI would be able to much better than humans can, if by changes you mean making rulings on new fact patterns that is the most consistent with current precedent and statutes.
Maybe AI will be cheap and equipment still expensive. So all the degreed white collar people with no capital costs like lawyers and accountants will have to become factory workers and laborers.
AI will do to many white collar jobs what Excel did to Accounting. There are still accountants but there sure as hell aren't bookeepers anymore.
Slow down. Use a Russian voice. That's it.
While her hyperbole at the beginning was a bit much, what exactly is she wrong about? Yes, if you allowed all the federal government's healthcare arms to negotiate prices for a product, that product's price would fall.
Law is dynamic. AI would be great at perpetuating precedent, but that isn’t the focus of what lawyers do.
AI can’t really address the trolly car dilemma without a human rule. Lawyers argue and make these rules every day.
