A few things Just because you have been hearing about these problems, doesn’t mean most people have . I stand by my take that without Yang , we would not be discussing these issues at nearly the same level. Talking about it doesn’t solve it , but you can’t begging to solve it unless you talk about it and identify it . What qualifications and experience do you want ? Proposing a legislative bill ? Having a government position ? He ran a test prep company , so he understands education . He ran a non-profit whose mission was to create entrepreneurship and jobs . In your opinion can an outsider ever have the skills to be a good president?(not judging , just asking)
We still are not talking about these issues on a national level it's about 5 on the list of what drives voters. The qualifications that I want is a real expertise for the subject matter and a history talking about it and pushing legislation before 2018. He ran a test prep company and a non profit, how exactly does that and talking about AI qualify for the presidency? These are links that talked about automation all the way back in 2015. https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...on-technological-unemployment-history/403576/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/01/how-will-automation-affect-society/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/tech...ing-will-affect-employment-and-public-policy/ https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/03/...nvasion-at-work-give-everyone-a-paycheck.html https://www.pwc.com/hu/hu/kiadvanyok/assets/pdf/impact_of_automation_on_jobs.pdf Does Yang actually have a plan?
Yeah man , he does Go to his website and check out all the policies he has proposed to fix issues small and large He has plans for gun control , healthcare , jobs and the economy , democratic reform , and climate change . He’s one of the few people I’ve heard talking about how many of these issues are intertwined. Based off what you said , you want a history of pushing legislation.., so it sounds like government experience is required? (Or does lobbying count haha) I would also argue the non-profit Jobs thing DOES give him experience. He’s been around the country, talked to people on the ground , and has been exposed to many different perspectives. If you don’t think he’s experienced enough or qualified , that’s an opinion you are allowed to have and I can understand. But , there are also only 2 real requirements... 35+ and U.S citizen and have been living here . Let’s take a look back Trump -no experience Obama - senator for 4 years , state government before that Bush - governor for a few years Clinton - governor ( 10+ years) Bush - congress for 4 years , then a variety of roles like RNC chair , VP , and cia director Reagan - governor (less than 10 years) When you back you can look at some other cases Wilson was a governor for all of 2 years Taft was just a judge TR was a governor for 1 year before he became vp Most of these dudes had executive type experience. It’s up to congress anyways to get Legislation passed . Yang has got the ideas and solutions man
Don't know why you brought up Trump not helping your case. Everybody had over 4 years working in actual government and knowing how things actually work and who to go to for help. You have yet to give me any actual expertise he has on these subjects. Looked at his site and he has 3 things he talks about and UBI is the only thing he gets into any specifics on and sorry this is the outline of a plan. https://www.yang2020.com/what-is-freedom-dividend-faq/ Andrew proposes funding the Freedom Dividend by consolidating some welfare programs and implementing a Value Added Tax of 10 percent. Current welfare and social program beneficiaries would be given a choice between their current benefits or $1,000 cash unconditionally – most would prefer cash with no restriction. A Value Added Tax (VAT) is a tax on the production of goods or services a business produces. It is a fair tax and it makes it much harder for large corporations, who are experts at hiding profits and income, to avoid paying their fair share. A VAT is nothing new. 160 out of 193 countries in the world already have a Value Added Tax or something similar, including all of Europe which has an average VAT of 20 percent. How does he propose to get that tax passed and implemented? Not knocking you for liking and thinking he will make a great president I just don't see it and in hind site think Obama was a little to green and naive for job but he made the best of a bad situation. Still my biggest issue is that he does not have any real solutions unless you think UBI is cure all for everything.
@jiggyfly i suggest you look a bit further into the page . He has way more than 3 policies , those are just the headliners. Maybe he is too new or naive. I have listened to him speak a lot and read a lot about his plans . I think he has good judgement , and that’s really what the experience is about no? I don’t think UBI is a cure all and neither does he . But he’s all about putting the resources in people’s hands so they can solve their own problems .
Yes he has more than 3 policies and they are mostly about 2 paragraphs and don't go into any real plans. Anyway did not come in here to drag your candidate I just don't see him as a good presidential candidate and want people to put some meat on the bones.
Talking about jobs lost to automation helps the Democratic Presidential primaries, since candidates have to have "a plan for that".
Yang just dropped his first TV ad buys to the tune of 1MM. Here's the spot. A bit cheezy, but this is targeted at boomers and zoomers in Iowa so it's going to be a bit more traditional. Have to get our butts in gear as the polls were not kind to us this week.
The copy and images are fine, but they needed different voice talent (almost, ironically, sounds like an automated voice!) and def a different soundtrack. Something like autobahn would have been good, or something more metal.
Yang just gave a speech to a small group of donors in LA and made a few interesting assertions: New Hampshire is where they are planning their breakout moment. It's an open primary and there is a lot of energy for his campaign among Independents and disaffected Republicans (of which there are many in the NE). Already polling at 5% without any advertising and are planning a 7 figure ad buy. Polls oversample landlines and registered Democrats which are two groups that Yang is least represented in. Something around 80% of primary voters are undecided so there's plenty of headspace left to win votes. In terms of voter loyalty Yang ranks the highest so his attrition rate is almost zero. Nevada is a surprisingly strong state for his campaign and they expect to make noise there on the coattails of New Hampshire. Large Asian population and is home to many of the industries that are primed for automation which his campaign has been coordinating with.
"Andrew Yang's 'Department of the Attention Economy' Is Why Libertarians Don't Trust Democrats": https://reason.com/2019/11/19/andre...omy-is-why-libertarians-dont-trust-democrats/ excerpt: Andrew Yang's 'Department of the Attention Economy' Is Why Libertarians Don't Trust Democrats The answer to real and imagined problems is always spend more, regulate more. Nick Gillespie | 11.19.2019 10:30 AM Yang . . . proposes to Create a Department of the Attention Economy that focuses specifically on how to responsibly design and use smartphones, social media, gaming, and chat apps. It will include overall guidelines, as well as age-based ones. Provide guidance (and regulation, if needed) on design features that maximize screen time for young people, like removing autoplay video for children under 16, removing the queues that allow infinite scrolling, capping the number of recommendations per day, reducing notification signs and "like" counts, and using artificial intelligence and machine learning to determine when children are using devices to cap screen hours per day. Establish rules and standards around kid-targeted content to protect them from inappropriate content. Incentivize content production of high-quality and positive programming for kids similar to broadcast TV. Require platforms to provide guidance on kid-healthy content for parents, and provide incentives for companies that work to make user data of minors available to their parents. Include classes on the responsible use of technology in public school curricula and teach children how to distinguish reliable from unreliable news sources online. It's this sort of "new" thinking that loses libertarians. In what way does a new, presumably cabinet-level, agency do anything other than expand the size, scope, and spending of government in a way that will inevitably limit speech and expression? That it's being done in the name of "the children" makes it seem like a punchline from a mid-1990s episode of The Simpsons. Yang asserts that "we are beginning to understand exactly how much of an adverse effect" social media is having on kids and that Facebook, Twitter, and the rest face no "real accountability" even as he rhapsodizes about his 20th century childhood: "I look back at my childhood and I remember riding a bike around the neighborhood, but now tablets, computers, and mobile devices have shifted the attention of youth." Spare me the nostalgia and moral panic, which is highly reminiscent of the '90s panic over the supposed effects on kids of sex and violence on cable TV (lest we forget, Attorney General Janet Reno and other leaders threatened censorship if the menace of Beavis and Butt-head and other basic cable fare wasn't cleaned up). The social science is far from settled on any of this stuff and the first reaction to perceived problems should never be creating a series of government controls. Social media companies face all sorts of pushback in the marketplace, too, including lack of interest from users (Facebook has posted two years of declining use in the U.S.). What would any of Yang's plans cost in terms of dollars and cents? It doesn't really matter because the visionary will pay for everything with a value-added tax on digital advertising. more at the link
@Os Trigonum while I’m deaf bit biased as a big fan of Yang’s , the article doesn’t really resonate with me at all Department of attention economy just sounds like a communist beauracracy. It’s a bad name haha Yang is probably one of the least “top down” beauracracy guys you can find on the Democratic side . His signature proposal UBI - incredibly little overhead . On the healthcare side of things he views regulation as one of the main problems stifling the supply . Maybe this idea goes too far . In the wrong hands or with too much power I can see this going wrong . But the devil is in the details , and presumably some government regulation was the reason why we don’t see commercials for cigarettes in between Saturday morning cartoons . People are so easily captivated and manipulated. I do think responsibility ultimately falls on the parents . Would your fears (not saying you have any since all you did was post an article ) be quelled if all this agency had the authority to do was “recommend” and provide info to the public about this tech ?
then why not use one of the existing bureaucracies—the Dept of Education for example—if all you’re talking about is an advisory, non-regulatory role? Or the President’s Council on Physical Fitness
That’s a good point . Frankly , I’m uneducated on this issue . I don’t know what the scope of problems is that Yang sees . Maybe he feels that it’s something that needs its own agency etc . Maybe within the framework of how the executive branch functions (and works with congress) it’s easier to create a new department than restructure or expand an existing one . It’s also possible that the costs of constantly educating the public and changing behavior is much higher than simply regulating away the design choice that led to the negative effects you are hoping to mitigate . Like I said earlier , you are arguing against a bit of a brick wall . I have a pretty high opinion of Yang’s thought process ..... in other words , I *gasp* trust him.
I imagine it would be folded into the resurrected Office of Technology Assessment. It can sound a bit draconian when dressed up in Heritage Foundation boogeyman costumes, but it's basically a digital version of the same agencies that monitor the environment, or medicine, etc. Given that he's plugged into Silicon Valley, and he's a parent of young children, he is worried about how the last 25 years of technology development may have given rise to some sinister things that are gnawing away at our wellbeing in an unseen manner guided by nothing more than the profit motive. He says regularly that many tech entrepreneurs are desperate for some government regulation/guidance when it comes to making very heavy decisions as they create new services and products. You know something is a little off when private industry is asking for the government to make a decision for it.
Why would libertarians take what a guy who only has 5% support as a reason to not trust the Democratic Party? This logic means that they agree with Yang since most democrats don't. You post some of the most nonsensical articles out there. Why do you like strawmen arguments?
