« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Obama On Technology: Prometheus Had It Coming

Dorothy, I Have a Feeling We Aren?t In America Anymore!

These changes didn’t just affect blue-collar workers. If you were a bank teller or a phone operator or a travel agent, you saw many in your profession replaced by ATMs or the internet.

– President Barack Obama (HT: RealClearPolitics)

They obviously don’t dispense wisdom and knowledge at Harvard or Columbia like they used to. Here we have a man who prior to being elected President of The United States, obtained a law degree from Harvard. Along his winding journey to the pinnacles of American achievement, he also collected a noxious gallimaufry of profoundly mistaken notions of how technology effects the world around him.

Yes, over time, technology replaces outmoded and inefficient processes with more automated and effective alternatives. It must be a terrible existential punch in the gut to be told that a machine or algorithm does whatever you do for a living more advantageously. Count me as one who personally empathizes with the beleaguered travel agents, but who doesn’t buy Barack Obama’s Neo-Marxian velleities of the intellect at the expense of logic and truth.

President Obama decries the fate of the travel agents with no reference to what these people would be doing for a living absent the technological progress made by Hughes, Lockheed or the Boeing Brothers. Yes, the supermarket made the milkman obsolete. But, your local Kroger’s could sure use a man with a strong back to help stock its dairy section.

The fundamental truth athwart our President’s epistemological bong smoke is that with very few exceptions* technology is at worst a wash and at best an economic benefit. The bank tellers replaced by ATMs would never have been paid to handle currency absent the rise of the first modern banking houses during The Florentine Renaissance. Both the travel agents and the bank tellers owed the existence of their current livelihoods to the very demon technology that Barack Obama decries in his populist oratory.

Barack Obama ridicules the very idea that “the market will take care of everything.” Of course he does. Barack Obama believes capitalism is a failure. When you examine life from the perspective of the statist, capitalism is the very epitome of failure. Once I’m out there reaping the benefits and eating the negatives from my own volitional decisions, the power of the statist will assuredly wither.

Barack Obama, like most intellectuals, political leaders and major industrialists, hates capitalism at his very core. Capitalism recognizes and rewards inequalities. Believing in capitalism is like living your life as if you actually believed in Darwin. Survival comes from fitness. Fitness comes from adaptability. If any part of your being doubts your own adaptability or fitness, capitalism requires a leap of faith that would make Soren Kierkegaard’s breath catch in the back of his throat.

The sad truth of our current economy is that our most powerful citizens use their wealth to insulate themselves from Capitalism; not promote it. Thus, it takes a Yeoman’s Effort to dissuade the ultra-rich from supporting politicians just like Barack Obama.

What Barack Obama believes in is guarantees and predictability. Capitalism offers variability and opportunity instead. Barack Obama believes in equality and fairness. Everybody gets what they want (provided they’re on SantObama’s nice list). In capitalism, you get precisely what you earn. Sometimes you get that cold, hard and right up your rectum. Capitalism is, in itself, an innovation that could make unnecessary people obsolete. It could make people of Barack Obama’s worldview as obsolete as Odoacer or Charlemagne.

For a brief moment at the beginning of his vituperative discourse against the things that make progress possible, Grima Wormtongue appeared lost and befuddled. Like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz he had this feeling that he wasn’t in Kansas anymore.

I understand and forgive the man his lapsus lingua. I went to realclearpoltics and watched a YouTube of my President spewing hatred towards the very values and attributes that made my country the foremost nation in the modern world. Sometimes, when I hear this President speak, I have a feeling that I am not in America anymore. In 2012, no matter who the GOP nominates, all of us who still care need to fight like perdition to change that.

* – The technology used to bomb somebody back into The Stone Age or to censor their rights and liberties could be seen as an exception if the person in question deserved better than The Stone Age or incarceration.

COMMENTS

  • banzaibob

    We can we replace the President with Colossus.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      I may not be mighty, but the more I look upon Obama’s works, the more I despair (or at least need a good, stiff, Vodka-Collins).

  • andystone

    the fastest way to full employment is to outlaw farm machinery.

  • Spartan4Life

    While visiting a Southeast Asian development project Friedman commented on the lack of heavy equipment by noting that the workers were only equipped with shovels. “But, Professor Friedman, it is a Jobs Program”, he was told by his hosts.

    “Then why don’t you give them spoons?”, Friedman replied.

  • Spartan4Life

    While visiting a Southeast Asian development project Friedman commented on the lack of heavy equipment by noting that the workers were only equipped with shovels. “But, Professor Friedman, it is a Jobs Program”, he was told by his hosts.

    “Then why don’t you give them spoons?”, Friedman replied.

  • macbookben

    In third grade we learned about Eli Whitney’s revolutionary ‘cotton gin’ during our study of Southern history and the Civil War. So using Obama’s logic as evidenced in his speech yesterday, it must have been a damn shame that the plantation owner had to lay off all those poor slaves due to the technological unemployment brought upon by this new invention. Barack Obama is an overeducated fool who lacks the analytical thinking skills needed to survive elementary school.

    Nope. Gotta take that back. The voters who supported him in 2008, and his prospective ones in 2012 are all truly blind fools for buying this line of crap.

    God have mercy on the United States.

  • Kyle2005

    Your ideology is blinding you and your economic framework is simplistic at best.

    Obama’s not decrying technology. He is making the case that technological advances can cause structural employment shifts. While those are good in the long term, in the short term that can cause suffering and misery for targeted populations whose work is no longer needed.

    Yes, over time the market reacts to surplus labor by creating new opportunities, but that doesn’t happen immediately.

    Providing support and a short term bridge to those that are most negatively impacted by structural economic realignments doesn’t significantly future capital investments. Certainly no more than fear mongering by implying (or flat out saying) that our president is a socialist and will take private property scares new capital investment.

    I work at a company where are constantly looking to improve productivity and efficiency to improve profit margins (of course, if not we wouldn’t survive). That is the core of my job for the company. When we find efficiency, it often means that we need less capacity and we lay people off. But I sleep better at night knowing that a small portion of our increased profit margins goes toward helping those that are displaced by it – at least until someone else who has had a new idea and needs labor to support that idea can employ those people.

    But beyond just “sleeping better” knowing that human misery is reduced, having a social safety net helps ensure that the labor market doesn’t fluctuate too wildly when structural employment shifts occur. Having spare labor in the market that is receiving the minimum to survive means that when new ideas come along that require labor, that labor is immediately available so those new ideas can become products and services for us to consume.

    Kyle

    • Kyle2005

      “Providing support and a short term bridge to those that are most negatively impacted by structural economic realignments doesn?t significantly *impact* future capital investments”

    • andystone

      “[we] are constantly looking to improve productivity and efficiency to improve profit margins (of course, if not we wouldn?t survive)”

      Are you saying your job with the Obama campaign involves fundraising?

    • jkliegel

      government interference in the labor market will have a different outcome than government interference in any other market?

      Why do you think so?

      What do you think the effect of government interference in a market is? Do you think it improves on the “market” solution? Can you cite any real world examples?

      Thanks

      James

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      Oops, that’s right. He’s not. My bad. I guess my ideology just temporarily blinded me.

    • dcacklam

      By delaying a structural re-alignment that should have happened in the 80s or 90s.

      Rather than coming out with the ‘hard truth’ – that there is no future for manufacturing labor in America…..

      Politicians have come up with all sorts of schemes to ‘save’ or ‘bring back’ jobs that have no business being in the USA to begin with…

      If we as a nation had faced up to this in the 80s or early 90s, Americans would have stopped seeing manufacturing as a viable career field, and would have developed other skills…

      Every year that we pretend a $5/day job is worth $35-50k/yr, is another year that we encourage people to develop job skills the market WILL NOT bear without govt intervention.

    • wennejunk

      …is a socialist and will take private property…

      I think a bondholder with first claim on a company’s assets would properly qualify as a private property holder.

      If you were a GM bondholder, your private property was taken and given to others = socialism.

      Having spare labor in the market that is receiving the minimum to survive means (snip)

      It means they have the ability to congregate and defecate in public spaces when they should be out doing anything that brings in income. Your endless social safety net promotes the equivalent of malingering.

    • renl57

      “He [Obama] is making the case that technological advances can cause structural employment shifts.”

      Gee, you liberals should get your act together.

      Because Paul Krugman [heard of him?] has spent a whole year trying to refute the notion that any significant part of our currently high unemployment rate is due to structural problems. Krugman has stated flatly that high unemployment is entirely due to aggregate demand being too low to incentivize business to expand, not because millions and millions of Americans have suddenly found themselves obsolete by new technology.

      So go argue with him.

      I don’t agree with Krugman’s analysis as to *why* business is operating at less than full capacity. And I disagree with him even more as to what to do about it.

      But he’s right about one thing: No technological revolution ever led to mass unemployment as long as the economy was otherwise prosperous. Not railroads, not electricity, not cars, not radio, not computers.

      Paul Krugman and Robert Reich are lefties, but they don’t feel compelled to make excuses for Obama’s economic policies, the way you’re doing.

  • johnt

    is on the affirmative. Of course hate needs it’s allies, Stupidity, Ignorance, and a sense of Vengeance, O being the agent for all, but especially the last. That’s the fun part, the part that makes him wiggle his toes just thinking about it. Gaze around the Net, he has thousands just like him, boiling, on the edge, like wolves around a camp fire, just waiting.
    Of course when we go down, they go down as well, but how far can a rat’s mind take him ?

  • flguy

    Around the turn of the century as the automobile was replacing the horse, a lot of blacksmiths lost their jobs due to technology, as did many saddle-makers, feed-store owners, etc. But what really happened was that those people went into other professions, they didnt’ just lay down and die. Many new jobs were created: gas stations operators, fuel hauling truckers, auto repairmen, travel lodge owners and employers, etc.

    All of those ATM’s need people to maintain them, restock them, build them, design them, etc. etc. As a former bank-teller, it was my job at times to be the ATM teller, restocking it and making sure that it was functioning properly They do not run themselves and magically make money appear inside of themselves. If this president had ever had a real job, he might know about such things.

    ~Historian Mike

  • renl57

    Study: Internet economy has created 1.2M jobs
    Job boost comes with 10% of sales now being made online
    By Patrick Thibodeau
    June 10, 2009 06:01 PM ET

    Computerworld – As the automobile industry sheds jobs, it comes as good news that over the last decade or so the Internet has created 1.2 million jobs, many paying higher salaries than average, a new study finds.

    Internet business contributes 2.1%, or $300 billion, to the total GDP (gross domestic product) of the U.S.

    http://tinyurl.com/3cgvyep

    Compare to the solar power loan guarantee program:
    3,500 jobs created at a cost of $20 billion; several solar companies have folded

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      How much new wealth has been created by just the amazon.com affiliates program alone?

  • Tbone

    Columbia degrees not withstanding, once you accept that Obama has a mundane intellect permanently bent by a Marxist childhood, his gross stupidity of the world is quite understandable.

    • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

      NT

  • Return to Revolution

    to even the dimwitted individual holding an advanced degree from Harvard that Thomas Edison started us down this road to destruction. If only the government had had the foresight to outlaw electricity and prop up the candle industry, we’d be living in paradise today.