Can America ever again have a social class of economically independent producers?

[doctor_insanus]

Why would it? The commercialization of space began here. It's still in it's infancy. It's a given that it any " sub orbital vehicle" will be built by the lowest bidder, but until trips become as common as air travel safety, quality and government regulation will rule. Also if something goes boom, your fucked.

If I used your logic then NASA would have all it's "toys" built in China.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQd7zqyd_EM

The commercialization of space will lead to nowhere.

 

[magicalmoments]

Y
Most workers only need a PC or smartphone to do their jobs.

Your original statement is above. You spoke of here and now, not sooner or later. You are wrong.

Currently most workers need to report to work. One of my examples was a plumber but the same applies to any person employed in any of the the building trades, mechanical engineering, furnishing and practically any other trades you might care to mention. The same goes for workers in retail, wholesale, service, hospitality and medical.

I don't disagree with you that all of that is changing and automation, robotics and things yet to be dreamed off will change the face of the world, you've only got to look at the print industry, but in my opinion it will be a couple of generations before the level of change you're speculating about will happen.

I think most Singaporeans would find your classification of their country as being 3rd world offensive. They are firmly placed in the first world.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The above is not my original statement. It's not even in the spirit of my original statement.

They were third world until they blew up. Which was the point. They didn't have tons of old stuff to replace, they just had to build and they built an AMAZING place. Most places in America cannot do that.

 

[richard_daily]

Two things come to mind

1) Get the government out of peoples business. Let innovators innovate. Emerging technology will multiply peoples ability to create which will lead to #2

This is exactly what the robber barons of the early 1900s were saying. They screamed "THERE'S TOO MUCH REGULATION" at the top of their lungs, because they had to shut down production when a 13 year old kid lost their arm in a machine.

2) I think the next big thing will be the commercialization of space travel. That shit won't be made in China. There will be a whole new industrial revolution resulting from that which will spin off countless new industries & technology = good paying jobs. IMO

Are you out of your mind? China is sending rockets into space on a regular basis... you know who isn't? The US.

Stop stroking off corporate america.... who in actuality, are no longer american at all, and are not at all patriotic.

Corporations are way beyond nationalistic pride at this point, but not in a good way.

 

[jeninflorida]

nice to see obama's club welfare in action

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Here is the same, original fallacy, only being applied in anther way:

How many times have you heard that we humans are "using up" the world's resources, "running out" of oil, "reaching the limits" of the atmosphere's capacity to cope with pollution or "approaching the carrying capacity" of the land's ability to support a greater population? The assumption behind all such statements is that there is a fixed amount of stuff—metals, oil, clean air, land—and that we risk exhausting it through our consumption.

"We are using 50% more resources than the Earth can sustainably produce, and unless we change course, that number will grow fast—by 2030, even two planets will not be enough," says Jim Leape, director general of the World Wide Fund for Nature International (formerly the World Wildlife Fund).

But here's a peculiar feature of human history: We burst through such limits again and again. After all, as a Saudi oil minister once said, the Stone Age didn't end for lack of stone. Ecologists call this "niche construction"—that people (and indeed some other animals) can create new opportunities for themselves by making their habitats more productive in some way. Agriculture is the classic example of niche construction: We stopped relying on nature's bounty and substituted an artificial and much larger bounty.

Economists call the same phenomenon innovation. What frustrates them about ecologists is the latter's tendency to think in terms of static limits. Ecologists can't seem to see that when whale oil starts to run out, petroleum is discovered, or that when farm yields flatten, fertilizer comes along, or that when glass fiber is invented, demand for copper falls.

That frustration is heartily reciprocated. Ecologists think that economists espouse a sort of superstitious magic called "markets" or "prices" to avoid confronting the reality of limits to growth. The easiest way to raise a cheer in a conference of ecologists is to make a rude joke about economists.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...7862612287156.html?mod=WSJ_hp_RightTopStories

The whole article is rather a good read.

 

[Saint Peter]

Get right with your god(s).

Human are fucked and will be gone by 2040.

 

[IntmtStrngr]

...

in addressing the original question---,

NO