I'm Liberal btw.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883173)

the people who are populating town square is kind of a problem, but I dont really think we will even have town squares as the internet continues its march. 2007 iphone was some kind of Pearl Harbor, but we cannot even name it yet. Its truly destroying everything that matters. Real dark shit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883178)

They're not good for kids but that's not some unsolvable problem. People want to blame "screens" for all of societies ills now that boomers (the previous scapegoat we all used to deflect from the real issue) are too old to blame.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883196)

No tech book, so no jeets. No gps apps, so fewer illegals making their way across the border.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883278)

everything else you can fix, but the post-1965 demographic disaster can never ever be fixed

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883390)

To be clear: I don't think we have the stomach to fix demographic problems. But I see how they could theoretically be fixed. I don't see even a single avenue for fixing technology though

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883392)

Tech has become the military industrial complex of our time enabling never before seen capabilities to track, disrupt, and interdict "threats," as well as control, manipulate, and enslave entire populations. It's distributed. It runs our economy. It gives people tremendous comfort--the one commodity humans seem to be incapable of sacrificing--while keeping them firmly under the thumb of real authority

That only goes away when the owner of the power transitions out of human hands, and I don't see why it would get any better for us at that point

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883408)

The thing that worries me as much (less drastic outcome, but higher probability) is a total massacre of white collar employment especially the young fresh out of college who will never have a chance, in the same way that china trade totally massacred blue collar employment.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883422)

And in all honesty, I think the modern world shows that shared values and beliefs, and the willingness to live within those values and beliefs, is a million times more important than race. The motherfuckers at the top are selling out their own people, in the classic sense, at rates never before seen

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883435)

demographics are a direct byproduct of our immigration policy. maybe in the long run it's destiny that we become a species of grey skinned cyborgs, but that's a very long way off and quite different from "the US is now Upper Mexico"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883406)

1.) Less need for serf labor in smartphone-enabled "jobs." No Door Dash, no Uber. If you want delivery, you need to hire someone competent (easier when the average IQ is still actually 100 and not everyone is vaping weed all day). If you want a taxi, you need someone who knows the roads and isn't competing with every person who owns a car to pick you up. BUT OH MY CONVENIENCE!! Too much convenience is obviously bad.

2.) More general competence required across the economy. Less abundance of information means you need people who are more adept at dealing with uncertainty and using judgment to make decisions. This requires a higher average IQ across industries. It also selects more for MEN. 

3.) Less general malaise because of anhedonia and media addiction. More general friction in life. More texture. More of a need to simply be on the move to get things done and not sit at a desk all day. All of this keeps people happier and also sustains industries that add to the texture of life (newsstands, for instance.) 

4.) Less financialization of industry and less of an economy purely driven by transactions. Much more vibrancy to the economy overall. Less outrageous wealth inequality, stronger (actual) middle class that isn't just paper pushing middle management fraud types.

5.) Stories on TV / movies can still have heavy procedural elements instead of just looking at a cell phone screen for an answer. Go watch an episode of Law & Order from 1994, it is amazing.

6.) People being themselves and not just adopting personalities they see online all day on social media on their faggot phones.

7.) Virtually zero trannies because of lack of social contagion and women being insane from Instagram.

8.) Still a feeling of real exploration in the world.

9.) Real and distinct sub-cultures that aren't just farmed for views online. Things develop more organically.

10.) People would be thinner and healthier overall.

Most of this acts as a barrier to importing 90 IQ third worlders. It is the ultimate win-win.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883430)

Farmers are why we had the Bracero program, and they used illegal immigration to replace it.

Obviously it wasn't just them, but they were by far the single largest driver and more importantly the *first* driver of illegal immigration, setting a precedent for other business owners to not fear employing illegals.

And all of this was set in motion long before anyone had a PDA or whatever.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883603)

The question to ask is why did government largely turn a blind eye to illegals for so long. I don't think it was the farmers. Besides, if the farmers had the clout you say, they wouldn't have ended the Bracero program or would have replaced it with something codified into law like every other farm-friendly program

EDIT: You know, in talking through this, it probably was the communist plot to destabilize America through "education" and demographic splintering that drove this. I don't know if "globalism" was an organized vision at that point that pulled the communist strings or not. If it was, then it gets back to my initial thought that it was a corporate interest-driven thing. If it wasn't, then it was probably a "we're enemies and need to destroy you" thing glommed on to our fucking leaders always being eager to sell the rest of us out type thing

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883693)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883576)

What's more, imperfect information is where the fun lies. Uncertainty is good and adds to a sense of mystery and adventure. People obviously seek this feeling out constantly on their phones and it has blown out their brains.

I see the other poaster talking about illegal immigration and farm labor. And he isn't wrong. But with tech locked into 1994 levels, the immigrant labor might actually just stay in the realm of "but who will pick the lettuce?" The broader economy would still sustain a huge number of quality jobs for people who have to work with imperfect info to make decisions and organize people and assets around various endeavors because software would not exist to do this for them.

And guess what, those quality jobs require a certain baseline level of competence which means a certain baseline of IQ. Which means you don't import millions of mystery meat people.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49883844)

"People being themselves and not just adopting personalities they see online all day on social media on their faggot phones." - 90s MTV pop culture was alive and well. everyone dressed like shit between grunge wannabes and girls wearing frumpy sweaters and mom jeans because they watched my so called life or some shit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866292&forum_id=2",#49885679)