queermunist she/her

They said “China doesn’t have problems with homeless or unemployment” and that was correct, 5.1% unemployment is full employment. You’re just too up your own ass to communicate with, you just want to “win” instead of talk like a reasonable person. You see me as something inhuman, just another mindless hivemind NPC to crush with your incredible intellect.

This wasn’t a contest and you didn’t win anything, you just ruined a discussion for no reason.

… you’re really proving my point. You don’t care about anything I have to say or any of the facts or data that I quote or link to, you just want to pick and win fights.

It doesn’t matter that I find the LLM bubble stupid and I don’t think we’re even close to AI replacing human labor, because I dared correct you about China. It doesn’t matter that I think China isn’t far enough along the path of socialist development for it to actually be a good thing when AI does replace human labor. It doesn’t matter that my support for China has a lot of caveats and criticisms, some of which do surround queer rights. None of that nuance matters, nothing I say matters, and nothing I believe matters.

All that matters is that I’m in the way and that you need to tear me down so you can win the posting RPG.

There will be a point where it can take our jobs, though. The question is if the AI be privately or collectively owned. If its privately owned, we’re fucked and we’re all going to be turned into paperclips. If its collectively owned then we can decide which jobs are eliminated and the people who have had their jobs eliminated can help decide what they get to do next, now that they’re free.

Do you want to work for a wage for the rest of your life simply to survive? I certainly don’t.

We have to be careful, because if the AI which automates our labor is owned privately then it will be used to eliminate our jobs and then eliminate the surplus population left behind. AI which is owned collectively, however, will liberate us from work.

We just have to get to that stage of collective ownership. China hasn’t reached that stage of socialist development but they’re closer than anyone else and seem to be progressing in that direction. Not that you care, you just want to pick fights.

Anything between 4-6% is generally considered full employment by most countries, including the US. At that level the unemployment mostly consists of people between jobs, rather than people in long-term unemployment where they have no hope of finding work.

The homelessness number you’re referencing is misleading. They’re not unhoused, they’re living outside of their registered address. A day laborer that moves from city to city and stays in group homes is considered “homeless” but they’re not actually living on the street. Much of rural China has yet to be developed to a level that can sustain employment, so they have to migrate.

Not that you care.

It’s 5.1%

That’s considered pretty good in most countries.