I'm sorry but I don't think the 80s are really something that can be explained to someone that didn't live through them, which I assume you didn't, otherwise you wouldn't be asking for clarification on Reaganomics.
Not sure what's expected here. I mean, this is hardly the format for 20 page dissertations on lived history. I'm guessing these downvotes are coming from folks that are missing context because they're in their 20's and don't actually know anything about Reaganomics, what was proposed vs what the actual observed outcomes were, etc.
O RLY. So you claim your average sixty year old with (in your example) 20 years of experience owning a personal computer, is somehow so technologically illiterate as to be unable to utilize browser bookmarks, desktop links, or write down a URL on a post-it note? Alternately, are we pretending that smartphones aren't utterly pervasive in all demographics, including people's grandparents? I mean, yeah, if you absolutely had to you could probably cruise the local K&R cafeteria for the odd outlier who is totally technologically illiterate, but that group is also unable to utilize social media to any extent either and so aren't particularly germane to the conversation. So no, outside of the minds of a handful of programmers, there is no real obstacle.
Rolling out "grandma" as a reason to not do N is a tired chestnut that is growing less relevant with every passing day. It's ageist. It also ignores the fact that all of the people you're casually dismissing lived through the creation of the web and remember a time when going to someone's web server to view their particular content was the norm. You also appear to overlook the utility of post-it notes in your claim that coaching and repetition are a required ingredient for success.
Quick question: in this hypothetical where China presents an existential threat to the US, what happens to the Chinese economy when they invade the largest consumer of their domestically produced goods and services?
Scandinavia and the entire Soviet Union spring to mind instantly. There's nothing particularly white or privileged about healthy skepticism of any system that hinges on labor arbitrage to accomplish it's goals. Go meditate on the econ definition of the word "exploitation" until enlightenment is achieved. Note, if you're planning on trying to muster McCarthyite arguments at this point you're going to have to overcome the fact that the first manmade object and the first person in space were both put there by communists.
Sure, but the argument is specious for all of the same reasons that philanthropy has a track record of exacerbating the social problems it intended to solve.
That an education should be pursued primarily or solely as a means to achieve employment is even more dubious. Unless, of course, you're trying to claim that having a highly educated populace isn't, in and of itself, a Social Good?
Letting "the market" decide what is and isn't valuable in terms of human knowledge seems dubious at best. We are talking about a system that prioritizes extraction of non-renewable resources to produce dumb shit like bluetooth toothbrushes.
There have been spontaneous demonstrations among the workers voicing their joy and gratitude at our happy new way of life. /s It seems pretty naive to assume that a handful of individuals being paid a fraction of the going rate for western labor is going to have a meaningful impact on the country's economy or lead to sweeping social changes.
Agreed, that is a particularly offensive line of bullshit. Labor arbitrage is a thing, sure, but it takes a special flavor of insipid shithead to try to unfurl that kind of tortured logic to handwave past the obvious exploitation taking place.
History isn't done yet. Your rosy prognosis appears to ignore current widespread ecosystem collapse and mass extinction, growing geopolitical instability, and the looming possibility of the biosphere becoming incompatible with human civilization as it is currently implemented.
I am saying that using economic activity to gauge positive impact on society is utterly misguided. Consider: we are currently living in an age of robust economic growth and international trade, historic levels of income inequality, and are in the midst of a global mass extinction event with the very real possibility of climate change rendering human civilization in it's current form impossible.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with a coworker six or seven years ago. Dude comes to me to get me to help him spec out a web-based "tool sharing" service. I told him that what he was proposing, first and foremost, automated discovery for would-be tool thieves and politely declined to involve myself in his project.
Average income hasn't even kept pace with inflation since the 70's, go take a look at a graph of income inequality over time if you're curious where all those productivity gains went, you prove my point regarding no measurable drop in food prices (incidentally a loaf of bread is closer to $2.00 here), and would anyone care to take a crack at the larger criticism, namely total economic collapse of vast swaths of rural America or is "well, actually" over the price of a fucking loaf of bread the best HN can do?