> "a soft robot that can 3D bio-print inside the human body."

We've had those for millions of years, they are called "bacteria" and "viruses".

Foz do Iguaçu is the place where the Iguaçu river meets the Paraná river, that's about 10 km northwest of this point. "Foz" is a Portuguese word that means river mouth, the point where a river ends. This place is Cataratas do Iguaçu, the Iguaçu Falls.

Canada making 'terrible mistake' in creating stupid legislation: me.

And what does the United Nations rights chief have to say about the many grave threats presented by governments around the world? What safeguards does he propose to prevent violations by dictators and corrupt politicians?

Before they try new regulations, they should consider de-regulating.

All these problems started when someone came up with laws trying to make "piracy" more difficult. All those laws should be rescinded, starting with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The people who came up with that abomination should be sent to a Gulag somewhere in North Korea. Rescind the DMCA and companies will create ways to repair any electronic equipment.

> The US is a single market.

The US is fifty different markets, every state has its own laws.

> Switzerland is an outlier on everything related to economics.

Exactly. And the important thing is learning why and how this happens. Venezuela is another outlier in economics. Look at the laws, regulations, political and economic systems each country has and you'll know why they have different levels of development.

Germany has almost ten times the population of Switzerland, yet they have the same percentage.

> access to a huge and rich home market.

Are you saying the European Union isn't huge and rich?

I would say the reason is because European corporations face more regulation hurdles that limit their growth.

Look how the percentage for Switzerland is the same as for Germany, despite Germany having almost ten times as much population.

It's not a joke, I've met people who were diagnosed with clinical depression and their thoughts are exactly like what OP is posting.

"A Future Without Jobs"... Lets see how reality works. Two hundred years ago, 95% of the people worked on farms. Today only 5% of the people in industrialized countries are farm workers. 90% of the jobs we had back then disappeared, are we living in a future without jobs?

And their attitude towards rich people. "People who are rich are people who enjoy seeing the suffering of the poor". Really, how paranoid can you be. Rich people are people like anyone else, they are rich because they are interested in markets and investments and businesses. I'm not rich because I'm not interested in those subjects, they bore me. If you like a subject and study it a lot you'll become good at it, that's how you become rich.

This sub is a magnet for the depressed and the paranoid, they post their crap here and they think they are right because other depressed and paranoid people come here to agree with all this bullshit.

> your labor is of little value.

The real question is if your money still has value. Assuming you had no hyperinflation, savings would still be money, independent of where the savings came from.

This is one of the main pillars of a free market, money has the same value that doesn't depend on its origin. You may have worked hard, you may have inherited it, or you may have earned it as interest on an investment. It doesn't matter, money is money.

> as if you'd be able to own land.

Unless you live in a country ruled by a Marxist dictatorship, you are able to own land. All you need to do is work and save enough money to buy land from someone.

> forcing others to live in poverty, for their satisfaction.

Seriously, you should seek a mental health expert ASAP. The fact that you started this whole discussion shows that you're suffering from depression, but this comment here is much worse, you're paranoid.

Go seek a psychiatrist before you break over and do something that could harm yourself and others.

I don't know exactly where the Virgin Islands are, but I'm sure they are nowhere close to the Isle of Man.

Theme music: The Little Drummer Boy. He will beat some rhythm in that wood.

> For one multiplayer gaming over the internet may still happen, and cheaters already exist now in fps's but soon every game will have issues with bots that will more than likely become completely undetectable.

Why would that be a problem? When you play a game, you want to have some fun, if you're enjoying the experience, does it matter whether the opponent is a human or a robot?

I, for one, would prefer to play a robot that can be programmed to have a specific response, rather than a human who will throw a rant and start making claims about my mom's ability as a sex worker whenever he loses.

Neither of them, but Alphabet will be better positioned than Microsoft.

Big corporations don't adapt well to novelties. They can't handle what Clayton Christensen called "disrupting innovations" in his book The Innovator's Dilemma. Microsoft is already showing this in how they tried to enter the smart phones market and failed miserably.

Alphabet came into being one technology generation later than Microsoft, that's why they stand a slightly better chance to survive, but don't count too much on that.

The corporate giant who will dominate the AI world doesn't exist yet. There may be a guy or two working in a garage to create that giant, it's too early to tell.

> you have provided no argument except “there used to be no inflation, so there should be no inflation now!”

Isn't that a good enough argument? They knew how to manage a stable economy, now they have forgotten how to do it. It's like the Dark Ages, the Romans knew how to build aqueducts, but people then lost that technology.

> Doctors used to use electroshock to treat schizophrenia. > > Dentists used to use arsenic to treat tooth pain. >

And economists still use inflation to treat economic recession.

> I guess we better just ignore the composite opinions of every group of professions in today's world /s.

If the professionals use their expertise to create better and better products, then we should listen to them. However, if almost a hundred years after the creation of the Fed we are still facing major economic crises, then it's pretty much obvious to everyone that those guys are still in the arsenic and electroshock state of ignorance.

They do not understand things better if they commit the same mistakes eighty years later.

> This is a widely accepted view from financial professionals

At one time, it was a widely accepted view from scholars that disease was caused by humid air, the word "malaria" means literally "bad airs". Economics is like medicine was before the germ theory, it's still a rather primitive science, it doesn't produce reliable mathematical models.

Think of this, the Federal Reserve system was created in 1913 to prevent financial crises from happening. Less than twenty years later the US would plunge into the worst economic crisis in history. If they know so much, why did they fuck up so badly? How could the Great Depression happen after the creation of the Fed and why didn't it happen before?

> Why would anyone buy anything if they think they can get it cheaper tomorrow.

Because they are consumers, not speculators.

If the price goes down, anything looks like a bargain. You see many ads saying "Now 10% off!", lower prices are always a great incentive for buying stuff. An economy with a steady deflation would have a market with continuous discounted prices.

What most people, including many economists, don't understand is that deflation is a result of economic depression. Sellers offer lower prices because they are stuck with a warehouse full of unsold items. There is a correlation between deflation and recession, but deflation is not the cause, it's an effect of recession.

> If you don’t have some inflation there’s no incentive to spend.

You're confusing speculation with spending. The logic consumers use is the opposite of the logic speculators use.

Consumers don't buy something expecting the price to rise. Lower prices mean something we wanted to buy but couldn't afford is now within range. Look at all electronic devices. Are you saying nobody will buy a smart phone because prices will be lower next year?

> Target inflation should be 1-2% for a consumer economy.

That's a myth. The industrialized countries had zero inflation in the Victorian era, which was also a period of great economic growth.

When the FIFA calls you corrupt, that's an accomplishment in itself. A negative accomplishment but there's no doubt it's truly remarkable. It's like Hitler calling you a genocidal dictator.

When he realizes he's sliding too fast and will crash at the end: "Shit!"