And the GOP had to do nothing.....

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/03/09...estaurant/

Quote:A Californian fast food restaurant has introduced a robot that flips and cooks burgers, replacing human workers at the grill.
The Telegraph reports that the robot, named Flippy, was developed by Miso Robotics and began its first day on the job at Caliburger this week. “Much like self-driving vehicles, our system continuously learns from its experiences to improve over time,” said David Zito, CEO of Miso Robotics.

The Telegraph reports that the robot, named Flippy, was developed by Miso Robotics and began its first day on the job at Caliburger this week. “Much like self-driving vehicles, our system continuously learns from its experiences to improve over time,” said David Zito, CEO of Miso Robotics.

Zito continued, “Though we are starting with the relatively ‘simple’ task of cooking burgers, our proprietary AI software allows our kitchen assistants to be adaptable and therefore can be trained to help with almost any dull, dirty or dangerous task in a commercial kitchen — whether it’s frying chicken, cutting vegetables or final plating.”
Flippy is slightly limited in its current form; the robot can flip burgers and use built-in cameras and sensors to determine when the burger is cooked before placing the burger on a bun. However Flippy has not been developed to add sauces or condiments, a human worker must be available to perform those tasks.

This introduction of robots to the kitchen follows on the heels of restaurant chains including Wendy’s rolling out self-order kiosks to their stores.

Caliburger aims to have Flippy robots installed in 50 of their restaurants worldwide by 2019. The company stated that the benefits of using Flippy over a human worker include making “food faster, safer and with fewer errors.”

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan_ or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

Way, way, way back on the old forum, a few years prior to its demise, I got signed up.

I had more characters in my handle back then:

XYMOX_4AD_84.

It's a highly Atari X, highly 3T handle.

Quiz time.

What does each element signify?

(I previously stated the meanings on the old forum ... but newbs and those with poor attention spans wouldn't have gotten the 411 .... )

Great article I ran into in The Atlantic: Trump Has Caused a Civic Surge in America

Quote:There are two ways to look at the effect of Donald Trump’s presidency on American democracy. One is that he is a menace to the republic: that his attacks on journalists, federal judges, and constitutional norms undermine the rule of law. The other is that he is the greatest thing to happen to America’s civic and political ecosystem in decades.

These views are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are causally related. The president’s attacks on established institutions have triggered a systemic immune response in the body politic, producing a surge in engagement among his opponents (and also his fans).

Since the early 1970s, the nation’s civic health—from membership in civic groups to attendance at public meetings to newspaper reading—has been in steady, severe decline. Economic inequality has fed political inequality in a viciously self-reinforcing loop of disenfranchisement and concentration of clout.

But now millions of people, once cynical bystanders, are participating earnestly. In mass marches and packed congressional town meetings, Americans have taken vocal stands for inclusion. At airports and campuses and street corners they have swarmed in defense of Muslim and undocumented neighbors. Membership in the ACLU and the League of Women Voters has swelled, as have subscriptions to leading newspapers.

The ranks of Trump’s supporters, meanwhile, are filled with first-time or first-time-in-a-long-time participants in politics. He has given voice to communities long disregarded by cosmopolitan political elites. Heartened by his election and his willingness in office to buck convention, they are now rallying to his defense.

Trump has also generated a boom in popular civic education. Across the country, people are creating political clubs, discussion circles, teach-ins. My organization, Citizen University, has launched regular gatherings called Civic Saturdays—a civic analogue to church—that have drawn overflow crowds. Indivisible, an insiders’ guide to pressuring Congress, has sparked intense local organizing and activism. Google searches for the Emoluments Clause, recusal rules, and judicial review have spiked. And iCivics.org, the civics video gaming platform created by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, has seen a doubling of game-playing this year.

This civic surge, it’s important to note, crosses ideological lines. Many principled libertarians and conservatives, troubled by Trump’s recklessness, are now cheered by rising popular interest in the ideals of liberty and limits on government power.

The conservative Federalist Society is fielding new inquiries from left and right about its Article I Project, which aims to restore congressional primacy against an overreaching executive. Civic start-ups like Free the People are sparking interest among Millennials in a hip libertarianism. The right-leaning American Enterprise Institute held a symposium recently positing that Trump’s arrival is a “Sputnik moment” for civic education.

All this energy, now visible and palpable, had been gathering long before Trump became president and has extended well beyond the borders of the United States. From the Arab Spring to the Brexit, from the Tea Party to $15 Now and Black Lives Matter, we live in an age of bottom-up power: citizens self-organizing to challenge entrenched monopolies and orthodoxies. Trump’s election itself was evidence of this.

The surge will likely outlast his presidency. Americans today are rushing to make up for decades of atrophy and neglect in civic education and engagement. But as they do so it’s important to remember that citizenship is about more than know-how. It’s also about “know-why”—the moral purposes of self-government.

Citizenship in a republic requires not just literacy in power but also a grounding in character. Power literacy means understanding systems of law, custom, and institutions—and acting with skill to move those systems. Civic character is more than personal virtue. It is about character in the collective—mutuality, reciprocity, respect, service, justice—and the prosocial ethics of being a member of the body.

Perhaps the most heartening part of today’s civic renewal is that people are exercising both power and character. They are practicing strategies of action while reckoning with questions of first principle. On campuses and public squares, they are debating the rights and responsibilities of dissent. On social media and in person, they are asking just what makes a leader legitimate and a representative truly representative.

Every time Trump acts or speaks against disfavored minority groups, they also are reminded that democracy alone—that is, a process of majority rule—is not enough. As Abraham Lincoln argued during his 1858 debates against Stephen Douglas about slavery, a democratic process is legitimate only when coupled with a moral sense. America today is beginning to rediscover its moral sense.

The president and his advisers will keep challenging moral and civic norms. Yet that is precisely why over the long term I am optimistic. As Americans have shown each other the last two months, the deepest source of this nation’s greatness and resilience is the decentralized way that citizens will reclaim their power. There are more civic antibodies here than viruses. We should thank Donald Trump for giving us the chance to prove it.

Happy Anniversary, Bull Market!  Tomorrow marks the eighth anniversary of the second-longest bull market in U.S. history, dating from the March 9, 2009 low in the major stock indices.  It's been quite a run for equity investors.  So it seems like as a good time as any to ask if the stock market is approaching the kind of "bubble" territory that might usher in the Great Devaluation, to which Strauss & Howe make frequent reference in The Fourth Turning.

I have provided links to some of the more interesting articles published, some of which provide excellent perspective with various graphics.

Disclaimer: Nothing here should be construed as trading or investment advice.  Consult your financial advisor for guidance:

Stop! This is NOT like the dot-com bubble... it’s much worse, according to this chart

The dangers lurking within the world’s ‘most deceptive’ stock market chart

Wall Street's super-charged bull faces its own March madness

Stock investors can’t bank on another 8-year bull-market bonanza

A Republican and a Democrat agree: Wall Street’s too bullish on Trump

Bull market depends on whether Trump can deliver on key promises

Of course, the above-referenced articles are limited to the stock market, leaving aside for the time being any discussion of "bubbles" in bonds, real estate, or arts & collectibles.  (And, for what it's worth, some investment advisors say that we're already in an "Everything Bubble.")  

I have a couple of questions--hopefully not rhetorical.  Do you consider the trillions in "lost" wealth, resulting from the financial crisis of 2008, to be sufficient--both in terms of magnitude and duration--to qualify as the Great Devaluation?  Or do other factors have to come into play first, such as a fiscal crisis, currency devaluation, what have you?

Will you get one that matches your generational archetype, like I did?

(I am a boomer prophet and I got Benjamin Franklin)

http://www.quizony.com/which-american-fo...index.html

In various posts and threads I've been stating we should impeach Trump or prosecute him for treason.

In a way, I am now increasingly suspecting the situation is even worse than criminality. I suspect Trump is mentally ill.

Invoke the 25th:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...f86d5a3891

'“We have as president a man who is erratic, vindictive, volatile, obsessive, a chronic liar, and prone to believe in conspiracy theories,” said conservative commentator Peter Wehner, who was the top policy strategist in George W. Bush’s White House. “And you can count on the fact that there will be more to come, since when people like Donald Trump gain power they become less, not more, restrained.”'

I agree with this assessment. There is something that is just not right with Donald Trump's mental health.

I'm starting to feel a bit sorry for him. He must be going through some dark nights of the soul. What turmoil must be roiling his psyche. For his sake and the sake of the US, invoke the 25th.

"You unlock this door with the key of imagination.  Beyond it is another dimension.  We offer, for your consideration..."

Those of you old enough to remember will recognize that lead-in by the late Rod Serling to The Twilight Zone.  I make reference to this old TV show because some members of this forum have discussed at length other cycle theories as alternatives to--or modifications of--the generational theory of Strauss and Howe.  The other theories cited have ranged from Kondratieff waves to the Modelski model and, yes, even to astrological cycles. 

For some time now I've been playing around with a modification of my own.  What got me to thinking about it in earnest was viewing the Steve Bannon documentary Generation Zero recently.  His documentary, which included short interview segments with Neil Howe, shows slightly different turning boundaries for the Millennial Saeculum, as follows:

                            The Awakening         The Unraveling
Strauss & Howe        1964-1984                1984-2008
Generation Zero        1966-1986                1987-2007

I actually agree more with the documentary's boundaries than I do with those of co-author Neil Howe, although I would further adjust  Bannon's boundaries, as follows:

       The High        The Awakening        The Unraveling
       1942-1966         1967-1987                1988-2007

Note: I will offer a more detailed (qualitative) justification for the boundaries outlined above in a subsequent post:

The word(s) mood or social mood are used over and over again in The Fourth Turning text, too many times to count.  And Strauss and Howe correlate shifts in social mood to the boundaries of the four turnings.  So a question comes to mind, and perhaps it's occurred to others of you: Is there a way to gauge shifts in social mood, a barometer if you will, something other than the qualitative assessments offered by Strauss and Howe?

I contend that, yes, there is.  According to the Elliott Wave theory, major peaks and troughs in US stock indices, such as the Dow Jones Industrial Average, roughly coincide with shifts in social mood.  And before any of you familiar with this arcane stock cycle theory turn up your nose, please indulge me for a moment.  [I stopped using EW theory to make investments years ago; it's for the most nimble "day traders" only, in my humble opinion.]  What I do place stock in, though, is the Fibonacci sequence that Elliott Wave theory incorporates.  Some of you may be acquainted with this mathematical concept: a series of numbers in which each number is the sum of the two preceding numbers. The simplest expression is the series 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 89, 144, 233, etc.

I intend to use the Fibonacci sequence to align the four turning boundaries--past, present, and future--to major turns in the U.S. stock market.  I concede that I'm "spitballing" here, so I simply offer this "for your consideration":

The Battle of Lexington and Concord (1775) kicked off the Revolutionary War, though not the Crisis (1773) according to S&H.  Add a Fibonacci 233 years to 1775, and the result is 2008, the year of the financial panic that marked the beginning of the current Crisis.

Take the Declaration of Independence (1776) and add a Fibonacci 89 years, and the result is 1865, the end of the Civil War saeculum.  If we add, in turn, 8 more years to 1865, the resulting sum is 1873, as in the Panic of 1873.  Add another Fibonacci 55 years to 1873, and the result is 1920, which marked the beginning of the 1920-1921 depression that nobody's ever heard of.  (If we go back as far as the Glorious Revolution (1688), add a Fibonacci 233 years, the sum is 1921.)  Add still another Fibonacci 8 years to the end date of that depression, and the sum is 1929, the year Wall Street crashed, ushering in the twin crises of the Great Depression/World War II.

If you're following my train of thought here, you get the general idea.  Which, simply put, is the notion that perhaps the turnings are "rocking to the rhythm" of the Dow, a stock index that has only been in existence since 1896.  The mere fact that Howe pinpoints the start of the Millennial Saeculum Crisis (2008) and that of the previous crisis (1929) to stock market crashes would tend to give some credence to this notion of overlaying Fourth Turning theory with a Fibonacci time series.

Here are a few other examples:

1865+144=2009 (end of most recent bear market)

1929+13=1942 (1942 is unorthodox double bottom; a secular bull market begins then, marking the last year the Silents are born)
1921+21=1942

1932+34=1966 (1932 is the absolute bear market bottom; 1966 ends secular bull market--and the American High, as I interpret it) 
1932+55=1987 (1987 is the year of the worst Wall Street crash, marking the end of the Awakening--as I interpret it)

1966+8=1974 (1974 is the first bottom in a 16-year secular bear market)
1966+34=2000 (end of a bull market and the dotcom boom, marking the last year the Millennials were born--as I interpret it)

1974+8=1982 (1982 is the "double bottom" in a secular bear market, marking the first year the Millennials are born)
1974+34=2008 (2008 is the climax of a historic financial panic, catalyzing the current Crisis--maybe, as Mikebert has also hedged)

1982+5=1987
1987+13=2000
1987+21=2008

2002+5=2007 (2007 is the peak of a cyclical bull market, and marks the beginning of the financial crisis)

Where am I going with all this?  A theory, including a social science theory such as the Fourth Turning, is only as good as its predictive value.  So far, I give generational theory a qualified benefit of the doubt.  The book has made some amazingly accurate predictions, as we all know.  So let me pose a few of my own, while fully acknowledging that making predictions is a mug's game.  The truth is, nobody knows anything about the future.

Disclaimer: The following predictions should not be construed as trading or investment advice.  Consult your financial advisor for guidance:

2009 was the most recent bear market bottom.  According to OEW interpretations of Elliott Waves, bull markets tend to run 5, 8, or 13 years in length.  So, using the Fibonacci sequence, the following years present as possible peaks in the current bull market:

2009+5=2014 (that year has obviously passed)
2009+8=2017 (implies a peak this year, perhaps in the spring, more likely in the fall; this would make this bull market analogous to the eight-year run from 1921-1929, and would imply that Trump might be a one-term president)
2009+13=2022 (this would match the longest-running bull market ever (1987-2000), and would imply Trump's re-election)

1929+89=2018 (this year might mark the peak of a second financial crisis, analogous to the 2007 market peak and 2008 crash)

1932+89=2021 (potential bottom of next bear market, analogous to 1929-1932?)
1987+34=2021
2008+13=2021

1942+89=2031 (end of this 4T Crisis?)

And one last thing: 1787+233=2020 (a Constitutional crisis coinciding with the next presidential election?)

Again, just "spitballing" here...

Damn, this kid can sing: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G-ZvpApA5rw

This thread title is an updated variation of the phrase "The economy, stupid," which James Carville coined as a campaign strategist of Bill Clinton's successful 1992 presidential campaign against sitting president George H. W. Bush.

According to Investopedia, Trumponomics describes the economic policies of President Donald Trump, who won the November 8, 2016 presidential election on the back of bold economic promises to cut personal and corporate taxes, restructure trade deals, and introduce large fiscal stimulus measures focused on infrastructure and defense.  Trump's chief political strategist, Steve Bannon, has summed up these policies as "economic nationalism."  Most pundits will defer to the shorthand of Trumponomics. 

As with any U.S. president, Trump's fortunes will rise and fall on the strength of the domestic economy, over which he has only partial control.  Indeed, a president's economic success is often as much a matter of luck as it is a matter of his fiscal policy.  Where America happens to be in the economic and market cycles at the time of his inauguration has as much--if not, more--bearing on his success or failure as any domestic policies he might get enacted into law.  Consider Herbert Hoover, who, for all his vast experience and business acumen, had the poor, dumb luck to come into office right as a speculative stock market was headed for a crash.  Like Trump, he had similarly ambitious programs, but the twin tsunamis of a bear market and banking crisis overwhelmed Hoover's attempts to revive the economy.  Bill Clinton, by contrast, assumed office after a mild recession, and benefited immensely from the dot.com boom over which he had little influence.  In the case of "Boomerang Bill," as I like to call him, it's more apt to say that he presided over a long-running recovery rather than engineering it through economic policy.   

Trump recently proclaimed, "To be honest, I inherited a mess.”  In some respects, that may be true.  But if we consider GDP, the U.S. unemployment rate, not to mention market trends (equities, real estate), Trump has very little to complain about and so much to fear.  The economy is grinding along (albeit below its long-term average), and the stock market is booming, the latest rally of which can be properly attributed to "great expectations" about the salutary effects of Trumponomics, though it should be said that the stock market seems to be "getting well out over its skis" in the short run.

So let's start the discussion first by countering Trump's claim that he inherited a mess.  He hasn't, though there's room for improvement, as pointed out in this article:

"The Economy Trump Inherited, in Two Charts"
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/...two-charts

And FactCheck.org provided a more detailed glimpse of the economy that Trump inherited.

"What President Trump Inherits"
http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/what-pr...-inherits/

All in all, the economy is in pretty good shape, though there are worrying signs.  In addition, there is the omen of history, which is why Trump has much to fear.  He's raised expectations sky-high, not least among his supporters.  History has not been kind to Republican presidents: recessions are much more common during their terms in office, with the notable exception of Ronald Reagan, whose timing could not have been more fortuitous.  (And as I have previously noted, there's certainly something to be said for timing.)

I would liken the economy that Trump has inherited to a baton that is passed during a relay race, a race that I would characterize as a race against time.  I say that because so many of the voters that switched their allegiance from Democrats to Republicans in this past presidential election gave essentially the same answer when asked how much time they were willing to give Trump: "Two years." 

That speaks volumes about the "patience" of many desperate Americans.  The worst of the financial crisis was blunted, and the policies of Obama made up some of the ground, but not enough.  Trump may well sprint to the finish line, or he could stumble badly.  Time will tell.  For now, Trumponomics is taking shape, and experts are already weighing in on the potential benefits--and pitfalls--of his economic proposals.  I have my own instincts that I will comment on later...

We are truly in a 4th turning now, and what everyone wants, whether they know it or not, is a huge crisis, a massive conflict big enough to bring the country together.  People aren't aware of what they want, though; it's under the surface, never truly looked at or acknowledged.

Democrats want a war with Russia.  Hillary Clinton was prepared to take us there, and Democrats are frustrated by Donald Trump's foiling of this plan.  They're now hoping to find or manufacture evidence of ties between Trump and Russia which will allow them to remove Trump from office and put someone in his place who will bring the war about.

Republicans want the removal of all Muslims from the U.S. and western europe, the deportation of all Mexicans living in the U.S. illegally, the end of all Mexican immigration, and the end of multiculturalism.  There's the possibility of the deportation of the entire mexican american population, and if the above doesn't create enough drama, they will want a war with China.

Almost no one knows yet that this is what they want, but it's what they will attempt to bring about, given the chance.

For those who are confused by my statements about Democrats and Russia:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/07/the-...mir-putin/

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/15/opinions/p...ir-ghitis/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...Trump.html