Workin’ For A Living

From People Thought the Industrial Revolution Was Servile Too by Walter Russell Mead:

Those kind of fears have a long history. At the beginning of the industrial age, both the left and sentimentalists denounced factory work as servile and destructive, compared to the honest independence of the family farmer. The same factory system that pundits are now favorably contrasting to the evolving service economy was itself expected to result in permanent subservience. And just as those predictions didn’t come true, the wailing and gnashing of teeth about an economy centered around dog walkers and personal chefs and wedding planners will also turn out to be unjustified in retrospect.

In fact, what’s likely to happen in the information age is that services once reserved for a privileged few will increasingly be available for larger numbers of people. There will be more and less expensive personal chefs, for example, but more people than ever will be able to eat high class meals. That’s a good thing, not a bad thing, especially when you consider the appalling dullness and deadening conformity of those industrial jobs and social conditions that people are apparently so nostalgic for.

It is not the summit of human social organization to create an economy where millions of people spend their working lifetime making mechanical motions that a robot could replace. And serving people is not necessarily servile or demeaning. Jobs that involve varied tasks and using the worker’s talent and social skills to enhance and enrich other lives are not bad lives.

Much of the reason that people fear the new service economy is that it, like the industrial economy before it, is emerging out of the breakdown of an earlier model. Because the millions of people fleeing the agricultural economy and seeking factory work were so desperate, and because the supply of willing labor was so large that factory wages were desperately low and factory working conditions were so horrible, factory work looked worse in Charles Dickens’ time than it looked later. As industrial workers adjusted to the new conditions, as the balance of supply and demand in the labor markets changed in favor of workers, and as society came to see this new form of economic organization as normal and natural, both conditions and attitudes changed.

There is probably no era of American history that is more misunderstood and wrongly maligned than the 53 year period between the end of the Civil War and the end of World War I. I’m 53 years old, so that’s the same length of time that I’ve been alive.

During that period we transitioned from a predominantly agrarian economy to primarily industrial. We tripled in population, and at least half of those were immigrants as we absorbed millions of people from Europe and Asia as well as Mexico. We connected our east and west coasts and then filled in the spaces in between. Railroads criss-crossed the nation and extended into Mexico.

Tremendous wealth was created during those 53 years. That prosperity was not distributed equally, but we saw huge growth of the middle class. Many of the so-called “robber barons” started the era poor and finished it fabulously wealthy. That is the definition of social mobility.

It was an era of tremendous change, and change always brings problems. But some of our problems were preexisting. The South was devastated from the Civil War and would not recover until the latter half of the 20th Century. Lingering resentments from the Civil War resulted in violence on the western frontier. The Native Americans that weren’t slaughtered were rounded up and placed on “reservations” located in inhospitable areas.

The national economy went thru cycles of boom and bust. There was little or no regulation of business. There were regular epidemics that killed thousands. There were no laws on worker safety, food safety, or sanitation.

Because of the tendency of academia to lean leftward, the era between the end of the Civil War and the end of World War I is often portrayed as some kind of dark age. In reality is was an era of growth and progress.

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in History, Klown Musings and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

95 Responses to Workin’ For A Living

  1. The Klown says:

    Ironically, if it wasn’t for those evil robber barons many of those poor, exploited workers would have had no jobs at all.

  2. DeniseVB says:

    Gah, added a graphic to the TCH FB share page, not sure why it’s leaving that big honking space? I think just the video embeds aren’t working ?

  3. The Klown says:
  4. The Klown says:
  5. lorac1 says:

    In fact, what’s likely to happen in the information age is that services once reserved for a privileged few will increasingly be available for larger numbers of people. There will be more and less expensive personal chefs, for example, but more people than ever will be able to eat high class meals.

    I don’t know…. we were the world’s largest creditor until around the mid 80s and now we’re the world’s largest debtor. We’re only surviving because we borrow and keep printing money.

    The only reason we can print money is because we’re the world’s reserve currency – but countries are already calling for that to change because we’re so in debt, and many countries (Russian and China among them) have already started dealing with each other without using the dollar. Many countries already no longer allow tourists to use dollars, and put a quota on how much they can exchange – they don’t want to get stuck with the dollars.

    Once we’re not the reserve currency, we can no longer print money, people will stop lendng to us (or using our money), our investments and savings will vanish, it’s going to be bad. They say most Americans are going to experience a huge decline in their standard of living. We haven’t always been the reserve currency, and our spending what we don’t have, and the push by other countries to change the reserve currency, are leading to our losing that position in the not too distant future.

    • DandyTIger says:

      I agree that this is very likely. We’ll crash. And crash hard. But we’ll come out of it too. Hopefully a bit more humble and thrifty and with a much, much smaller government. We’re en entrepranaur based culture, more than any other, and I think that’s the gem that will pull us through.

      Having said all that…. guns are good to have. 🙂

    • 1539days says:

      I think this is part of the progressive game plan. By 2008, we knew that the weakest economies were being controlled by the banks with forced austerity. The left could either accept fiscal responsibility or keep spending until the banks stepped in to force austerity on us. Who better to bring in than Obama? His profligate spending is the only true constant of his administration. All the social interest thugs are going to take the money and run, let the Republicans get in and make the hard choices, then wait for the economy to recover, blame the GOP for bad times and open the floodgates of money again.

    • angienc says:

      It’s priorities. Slightly more than 50% of the voting public’s have been misplaced for a long time now.

  6. The Klown says:
    • elliesmom says:

      While white suburban kids aren’t doing well on tests that test things they haven’t been taught, black urban kids are doing even worse. How about we test all kids on the stuff we’re actually teaching them? And if that’s nothing, at least we’ll have an accurate gauge of how well they are learning. Teachers should have to pass a test on the subject matter they are becoming licensed to teach much like lawyers have to pass the bar exam and doctors need to be board certified. But testing kids on curriculum they haven’t been taught tells us nothing about what the kids have learned or how well their teachers taught them. Common core has become a political football because the agenda is not limited to basic education. How students are taught math from school to school is not important if the expected skill levels are reached. If one school favors teaching using rote learning for 3 years and another spends two years teaching number sense before they tackle the multiplication tables, it shouldn’t matter to the federal government as long as all of the kids can multiply numbers at the end of third grade. Education, like pantyhose, isn’t on size fits all.

    • angienc says:

      Please, I’ve seen some of the Common Core crap with my cousin’s kids — the only ones who aren’t are brilliant as they think they are are the idiots who designed this b.s.

      You can’t make everyone THINK the same way. Hell, even the communists didn’t try that. But that’s exactly what Common Core is attempting to do. And worse, you’ve got teachers who think 1/2 +1/3 = 2/5 attempting to “teach” it. Huge clusterfuck of epic proportions.

      Sadly, we could really have a great education system in this country with the money we spend on it — the problem is it isn’t spent properly.

  7. helenk3 says:

    the railroads expanded this country and the robber barons that owned them could be real bastards, but they created an expanding country. The freight and people that they carried opened up new trade routes, new chances for many people and so much more information about the country

    the oil and kerosene business killed the whaling industry but created a new industry where many made a good profit.

    cold type replaced hot type in the printing industry. the computer replaced most of the printing industry

    the internet is hurting print newspapers but so many more people are getting information. how many people now talk to each other without having met each other through the internet. how many ideas are exchanged. just look how computers have evolved. I started as a keypunch operator and the punch cards were verified, sorted and fed into a computer to get the solutions and answers. we have come a long way from that.

    look at the changes in medicines. how far we have come, but how far we still have to go to cure many sicknesses

    the only thing that stops change is lack of imagination and the lack of courage to try new things

    • The Klown says:

      Railroads provided a vital service, but they had a monopoly on the routes they covered. People wanted and needed the railroads, but they wanted them to charge less.

      • 1539days says:

        and now we have “free” railroad companies like Amtrak. That’s also kept alive for mostly nostalgic reasons.

        • helenk3 says:

          being a retired employee of Amtrak, I am prejudiced in favor of keeping a passenger railroad. a really great way to see the country and meet people from all over the world. keeps a lot of cars off the roads and saves fuel. Do I wish the freight railroads were still in charge of the passenger railroad rather then the government yes.
          But the freight paid for the passenger and when the freight railroad got the chance to unload it they did. I do understand their business decision. The Northeast corridor is the only track that Amtrak owns. the rest of the freight railroads own the track and have a contract to allow Amtrak to run over them

          • The Klown says:

            In most countries the railroads are government owned, but most of them are much smaller and have denser populations. In Europe you can cross several countries by train in a matter of hours. Not only that but train stations double as bus stations.

        • 1539days says:

          The reality is that freight movement has never been greater and eliminating passenger rail from those lines would keep big rigs off the road. Train travel is nice, but it is not financially viable.

          For example, I live in a city where there is no Greyhound and a train station. The station was built because we used to be a major river route a hundred years ago. However, we are not near any highways and the buses don’t want to waste the hour round trip to get off and back on the highway.

          My mother took Amtrak about 10 years ago. It was late, she missed the connecting train that night and chose to take an expensive cab ride rather than wait an extra day to get to Virginia. This was a couple years after Amtrak stopped refunding people for terrible trips like this, probably because there were so many.

          You can call me prejudices against Amtrak.

        • helenk3 says:

          didn’t her train have a guaranteed connection? I have arranged buses for passengers from one train that were to continue their journey on another. the bus would meet the first train and then take the passenger to the connecting train . example train train #3 the passengers would get off at San Bernardino and meet #14 at Santa Barbara. the end destination for #3 is Los Angeles. the starting point for #14 is Los Angeles. but if 3 was too late to make the connection the passenger would get off enroute and meet the other train in route

        • 1539days says:

          They didn’t do one damn thing. I called Amtrak about a refund and they would only offer another train ride and no reimbursement.

        • r u reddy says:

          2 years ago when I went by Amtrak, super-heavy rains closed the railroad way ahead of us. Amtrak arranged for buses to get us all to our final destination.

      • helenk3 says:

        and the wanting created cross country trucking, and air freight. and faster mail

  8. westcoaster says:

    the latest hit-piece on Hillary. this time from a non-American. he says she wouldn’t help women if elected:

    • elliesmom says:

      If we’re honest, he’s probably right. If the goal is to open the door for other women, then a presidency that is unremarkable in relationship to gender would probably be the best route. Since women can’t agree on what our agenda is, pandering to women’s issues becomes problematic. No matter what she does, half of us wouldn’t like it. So a legacy of “we elected a woman and it made no difference” might be the best result of all.

      • Constance says:

        We have had many women politicians in Washington state and one thing has been made perfectly clear to me because of it… Electing women isn’t going to clean up politics. It isn’t going to get rid of corruption or stupidity or incompetence so common in politicians. But women politicians aren’t any worse than male politicians so we should elect them to 50% of positions because it is a worthy idea to have politicians from all classes of people. Modern feminists seem to be content to prance around empowerfully in their underwear so they don’t really have an agenda to enact. I think Hillary would be generally better for women and girls than any other politician. Of course Elizabeth Warren could be the first native American president besides the first woman president.

      • westcoaster says:

        not that I’m an expert but despite her flaws, I thought that as a New York senator she focused on jobs, research, and healthcare, which to me are women’s issues, but I agree that focusing on her being a woman only brings trouble.

  9. underwhelmed says:

    Can’t get to the source of this, but here’s a quote lifted from His44, from a piece in the ChicagoSunTimes:

    “Somewhere deep in the mind of President Barack Obama, way back where it’s safe and warm, the man must be seeking refuge in memories of happier days.

    Days when he could easily wield magical powers like the political messiah he once was, feeding the multitudes with his rhetoric, bringing Hopium-smoking journalists to tingles and tears.

    All the man had to do was hold out his hands to stop the oceans. He said so.

    “I am absolutely certain that generations from now,” he said the night he won the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 2008, “we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

    He who could heal the planet and stop the oceans must be a man who could control one-sixth of the American economy and impose Obamacare on us whether we wanted it or not.

    But it didn’t turn out that way, did it?

    Hubris has a way of ruining grand designs. And like reality, it bites.

    So last week the Obama presidency began crumbling. Some may be disappointed, and may see him in heroic terms, withering like a character in an ancient tragedy.

    A few of us saw a backbencher from the Illinois state legislature, a guy who took orders, then rode to the White House on a personality cult, finally exposed.

    Obamacare, his health care plan rammed down America’s throat without a bipartisan consensus, not only became a political embarrassment, it became a political disaster.

    The Obamacare website continued to implode, Americans lost their health insurance even though he repeatedly promised them they wouldn’t. Period.

    The word “liar” was suddenly attached to his name, because of the cynical, untruthful promise he repeatedly made, and once Obamacare began collapsing, his fellow Democrats began to run in panic. [snip]

    But political disasters are different from lies. Political disasters have one father, usually, and this one sprang directly from the president’s own forehead.

    Disasters are contagious, and politicians are terrified of infection. So his guys began to run. And journalists asked him pointed questions at his news conference last week, and his performance was beyond awkward.

    It was embarrassing.

    “OK,” Obama conceded. “On the website, I was not informed directly that the website would not be working as — the way it was supposed to. Had I been informed, I wouldn’t be going out saying, ‘Boy, this is going to be great.’ You know, I’m accused of a lot of things, but I don’t think I’m stupid enough to go around saying, ‘This is going to be like shopping on Amazon or Travelocity’ a week before the website opens, if I thought that it wasn’t going to work.”

    Watching him blame others for the failure of his signature policy — saying, “I was not informed directly” — was depressing.

    He’d promised us, repeatedly, famously, stridently, that under Obamacare, we could keep our health plans and our doctors. “Period,” he said.

    He guaranteed it. He gave his word. It was as if he asked us to read his lips.

    What he said wasn’t true. And Americans know it, and they don’t like it. [snip]

    But this lie from Obama is different. It’s not about death and destruction overseas, or infidelity among the elite.

    This one is close to home. If all politics is local, there’s nothing more local than your own body.

    What could be more personal than our own bodies, or those of our spouses and our children? And that makes it all the worse for the president.

    Imagine what all those people who’ve lost their health insurance as a result of the Obama catastrophe are feeling right now. They’re confused, and afraid, and feel betrayed.

    You’ve seen them in news accounts. You’ve heard their anguish.

    You’ve also heard the president’s men shriek and holler in his defense.

    But what about the father who’s just had his family’s health insurance canceled? To him, the political arguments must sound like the barking of dogs.

    And when the president speaks, blaming others for not informing him directly? That father is done listening to Mr. Obama.

    And that’s no lie.”

  10. DandyTIger says:

    Shit happens. Things change. It’s rough for a while. But it’s better than the alternative.

  11. The Klown says:
  12. The Klown says:

    Tornado warnings in Indy. My Darling Daughter and Awesome Grandkids are hiding in the bathroom to wait out the storm.

    MDD: “I miss earthquakes.”

  13. The Klown says:
  14. helenk3 says:

    off topic
    I just got the neatest thing for two of my great grandsons ages 6 and 7

    an alarm clock shaped like a rocket. it projects space and astronauts and the time on the ceiling. different planets and stars. a good way to promote dreams

  15. 1539days says:

    i blogged a while back about China vs. Japan in terms of manufacturing and production. Japan started with Demming and has applied continuous improvement, process efficiency and lean manufacturing principles. Basically, you invest time and money into making better products more efficiently and with more highly skilled workers.

    China went another way. They slash costs by using inferior materials, unskilled labor and temporary facilities. Overall labor efficiency isn’t important if the workers are cheap. Quality isn’t important if you overproduce and offer free replacements. Even the boxes can be low-grade cardboard because they are shipped to homes and not arranged on store shelves.

  16. helenk3 says:

    per dem…amnesty for illegals will fix obamacare.

    this fool does not even make good sense

  17. The problem with having our economy based on service is that we don’t MAKE anything. Which puts us at the mercy of those who do. Crappy, cut rate, cheap products that have obsolescence built in are the norm now. Knock offs of what we used to make and make well. I know, I bought a Kenmore washer a few years back and it sucks. It has sucked since the day I bought it. The one I had prior to that was a Kenmore- made in America. It lasted through 20 yrs and three kids. The “new” “energy Efficient” piece of shit was made god knows where.
    We can not survive if we do not know how to make and repair things. Washers, dryers, refrigerators. Fans and air conditioners. Widgets and what nots. If we are to remain a country we need to be able to provide for ourselves. Food, clothing and gadgets.

    • erica says:

      I could not agree more. Buying anything today is practically a guarantee you’ll be buying a replacement in short order. Planned obsolescence and planned non-repairability. I think I just made up that word, but you know what I mean. We’re on the road to being owned, lock, stock, and barrel, if not already there.

      • 1539days says:

        I think one of the reasons that electronics flourishes under “made in China” is that the next big thing is so frequent there’s less time for the POS to fail before it’s obsolete.

    • The Klown says:

      People like to point to Germany as a country with a strong manufacturing base, but Germans prefer to buy from German companies rather than import stuff. If Americans were buying quality American made stuff then factories here would be making it and stores would be selling it.

      We buy cheap crap.

      • 1539days says:

        The unions killed “look for the union label.” Cars and other union products were notoriously crappy by the 1970s. The Japanese used their higher standards to make inroads in American markets while GE used low prices to introduce Americans to the disposable product.

        There’s not a lot of money in durable goods anymore. If you buy a $400 washer and it costs $200 to repair it with a paltry 90 day warranty, it get to the point it’s not worth fixing. A product that lasts 20 years costs more to make and will lose you a customer for two decades. They’re better off making computers. They either break or slow down every few years and no one knows how to fix them.

      • ProudMilitaryMom says:

        Yup. I looked and looked and LOOKED for an American made washing machine before I bought the crapola.
        The only one I could find cost
        $6000! SIX THOUSAND dollars! For a fucking washing machine?
        When this one dies for good, I’m getting a washboard and hitting the creek. It will be faster than this piece of shit.

    • lyn says:

      I hear you. My husband has been replacing parts in our 20+-year-old Maytag washing machine for five years now and hopes to rebuilt it when it dies. Our Kenmore refrigerator pooped out after 10 years; the Whirlpool before it lasted 13. When our fridge was picked up to recycle, the guy showed us a fridge that was from the 60s and it was still working. The elderly couple who owned it decided to buy a new one.

    • r u reddy says:

      Free Trade was designed to ship all those industries out of America.
      If we want them back, we will have to abolish Free Trade and re-protectionize ourselves against low wage low quality economic aggression from China/Mexico/Bangladesh/etc. Then we can afford to rebuild those industries here.

  18. It’s interesting that Mead took that global approach to the NYTs article and progressive backlash of it. He is talking about this in the context of a Wisconsin nanny getting trained by world-class chefs to cook food for a five year old, and in that context, he has a point. That Wisconsin nanny might be college educated and well-paid, but it’s doubtful she has much if any training in nutrition, or world class chef skills. I don’t get the outrage over her being trained on her employers dime. It’s not servile in the least, and is actually a benefit to her not only in the employment sense, but personally later on if she chooses to have a family herself. She’s got a leg up on some great skills there.

    But that’s different than what PMM is talking about, which I agree with. I think we let manufacturing go at our own peril, and we are definitely seeing the consequences of it as more and more Americans are moved into the classification of what I call “warehoused humans.” They are simply superfluous, not necessary at all, and a drain on the system. There is not enough opportunity in this service economy to accommodate them all, even if they were willing to work, which many are not. We are now approaching the tipping point. Once half the population works to support the other half, it’s lose-lose for us all. Once upon a time we put many of these folks to work making shit we needed, or wanted.

    • The Klown says:

      I wasn’t outraged, I was amused. But people can spend their money any way they want.

      • Not your outrage, progressive idiot outrage. You know, where they keep everybody barefoot, ignorant, and pregnant, except for the ones who aren’t allowed to breed at will?

    • 1539days says:

      They only way you will ever get businesses like that to stay in America is if they are owned by the employees who work there. Unions constantly complain about the CEOs and boards that are responsible for lower profits, but never suggest that the union workers actually unite and run the company where they work. The drawback is that they have to survive, make a profit and pay themselves what is a reasonable salary. How do you decide what to pay yourself? When can you give yourself a raise?

  19. The Klown says:

    When the Obama Magic Died:

    The current troubles of the Obama presidency can be read back into its beginnings. Rule by personal charisma has met its proper fate. The spell has been broken, and the magician stands exposed. We need no pollsters to tell us of the loss of faith in Mr. Obama’s policies—and, more significantly, in the man himself. Charisma is like that. Crowds come together and they project their needs onto an imagined redeemer. The redeemer leaves the crowd to its imagination: For as long as the charismatic moment lasts—a year, an era—the redeemer is above and beyond judgment. He glides through crises, he knits together groups of varied, often clashing, interests. Always there is that magical moment, and its beauty, as a reference point.

    Mr. Obama gave voice to this sentiment in a speech on Nov. 6 in Dallas: “Sometimes I worry because everybody had such a fun experience in ’08, at least that’s how it seemed in retrospect. And, ‘yes we can,’ and the slogans and the posters, et cetera, sometimes I worry that people forget change in this country has always been hard.” It’s a pity we can’t stay in that moment, says the redeemer: The fault lies in the country itself—everywhere, that is, except in the magician’s performance.

    Forgive the personal reference, but from the very beginning of Mr. Obama’s astonishing rise, I felt that I was witnessing something old and familiar. My advantage owed nothing to any mastery of American political history. I was guided by my immersion in the political history of the Arab world and of a life studying Third World societies.

    In 2008, seeing the Obama crowds in Portland, Denver and St. Louis spurred memories of the spectacles that had attended the rise and fall of Arab political pretenders. I had lived through the era of the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdul Nasser. He had emerged from a military cabal to become a demigod, immune to judgment. His followers clung to him even as he led the Arabs to a catastrophic military defeat in the Six Day War of 1967. He issued a kind of apology for his performance. But his reign was never about policies and performance. It was about political magic.

    In trying to grapple with, and write about, the Obama phenomenon, I found guidance in a book of breathtaking erudition, “Crowds and Power” (1962) by the Nobel laureate Elias Canetti. Born in Bulgaria in 1905 and educated in Vienna and Britain, Canetti was unmatched in his understanding of the passions, and the delusions, of crowds. The crowd is a “mysterious and universal phenomenon,” he writes. It forms where there was nothing before. There comes a moment when “all who belong to the crowd get rid of their difference and feel equal.” Density gives the illusion of equality, a blessed moment when “no one is greater or better than another.” But the crowd also has a presentiment of its own disintegration, a time when those who belong to the crowd “creep back under their private burdens.”

    Five years on, we can still recall how the Obama coalition was formed. There were the African-Americans justifiably proud of one of their own. There were upper-class white professionals who were drawn to the candidate’s “cool.” There were Latinos swayed by the promise of immigration reform. The white working class in the Rust Belt was the last bloc to embrace Mr. Obama—he wasn’t one of them, but they put their reservations aside during an economic storm and voted for the redistributive state and its protections. There were no economic or cultural bonds among this coalition. There was the new leader, all things to all people.


    If Barack Obama seems like a man alone, with nervous Democrats up for re-election next year running for cover, and away from him, this was the world he made. No advisers of stature can question his policies; the price of access in the Obama court is quiescence before the leader’s will. The imperial presidency is in full bloom.

    There are no stars in the Obama cabinet today, men and women of independent stature and outlook. It was after a walk on the White House grounds with his chief of staff, Denis McDonough, that Mr. Obama called off the attacks on the Syrian regime that he had threatened. If he had taken that walk with Henry Kissinger or George Shultz, one of those skilled statesmen might have explained to him the consequences of so abject a retreat. But Mr. Obama needs no sage advice, he rules through political handlers.

    Valerie Jarrett, the president’s most trusted, probably most powerful, aide, once said in admiration that Mr. Obama has been bored his whole life. The implication was that he is above things, a man alone, and anointed. Perhaps this moment—a presidency coming apart, the incompetent social engineering of an entire health-care system—will now claim Mr. Obama’s attention.

    It didn’t die. It never existed in the first place. It was all smoke and mirrors.

  20. DandyTIger says:

  21. The Klown says:
  22. helenk3 says:

    things that create change
    this 3D printer is something that is going to change a lot things in many industries.
    people talk about making guns from it but it has so many other possibilities. A man made an hand for his kid from it.
    just something that caught my interest

    • DandyTIger says:

      Yep. And add to that progress in nanotechnology. As we move towards nanofactories, everything changes.

      • 1539days says:

        I’ve seen a nanotechnology research facility at the University of Albany. The process is complicated and expensive. Even carbon nanotubes (which have been around since the invention of arc welding) are not easy to produce. We’re reaching a limit point in the gate sizes for silicon semiconductors and we’ll probably have to look into new processor architecture in the future.

        That being said. I think nanotechnology will be slow to implement because of initial expense and general aversion to unnatural materials like nanofiber clothes that never have to be washed. I think it’s more likely we’re on the brink of a biological revolution.

  23. helenk3 says:


    have you heard anything from your family yet?

  24. Propertius says:

    During that period we transitioned from a predominantly agrarian economy to primarily industrial.

    Agriculture only accounted for about 40% of GDP even in 1860.

  25. helenk3 says:

    best case scenario after obamacare website is fixed 20% of users will still be unable to use the exchange

    only backtrack could change 5% uninsured into 20% uninsured. not really like the loaves and fishes though

  26. helenk3 says:

    cell phone numbers go public next month
    call 1-888-382-1222 the national do not call list to avoid calls from telemarketers

Comments are closed.