@SenWarren said, "If you had a magic wand and knew AI was coming and CEOs were predicting mass layoffs, what would you do?" My answer? Encourage MORE AI investment. And tell my own kids to go into construction, electrical, welding, and HVAC -- the career technical jobs a software update cannot replace. Why? Because I actually studied economic history. You should try it sometime. Shocking concept, I know, but maybe between your Harvard professorship and your $12 million personal net worth you could squeeze in a chapter or two -- assuming, of course, that your mind is not still buffering from the last policy position someone handed you. This EXACT same panic has happened with every single new technology in recorded history. Allow me to give you the crash course your education apparently skipped -- and I will try to use small words so nothing gets lost in translation. GASOLINE CARS. People said they would destroy jobs and cause explosions everywhere. England literally required someone to WALK IN FRONT of every automobile waving a red flag -- because apparently that was the government solution to new technology. If that sounds familiar, it is because your proposal smells like the same red flag, just with a Senate office number on it. The automobile industry then proceeded to create 6.9 million net jobs between 1910 and 1950. The horse carriage industry collapsed. The people who shifted to the new industry thrived. The ones who kept waving red flags while waiting for a government program to rescue them did not. You would think someone with a Harvard law degree could connect those two dots without a crayon. You would be wrong. THE PRINTING PRESS. Scribes in the 1440s were absolutely certain civilization was ending. Their specific task -- hand-copying manuscripts -- yes, that went away. And the book industry exploded, employed exponentially more people in printing, typesetting, bookbinding, and bookselling, and gave us the Reformation, the Scientific Revolution, and modern literacy. All because one German ran the same argument your party is running right now and lost -- spectacularly. I could eat a bowl of alphabet soup and produce a smarter economic projection than the medieval scribes who insisted the printing press was the end of work, and yet here we are, listening to the modern equivalent of that argument from a United States senator. THE STEAM ENGINE AND THE LUDDITES. The Luddites -- and yes, Senator, that word comes from a real historical movement, not a Twitter insult -- smashed machinery in English textile mills in the early 1800s because mechanized looms were going to destroy skilled weavers. Parliament actually passed the Frame Breaking Act making machine destruction a capital offense. The textile industry boomed. Total employment in England grew dramatically. The Luddites are now an enduring synonym for being colossally wrong about technology, and I want you to sit with that for a moment. Because right now, you are the Luddite. You are the one standing in the mill with a hammer, and history is already writing the caption. THE ASSEMBLY LINE. Henry Ford mechanized automobile production and skilled craftsmen predicted the end of dignified labor. What actually happened: cars became affordable, demand exploded, and the industry created an enormous American middle class. Millions of jobs. Higher wages. The very working class your party claims to champion -- BUILT by a technology everyone said would destroy them. You have the IQ of a speed bump on this issue, Senator, and the historical record is the road. FACTORY ROBOTS IN THE 1980S. Every union hall in America was convinced industrial robots would produce a jobless future. Manufacturing employment did shift. New jobs grew in robot maintenance, programming, quality control, logistics, and entirely new sectors that did not exist before. Productivity rose. The economy expanded. People who refused to shift got left behind. People who adapted did not. This pattern has repeated itself with the reliability of a metronome for six centuries -- but sure, a Blatherskite with a magic wand is going to be the one who finally breaks the streak. ATMs. Going to eliminate every bank teller in America. Bank tellers are still here, doing higher-value advisory and customer service work. The operational cost savings allowed banks to open MORE branches, which meant MORE tellers, not fewer. This is not a trick question. It is not even a difficult question. And yet somehow it stumps the woman who taught contract law at Harvard. I have heard more coherent arguments from a drunk parrot at a county fair. THE WORLD WIDE WEB. In the 1990s, economists and politicians predicted the internet would kill retail, destroy travel agents, and hollow out the American economy. Amazon was specifically called a "job killer" and the engine of a "retail apocalypse." E-commerce did reshape traditional retail -- and then created hundreds of thousands of new positions in logistics, software, digital marketing, fulfillment, cloud computing, and entirely new industries that did not exist the day Tim Berners-Lee flipped the switch. The net result was more jobs, better jobs, and a standard of living improvement that no government retraining program on earth could have engineered. But I understand nuance is difficult when your mind is like a steel trap -- rusted shut. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. -- new technology eliminates specific tasks and GROWS total employment. This is not theory, Senator. This is a pattern so consistent across 600 years of documented economic history that denying it is not a political position. It is a cognitive failure. You would have more credibility at this point waving a red flag in front of a Tesla. You have miles to go before you reach mediocre on this subject, and you started from a considerable deficit. The people who got left behind in EVERY one of these transitions were the ones who refused to shift. The scribes who learned to operate printing presses ate well. The carriage makers who retooled for automobiles thrived. The textile workers who moved to factories built entirely new lives. The ones who stood in the street demanding the government halt progress and redistribute the gains -- did not. So here is my actual magic wand advice: SHIFT. Learn to operate, maintain, and work alongside the technology instead of standing in the street with a permission slip waiting for a Mountebank in a Senate chamber to tell you what your next job is. Your proposed solution? Government retraining programs. Forced gain-sharing mandates. How original. How breathtakingly brave. Quinn's First Law of Liberalism: LIBERALISM ALWAYS GENERATES THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF ITS STATED INTENT. Federal job training programs have a well-documented track record of producing workers who end up no better off -- and in several peer-reviewed studies, measurably WORSE off -- than workers who adapted on their own without government supervision. But sure, let us hand THIS particular challenge to the same institution that gave us the DMV, the $800 Pentagon toilet seat, and six decades of Great Society programs that were going to end poverty and instead institutionalized it. You are a Fopdoodle with a floor vote, Senator, and the historical record is not on your side. Quinn's Law Number 25: LIBERALS ARE GREAT AT GIVING AWAY OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. You are worth $12 million, Senator. You are not opening your own checkbook for any of this. You are mandating that businesses absorb the redistribution cost while you collect the political credit, the cable news hits, and the donor checks. It is the same arrangement every time. It has never once varied. You speak an infinite deal of nothing and then send the invoice to someone else. Here is what your magic wand keeps missing: the most in-demand, highest-paid workers in this economy RIGHT NOW -- without a four-year degree -- are the ones your party spent 30 years sneering at. Electricians. Plumbers. Welders. Pipefitters. HVAC technicians. The Snollygosters in Washington gutted vocational education funding, treated the skilled trades like a consolation prize for people who could not cut it academically, told an entire generation that anything less than a university diploma was failure -- and called all of that PROGRESS. If brains were dynamite, the people who designed that policy could not blow their collective nose. Now you want credit for solving the problem you helped create. Thou art the cap of all the fools, Senator, and I mean that in the most historically accurate sense of the phrase. I teach in a Career Technical Education district. I WROTE the textbooks my students use. My CTE graduates -- the ones your party wrote off as not college material -- are out-earning their four-year university peers at 23 while the university crowd services $80,000 in debt for a degree in a field that never called them back. The market already answered your question. You were just too busy being a Jobbernowl on the Senate floor to notice. But what do I know -- I am only a medically retired Army combat medic and science teacher who has apparently read more economic history than the senator currently holding the magic wand with a Harvard law degree and a brain running on dial-up. IF you agree: LIKE this post so the algorithm shows it to people who need to read it. SHARE this. COMMENT below -- what trade or skill are YOUR kids learning? Tell me. And if you want MORE of this -- JOIN Bski's Classroom on X or YouTube. @JoJoFromJerz @GuntherEagleman @catturd2 #MAGA #Veterans #Trump