7
39

[–] network_guy 7 points 39 points (+46|-7) ago 

I think it was going to happen regardless, but the push to pay people this ridiculous dollar amount for an almost no-skill job hastened the process.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 19 points (+20|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
9

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Machines have already replaced at least some fun jobs (or at least fulfilling jobs) like cabinet making and weaving. The result has generally been "more fun jobs." Human cabinet makers and weavers still exist, they just target the luxury market, and because of the reduced cost of living caused by all the automation, we're able to afford to pay people to do things like play sports or run game shows.

1
7

[–] MirrorMan 1 points 7 points (+8|-1) ago 

Do you not have a hobby or three? You now get to dedicate as much time to your hobby as to your job without sacrificing all of your free time to make it happen. If you don't have a hobby and all the "meaningful" time in your life is spent at work that is very sad. People who produce only while they are on the clock and consume every other waking moment of existence are the worst.

1
1

[–] katphish 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

people will never be obsolete

4
1

[–] RedditisPropaganda31 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago 

Universal basic income... People can create their passion and innovate.

Automation will create massive monopolies on unparalleled scales.

1
8

[–] leahbettsisdead 1 points 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

So if it is inevitable, what happens when automation replaces all jobs?

[–] [deleted] 1 points 14 points (+15|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

1
8

[–] Broc_Lia 1 points 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

what happens when automation replaces all jobs?

Always gets predicted, never actually happens. Automation has been happening since we started farming, if not before. Whenever we replace a human with technology (or animals) we find something else for the human to do. This has been the case for thousands of years, there is no reason to believe it will cease to be the case now.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] Nietzsche__ 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Consumers have to respond. That or 70% roughly lose their livelihood. If an automated life is the future, then we have to abandon capitalism in the American sense.

I welcome disagreement, but please share your alternative.

0
4

[–] Pwning4Ever 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

After slavery was made illegal, the push for better farming automation went up

0
2

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Probably. Pushing up the price of labour changed incentives and made robots more attractive. It's not even new technology, automats have been around since the 1920s and McDonalds rose to prominance by automating jobs which had previously been done by bored teenagers working summer jobs.

[–] [deleted] 4 points 19 points (+23|-4) ago 

[Deleted]

0
14

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

Sure, but they only need one guy for every five stores, and human staff fuck up too.

[–] [deleted] 4 points 9 points (+13|-4) ago 

[Deleted]

1
5

[–] Whitworth 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

Who do you think maintains the touch-screens they already have in all of their stores? They could literally just spin those puppies around and let me punch in my own order while I tell the pimply retard behind the counter to fuck off and it would be no different. The only thing they're adding is a flashier UI, which they already have an IT team to handle.

0
1

[–] Ifaptocomments 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

sure but if you have redundency then you will minimize the losses during down time and as other people said paying a small team to manage possibly tens of stores will be cheaper.

$15/hr*5 people needed * 18 hours per day (say they close 12-6) *7 days per week * 52 weeks per year, that is half a million dollars per store, and you will usually need more than 5 people. Could easily hire 3 guys to maintain a at least 3-5 stores for that, probably more.

0
0

[–] Sisti 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

As an electronics guy I wish maintenance jobs paid that much

1
11

[–] HugoFord 1 points 11 points (+12|-1) ago 

One can argue the pragmatics all day long and not reach consensus. Bottom line, this is coercion. Business owners and potential employees cannot negotiate according to their own bests interests. As a business owner, if I can only get $10/hr of value from a position, I have no choice but to leave it empty. If I as an employee would be glad to work for $8/hr to gain experience and feel proud of my accomplishments, I can't because I don't have control over my own labor.

1
3

[–] HowieCameUnglued 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

That's capitalism and what happens when you fuck with it. There's a large supply of workers and good demand for workers at $8/hour. If there were no minimum wage and companies were free to hire employees at the equilibrium price of the market, then they would hire them at $8/hour. Once the government starts to enforce minimum wages, suddenly companies have to get creative.

Minimum wage is forever a stopgap measure. It will improve the lives of people for a few years (which politicians love), but in the long term companies are forced to adapt or go out of business, either way leading to unemployment.

0
1

[–] Alopix 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

If I as an employee would be glad to work for $8/hr to gain experience and feel proud of my accomplishments

Then statistically you're a teenager in high school or a retiree, have limited economic needs, and are a tiny minority of workers

Business owners and potential employees cannot negotiate according to their own bests interests.

A business in an economy with a large labor surplus, where people on the bottom are struggling, has zero pressure to negotiate. This mythological level playing field between businesses and employees cannot and will not ever exist.

As a business owner, if I can only get $10/hr of value from a position

If your business is successful and profitable, then you're probably not counting right. The money is there, the value is there- you can't operate at all without employees, but you choose to allocate it to other things than paying your front line. That's your choice, why should people feel sorry for you or be forced to subsidize your worker's living expenses via SNAP and such?

3
1

[–] EIMR 3 points 1 points (+4|-3) ago 

Who would be glad to work for $8/hr? Nobody. The only ones who would do such a job is people who don't have another choice. That's not a living wage. That is preying on the weakest.

Those jobs aren't exactly good. They are mostly unskilled labor, like moving boxes. Nobody is interested in that kind of job for itself, and if anybody is, they are volunteering somewhere else. It is also quite difficult to be proud of ding something when you don't have another choice, and you are hungry. There's no experience to get there, 6 months as a cashier means nothing. There is basically no upward mobility, no nothing. Difficult to argue that it would be in the employee's best interests, since they don't get anything except money which isn't enough to live.

Also, you have to take into acount that they are replaceable and desperately need the money, they can't negotiate and they can't leave. All businesses could pact a price, no matter how low it is, and the workers would have no choice but to accept it.

Minimum wage is there to prevent exploitation. When we are talking about the lowest jobs, people just can't do anything, they have to accept any coercion, which is why Walmart can get away with forbidding unions.
Maximizing profit isn't bad by itself, but you filling that $8/hr so you can get every drop of money means that someone is going to work for wages that aren't enough to live. I don't think that getting just those eight more dollars are worth exploiting someone.

And that's only moral arguments. There is also to consider the economical benefits of minimum wage, as well as political and cultural.

2
-1

[–] HugoFord 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

It can't be exploitation if the employee is free to leave. You say they "have no choice" but that clearly isn't true. They may, due to limited education and experience, have few options but they clearly have a choice. The reality is that increasing minimum wage decreases their choices. If, due to their lack of education and experience, cannot generate revenue to cover their cost of employment, they won't get hired. Period. Businesses are not charities.

9
0

[–] poly 9 points 0 points (+9|-9) ago 

Lets not pretend that as a business owner your objective is to provide employment opportunities. Your true objective is to exploit as many workers for as much profit as possible right? Fiduciary responsibility and stuff?

2
4

[–] Broc_Lia 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago  (edited ago)

Lets not pretend that as a business owner your objective is to provide employment opportunities. Your true objective is to exploit as many workers for as much profit as possible right? Fiduciary responsibility and stuff?

Exploitation, noun, A situation when two individuals make a mutually beneficial agreement involving an exchange of resources

Marxists sure talk funny

1
2

[–] HugoFord 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Why do you consider it exploitation when a business owner employs someone at a rate agreed upon by the employee?

2
1

[–] Super_Cooper 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

You have no idea what it's like to run a business. Please grow the fuck up.

0
8

[–] Mathurin1911 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

When I worked in food service many years ago, I recognized that every task done there could be done by a machine, I didnt understand why it wasnt.

Now, older, more educated in the ways of both restaurants and automation, I know why. Sunk cost, and risk. Restaurants fail left and right, so fast, while automation is a major capital expense to set up. Its much 'cheaper' to start up your business with humans manning the grill. The risk drops a bit after the first year, but the risk still hangs over the head of the owner, they never want to go too deep into debt.

The money maker will be for a company that earns money from that risk, say, a company that manufactures, installs and services the Burgerbot 5000 for a monthly fee. The restaurant will see a "labor" bill instead of a massive purchase price. It may even be able to be pro-rated based on hours of operation, like labor would, rather than becoming yet another fixed overhead price.

0
3

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

And also: It's much easier for big chains like McDonalds to make that investment because they can centralise all the RnD and benefit from massive economies of scale. Creating a regulatory atmosphere where automation is all but mandatory just handed them the market.

0
1

[–] MirrorMan 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

There will still be a market for people who want other humans to make their food. A shrinking market, for sure, but it will exist and be staunchly opposed to the automation establishments. McDonalds isn't going to gain any more market share than they already have, they are just going to increase their profit margin.

0
7

[–] Consequence-Earned 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I haven't had any of their shitty burgers in over 2 1/2 years now. I don't give a shit if they replace them with gigantic suction dildo's. That way the customers can fuck themselves too.

[–] [deleted] 5 points 5 points (+10|-5) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 2 points 5 points (+7|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

1
5

[–] Broc_Lia 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

Calling in sick/quitting isn't so bad, that can be accounted for. I'd be much more worried about Jamal suddenly deciding it's beneath his dignity to serve burgers and having a screaming fight with a customer, or Frank watching fight club for the first time and deciding to take down the man by putting pubes in people's milkshakes.

Humans are a massive liability.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

2
9

[–] Broc_Lia 2 points 9 points (+11|-2) ago 

Most managers dont even make that, what in fucks name makes you think you deserve it?

If you can't pay a "living wage" you don't deserve to be in business.

Inb4 the wailing when they put almost every company out of business and there's no more starbucks.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

This goes to show that industry is always going to win because people will still go there and get cheap stuff.

This isn't the industry winning though, it's lose/lose. They currently employ humans because it's marginally more economic (either because they're cheaper or because human service is more valuable). The fact that the state has outlawed this means they have to move to a less economic solution, and probably endure a reduction in service.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

1
4

[–] orange_viper 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago  (edited ago)

These are already widespread here in the UK. You can go in and order your food and get it before most people in the queue in front of you (waiting for a meatbag server). Anyone who makes less than $20/hr is at serious risk for automation within the next decade.

The first true smartphone (iPhone 1st gen) was released 9 years ago, I can't even imagine what we'll have in 10 years time. InVitro meat, full automation of stores like McDs while the high streets continue to loose out to the web, delivery drones, etc.

0
1

[–] PlasmaDistortion 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

We have one of these stores here in a suburb of Seattle too. It is way faster to go there than McDs a few miles away with slow people.

0
3

[–] Tancred 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

"Surprise"

0
13

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

Even funnier: The CEO came out in favour of the $15 minimum months ago and all the lefties loved him. He was most likely doing it because big companies can afford to automate, whereas small, family run, takeaways can't, so the government just eradicated one of his main competitors.

And the very same people who campaigned for the minimum wage hike will whine about their local chipper being replaced by a mcdonalds and demand the government do something about it.

0
7

[–] GrandpaPepe 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Isn't it obvious? Walmart was lobbying to increase minimum wage to $15... To get rid of competition. When are these idiot millennials going to learn?

0
1

[–] Tancred 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

The result of said people getting government "education".

0
0

[–] jerrykantrell 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

This is what the muslims call 'taqqiya'

load more comments ▼ (33 remaining)