Jump to content

Building robot McDonald's staff 'cheaper' than hiring workers on minimum wage


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Dago 3.0 said:

your evidence has a very serious flaw in it

they don't compute unemployment the same way now as they did in 1950 

Well, I could've used the unemployment rate during the Great Depression to prove my point, but thought there was enough common sense for people to realize the truth. Advancements in technology and a booming economy create new business opportunities, and that creates more jobs. There are hundreds and even thousands of low and mid-level jobs created for every single CEO attached to new corporate businesses. Not small businesses, but businesses in evolving markets that want to compete to be the dominant player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

18 hours ago, Gritzblitz 2.0 said:

That's an interesting thought. I'm as much a capitalist as anyone, but if it's true that the more technology advances, the fewer jobs will be available then it seems that we will be forced into a system of income redistribution simply because there won't be enough jobs in any sector of the economy for most of the population to earn a living wage. 

 

Meh.  People have been making that argument for centuries, but it is one of the reasons our economy has gone from production based to service based (excluding the consumer component).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pzummo said:

Well, I could've used the unemployment rate during the Great Depression to prove my point, but thought there was enough common sense for people to realize the truth. Advancements in technology and a booming economy create new business opportunities, and that creates more jobs. There are hundreds and even thousands of low and mid-level jobs created for every single CEO attached to new corporate businesses. Not small businesses, but businesses in evolving markets that want to compete to be the dominant player. 

So we agree that the current unemployment rate is calculated in a way that would skew the numbers in favor of your opinion. Add to that the labor participation rate and your example becomes completely irrelevant since unemployment is a ffunction of the labor participation pool

US_Labor_Participation_Rate_1948-2011.sv

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robots, Autonomous cars, 3D Printing are going to cause a dramatic shift in employment in society and they are all going to hit at roughly the same time.

We have to decide if we let people die in the streets and throw them a bunch of bootstraps or do we take care of a growing percentage of people out of work due to technology?

Eventually as technology progresses money become less and less relevant, we are going to need to figure this out sooner or later as a monetary based society might not be feasible in the near future.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DD: Objective Elite said:

Does anyone actually believe the 20 year old high school dropout working the fry station will seemlessly transition to robotics technician??

Not sure that is what is being suggested...

The idea that emerging technologies will render some current jobs obsolete, but open the door for new market opportunities and their related support jobs is nothing new in our history. Just because we don't yet necessarily know what the new market opportunities are doesn't mean there won't be any. Humans are a fairly creative lot. Mix in an opportunity to make a buck and I guarantee someone will have a bright idea that will open up all kinds of jobs for the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Porkins said:

Not sure that is what is being suggested...

The idea that emerging technologies will render some current jobs obsolete, but open the door for new market opportunities and their related support jobs is nothing new in our history. Just because we don't yet necessarily know what the new market opportunities are doesn't mean there won't be any. Humans are a fairly creative lot. Mix in an opportunity to make a buck and I guarantee someone will have a bright idea that will open up all kinds of jobs for the future. 

The caveat to that is supply and demand, and how artificial wage inflation ****s it all up.  Some jobs will simply no longer make sense from a wage standpoint, they won't be replaced by robots, and will simply die.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, kicker said:

The caveat to that is supply and demand, and how artificial wage inflation ****s it all up.  Some jobs will simply no longer make sense from a wage standpoint, they won't be replaced by robots, and will simply die.  

Much like the scrivener. Bartleby in particular. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Free Radical said:

Were ignoring that it is becoming more and more difficult to get by in the world with just a high school education. So if a high school education doesn't work any more, and college on average is leaving graduates with mounds of debt, what we can do to fix this?

Bootstraps and die quicker please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dago 3.0 said:

So we agree that the current unemployment rate is calculated in a way that would skew the numbers in favor of your opinion. Add to that the labor participation rate and your example becomes completely irrelevant since unemployment is a ffunction of the labor participation pool

US_Labor_Participation_Rate_1948-2011.sv

 

No, we don't. Just not going to bother explaining why you are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dago 3.0 said:

so you are saying that the way unemployment is calculated has not changed since 1950?

I'm not saying that. I'm saying I don't agree with your deductive logic proclaiming that it skews it enough to make my point irrelevant. High unemployment over the decades have not coincided with technical advancements. They coincide with economic downturns.

I do not have any interest in going down irrelevant rabbit holes debating statistics for single year comparisons. As I said, we could compare with the great depression where nobody could find a job versus the Internet boom creating very high employment participation (or lows for unemployment). The only thing irrelevant is debating something that is demonstrable historical fact. Advancements in technology have always led to more jobs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, pzummo said:

I'm not saying that. I'm saying I don't agree with your deductive logic proclaiming that it skews it enough to make my point irrelevant. High unemployment over the decades have not coincided with technical advancements. They coincide with economic downturns.

I do not have any interest in going down irrelevant rabbit holes debating statistics for single year comparisons. As I said, we could compare with the great depression where nobody could find a job versus the Internet boom creating very high employment participation (or lows for unemployment). The only thing irrelevant is debating something that is demonstrable historical fact. Advancements in technology have always led to more jobs. 

There isn't any denying that automation and globalization has greatly reduced the manufacturing sector in this country, while also reducing the opportunities for those who only graduated with a high school education. Once we start automating the service industry, things are going to get even worse for the lower tier in society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Free Radical said:

There isn't any denying that automation and globalization has greatly reduced the manufacturing sector in this country, while also reducing the opportunities for those who only graduated with a high school education. Once we start automating the service industry, things are going to get even worse for the lower tier in society.

There's no denying that car manufacturing has greatly reduced the horse and buggy sector in this country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Free Radical said:

Hurf durf.

It's a real world example of innovation and technological advancement creating more jobs for low and medium skilled workers. It started with highly skilled engineers, and it was too expensive for the lower income brackets. They improved manufacturing and millions are employed across the country supporting the automobile industry. The same thing happened with flying. It will eventually happen with SpaceX. 

When technology is new, it's much more complicated and nobody can imagine someone with a HS degree working in that area. As demand drives the supply, the industry breaks down simpler tasks for less expensive employees to contribute, driving down the cost of goods or services. That's how it works.

Find me one technological advancement that eliminated jobs without creating more than there was before. I can name literally thousands that led to more jobs than existed before the new technology eliminated the old. Usually, the new just makes the old tech that much cheaper for lower incomes to afford, like AC window units in every Section 8 apartment building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, pzummo said:

It's a real world example of innovation and technological advancement creating more jobs for low and medium skilled workers. It started with highly skilled engineers, and it was too expensive for the lower income brackets. They improved manufacturing and millions are employed across the country supporting the automobile industry. The same thing happened with flying. It will eventually happen with SpaceX. 

When technology is new, it's much more complicated and nobody can imagine someone with a HS degree working in that area. As demand drives the supply, the industry breaks down simpler tasks for less expensive employees to contribute, driving down the cost of goods or services. That's how it works.

Find me one technological advancement that eliminated jobs without creating more than there was before. I can name literally thousands that led to more jobs than existed before the new technology eliminated the old. Usually, the new just makes the old tech that much cheaper for lower incomes to afford, like AC window units in every Section 8 apartment building.

 

http://andrewmcafee.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/mfg-output-and-employ.jpg

 

http://www.hamiltonproject.org/assets/legacy/images/uploads/thp_image_uploads/charts/120211_chart2_v2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you are just baiting and actually understand that your charts have absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying. If not, I can't help you. Well, I probably could, but it would take a lot more work than I'm willing to do for you. So I won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/26/2016 at 7:38 PM, pzummo said:

The entire concept of technology advancement eliminating jobs is completely untrue.

There is literally no historical data what so ever that lends any validity to the theory. It's fear mongering that has been used many times every time technology advances because of the job it looks like it replaces. The truth is that it has created more new jobs every single time throughout history.

As manufacturing productivity increased, the number of jobs in the industry went down, primarily do to two factors, automation and globalization. Automation is the "new technology" being discussed. So, manufacturing jobs go down the toilet, the money earned by those with only a high school education drops, thus making it a "requirement" for people to pursue college educations, where graduates are now facing record levels of debt as a result of pursuing that education. What is the solution?

If you can't see the big picture argument I'm making here, then maybe you should stick to acting like the old man and post bad articles and hitting the like button. It's pretty dumb **** clear that this system isn't sustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Free Radical said:

As manufacturing productivity increased, the number of jobs in the industry went down, primarily do to two factors, automation and globalization. Automation is the "new technology" being discussed. So, manufacturing jobs go down the toilet, the money earned by those with only a high school education drops, thus making it a "requirement" for people to pursue college educations, where graduates are now facing record levels of debt as a result of pursuing that education. What is the solution?

If you can't see the big picture argument I'm making here, then maybe you should stick to acting like the old man and post bad articles and hitting the like button. It's pretty dumb **** clear that this system isn't sustainable.

You must be looking at manufacturing jobs. Manufacturing as a sector includes sales, distribution, import/export, and every channel that is needed to create revenue that justifies the manufacturing output. Generally speaking, as automation and globalization has progressed, manufacturers have invested more supporting sales. There's also the support aspect that increases with increased production and sales.

Take my horse and buggy comparison. If you looked at the decline in jobs for carriage conductors, they plummeted. That does not mean the job market plummeted. As a matter of fact, many jobs were created in newly formed industry.

Automation processes have been around for a long time. They do reduce the number of people needed for particular tasks. But generally speaking, the company has to support the increased productivity with increased sales and increased operations sustaining the transition to a mass scale approach to their business. It also puts more money into other industries and drops the price of goods, making luxuries more affordable for lower incomes. It's not as simple as saying, manufacturing jobs are less now than they were before. The's oversimplifying how the economy works. Mass production through automation drives more material purchases, supporting other businesses that employ other people. It also encourages competition, which creates a marketplace for more businesses to exist providing the materials, transport, or sales channels for that same manufacturer. 

In other words, looking at a specific job is an invalid assessment of how change effects the job market. There are less manufacturing jobs, and that skill diminishes in value. That doesn't equate to there being less jobs overall, and actually works to the contrary. If our manufacturers can use tools to be more efficient and drive down the price of their goods, they can be more competitive in the global market, which will be supported by more US businesses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which completely fails to address the point. Manufacturing was a field that supported numerous people with a high school education for several decades. The alternatives to the lost manufacturing jobs are typically going to be lower wage, or an entry point that requires a post-secondary education. There's a severe lack of a middle ground to work with, and further automation is going to continue to drive the lower side of the socio-economic ladder downward, combine that with the exponentially rising cost of tuition and debt, and it's obvious that this isn't a sustainable model.

So again, what is the proposed solution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Free Radical said:

Which completely fails to address the point. Manufacturing was a field that supported numerous people with a high school education for several decades. The alternatives to the lost manufacturing jobs are typically going to be lower wage, or an entry point that requires a post-secondary education. There's a severe lack of a middle ground to work with, and further automation is going to continue to drive the lower side of the socio-economic ladder downward, combine that with the exponentially rising cost of tuition and debt, and it's obvious that this isn't a sustainable model.

So again, what is the proposed solution?

Mechanic. Cook. Fedex. Software developer. Web developer. Network engineer. Call Center first tier support. Telemarketing. Car salesman. 

You do not need a college education for any career path. It helps to have one, but it is not required. I found a job for $10/hour when I was 20 working in a Call Center. I learned the details of what I was taking calls for, worked my way up to tier 2, tier 3 support, and into an $80k per year engineering job by the time I was 23 without a college degree. I didn't get my college degree until I was 25 because I put my career first and took night classes. 

Based on personal experience, I went from being a mechanic at Goodyear making $8/hour to an $80k per year engineering job without a college degree. It was extremely difficult. I focused on outworking every person that sat on their degree thinking that made them worth more than me. 

And FTR, in the industry I am in, we value certifications more than any college degree. My college degree added $0 to my salary. Obtaining my CCIE added $$$ to my salary. So forgive me if I call bull**** on all of these excuses about not being able to work in a freaking plant and there not being jobs for people with just a HS diploma. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...