Minimum-wage campaign for $15/h could speed arrival of robot-powered restaurants and reduced number
205 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493609]Nope, the unions blocked my grandfather from working sometimes because he was non-union. He did not go to college, only a vocation school for sheet metal. Back then, people were not working at low-skill jobs like flipping burgers, but they were working on high-risk jobs that resulted in better pay because of their risk. He was not on social welfare because he was smart enough to use the public schools in place so he can go into a skilled job that can support his family.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry that your grandfather is the apparent antithesis of all that America once stood for. Sounds really credible. My grandfather got a masters degree from CUNY college and retired.
And for the record, burger flipping hasn't been a thing for like 20 years. Most burger joints use cooking presses or broilers.
[QUOTE=Fr3ddi3;48493606]People have adapted ... that's why millions of people are still on the lowest rung of the employment ladder unable to get off of it, and if you take their job (which they already know is shit) away from them then what? Just write them and their kids off from existence i guess.[/QUOTE]
As they say, Survival of the fittest.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;48493627]I'm sorry that your grandfather is the apparent antithesis of all that America once stood for. Sounds really credible. My grandfather got a masters degree from CUNY colleges and retired.
And for the record, burger flipping hasn't been a thing for at least 20 years. Burger joints use heating presses or broilers.[/QUOTE]
Why would you spend money on a college education and then retire? True, cooking burgers has changed significantly, but it still requires a person. (But probably will not in the future)
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493629]As they say, Survival of the fittest.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
Why would you spend money on a college education and then retire? True, cooking burgers has changed significantly, but it still requires a person. (But probably will not in the future)[/QUOTE]
He didn't spend money because CUNY schools used to be completely tuition free and he retired after living his life. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear in the context. For the record, dedicated "burger flippers" do not exist in most situations, the task of cooking burgers is given to the same workers who build the sandwiches unless it is incredibly busy. That is a position that pretty much does not exist anymore.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493629]As they say, Survival of the fittest.
[/QUOTE]
Uhh no. In a country with the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the fucking planet, we can't play social darwinism.
We don't need to let people die/live in poverty just because of a supposed free market economy. If that is your assertion, you are foolish.
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;48493651]He didn't spend money because CUNY schools used to be completely tuition free and he retired after living his life. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear in the context. For the record, dedicated "burger flippers" do not exist in most situations, the task of cooking burgers is given to the same workers who build the sandwiches unless it is incredibly busy. That is a position that pretty much does not exist anymore.[/QUOTE]
Ah I see, sort of like Soda jerks. My question is why should I as a business owner pay someone $15 an hour for just making a sandwich? If I have to I'll just cut people, and find a more efficient and cost effective way. Working at a job like McDonalds, or Chic-fil-a should not be a job that can support people because it is a job most anyone can walk up and do.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;48493651]He didn't spend money because CUNY schools used to be completely tuition free and he retired after living his life. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear in the context. For the record, dedicated "burger flippers" do not exist in most situations, the task of cooking burgers is given to the same workers who build the sandwiches unless it is incredibly busy. That is a position that pretty much does not exist anymore.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
Uhh no. In a country with the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the fucking planet, we can't play social darwinism.
We don't need to let people die/live in poverty just because of a supposed free market economy. If that is your assertion, you are foolish.[/QUOTE]
But we have the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the planet. How then is it so hard to get out of poverty?
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493676]Ah I see, sort of like Soda jerks. My question is why should I as a business owner pay someone $15 an hour for just making a sandwich? If I have to I'll just cut people, and find a more efficient and cost effective way. Working at a job like McDonalds, or Chic-fil-a should not be a job that can support people because it is a job most anyone can walk up and do.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
But we have the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the planet. How then is it so hard to get out of poverty?[/QUOTE]
Because new wealth doesn't reach lower class workers. You tell me how easy it is to work your way up when service industry jobs by default don't even fucking allow people to work full time.
These aren't made up numbers, you would do good to actually research these things before asserting lower class workers are just lazy.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493676]Ah I see, sort of like Soda jerks. My question is why should I as a business owner pay someone $15 an hour for just making a sandwich? If I have to I'll just cut people, and find a more efficient and cost effective way. Working at a job like McDonalds, or Chic-fil-a should not be a job that can support people because it is a job most anyone can walk up and do.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
But we have the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the planet. How then is it so hard to get out of poverty?[/QUOTE]
My question is, as a worker, why is my CEO being paid many times higher than CEOs in other countries? Why is it so hard for Americans to feel the need to increase wealth at the bottom where it is rapidly disappearing when the wealth is being collected at the top in absurd amounts? We have the highest gap between median worker's pay and ceo pay than any other country on the planet by a wide margin. CEOs in America are paid substantially higher salaries than their counterparts in other countries. Unless you wish to assert that the reasoning behind this is that CEOs in America are harder workers comparatively to their own workers than that of the rest of the entire planet, there is no argument here. It is ridiculous to assert that $15/hr is outrageous when we as a society are completely desensitized to the unreasonably high wages of CEOs vs average worker.
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;48493459]We have to rely on federal and state legislation to curtail that. If we cannot, then we must simply wait a generation for these policies to implode on themselves and then push legislation.
Like I said, I fully support federal minimum wage increases and I really don't see how pandering to corporate America looking for better ways to screw over lower class workers will really do anything. They will head this way regardless.[/QUOTE]
Corporations will always find a new way to circumvent the law.
Minimum wage is raised? Start automating things
Full time employees have to have health coverage? Everyone is part time now
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493490]Addressing your last point, Nothing of value is free. If you want to get out of poverty you better get creative on how you make money. That is how people have done it is the past and how it will happen in the future. Minimum wage was set with the intention of preventing worker abuse, but it did not have [B]the intention of being able to support a livelihood[/B].[/QUOTE]
Actually that's demonstratively false. The language used from even pre-minimum wage continually discussed the minimum wage as a way of providing a living income. The US minimum wage came inot existence in 1937- the push began well before but the real political momentum came with FDR. He has this to say during the minimum wage campaign in 1933:
[quote='FDR']In my Inaugural I laid down the simple proposition that nobody is going to starve in this country. It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.[/quote]
So basically that's bullshit. It's funny how most people who like to talk about the minimum wage A) Don't fucking work at minimum wage and B) Don't know shit about the current research, the history, or the politics surrounding it. Minimum wage has ALWAYS been intended to be a living wage, and it has been at times in the past. However, in real dollars, the wage has drastically decreased from the 1970s, when it truly was a living wage for a brief half decade. No one deserves to starve or live on the streets in the United States, there is no excuse for that.
By the way, fast food is not an easy job by any stretch. It is an unskilled job, but it is not an easy job. I worked in fast food for 3 years while in college. I would implore you to try it for yourself before suggesting that "just making a sandwich" is an easy task. Try making hundreds of sandwiches in a 90 degree kitchen for 6 hours while being screamed at by employees and customers.
I have been thinking of investing into these types of robotics. A robot can flip a burger for pennies an hour. A person doing that kind of job is simply not worth 15 an hour and the economic inflation that will come of it. This is the future whether we like it or not. We might as well join early.
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493676]But we have the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the planet. How then is it so hard to get out of poverty?[/QUOTE]
have you just flat out not been paying attention to economic discourse for like the past 7 or 8 years?
increasingly in the american economy, wealth has become unequal - what that means is that the new money that is being made is going towards people who already possess wealth. say such as yourself, the business owner. and take that with what you said earlier in the post,
[quote]Ah I see, sort of like Soda jerks. [B]My question is why should I as a business owner pay someone $15 an hour for just making a sandwich?[/B] If I have to I'll just cut people, and find a more efficient and cost effective way. [B]Working at a job like McDonalds, or Chic-fil-a should not be a job that can support people because it is a job most anyone can walk up and do.[/B][/quote]
they [B]can't get out of poverty[/B] because they're being [B]kept in poverty by people like hypothetical you[/B]. if you increased their wage, then yes, it'd be easier for them to come out of poverty. but you won't.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48493722]Corporations will always find a new way to circumvent the law.
Minimum wage is raised? Start automating things
Full time employees have to have health coverage? Everyone is part time now[/QUOTE]
Like I said, I will choose not to pander to corporations just because they feel the need to exploit society.
We should just make the higher ups like CEO, CMO, etc. into robots and pay the workers the wages of all the higher ups in the corporation.
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493464]I think people fail to realize how rich most people people in the U.S are. Ever those we consider "poor" are extremely rich compared to others world wide.[/QUOTE]
"Circumstances are better/worse in _______" is always a stupid argument.
Lol, hey, another idiot that thinks 15/h is a demand instead of a bargaining chip. GG. Though, truth be told, I'd like it to go through, because my job can't really be automated away(The cost of designing, building, operating, maintaining and replacing at EOL a grocery store stocking robot is FAR higher than 15/hr for the retail slaves doing it currently) and I'd get a little over a 50% raise overnight.
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493629]As they say, Survival of the fittest.[/QUOTE]
Or luckiest .. and in 'developed' countries that's utter bullshit, another caveat to this is the 'have not's of our countries far outnumber the have's' and if you push people to the brink of their own and their families existence then somewhere along the line they push back, history has proved this time and time again. We've had strikes, we've had riots it's not beyond the realm of possibility of it happening again or worse.
If you are so against social policies that you are willing to say that working full time [B]should not[/B] guarantee living above the poverty line then I really am not sure what you think the point of our society is. Why should we even consider ourselves a great nation if we don't even care about the livelihood of productive hard working people? These people should be the foundation of our economy, not surviving on public assistance.
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493676]Working at a job like McDonalds, or Chic-fil-a should not be a job that can support people because it is a job most anyone can walk up and do.
[/quote]
It should be, though, because sometimes it's the only job they can get. Not everyone working at McD's is a lazy pothead that still snickers when someone calls for Mike Litoris over the PA. Some people used to make two, even three times, what the slave wage they get turning burgers is, but due to circumstances out of their control have no other choice.
[quote]
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
But we have the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the planet. How then is it so hard to get out of poverty?[/QUOTE]
Lemme tell you from first-hand experience.
1: Work experience is a must have. I was stuck in this rut for almost a decade because I couldn't get a job without formal work experience but I couldn't get formal work experience because nobody would fucking hire me because I didn't have any to begin with. Catch 22 right there, catches many teens these days.
2: Want a living wage? Go put yourself in six figure debt at College first. Decent paying(IE they pay a living wage) jobs might as well have signs posted saying "Go get a four year or we won't give you the time of day.".
3: "We're desperately understaffed so we're trying to pull in everyone we can" - The HR dude that interviewed me at Walmart three months ago. Exact words. The only way for those of us in poverty to get work is to wait until a place like Walmart is absolutely desperate and is hiring anyone with at least one working limb.
It's asinine. I just want to pull in 45-50 large every year, enough to support a couple people(Four once my parents retire, they're both 60 now) and live comfortably without too much worry. That's not too much to ask, yet it's goddamn near impossible to actually get there. I'm making progress, my slave job at Hell Mart is paying me half what I need and most crucially I'm getting that formal work experience that's so important these days, but I'm still in poverty. I'm still driving a worn-the-fuck-out car, I'm still living paycheck to paycheck, the only real change is now I can attempt to buy a car in the 2-5 thousand range that [i]isn't[/i] worn-the-fuck-out and start banking up for NADC. It's possible to claw out of poverty but my fucking god is it difficult. And I got really effing lucky with point number 3 up there, had that not happened I'd still be unemployed.
[QUOTE=catbarf;48493489]Machines which are designed, built, and serviced by other people, so the net workforce is still well over 10 people. It will not still be 200 workers, since increasing efficiency is the point of automation, but two hundred years of industrialization have shown that businesses are far more likely to build a second factory with the money they save, in turn employing more people, than they are to just chop the workforce and be done with it. It's not as simplistic as 190 people getting fired and that's that.
Anyways, people should have seen this coming- when wages suddenly double, automation becomes the cheaper alternative, and businesses are all about the bottom line.[/QUOTE]
They won't reach anywhere near the 200 people though, and would only be employing a very select few as well.
I know we're not all that compassionate about these kinds of things, but what happens to those workers when the majority of the industry is unavailable to them? What about with transportation?
We're going to have a massive unemployment issue, I don't see how that's NOT true.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Timof2009;48493676]
But we have the largest economy and highest level of productivity on the planet. How then is it so hard to get out of poverty?[/QUOTE]
How little do you know about your own country?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48493890]We're going to have a massive unemployment issue, I don't see how that's NOT true.[/QUOTE]
This process has been underway for centuries, what's changed now that somehow will cause unemployment to suddenly skyrocket?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48493943]This process has been underway for centuries, what's changed now that somehow will cause unemployment to suddenly skyrocket?[/QUOTE]
What has changed is that 15 dollars is becoming a reality and corporations are pretty scared and are kicking up scare tactic shit to divide us.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48493943]This process has been underway for centuries, what's changed now that somehow will cause unemployment to suddenly skyrocket?[/QUOTE]
I know you always repeat this
but the industrial revolution had an extremely messy period where people didn't know where to go or what to do and weren't really able to make ends meet or survive the age.
But no Sobotonik, transitory periods of extreme uncertainty never hurt anyone!
Automation is going to be a problem in the next few decades. What are we going to do with all the unskilled workers getting replaced?
Like Sobotonik, you're self centered as fuck when it comes to this issue. You're not going to lose your job, so your default response is "Well nothing is going to happen, and it's all going to be peaches and cream for everyone."
No its not like that for a lot of people.
Lets make a scenario, shall we?
You work at walmart. You live in a town of 100,000 people. A small, but reasonable sized town. You have a target in town. You also have a Costco and a Sams Club. Now, Walmart one day decides to automate about 80% of it's work force, leaving the store with about 15 people working part time jobs. Then target does the same thing. Then Costco. Then Sams Club. They all cut their work forces by about 80%.
Now, you see Sobotonik, there's a problem for some people and I know you don't care about them, but I do.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Buck.;48493974]Automation is going to be a problem in the next few decades. What are we going to do with all the unskilled workers getting replaced?[/QUOTE]
Ask Sobotonik, he claims there won't be an issue for us to face and everything will transition flawlessly.
[QUOTE=Buck.;48493974]Automation is going to be a problem in the next few decades. What are we going to do with all the unskilled workers getting replaced?[/QUOTE]
We could invest in tuition free state education so that unskilled positions are not as important.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48493943]This process has been underway for centuries, what's changed now that somehow will cause unemployment to suddenly skyrocket?[/QUOTE]
Was the transition for Detroit flawless? NO!
It left thousands unemployeed and cut down the number of jobs needed.
I guess that we just don't care about that kinda shit.
Detroit, before the started outsourcing, had started using Automation as a method of saving money. It's great and it works and it's good for all of us, except for those people, who no doubt had to change cities to find communities and environments that had acceptable jobs.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
I just truly don't believe saying "This industrial revolution will function identically to the last one we had, nothing will be different, it's not a problem for us to worry about". I don't believe it and I don't see a single shred of reasoning for that the more and more I think about it.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48493961]I know you always repeat this
but the industrial revolution had an extremely messy period where people didn't know where to go or what to do and weren't really able to make ends meet or survive the age.
But no Sobotonik, transitory periods of extreme uncertainty never hurt anyone![/QUOTE]
Except we have mechanisms for dealing with the problem (welfare, job programs, better education, etc). If they fail, then obviously they have to be overhauled and the benefits given to vunerable people are increased.
The point is that ever since the time of the luddites, people keep bullshitting about how automation causes sustained unemployment that only gets worse as time goes on. The reality is that this doesn't happen - different economies have different problems.
16th century England suffered from a massive unemployment problem, despite the lack of automation. 21st century South Korea doesn't have an unemployment problem, despite the massive and widespread adoption of automated machinery and techniques.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48493961]I know you always repeat this
but the industrial revolution had an extremely messy period where people didn't know where to go or what to do and weren't really able to make ends meet or survive the age.
But no Sobotonik, transitory periods of extreme uncertainty never hurt anyone![/QUOTE]
'There will be a transition period of instability but society will continue, just like it has when this happened before' is not at all remotely the same issue as 'Robots are going to make us all unemployed, the end is nigh' which is pretty much the theme of every one of these threads. Arguing that in the long run automation will not destroy the economy and put everyone out of work is not arguing that everything will be just fine for everyone and nobody will have to worry about losing their job. As far as I can tell Sobotnik hasn't said that nobody will be harmed so you're railing against a straw man and I'd much rather see what argument you have against the idea that this will be a period of instability, not a permanent trend, just like previous examples of mass automation.
Or you can keep flaming and putting words in his mouth because reading what he actually wrote is too hard. You do this a lot.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48494058]Except we have mechanisms for dealing with the problem (welfare, job programs, better education, etc). If they fail, then obviously they have to be overhauled and the benefits given to vunerable people are increased.
The point is that ever since the time of the luddites, people keep bullshitting about how automation causes sustained unemployment that only gets worse as time goes on. The reality is that this doesn't happen - different economies have different problems.
16th century England suffered from a massive unemployment problem, despite the lack of automation. 21st century South Korea doesn't have an unemployment problem, despite the massive and widespread adoption of automated machinery and techniques.[/QUOTE]
I am not a luddite.
You misunderstand me entirely.
I WANT automation.
I just want people like yourself to admit that in that transitory period, hundreds of thousands will suffer and may never rise out of the poverty they'll be stuck in. I just want people like you to admit that this is a different instance of automation than the steam age. That this will have different outcomes than that, and will result in a very tumultous transition for hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, and we have NO way of dealing with this.
You say "Welfare". Nope, NOT an option in America unless the public opinion changes SO drastically and changes before this happens. Job programs? Where are they going? To what jobs? If something is a target for automation, where are you sending the workers? That's literally a non argument. Better education would be great but how are you going to force through a HUGE PORTION OF THE POPULATION ALL AT ONCE through the education system?
My concern, my only concern, is that people like yourself rush in to claim that ANYONE who dares say a fucking word against you is a "Luddite", and are ignorant to the reality around them. My concern, is that because we won't look at this issue seriously enough, we won't look for solutions early enough to make a difference, that the transitory period for the workers will be horrible, hard, and cost many human lives. We need solutions for these problems that people have thought about for longer than "Welfare Job programs education!" as you just did. No, those are NOT viable options anymore. We have to try harder. Stop calling people luddites when they're justifiably scared of their future, and just want answers as to how they're NOT going to get completely fucked in the transition.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=catbarf;48494073]'There will be a transition period of instability but society will continue, just like it has when this happened before' is not at all remotely the same as 'Robots are going to make us all unemployed, the end is nigh' which is pretty much the theme of every one of these threads.
Or you can keep flaming and putting words in his mouth because reading what he actually wrote is too hard. You do this a lot.[/QUOTE]
I am not flaming.
I am not saying the end is nigh.
But hey, you can always say "Stop putting words in his mouth" while you've got your hand ready to shove words into my mouth.
[editline]19th August 2015[/editline]
I guess it's easier to not read what I said and pretend I'm saying "the end is nigh" eh catbarf?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48494104]You say "Welfare". Nope, NOT an option in America unless the public opinion changes SO drastically and changes before this happens. Job programs? Where are they going? To what jobs? If something is a target for automation, where are you sending the workers? That's literally a non argument. Better education would be great but how are you going to force through a HUGE PORTION OF THE POPULATION ALL AT ONCE through the education system?[/quote]
I offer a list of suggestions and if the response is "people don't want to implement them", then I'd say the problem isn't with automation, but with the politicians who adopt shitty policies and the people who endorse them.
[quote]that the transitory period for the workers will be horrible, hard, and cost many human lives.[/quote]
Despite the hyperbole, I really don't think this transition will be anywhere near what happened in the industrial revolution when people regularly died from cholera and children were sent to work down mines, especially in developed western countries where relatively extensive social safety nets exist for people.
[quote]We need solutions for these problems that people have thought about for longer than "Welfare Job programs education!" as you just did. No, those are NOT viable options anymore.[/QUOTE]
What do you mean they aren't viable options? They are all valid options in a modern industrialized economy. I mean sure not having work sucks, but it's a good idea to make sure that the vulnerable people in society are looked after with enough support that they don't starve or freeze or find themselves unable to go to college or take on an apprenticeship.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48494104]I
My concern, my only concern, is that people like yourself rush in to claim that ANYONE who dares say a fucking word against you is a "Luddite", and are ignorant to the reality around them. My concern, is that because we won't look at this issue seriously enough, we won't look for solutions early enough to make a difference, that the transitory period for the workers will be horrible, hard, and cost many human lives. We need solutions for these problems that people have thought about for longer than "Welfare Job programs education!" as you just did. No, those are NOT viable options anymore. We have to try harder. Stop calling people luddites when they're justifiably scared of their future, and just want answers as to how they're NOT going to get completely fucked in the transition.
I guess it's easier to not read what I said and pretend I'm saying "the end is nigh" eh catbarf?[/QUOTE]
Why are these not viable options anymore exactly? We need programs to protect workers and we need a better standard of higher education.
We HAD these programs to protect us in the past but they have since been eroded.
[quote]You say "Welfare". Nope, NOT an option in America unless the public opinion changes SO drastically and changes before this happens. Job programs? Where are they going? To what jobs? If something is a target for automation, where are you sending the workers? That's literally a non argument. Better education would be great but how are you going to force through a HUGE PORTION OF THE POPULATION ALL AT ONCE through the education system? [/quote]
Public opinion on welfare is only negative because of a lack of understanding of public assistance programs. As for jobs programs, we could use a few billion dollars in updating our collapsing infrastructure much like the federal works programs of the 30s and 40s.
As for education, if you made it free I guarantee you would see a massive calling of people heading back to school.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.