Wendy's to install self-ordering kiosks at 1000 locations

[Bitek]

Way to punch down on the lower class workers tho GOP.

Next time some conservative talking head lambasts the left on "not respecting/talking to the working class, ergo Trump..." we can just point to this thread.

What are you going to do about it then O Savers of Jobs, Heroes of the Poorly Educated and Remakers of Greatness?

Ban kiosks? Make ATMs illegal? Outlaw vending machines?

Put up or STFU.

 

[Jaskalas]

You can forcibly raise the value of labor as illustrated by the literature surrounding minimum wage.

You can try. What jobs can be, will be shipped overseas to be supplied by cheaper labor. Others will be cut or automated. The more you fight by artificially raising the cost of labor, the more you incentivize its replacement.

Minimum wage is a way for society to push back on corporations.

I have long supported minimum wages over taxes and redistribution. It is a direct solution that keeps government involvement minimal. But economic reality does not conform to what we want. Instead we have to conform to it by reacting to the situation developing around us where consumers are dropping like flies. We already go to great lengths to subsidize their consumption for both their sake, and for the sake of the economy.

What I'm promoting here is a result of weighing all this and seeing just one solution. We restructure our government budget and ensure that our subsidies go to all consumers who need it. A universal basic income (UBI), available today for ~66% of our current budget. In exchange for a level of economic security most can scarcely imagine. We have the production to afford it, all we have to do is push forward and apply ourselves to the task.

At the same time we embrace global trade and automation to ensure cheap goods are available. We're admittedly going to need them.

 

[brycejones]

So what automation do you keep? Do we go back to a China style to make cars? If not, then what?

I'm just making the point that certain people around here love to shit on anyone who asks for a living wage or has their job automated away. Its probable that in the next 20-40 years almost any job will be capable of being automated. We need to have a different conversation about how to make that world work for people instead of just shitting on them.

FYGM will only lead to a repeat of 1789 or 1917.

 

[brycejones]

Expect jobs from the following:
Keystone pipeline
DAPL
The border wall
Rebuilding of the infrastructure
New military jobs, ships and aircraft

There are going to be plenty of jobs coming up in the next year or two. Be happy!

DAPL is already almost complete and will have very few ongoing jobs.
Keystone once it is complete will also have very few ongoing jobs.
The border wall that won't be a wall and may not make sense to do in many areas?
Rebuilding infrastructure - will be interesting to see. Early proposals looked like a great way to socialize the costs and privatize profits by encouraging creation of new toll roads and bridges with public money.
New military jobs - LOL really. So we're robbing Peter (domestic programs) to pay Paul (military programs) as a net zero to the budget. So a bunch of people are going to lose their jobs. This looks like a wash.

But do keep on trying.

 

[realibrad]

I'm just making the point that certain people around here love to shit on anyone who asks for a living wage or has their job automated away. Its probable that in the next 20-40 years almost any job will be capable of being automated. We need to have a different conversation about how to make that world work for people instead of just shitting on them.

FYGM will only lead to a repeat of 1789 or 1917.

I think the problem is that people expect a lot more as a standard of living. We want bigger houses, nicer cars, better entertainment, ect. We all want more, while doing less. Our basic needs are being met, but we have raised the bar at a pace that may be unreasonable.

http://www.freeby50.com/2008/11/history-of-new-car-costs-and-average.html

What you call a basic living wage (assuming $15/hr) would represent an income that is almost double the global average.

 

[Blackjack200]

Money is a store of value, we have to make sure there is actual value behind those dollar bills. Merely printing money and handing it out to everyone saying "here ya go, here's your monthly stipend" is worthless unless there's actual value and wealth being transferred to them.

What an amazingly informed and intelligent opinion.

 

[norseamd]

It's not Moore's law, we aren't talking about the processing power of computer chips.

And I do agree that automation is taking over, not just low level jobs like this but higher skilled jobs as well. It is becoming more intense, but what's driving that? Advent in technology certainly, but money is being funneled into that not just for the hell of it but because economic forces drive it. The quest for more efficiency and to combat the most expensive variable for many companies which is labor cost.

I get that you want to push for basic income, but we aren't there yet. Money is a store of value, we have to make sure there is actual value behind those dollar bills. Merely printing money and handing it out to everyone saying "here ya go, here's your monthly stipend" is worthless unless there's actual value and wealth being transferred to them.

Providing housing, food, & healthcare to individuals would be a far better strategy, and probably far cheaper, after considering economies of scale.

 

[Bitek]

DAPL is already almost complete and will have very few ongoing jobs.
Keystone once it is complete will also have very few ongoing jobs.
The border wall that won't be a wall and may not make sense to do in many areas?
Rebuilding infrastructure - will be interesting to see. Early proposals looked like a great way to socialize the costs and privatize profits by encouraging creation of new toll roads and bridges with public money.
New military jobs - LOL really. So we're robbing Peter (domestic programs) to pay Paul (military programs) as a net zero to the budget. So a bunch of people are going to lose their jobs. This looks like a wash.

But do keep on trying.

Not to mention the GOP hawks have already punted on the infrastructure spending. This currently has no momentum behind it.

Priority #1 is cutting taxes for the rich, defense spending and running up the deficit.

 

[brycejones]

I think the problem is that people expect a lot more as a standard of living. We want bigger houses, nicer cars, better entertainment, ect. We all want more, while doing less. Our basic needs are being met, but we have raised the bar at a pace that may be unreasonable.

http://www.freeby50.com/2008/11/history-of-new-car-costs-and-average.html

What you call a basic living wage (assuming $15/hr) would represent an income that is almost double the global average.

I think you're missing the point of there may be no job period in the next few decades.

 

[norseamd]

People generally VASTLY overestimate the impact of foreign competition on labor. The vast majority of US jobs cannot be outsourced. What they can be is automated, but automation is a good thing.

Uh, Im not really one that is very knowledgeable in this field, but service jobs are harder to be outsourced, that doesnt mean resource and manufacturing jobs cant be outsourced, they already were a long time ago. Service jobs are also mostly intranational economy Im assuming, whereas resource and manufacturing industries can be both intranational and international, meaning you can earn national profit via trade balance surplus.

 

[Blackjack200]

Intro econ doesn't teach real models. Simple graphs like this are for dumbshits to pretend they know something about economics.

Yeah, it's a simple model to demonstrate a simple relationship. It's generally true that more businesses will demand labor at $10/hr than will demand labor at $15/hr. But the model is not meant to deal with a complicated issue like the minimum wage. So, for example, you'd expect more demand in the marketplace as a result of the higher wages. There are tons of other effect that a chart like that can't capture.

 

[realibrad]

I think you're missing the point of there may be no job period in the next few decades.

No job period would imply that nobody would be able to purchase anything, which would feed back to reducing production. Why would anything be produced if nobody would buy anything.

 

[realibrad]

Yeah, it's a simple model to demonstrate a simple relationship. It's generally true that more businesses will demand labor at $10/hr than will demand labor at $15/hr. But the model is not meant to deal with a complicated issue like the minimum wage. So, for example, you'd expect more demand in the marketplace as a result of the higher wages. There are tons of other effect that a chart like that can't capture.

You are not factoring in everything. Those with higher wages might demand more, but you miss that the net effect is a reduction if the increase in wage is offset by the total lost wages.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Luddites ftl.

 

[1prophet]

You can forcibly raise the value of labor as illustrated by the literature surrounding minimum wage. You can't raise it infinitely, but you can definitely raise it. Unionization is another way in which labor costs are forcibly raised, after all, if capital can organize in a collective fashion to raise its profits, labor can do the same thing. Anyway, it's not global competition keeping the burger flipper's wage low. Plus, the issue at hand is society is effectively subsidizing corporations' labor costs and corporations are getting away with it because we are letting them. Minimum wage is a way for society to push back on corporations.

Yes it can and does, if you send the higher paid manufacturing and service jobs overseas it has an effect on all the business that rely on them.

A high paid union worker can afford higher priced burgers that can support a higher wage for the burger flipper and the store owner can afford higher quality ingredients and help, the guy working at the dollar store due to the lack of better paying jobs not so much or has to find a much cheaper burger outlet.

 

[brycejones]

Luddites ftl.

Not at all. I'm actually for automating what can be automated. But we need to discuss and figure out how to address the impacts to society of automating away tens of millions of jobs. What has happened in the manufacturing and resource extraction industries is just a taste. In many cases those people have found new lower paying jobs with a reduced standard of living. When you automate away those jobs where do they go next? When a computer can apply the law quicker and more efficiently than a lawyer what does the lawyer do next? (queue up the lawyer jokes).

 

[Blackjack200]

You are not factoring in everything. Those with higher wages might demand more, but you miss that the net effect is a reduction if the increase in wage is offset by the total lost wages.

I wasn't trying to factor in everything, I was pointing out that while that chart does show a well accepted relationship between prices, supply, and demand, there are many more complexities that it cannot account for.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, it's a simple model to demonstrate a simple relationship. It's generally true that more businesses will demand labor at $10/hr than will demand labor at $15/hr. But the model is not meant to deal with a complicated issue like the minimum wage. So, for example, you'd expect more demand in the marketplace as a result of the higher wages. There are tons of other effect that a chart like that can't capture.

Exactly, there's a reason this figure is in an econ 101 textbook. It's trying to demonstrate basic concepts, not accurately model the world.

 

[1prophet]

That is my opinion of a them, I am sorry it's not PC.

Whatever faux liberal facade you may wear on the outside the self centered, me first Trump spirit is definitely on the inside,

 

[Brainonska511]

Yes it can and does, if you send the higher paid manufacturing and service jobs overseas it has an effect on all the business that rely on them.

A high paid union worker can afford higher priced burgers that can support a higher wage for the burger flipper and the store owner can afford higher quality ingredients and help, the guy working at the dollar store due to the lack of better paying jobs not so much or has to find a much cheaper burger outlet.

Maybe if it was a closed system and all the jobs were manufacturing. But none of that is the case. Economics isn't a zero sum game where some people need to be losers for others to be winners. The failure of globalization was not the outsourcing, it was the failure of public policy to help retrain people for the new jobs that arose as a result of a changing economy.

 

[nakedfrog]

Last time I checked it was pay me $15 per hour to flip burgers liberals doing those jobs.

When was the last time you checked? I know people working at fast food places, and they're pretty much representative of the typical split one would expect, some being republicans, some democrats, and some independents and libertarians.

 

[realibrad]

I wasn't trying to factor in everything, I was pointing out that while that chart does show a well accepted relationship between prices, supply, and demand, there are many more complexities that it cannot account for.

That comparison is not meant to look at demand from the consumer, so of course not. Just as the score of a football game does not explain the price of gasoline. Its not that the model is not able, its that its not meant to look at anything beyond the relationship of employment. You make it seem like the tool is not great at a job it has nothing to do with. You then bring up how it also does not capture rising demand, but that is weird to bring up given the tool you just used.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Not at all. I'm actually for automating what can be automated. But we need to discuss and figure out how to address the impacts to society of automating away tens of millions of jobs. What has happened in the manufacturing and resource extraction industries is just a taste. In many cases those people have found new lower paying jobs with a reduced standard of living. When you automate away those jobs where do they go next? When a computer can apply the law quicker and more efficiently than a lawyer what does the lawyer do next? (queue up the lawyer jokes).

I wasn't specifically referring to you and I actually agree with you. However I look forward to these changes and am not fearful of what the future will bring as our technology and society evolves.

 

[fskimospy]

That comparison is not meant to look at demand from the consumer, so of course not. Just as the score of a football game does not explain the price of gasoline. Its not that the model is not able, its that its not meant to look at anything beyond the relationship of employment. You make it seem like the tool is not great at a job it has nothing to do with. You then bring up how it also does not capture rising demand, but that is weird to bring up given the tool you just used.

He didn't use the tool, Uglycassanova did. He was pointing out that the tool is not great at the job UC tried to use it for.

He tried to use it to say that raising the minimum wage would reduce employment when such a simple model is insufficient to make that determination. If you actually wanted to model employment vs. the minimum wage you would absolutely need to factor in dynamic demand side effects, increased efficiencies due to lower employee turnover, etc, etc.

 

[realibrad]

He didn't use the tool, Uglycassanova did. He was pointing out that the tool is not great at the job UC tried to use it for.

He tried to use it to say that raising the minimum wage would reduce employment when such a simple model is insufficient to make that determination. If you actually wanted to model employment vs. the minimum wage you would absolutely need to factor in dynamic demand side effects, increased efficiencies due to lower employee turnover, etc, etc.

It might not be super accurate in terms of specific numbers, but it establishes the base idea of which we see played out in the economy. That is why overall we see a flat to net loss in jobs. The model is simplified to make it clear of what the effects will be, and reality has far more inputs, but its not meant to work on a real market. His use is perfectly reasonable to establish the idea. Its why raising wages by raising the floor will reduce employment. That not happening in a vacuum has no relevance to the concept.

So when Agent says its only used by dummies he is wrong. When BJ says its not good at doing something its not supposed to do, I reply.