Mad Mike Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 It's called reality Reality is that Walmart ALREADY uses as much automation as they can with their self checkout lanes. Reality is that touch screens cant unload trucks, stock shelves, or do 90% of the jobs in a large retail store. Reality is that you made up an imaginary scenario that conflicts with economic studies which say that those employees are also consumers who spend money when they have it ant take tax dollars when they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Again, studies show that raising the minimum wage doesn't significantly affect employment levels. Since you've introduced a new idea, I'll go ahead and say also that studies also show that automation doesn't increase unemployment (longer term) either. Have any of these studies been conducted at the macro level? Because I'm pretty sure that if WalMart and McDonalds were to reduce their workforce by 85% it would have a significant impact to unemployment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins3D Posted July 7, 2015 Author Share Posted July 7, 2015 Reality is that Walmart ALREADY uses as much automation as they can with their self checkout lanes. . Thats the kind of argument that requires a source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Id also dispute 90% of Walmart employeesstock shelves and unload trucks. Go ahead and cite that as well. He didn't say that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Have any of these studies been conducted at the macro level? Because I'm pretty sure that if WalMart and McDonalds were to reduce their workforce by 85% it would have a significant impact to unemployment. I'm pretty sure that if either reduced their workforce by 85% they'd go out of business. It's like you and 3D think employers have these secret plans to turn all jobs over to robots if we touch the minimum wage. "Oh you better not or we'll fire everyone..." Guess what, these corporations are profit driven. Pretty sure they're running awfully lean already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins3D Posted July 8, 2015 Author Share Posted July 8, 2015 He didn't say that I edited at the same time you commented, so we can call it a draw. Point being the 90%number is bull **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I'm pretty sure that if either reduced their workforce by 85% they'd go out of business. It's like you and 3D think employers have these secret plans to turn all jobs over to robots if we touch the minimum wage. "Oh you better not or we'll fire everyone..." Guess what, these corporations are profit driven. Pretty sure they're running awfully lean already. This is exactly what the American auto worker thought in the 50s and 60s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 This is exactly what the American auto worker thought in the 50s and 60s There could be no minimum wage and robots would still build most of our cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins3D Posted July 8, 2015 Author Share Posted July 8, 2015 This is exactly what the American auto worker thought in the 50s and 60s A machine can't hand you a sticker when you walk in the door...oh yea they stopped that 20 years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 A machine can't hand you a sticker when you walk in the door...oh yea they stopped that 20 years ago If you're against the idea of social services, you shouldn't mock the stereotypical elderly Walmart employee who can't afford to live on social security. But that's off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Thats the kind of argument that requires a source My source is walk into a Walmart and look around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins3D Posted July 8, 2015 Author Share Posted July 8, 2015 My source is walk into a Walmart and look around. That doesn't work because my Walmart could probably triple their self check outs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Well, you can take the data I've given you. Or you can take the identical data in the OP.Take your pick.----------Please, tell us which additional data you need, to answer that question.Feel free to pretend that it's whatever phase of the moon you'd like, for example. Nowhere in the OP does it cover your premise. By your premise every business owner is an absolute idiot for not wanting higher minimum wages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I edited at the same time you commented, so we can call it a draw. Point being the 90%number is bull **** I said that 90% of the jobs at Walmart can't be done by a touch screen. Yeah, I pulled that number out of my ***. It's probably more like 99%. That doesn't work because my Walmart could probably triple their self check outs Says the guy who accuses others of making up numbers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Apparently Wal Mart isn't nearly as efficient as they could be Redskins3D for wal mart ceo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins3D Posted July 8, 2015 Author Share Posted July 8, 2015 I said that 90% of the jobs at Walmart can't be done by a touch screen. Yeah, I pulled that number out of my ***. It's probably more like 99%. Says the guy who accuses others of making up numbers... You're rediculous. You make up a number and then dispute my experience after specifically asking me to use it Apparently Wal Mart isn't nearly as efficient as they could be Redskins3D for wal mart ceo Why not any lucky idiot can be a billionaire ceo, right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 you guys mocking the robots... the field is progressing quite nicely, all things considered. the all encompassing field of artificial intelligence is far away from producing skynet, and with robotics they're a long ways away from producing the terminator. which is what everyone associates with robots but you know what they're not a long ways away from doing? repetitious mundane tasks, working with the same materials in a limited world. i'm not someone who thinks the end of our economy is coming from robots. i think we'll find other work for people to do, though it'll probably be a rocky transition. but i wouldn't underestimate how quickly the fields are moving. when they have big breakthroughs change comes quickly and in an unforeseen way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 By your premise every business owner is an absolute idiot for not wanting higher minimum wages I've made no such claim. I have, however, asked a question. If a business's costs go up by 2%, and they raise their prices by 10%, where does the other 8% go? You know. My response to your claim that I can't possibly know what the owner of a business who employs me, makes? I've asked it once, and you pretended to not read the question. (And attacked me). I asked you, a second tine, to answer the question. You told me that you couldn't answer the question, because you needed more information. I asked you to answer the question a third time, and repeated it for you, just in case you'd forgotten it. I also pointed you at the data. (It's still in the OP, if you've forgotten). And asked you to please let us know which additional data you require, before you can answer the question. This now represents your fourth attempt at dodging the question. You've been hiding from it, for two pages, now. It's a simply, one line, question. And you've made four posts full of attitude, trying to dodge it. I'll make a couple of observations: 1). There isn't a person in this thread who doesn't know the answer. 2). YOU know the answer. 3). Every person in this thread is aware of facts #1 and #2. 4). And, the longer you keep attacking me (while dodging the obvious question), the stupider you look. 5). I'll point out that 3D tried the same thing, and my response was to point out that the article HE posted, contains the same numbers. It only took him one post to decide that pretending that he hadn't read the questions, and changing the subject, was the smarter move. Now, if you'd like to continue to sling attitude, while refusing to discuss even the most obvious of reasoning, it's fine with me. It's not even any effort, for me to make you look stupid. You're doing it on your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Why not any lucky idiot can be a billionaire ceo, right I'll meet you halfway, but I've seen no evidence you're lucky, 3D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 ---------- You're rediculous. You make up a number and then dispute my experience after specifically asking me to use it I thought people weren't allowed to use their experience. Against the rules, or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 That doesn't work because my Walmart could probably triple their self check outsYou keep missing his point. Make all the check out lanes automated. Still gotta unload trucks, stock shelves......, mop floors, bring carts in, slice meats, mix paint, arrange flowers, drive the forklift, work the fabric department, get things off the top shelves (always ask an associate for help. ) Let's face it. ...if it were possible and financially prudent, wal mart would be doing this all by robots regardless of minimum wage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 On the micro level: An extra $40 to a person who is working a 40 hour week making an extra $1 per hour isn't much. Doubly so when that figure is more like $20-30 since that person is likely being denied full time hours. $20 per week per person. How cheap are WE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Now, though, I do think we need to recognize another fact that's glaringly obvious. Yes, raise the minimum wage, and yes, some forms of automation which were marginal, before, will get looked at, again. Will we see completely automated McDonald's? Haven't yet. But will we see more McDonald's with a machine that makes the drinks for the drive through? It seems like a reasonable conclusion, to me. Yes, raising the minimum wage will result in some job losses. That (IMO) is indisputable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 You keep missing his point. Make all the check out lanes automated. Still gotta unload trucks, stock shelves......, mop floors, bring carts in, slice meats, mix paint, arrange flowers, drive the forklift, work the fabric department, get things off the top shelves (always ask an associate for help. ) Let's face it. ...if it were possible and financially prudent, wal mart would be doing this all by robots regardless of minimum wage These jobs may not be as hard as you think. I mean, they're hard in the aspect that some insanely smart people are working hard to solve them, but we're getting there. Amazon is working on having robots run their warehouses. They deployed 15k of these in 2 months recently The people working in this field are getting pretty good at it... Will they still need warehouse staff? Absolutely. They'll be greatly reduced in numbers, ironically I bet they make more than the people that would normally run a warehouse... given the technology they're responsible for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Somewhere between Ayn Rand disciples who swear that any increase in the minimum wage will incite the the horsemen of the apocalypse and Pelosi /Sanders socialists who think uneducated dropouts flipping burgers deserve to be paid as much as certified accountants, there is undoubtedly a point in a bell curve where the increase in the purchasing power of manual laborers drives enough consumption to compensate for the increase in costs to business. you think certified accountants make that little? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.