So, You Want $15 An Hour?

[Airstrip One]

All these years of Republicans asking "why not $40/hr?" has seemingly been answered by Brandonflation. Apparently, he does offer solutions to everyday problems.

 

[Street Glider]

You're a fucking idiot...

2. Evidently, you have a problem putting in print precisely what is on your mind...either that or your incapable of recognizing self contradiction. I just follow your words....pity you don't like the conclusions of what you say/support. You can't support automation replacing folk and then say you prefer people keeping their jobs instead. Either you're for or against...no grey area.

Those are pretty much the same thing.

But, in my companies, we prefer actual people. But I can understand whylarge corporations like Wal-Mart would move towards automation. That's not a contradictory statement...

3. Ahh, another attempt to justify a position you've just said you're not taking. So now your saying that people deserve to be replaced by machines because they have the audacity to (GASP!) ask for a wage increase?

Show me a single instance where I've said that someone asking for a raise should be replaced by a machine. I challenge you, and I await your complete failure...

Hmmm, ever hear of COLA? Wonder why permanent Wal-Mart employees at one point had to supplement with food stamps and such? Or local, state or federal employees have to strike in order to get some type of raise after YEARS of a fixed salary?

No, I haven't. I don't work for Wal-Mart or any local, state or federal government...3

But hey, according to you the fix is just replace them with machines where ever possible.....then cut off unemployment because they can't get a new job at a decent salary due to owner/management decisions. No don't waste my time with some smoke blowing BS to deny the logical conclusion of what you put forth, okay?

I've said no such thing. Now stop being a douchebag. Instead of addressing what you wish I'd said, address what I've actually said...

4. Your first sentence signifies an upcoming attempt to misrepresent what I put forth and then lie about what you previously wrote....typical ploy by an insipidly stubborn person who can't admit when they are wrong, much less concede a point. The rest of your little tale is chock full of dubious claims and myopic justification for what I've pointed out is just management callousness towards employees. Let's examine your story: your "companies"? Are you an owner/CEO of a franchise or such? And if you have very little automation, then you and I are in sync regarding less automation, more people in jobs. You're not replacing people with machines for fiscal net gain. Good on ya. However, the second part of your story is loaded with supposition and conjecture, and just out right BS. Do you go into those stores with help wanted signs and ask what qualifications they are looking for? What salary are they offering?

No, I'm not a franchise.

As for going into the stores with "help wanted" signs, no, I haven't, with the exception of one. I do, however, know someone who's asked those with their "GOD BLESS. ANYTHING HELPS" signs if they'd like a job, and they simply say no. They have no interest in ever learning what the salary is. I have very little sympathy for those people.

The one store I've been in is a Firehouse Subs store. They're starting their employees out at $12 an hour...

Remember when during a townhall the Shrub was amazed that a working mom had to hold 3 jobs to make ends meet? Figure it out. And I have yet to come across a day laborer who turned down a job. Now, if you're approaching guys who are in bad shape and have been on the streets for some time, they are either not exactly emotionally stable or you're not offering simple day labor. This part of your story just doesn't add up. This is why I take you to task for exactly what you say...and why you get pissed when the logical conclusions prove you to be less than sympathetic to those replaced by machines.

5. My man, you are full of it. Plain and simple. You can't parrot various mantras that generalize people being unemployed to justify automation, then say you are against such. That's just plain hypocrisy...a sheer stupidity on your part as the chronology of the post will reveal your folly to the objective reader despite your denial. This is the 2nd time you've referred to "your companies"....which explains a lot. You have the defensive mindset of a large business owner/corporate head, which will justify various actions that benefit the bottom line ($$). But as I demonstrated throughout our exchanges, the reality to the employee counters such.

6. How stupid of you to parrot a moot point that I introduced as an example as to why automation beyond a certain point is unnecessary & bad for the economy. The chronology of the posts shows your folly. Clearly, you've got nothing but repetition and intellectually dishonest attempts to avoid conceding my original points. As I said before, insipid stubbornness doesn't cut it. So I leave you to the predictable smoke blowing, false allegations/statements and repetitive dubious claims.

The rest of this is just idiotic bullshit. Read my OP. That's happening. Wal-Mart is replacing cashiers with self-serve kiosks, and that's in no way related to anything I do or do not do at my company. As Wal-Mart is the largest retailer in the world, it seems like it wouldn't be a bad idea to look at how they're doing business.

I'm happy to have this conversation, but not if you continue on this trajectory. The point isn't what I'm do with my companies. The point of the discussion is what Wal-Mart is doing. If you lack the intellectual agility to have that conversation, please, fuck off...

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You're a fucking idiot...


...I'm happy to have this conversation, but not if you continue on this trajectory. The point isn't what I'm do with my companies. The point of the discussion is what Wal-Mart is doing. If you lack the intellectual agility to have that conversation, please, fuck off...

Agreed. Something off there...although I suspect he's mentally detached from reality rather than simply stupid like a few JPP members.

Automation of a business is 1) their choice and 2) only used when it's the cheaper alternative. JPP has both LW and RW members declaring that they have a right to a job. I disagree.

Freedom has fangs and one of the fangs is the freedom to lose out for being a fucking moron thinking a high school dropout can make close to the median wage of most states simply by being hired at the Dollar Store or Walmart.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_median_wage_and_mean_wage

That said, States are free to set minimum wages. Cities too. Asking the Feds to do it is an example of Authoritarian overreach...in this case from the Democrats...again.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Let's say your "great great grandpa" was 10 years old when he fled the French Revolution, and each generation is separated by 30 years, that would make you about 120 years old... IMPOSSIBLE

OK, let's say he was 10 years, and each generation is separated by 40 years, that makes you a bit older than 80... HIGHLY UNLIKELY

While one generation jump of 40 years would not be uncommon, four in a row would be very rare. You being over 80 (and posting) would also be rare.

The math says you are almost certainly lying. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt that you are lying? Maybe, but this is not a criminal trial.

Hey!

I am 85...and I post every day in two different fora. Let's ease up on the ageism here on the Internet.

 

[Ross Dolan]

There will still be someone there to monitor the self-serve kiosks...



The purpose of a business is to make money, not to keep people off of welfare.

According to recent SCOTUS decisions, "businesses" are persons. They SHOULD have a sense of social responsibility. SG is correct that their only purpose is to make money. That is one of the things that must be changed about the American form of capitalism to improve it.

If someone is genuine in their desire to work, but they just can't find a job, I've no problem helping them. There has to be a time limit, though, on how long they can receive benefits, and the individual has to be able to show that he's actively looking for employment.

Yeah, I agree with SG there. I would suggest a time limit of 95 years.

Now, someone who's not working simply because he doesn't want to, or is "too lazy"? Fuck 'em. Such a person should get nothing...

That is where he and I differ. It has to do with humanity...not stupidity or naivete, as some might suppose.

The most efficient use of humans would recognize and acknowledge that "lazy people" or "people who do not want to work" are a drag on the economy...and should be REQUIRED not to work. But, since we are a land of enormous abundance, it makes no sense to simply allow them to starve or freeze to death...so we should allow them enough money for them to have sufficient. And to help stimulate our consumer driven economy.

That...or simply dispose ourselves of our humanity...and allow them to starve and freeze to death. I suggest the former is the correct path.

 

[danielpalos]

We subscribe to capitalism. Why not solve simple poverty in a market friendly manner through equal protection of our own laws using existing legal and physical infrastructure?

 

[Taichiliberal]

You're a fucking idiot...



Those are pretty much the same thing.

But, in my companies, we prefer actual people. But I can understand whylarge corporations like Wal-Mart would move towards automation. That's not a contradictory statement...




Show me a single instance where I've said that someone asking for a raise should be replaced by a machine. I challenge you, and I await your complete failure...



No, I haven't. I don't work for Wal-Mart or any local, state or federal government...3



I've said no such thing. Now stop being a douchebag. Instead of addressing what you wish I'd said, address what I've actually said...



No, I'm not a franchise.

As for going into the stores with "help wanted" signs, no, I haven't, with the exception of one. I do, however, know someone who's asked those with their "GOD BLESS. ANYTHING HELPS" signs if they'd like a job, and they simply say no. They have no interest in ever learning what the salary is. I have very little sympathy for those people.

The one store I've been in is a Firehouse Subs store. They're starting their employees out at $12 an hour...




The rest of this is just idiotic bullshit. Read my OP. That's happening. Wal-Mart is replacing cashiers with self-serve kiosks, and that's in no way related to anything I do or do not do at my company. As Wal-Mart is the largest retailer in the world, it seems like it wouldn't be a bad idea to look at how they're doing business.

I'm happy to have this conversation, but not if you continue on this trajectory. The point isn't what I'm do with my companies. The point of the discussion is what Wal-Mart is doing. If you lack the intellectual agility to have that conversation, please, fuck off...

Folks, rather than rehash the corporate greed laden rhetoric this joker keeps pushing, let's just pull the rug out by quoting his motto:

What people need to wrap their heads around is the fact that business does not exist to give people jobs that pay too much for the performed task because, when that happens, employers will start looking at what Wal Mart's doing...


This is the mindset of a corporate wonk claiming to own "businesses". To date, junior has yet to explain to the reading audience how a "business" exists without employees (aka people doing a job). Unless junior is referring to a one man small operation, his statement has no place in reality. As any adult knows, one of the first selling points that is in a "business proposal" to a town/city for real estate construction/purchase is how many JOBS will be created to make the "business" a reality. A "business" can't make money without employees creating the actual items and products to sell that the owner (s)/founder(s) design. And with the salary derived from said job, the employees go out and buy products and items from other businesses (as is done all around). That's business 101, folks.

Now one only has to follow the chronology of the posts to see where junior LIES by inferring that my points were about people wanting "too much" money for their job performance/requirements. My initial point was that when you UNNESCESSARILY automate to replace jobs, you create the very unemployment/welfare situation that jokers like Street Glider love to bitch about (i.e., extended unemployment insurance).

Street Glider justifies the heinous practices of Wal-Mart with the above bogus narrative. In his warped corporate greed laden mind, asking for COLA when none is given for a few years warrants a business only paying near poverty wages while automating to the nth degree...he ignores the FACT that Walmart was doing it's thing at the onset...which is why it came to national attention. A similar situation just went down with Amazon, where Bezo's public bragging of record profits and personal wealth left him little choice but to raise the standard pay of his full time employees to $15/hr. Now in Street Glider's mind, that's a sin because company profits trump employee economic survival. Street Glider inadvertently pushes the mindset that existed before the Labor Movement and the New Deal. Hell, Ford had the 8th of brain to realize that if his employees couldn't afford to buy his product, that's less profit and detrimental to his employee's livelihood.

But Street Glider will shovel an incredible amount of BS to deny the conclusions in the real world of his own words. He says "I'm not doing that", as if that allows him to condone the automation and Walmart models. Street Glider, like all right wing corporate clowns on this board, all make fantastic claims of expertise, professional standing and such...yet will twist like a pretzel when caught flat footed contradicting their professed altruism.

But a real mind boggler is this amazing lie that Street Glider repeats: down and out street people prefer handouts to offered jobs. Mind you, Street Glider NEVER states what type of job he's allegedly offering, or the mental status of the alleged street folk he talks to. It's just another bogus story fabricated by a corporate wonk too stubborn to admit he's all idealism and no realism. He claims to own "businesses" but not a franchise (or corporation). What does his business do that he can't offer a realistic job to a day laborer? In my lifetime, guys on the street NEVER turn down a few hours labor for what pay they can make or negotiate. So yeah, Street Glider is full of it.

Street Glider is just wonk with delusion of intelligence regarding how the real world works. Nope, let's just not think about the cashiers and bank tellers let go NOT because they were greedy or incompetent, but because some asshole with Street Glider's blessing figured he could net more money with a machine...despite already raking in a decent profit.

That's the bottom line folks. The objective, rational and intelligent (does the research) reader can look at the chronology of the posts and verify what I say ... and see Street Glider's folly.

I'm done with this silly assed wonk's merry-go-round BS....he'll never have the stones to just concede a point. I'll just ignore him for a month or so...maybe he'll grow up.

 

[Street Glider]

Folks, rather than rehash the corporate greed laden rhetoric this joker keeps pushing, let's just pull the rug out by quoting his motto:

What people need to wrap their heads around is the fact that business does not exist to give people jobs that pay too much for the performed task because, when that happens, employers will start looking at what Wal Mart's doing...

You're a complete douche.

I'm not defending what Wal-Mart is doing. I understand why they do it, and anyone who has an IQ which exceeds their shoe size understands it. They've decided that's the way they should run their business.

Why you keep attacking me for that is a mystery...

This is the mindset of a corporate wonk claiming to own "businesses". To date, junior has yet to explain to the reading audience how a "business" exists without employees (aka people doing a job). Unless junior is referring to a one man small operation, his statement has no place in reality.

I've yet to explain it because I've never said anything so stupid. Why would I explain something that I've never said and don't believe?

As any adult knows, one of the first selling points that is in a "business proposal" to a town/city for real estate construction/purchase is how many JOBS will be created to make the "business" a reality. A "business" can't make money without employees creating the actual items and products to sell that the owner (s)/founder(s) design. And with the salary derived from said job, the employees go out and buy products and items from other businesses (as is done all around). That's business 101, folks.

And... what? Do you think Wal-Mart didn't do that?

Now one only has to follow the chronology of the posts to see where junior LIES by inferring that my points were about people wanting "too much" money for their job performance/requirements. My initial point was that when you UNNESCESSARILY automate to replace jobs, you create the very unemployment/welfare situation that jokers like Street Glider love to bitch about (i.e., extended unemployment insurance).

Street Glider justifies the heinous practices of Wal-Mart with the above bogus narrative.

You would prefer to tell Wal-Mart that they can't run their business in the manner they believe is best for them? I'm not justifying anything Wal-Mart does beyond saying they have the right to do it. Clearly, that's enough to set you off and get your panties in a knot...

In his warped corporate greed laden mind, asking for COLA when none is given for a few years warrants a business only paying near poverty wages while automating to the nth degree...he ignores the FACT that Walmart was doing it's thing at the onset...which is why it came to national attention. A similar situation just went down with Amazon, where Bezo's public bragging of record profits and personal wealth left him little choice but to raise the standard pay of his full time employees to $15/hr. Now in Street Glider's mind, that's a sin because company profits trump employee economic survival. Street Glider inadvertently pushes the mindset that existed before the Labor Movement and the New Deal. Hell, Ford had the 8th of brain to realize that if his employees couldn't afford to buy his product, that's less profit and detrimental to his employee's livelihood.

I don't have a single employee being paid minimum wage. Not one. Are my companies profitable? Yes, they are. Do my employees make that happen? They absolutely do. Which is why they're paid as well as they are...

But Street Glider will shovel an incredible amount of BS to deny the conclusions in the real world of his own words. He says "I'm not doing that", as if that allows him to condone the automation and Walmart models. Street Glider, like all right wing corporate clowns on this board, all make fantastic claims of expertise, professional standing and such...yet will twist like a pretzel when caught flat footed contradicting their professed altruism.

I haven't condoned whay Wal-Mart is doing, but it's their business. I can't imagine doing it with my company, but I don't know enough about how Wal-Mart operates to tell them that they shouldn't do it. I'll leave that to know-it-all dickheads like you...

But a real mind boggler is this amazing lie that Street Glider repeats: down and out street people prefer handouts to offered jobs. Mind you, Street Glider NEVER states what type of job he's allegedly offering, or the mental status of the alleged street folk he talks to.

I don't lie, you cum-gurgling bitch. I don't have to.

As for why I don't state what type of job I'm offering them, that would be due to the fact that I haven't offered any. I'm talking about businesses in strip malls with "HELP WANTED" signs in their windows. A sub shop? I'll go out on a limb and say they probably want to hire people to make sandwiches. The local Grease Monkey? They probably want people who can do oil changes. I don't know, because I'm not hiring for those business. Your problem is that you wish to, for whatever reason, have me answer for the business practices of other businesses. Sorry, dipshit, that's not gonna' happen...

It's just another bogus story fabricated by a corporate wonk too stubborn to admit he's all idealism and no realism. He claims to own "businesses" but not a franchise (or corporation). What does his business do that he can't offer a realistic job to a day laborer?

Sorry, but "day laborers" don't fit the culture and atmosphere in my companies. Not to mention that your average guy on the street, begging for change, likely isn't going to have the requisite skill set to work in my companies...

In my lifetime, guys on the street NEVER turn down a few hours labor for what pay they can make or negotiate. So yeah, Street Glider is full of it.

.

You're so full of shit it's almost frightening...

Street Glider is just wonk with delusion of intelligence regarding how the real world works. Nope, let's just not think about the cashiers and bank tellers let go NOT because they were greedy or incompetent, but because some asshole with Street Glider's blessing figured he could net more money with a machine...despite already raking in a decent profit.

I woujldn't expect a leftist, American-hating dildo like you to understand any of this.

Now you're saying I should feel bad if someone is let go due to incompetence? You truly are an idiot of the highest order.

I go to my bank and the windows are all manned, and there's someone at the drive-thru. No one there seems to be suffering because they've got a drive-up ATM...

That's the bottom line folks. The objective, rational and intelligent (does the research) reader can look at the chronology of the posts and verify what I say ... and see Street Glider's folly.

I'm done with this silly assed wonk's merry-go-round BS....he'll never have the stones to just concede a point. I'll just ignore him for a month or so...maybe he'll grow up.

Again, it appears as though you want me to answer for what another company has decided to do, and I'm just not going to do that, just as it's not your place to tell any business owner what they should do with theirs. If you feel strongly about it, start your own company, make the sacrifices, invest the time and money and you can run your company anyway that'll make your liberal little nipplehead happy.

Because you're far too big a fucking ignorant idiot to even suggest how I run mine...

 

[Into the Night]

Then reserving Labor through equal protection of our at-will employment laws must be the market friendly solution.

You cannot reserve labor...otherwise you are correct.

 

[Into the Night]

Sorry; I thought you understood basic economics. It is about reserving Labor through equal protection of our own laws to solve for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment by compensating for it.

I do. Far better, in fact, than you seem to. You cannot reserve labor. There is no compensation for unemployment (other than through communism). Apparently you still don't know what capitalism, fascism, or communism really is.

 

[Into the Night]

Robots do not get sick.

They do, however, break down. It takes skilled people to fix them again or replace them.

They do not steal.

Robots are stupid. It's easy for someone to steal through a robot.

They do not make mistakes.

They do. All the time. Mostly because someone mis-programmed them.

That I why companies want them.

Only cost effective ones.

Robots break down. They need maintenance.

Certainly.

They are expensive.

Not necessarily. The common robot known as the washing machine is in most every home. An even more common one is called a thermostat.
An Alexa dot is only about $60. A controller device for it to talk to costs only about $50 or so.

They cannot handle power outages.

Some can. Indeed, robot switchover systems to automatically started generators are installed in some homes and businesses. Other robots use batteries, such as Roomba. Roomba doesn't care about a power failure. It can still clean the room. All it means is that it can't recharge afterwards unless the charging system is hooked into an alternate power source.

There is a lot in play before you invest in kiosks. It is not all about wages.

There is no investment in kiosks. There is no such stock on the market.

 

[Into the Night]

But one thing is certain.....kiosks in, people's jobs out. I can't tell you how many times the auto-check out at a local store has gone on the fritz, causing TWICE the delays as only one cashier is on hand.

Sounds like someone isn't maintaining their self checkout counters. That's a customer service problem in the store, not the self checkout machines themselves.

 

[Into the Night]

1. Stop and think what you're saying: Fire the workers (cashiers, stock, managers) and replace them with machines, but keep one or two technicians on stand-by in case the machines malfunction. Nice dream, so long as the rest of the store is fully automated to the degree which I previously described (and no, our technology is nowhere near that type of sophistication). If not, then you have problems of longer delays and frustrated customers who may go else where for their business. And if you don't have a geographic monopoly, that's what's going to happen.

2. You're first sentence is the oft parroted idiotic mantra that has no place in reality. Think, my man, THINK! People make a business work, people earn money, people buy products and commodities from businesses with that money. Without employment that pays enough for people to buy said items, the economy goes in the toilet....unless you're pushing for a "metropolis" type society in which you are part of the "above" class.

3. You're second sentence is just a recap of the current system.....which with current level of automation is essentially creating a two tier society in which low level paying and/or temporary jobs without full benefits essentially just serve the inherent wealthy and upper management class who reap the full benefits of the latter's labor. Meanwhile, the folk that labor to make all this possible (farmers, miners, custodians, cooks, taxi drivers, etc.) either can't or just barely afford living conditions.

And if the owners/management screw up, it's the lower level working folk who really pay the price.....examples being the Wall St., the Savings and Loan, the mortgage scandals of the last 20 years. If the job opportunities are shut down and/or out sourced, that is NOT the fault of the worker seeking employment. I always marvel at some teleprompter reader on the "news" stating employment stats and including "people who have stopped looking". I would REALLY like to see the polling question that says, "have you stopped seeking employment? For how long?" and ask how do the separate that question from the lack of jobs from employers.

4. obviously you missed the sarcasm of my "too lazy to work" line. That is the mantra used by folk of a mindset to dismiss the reality of employment and labor problems in this country....they just use that line as a general classification, whether warranted or not.

I would strongly suggest you bone up on the history of the Labor Movement in this country....because the lifestyle you currently enjoy is a direct result of it, whether you like/believe it or not.

You apparently still do no understand that a business is not a welfare system. It is designed to make money, not pay out unnecessary payroll. If automation can do it cheaper, so be it.
Wages are set like any price, by market forces.

You want to make more money? Make yourself worth something to somebody. It's that easy. Don't whine about unskilled or low skill jobs that go obsolete.

 

[danielpalos]

You apparently still do no understand that a business is not a welfare system. It is designed to make money, not pay out unnecessary payroll. If automation can do it cheaper, so be it.
Wages are set like any price, by market forces.

You want to make more money? Make yourself worth something to somebody. It's that easy. Don't whine about unskilled or low skill jobs that go obsolete.

That is why equal protection of our own laws matters. Labor should be able to obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in an at-will employment State.

 

[danielpalos]

You cannot reserve labor...otherwise you are correct.

Are you on the right-wing?

 

[danielpalos]

I do. Far better, in fact, than you seem to. You cannot reserve labor. There is no compensation for unemployment (other than through communism). Apparently you still don't know what capitalism, fascism, or communism really is.

Are you on the right-wing? They tend to prefer to appeal to ignorance over valid arguments nearly every time we need to avoid repeating a historical mistake, yet they proclaim in public venues they are not really like that. How fantastical.

 

[Into the Night]

That is why equal protection of our own laws matters. Labor should be able to obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in an at-will employment State.

Non-sequitur fallacy. Law has nothing to do with whether there is communism or not.

 

[Into the Night]

Are you on the right-wing?

No. I am a constitutionalist and a conservative.

 

[Into the Night]

Are you on the right-wing?

I already answered this question. RQAA.

They tend to prefer to appeal to ignorance over valid arguments

Inversion fallacy. You are describing Democrats.

nearly every time we need to avoid repeating a historical mistake,

Inversion fallacy. You are describing Democrats.

yet they proclaim in public venues they are not really like that. How fantastical.

Again, you are describing Democrats.

 

[Taichiliberal]

That is why equal protection of our own laws matters. Labor should be able to obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in an at-will employment State.

Here's the fascinating psychosis for our resident corporatist wonks: During the the Shrub's 8 stolen years, all deregulation of corporations and such was justified with the promise that unencumbered, they could and would be the "job creators". Well, THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN under the Shrub....and it sure as hell wasn't going to happen under Obama with the GOP and their corporate masters wanting to make him "a 1 term President".

Now if there are no jobs, people go on unemployment and welfare...and our corporatist flunkies bitch about that to various degrees. Meanwhile, corporations recorded "net profits"...thanks to outsourcing at the taxpayers expense, and incorporating all the salaries, pensions and IRA's of their FIRED/DOWN SIZED employees. Of course, as people's unemployment benefits ran out, you had the MSM stupidly report that the economy was doing "better" because the rate of unemployment applications were lowering ... they lowered because a whole lot of people were no longer eligible under the rules of time constraint based on their length of employment. This is why you had "extensions" under Obama and Trump....because Americans with no money DO NOT BUY PRODUCTS.

This is a matter of history, a matter of fact. Yet our corporatist wonks will stupidly repeat their mantras as if jobs, money and businesses are separate, non-interacting entities.